4.6 Article

Improved facile synthesis of mesoporous SBA-15-CTA using citric acid under mild conditions

期刊

JOURNAL OF SOLID STATE CHEMISTRY
卷 282, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.jssc.2019.121079

关键词

Mesoporous silica; Citric acid; SBA-15-CTA; Mild conditions; Dry reforming

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21476145]
  2. Chinese Scholarship Council (CSC)
  3. Institute of Chemical Engineering and Science (ICES, A*star, Singapore)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Unlike being traditionally synthesized in HCl intermediates, in this study, well-ordered 2D hexagonal mesoporous silica (SBA-15) was developed under moderate polycarboxylic acid (e.g. citric acid or oxalic acid) medium without introducing inorganic salts and mineral acids. The key synthesis factors such as the type and concentration of polycarboxylic acids, preparation temperature and crystallization time are systemically studied. It was found that the amount of carboxyl groups inside the organic acid molecules plays a critical role in synthesizing high-quality mesoporous silica products owing to their bridging effects on both nonionic copolymer micelles and silica precursors. The more carboxyl groups the organic acid possesses, the less dosage of organic acid will be used. The citric acid concentration can be as low as 0.0010 molL(-1) (pH > 3) for forming the high quality SBA-15-CTA materials (CTA stands for the material prepared under citric acid medium) their microstructure and rod-like particle size can be tailored by varying the acid type and preparation conditions. As-synthesized SBA-15-CTA supported Ni catalysts showed a good potential for dry reforming of methane (DRM) reaction with much less coke formation at 700 degrees C. The synthesis strategy for mesoporous silica under moderate organic acid medium demonstrates a promising prospect for other mesoporous materials preparation and utilizations in catalysis, selective adsorptions, drug delivery, and so on.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据