4.6 Article

SPEEK-based proton exchange membranes modified with MOF-encapsulated ionic liquid

期刊

MATERIALS CHEMISTRY AND PHYSICS
卷 236, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.matchemphys.2019.121792

关键词

Metal-organic framework; Ionic liquid; Sulfonated poly (ether ether ketone); Zr-MOF/Ionic liquid-loaded proton exchange membrane

资金

  1. Coordenacao de Aperfeicoamento de Pessoal de Nivel Superior - Brasil (CAPES) [001]
  2. Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico (CNPq)
  3. Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo (FAPESP) [2013/07296-2]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ionic liquids (ILs) 1-butyl-3-methylimidazolium hydrogensulfate (BMI center dot HSO4), 1-butylimidazole hydrogensulfate (BImH center dot HSO4) and 3-triethylammonium propane sulfonic hydrogensulfate (TEA-PS center dot HSO4) were encapsulated in UiO-66 (Zr-MOF) framework. These samples were incorporated into sulfonated poly (ether ether ketone) (SPEEK) polymer in different concentrations of IL. The influence of ionic liquid concentration encapsulated in Zr-MOF was evaluated through the morphology and thermal and chemical stability of the modified membranes. The incorporation of 7.5 wt% Zr-MOF in SPEEK produced membranes with high proton conductivity, making this the best mass ratio for the incorporation of the ionic liquids. Contact angle and swelling analysis indicate that the presence of these ionic liquids provides stability to the membrane, preventing it from absorbing high amounts of water. Mass ratios of 2.5 and 5.0 wt% of encapsulated ILs in Zr-MOF were also used. Proton conductivity results show that a higher concentration of ionic liquid generates agglomerates, limiting proton mobility in the membranes. Among the three ionic liquids tested, TEA-PS center dot HSO4 presents the best proton conductivity values, between 92 and 140 mS cm(-1). These results indicate that the Zr-MOF/TEA-PS center dot HSO4 sample is a good candidate for use in proton exchange membrane for fuel cells.

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