CeMn/TiO2 catalysts prepared by different methods for enhanced low-temperature NH3-SCR catalytic performance

Ce(1.0)Mn/TiO2 catalysts with the same Ce/Mn molar ratio were prepared by impregnation method and an in situ deposition method. Compared with the Ce(1.0)Mn/TiO2-IP catalyst prepared by impregnation, the Ce(1.0)Mn/TiO2-SP catalyst prepared by in-situ deposition showed better catalytic performance in a wide temperature window (150-300 degrees C) under high gas hourly space velocities ranging from 10,500 to 27,000 h(-1). And Ce(1.0)Mn/TiO2-SP catalyst by in situ deposition method has a better sulfur resistance than Ce(1.0)Mn/TiO2-IP catalyst. Various characterization methods were used to explore the difference of the catalysts prepared by the two methods. The Ce(1.0)Mn/TiO2-SP catalyst exhibited a higher surface area, better thermal stability, a higher concentration of acidic sites, and less agglomeration than the Ce (1.0)Mn/TiO2-IP catalyst. Moreover, the in-situ deposition method resulted in an enhanced electron mobility effect that originated from MnOx and CeOx, thereby enhancing the low-temperature DeNO(x) efficiency. (C) 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Automated summary

Ce(1.0)Mn/TiO2 catalysts with the same Ce/Mn molar ratio were prepared by impregnation method and in situ deposition method. The catalyst prepared by in-situ deposition showed better catalytic performance and sulfur resistance compared to that prepared by impregnation. Various characterization methods were used to explore the differences between the two methods, with the catalyst prepared by in-situ deposition method exhibiting higher surface area, better thermal stability, higher concentration of acidic sites, and less agglomeration than the catalyst prepared by impregnation. The in-situ deposition method also enhanced electron mobility effect, thereby improving low-temperature DeNO(x) efficiency.