4.8 Article

Intermetallic Nanocatalyst for Highly Active Heterogeneous Hydroformylation

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY
卷 143, 期 49, 页码 20907-20915

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/jacs.1c09665

关键词

-

资金

  1. NSF [CHE-2108306/2108307]
  2. Iowa State University
  3. Michael and Denise Mack Faculty Fellowship

向作者/读者索取更多资源

RhZn intermetallic nanoparticles have been developed as an exceptional catalyst for efficient heterogeneous hydroformylation, showing high activity and selectivity compared to traditional homogeneous catalysts. Density functional theory calculations reveal that RhZn surfaces reduce the binding strength of reaction intermediates and have lower activation energy barriers, leading to more favorable reaction energetics. Additionally, potential catalyst design strategies for achieving high regioselectivity have been predicted.
Hydroformylation is an imperative chemical process traditionally catalyzed by homogeneous catalysts. Designing a heterogeneous catalyst with high activity and selectivity in hydroformylation is challenging but essential to allow the convenient separation and recycling of precious catalysts. Here, we report the development of an outstanding catalyst for efficient heterogeneous hydroformylation, RhZn intermetallic nanoparticles. In the hydroformylation of styrene, it shows three times higher turnover frequency (3090 h(-1)) compared to the benchmark homogeneous Wilkinson's catalyst (966 h(-1)), as well as a high chemoselectivity toward aldehyde products. RhZn is active for a variety of olefin substrates and can be recycled without a significant loss of activity. Density functional theory calculations show that the RhZn surfaces reduce the binding strength of reaction intermediates and have lower hydroformylation activation energy barriers compared to pure Rh(111), leading to more favorable reaction energetics on RhZn. The calculations also predict potential catalyst design strategies to achieve high regioselectivity.

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

4.8
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