4.8 Article

Application of Raman Spectroscopy for Sorption Analysis of Functionalized Porous Materials

期刊

ADVANCED SCIENCE
卷 9, 期 9, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/advs.202105477

关键词

adsorption; functionalized porous materials; gas separation; Raman spectroscopy

资金

  1. RESOLV - Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation) under Germany's Excellence Strategy-EXC-2033-project [390677874]
  2. DFG [RI 2482/2-1, 269357610]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Functionalized porous materials are crucial for gas separation processes, and Raman spectroscopy is shown to be an efficient tool for characterizing the adsorption capacity and selectivity of translucent porous materials. This spectroscopic approach can be used as a rapid screening method for these materials.
Functionalized porous materials could play a key role in improving the efficiency of gas separation processes as required by applications such as carbon capture and storage (CCS) and across the hydrogen value chain. Due to the large number of different functionalizations, new experimental approaches are needed to determine if an adsorbent is suitable for a specific separation task. Here, it is shown for the first time that Raman spectroscopy is an efficient tool to characterize the adsorption capacity and selectivity of translucent functionalized porous materials at high pressures, whereby translucence is the precondition to study mass transport inside of a material. As a proof of function, the performance of three silica ionogels to separate an equimolar (hydrogen + carbon dioxide) gas mixture is determined by both accurate gravimetric sorption measurements and Raman spectroscopy, with the observed consistency establishing the latter as a novel measurement technique for the determination of adsorption capacity. These results encourage the use of the spectroscopic approach as a rapid screening method for translucent porous materials, particularly since only very small amounts of sample are required.

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