4.7 Article

Triple-ligand zeolitic imidazolate frameworks for highly CO2 selective mixed matrix membranes

期刊

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING JOURNAL
卷 433, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.cej.2021.133606

关键词

Zeolitic imidazolate frameworks; Triple-ligands; CO2 separation; Mixed matrix membranes

资金

  1. National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) - Korea government (MISP) [2019R1A2C1085833]
  2. C1 Gas Refinery Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) - ministry of Science and ICT [2019M3D3A1A01069101]
  3. National Research Foundation of Korea [2019M3D3A1A01069101, 2019R1A2C1085833] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A new class of highly CO2 selective ZIF nanoparticles, TAZIF-8, has been reported, and their physical structure and textural properties can be fine-tuned for enhanced CO2 separation performance.
Here, we report a new class of highly CO2 selective ZIF nanoparticles, TAZIF-8, consisting of zinc metals and triple ligands, including 2-methylimidazole (MIm), tributylamine (TBA), and 3-amino-1,2,4-triazole (Atz). The Zn-MIm coordination retains an open porous sodalite topology, while the Zn-TBA analogue contributes to high processability. Lastly, the Zn-Atz coordination enables favorable CO2 permeation via a combination of enhanced size discrimination and specific chemical interactions. A high loading 6FDA-DAM/TAZIF-8 (40 wt%) mixed matrix membrane consequently exhibits an almost threefold increase in CO2 permeability and a twofold increase in CO2 selectivity over other light gases (N-2, CO, or CH4) compared to high performance 6FDA-DAM membrane. Furthermore, it maintains excellent CO2 separation performance over 90 days and even after exposure to water vapor. Our multiple hybrid modification technique enables the fine-tuning of the physical structure and textural properties of ZIF for enhanced CO2 separation performance.

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

4.7
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