4.5 Article

DFT reveals the support effects in Pd nanoclusters over defect-ridden graphene for the oxidative addition of bromobenzene

期刊

MOLECULAR CATALYSIS
卷 521, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.mcat.2022.112205

关键词

Oxidative addition; Cross-coupling; Activation barriers; Double vacancy graphene; B-doped graphene; Density functional theory

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, the activity of small Pd-n clusters immobilized on graphene supports for the oxidative addition of bromobenzene was investigated. The results showed that defected graphene supports act as charge donors, significantly reducing the activation barriers of oxidative addition and making them potential heterogeneous catalysts for cross-coupling reactions.
Oxidative addition of aryl halides is an elementary and the rate limiting step common to several cross-coupling reactions. Metal complex-based homogeneous catalysts are conventionally used for catalysing such reactions. In search for heterogeneous catalysts, graphene has been widely used as a support for immobilising catalytically active Pd nanoparticles or clusters. In this study, we investigated the activities of small Pd-n (n = 3, 4) clusters immobilised over pristine and defected graphenes for the oxidative addition of bromobenzene in the presence of water solvation. We compared the adsorption energetics and activation barriers of oxidative addition for a series of graphene supports and contrasted them with homogeneous free Pd-n catalysts. Our theoretical investigations reveal the defected graphene supports to act as charge donors thereby drastically reducing the activation barriers of oxidative addition of bromobenzene when compared to free Pd-n clusters. Double vacancy defected graphene and B-doped graphene were concluded as the best support materials providing stronger traps for small Pd-n (n = 3, 4) clusters and reducing the oxidative addition barriers, making them potential heterogeneous catalysts for cross-coupling reactions.

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

4.5
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