4.7 Article

Identification of active sites for preferential oxidation of CO over Ru/TiO2 catalysts via tuning metal-support interaction

期刊

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING JOURNAL
卷 475, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.cej.2023.146051

关键词

Ru/TiO2; Metal-support interaction; Active sites; Langmuir-Hinshelwood model; preferential oxidation of CO

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, Ru/TiO2 catalysts prepared by chemical-reduction method showed high performance in CO-PROX. The catalyst with enhanced metal-support interaction exhibited flat Ru nanoparticles, leading to more active sites and significantly improved reaction rate and intrinsic activity. Compared with conventional catalysts, this catalyst achieved 100% CO conversion in a wide temperature range.
Preferential oxidation of CO (CO-PROX) is promising to purify H2 resources for proton-exchange membrane fuel cells with the challenges of identifying active sites and developing efficient catalysts. Herein, we report the high CO-PROX performance of Ru/TiO2 catalysts prepared by chemical-reduction method. The kinetic results reveal that the CO-PROX mechanism over the Ru/TiO2 catalysts follows the Langmuir-Hinshelwood model. We discover that Ru delta+ sites are more active for O2 activation and CO oxidation, while Ru0 sites prefer CO methanation in CO-PROX. The enhanced metal-support interaction (MSI) induces the formation of flat Ru nanoparticles, thereby increasing the number of interfacial Ru delta+ sites. Especially, compared with the conventional catalyst prepared by conventional wetness impregnation method, the as-synthesized RuTi-CR-R200 catalyst with strengthened MSI exhibits about 27 and 13 times higher reaction rate and intrinsic activity, respectively, for CO-PROX. To the best of our knowledge, our catalyst surpasses the catalytic performance of the reported Ru-based catalysts, and achieves 100% CO conversion in the wide temperature range of 90-150 degrees C, as well as high stability.

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