4.6 Article

TiO2-CeOx-Pt Hollow Nanosphere Catalyst for Low-Temperature CO Oxidation

期刊

CHEMCATCHEM
卷 -, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/cctc.202301358

关键词

Catalyst; ceria; CO oxidation; hollow nanospheres; titania

向作者/读者索取更多资源

TiO2-CeO2-Pt hollow nanospheres with uniform size distribution of Pt nanoparticles were successfully synthesized using a liquid-phase strategy. The catalytic properties of the hollow nanospheres were evaluated for CO oxidation and demonstrated promising activity and stability, suggesting their potential application as high-porosity catalyst materials.
TiO2-CeO2-Pt hollow nanospheres (1 wt-% Pt) are realized using a liquid-phase strategy using NaCl as a template. The NaCl template is first coated with TiO2 and thereafter with CeO2 via the hydrolyzation of TiCl(OiPr)(3) and Ce(OiPr)(4) as suitable alkoxides. Finally, the NaCl template is removed by washing with water. The resulting @TiO2-CeO2 hollow nanospheres (: inner cavity) exhibit an outer diameter of 140-180 nm, a wall thickness of 30-40 nm, an inner cavity of 80-100 nm, a specific surface area of 210 m(2)/g, a pore volume and area of 0.08 cm(3)/g and 191 m(2)/g, mainly with micropores >= 5 angstrom and <= 14 angstrom. The hollow nanosphere support is impregnated with Pt nanoparticles, using two different methods - a wet-chemical deposition (Pt(ac)(2), acetone, 25(degrees)C) and a supercritical fluid reactive deposition (SFRD) process ([Pt(COD)Me-2], supercritical CO2, 80 C-degrees, 15.6 MPa) resulting in an uniform size distribution with Pt nanoparticles 2.5 +/- 0.1 nm (TiO2-CeO2-PtWCD) and 2.3 +/- 0.1 nm (TiO2-CeO2-PtSFRD) in size. The catalytic properties of the TiO2-CeO2-Pt hollow nanospheres are evaluated for CO oxidation between 50 and 500 C-degrees. A promising catalytic activity and stable light-out/light-off temperatures are observed especially for the TiO2-CeO2-PtSFRD sample, indicating the suitability of hollow nanospheres as high-porosity catalyst material.

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

4.6
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