4.6 Article

Continuous precipitation of Cu/ZnO/Al2O3 catalysts for methanol synthesis in microstructured reactors with alternative precipitating agents

期刊

APPLIED CATALYSIS A-GENERAL
卷 450, 期 -, 页码 1-12

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.apcata.2012.06.040

关键词

Continuous precipitation; Microstructured mixers; Hydroxycarbonate precursors; Cu/ZnO/Al2O3 catalysts; Methanol synthesis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ternary Cu/ZnO/Al2O3 catalyst systems were systematically prepared by innovative synthesis routes in microstructured synthesis setups, allowing to study different types of micromixers. The coprecipitation in the slit plate and valve-assisted mixers was operated continuously under exact control of pH, temperature, concentration and ageing time. Due to the enhanced surface to volume ratio in microstructured reactors, a precise temperature control and efficient mixing of the reactants are enabled. The precipitation was performed with sodium, ammonium and potassium carbonate as well as sodium hydroxide. To evaluate the potential of the novel synthesis routes, reference samples in a conventional batch process were prepared. The catalysts were synthesized according to the constant pH method with a molar ratio of 60:30:10 for copper, zinc and aluminum. The synthesis routes applied have a significant influence on the structures of hydroxycarbonate precursors and on the catalytic activity in methanol synthesis. XRD patterns of hydroxycarbonate precursors from the synthesis in micromixers, especially using ammonium carbonate as precipitating agent, display high crystallinity and sharp reflections of malachite and rosasite. Cu/ZnO/Al2O3 catalysts prepared in continuously operated micromixers in general show higher specific copper surface areas than catalysts prepared in conventional batch processes. The highest methanol productivity of all prepared catalyst systems was observed with the catalyst precipitated in the slit plate mixer with ammonium carbonate. (C) 2012 Published by Elsevier B.V.

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