4.8 Review

In situ solid-state NMR for heterogeneous catalysis: a joint experimental and theoretical approach

期刊

CHEMICAL SOCIETY REVIEWS
卷 41, 期 1, 页码 192-210

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c1cs15009j

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [20403017, 20573106, 20673111, 20873140]
  2. Ministry of Science and Technology of China [G1999022400, 2005CB221400, 2003CB615806, 2009CB623507]
  3. Chinese Academy of Sciences

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In situ solid-state NMR is a well-established tool for investigations of the structures of the adsorbed reactants, intermediates and products on the surface of solid catalysts. The techniques allow identifications of both the active sites such as acidic sites and reaction processes after introduction of adsorbates and reactants inside an NMR rotor under magic angle spinning (MAS). The in situ solid-state NMR studies of the reactions can be achieved in two ways, i.e. under batch-like or continuous-flow conditions. The former technique is low cost and accessible to the commercial instrument while the latter one is close to the real catalytic reactions on the solids. This critical review describes the research progress on the in situ solid-state NMR techniques and the applications in heterogeneous catalysis under batch-like and continuous-flow conditions in recent years. Some typical probe molecules are summarized here to detect the Bronsted and Lewis acidic sites by MAS NMR. The catalytic reactions discussed in this review include methane aromatization, olefin selective oxidation and olefin metathesis on the metal oxide-containing zeolites. With combining the in situ MAS NMR spectroscopy and the density functional theoretical (DFT) calculations, the intermediates on the catalyst can be identified, and the reaction mechanism is revealed. Reaction kinetic analysis in the nanospace instead of in the bulk state can also be performed by employing laser-enhanced MAS NMR techniques in the in situ flow mode (163 references).

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

4.8
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