4.8 Article

Operando XAFS Studies on Rh(CAAC)-Catalyzed Arene Hydrogenation

期刊

ACS CATALYSIS
卷 9, 期 5, 页码 4106-4114

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acscatal.8b04929

关键词

operando XAFS; rhodium nanoparticles; arene hydrogenation; Rh(CAAC); benzothiophene poisoning; cationic rhodium

资金

  1. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science, Office of Basic Energy Sciences, Division of Chemical Sciences, Geosciences and Biosciences
  2. U.S. DOE [DE-AC02-06CH11357]
  3. Canadian Light Source

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Rh K-edge X-ray absorption fine structure (XAFS) spectroscopy was used to examine the Rh-catalyzed arene hydrogenation of diphenyl ether by a combination of stoichiometric reactions of [(CAAC(Cy,Dipp))Rh(COD)Cl] (Rh-C1) (CAAC(Cy,Dipp)= cyclic alkyl amino carbene) and operando XAFS kinetics studies. Our results unequivocally show that Rh nanoparticles, generated from the single-site Rh complex Rh-Cl, catalyze the arene hydrogenation. Operando XAFS studies illuminate the role of silver cation on the precatalyst reactivity, the effect of increasing H-2 pressure on increasing the catalytic efficiency, the stabilizing influence of Ph2O on the relative rate of formation of active Rh nanoparticles, and the absence of soluble single-site Rh species that might leach from bulk heterogeneous Rh nanoparticles. We gained insights into the divergent deactivation pathways mediated by substoichiometric benzothiophene and excess (KOBu)-Bu-t toward H-2 activation, which is a key step en route to Rh nanoparticles for arene hydrogenation. Excess KO t Bu leads to the formation of a Rh-(OBu)-Bu-t complex that interferes with H-2 activation, precluding the formation of Rh nanoparticles. Benzothiophene does not interfere with the activation of H-2 at Rh in the CAAC(Cy,Dipp) complex while Rh nanoparticles are formed. Once Rh nanoparticles are formed, however, benzothiophene binds irreversibly to the Rh nanoparticles, preventing the adsorption of H-2 and diphenyl ether for arene hydrogenation.

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