4.8 Article

The effect of reactants adsorption and products desorption for Au/TiO2 in catalyzing CO oxidation

期刊

JOURNAL OF CATALYSIS
卷 376, 期 -, 页码 134-145

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcat.2019.06.038

关键词

Au/TiO2; In-situ characterization; Reactants adsorption; Products desorption; CO oxidation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Supported gold catalysts exhibit very high activity for CO oxidation. However, there is lack of systematic study for supports effect on reactants adsorption and products desorption. Herein, we successfully prepared supported gold catalysts on TiO2 matrix exposing either {1 0 1} or {0 0 1} crystal plane (labeled as Au/TiO2-1 0 1 and Au/TiO2-0 0 1 respectively) by deposition-precipitation (DP) method. It is found that the reactivity of Au/TiO2-1 0 1 was much higher than Au/TiO2-0 0 1 in CO oxidation reaction (9.33 x 10(-3) mol(CO)g(Au)(-1) s(-1) vs. 6.23 x 10(-4) mol(CO)g(Au)(-1) s(-1) at 30 degrees C). The gold nanoparticles (similar to 2 nm) were detected as sole gold species in Au/TiO2-1 0 1, while not only gold nanoparticles (similar to 4 nm) but also clusters (similar to 1.3 nm) were present in Au/TiO2-0 0 1. The difference in gold status induced different CO adsorption situations that CO was more effectively adsorbed on gold nanoparticles in Au/TiO2-1 0 1 which existed more Au-0 site. Meanwhile, we revealed that the bidentate carbonate, which could either block active sites for the reaction or hinder access of reactants, were adsorbed much more strongly on TiO2-0 0 1. While on TiO2-1 0 1, bicarbonate was the main surface species which was easier decomposed to form CO2. Therefore, the differences between Au/TiO2-1 0 1 and Au/TiO2-0 0 1 in the efficiency of CO adsorption and the ability of CO2 desorption resulted in disparate reactivity. We reasonably gave the deep insight into the support effect that was intrinsically related to the adsorption and desorption behavior of surface species on the catalyst. (C) 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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