A detailed understanding of reaction mechanisms and kinetics is required in order to develop and optimize catalysts and catalytic processes. While steady-state investigations are known to give a global view of the catalytic system, transient studies are invaluable since they can provide more comprehensive insight into elementary steps. For almost forty years temporal analysis of products (TAP) has been successfully utilized for transient studies of gas phase heterogeneous reactions, and there have been a number of advances in instrumentation and numerical modeling methods in that time. Since TAP is a complex methodology it is often viewed as a niche specialty. With the purpose to make TAP more relevant and approachable to a wider segment of the catalytic research community, part of the intention of this work is to highlight the significant contributions TAP has made to elucidating mechanistic and kinetic aspects of complex, multistep heterogeneous reactions. With this in mind, an outlook is also disclosed for the technique in terms of what is needed to revitalize the field and make it more applicable to the recent advances in catalyst characterization (e.g. operando modes).
In the development of catalytic materials, a set of standard conditions is needed where the kinetic performance of many samples can be compared. This can be challenging when a sample set covers a broad range of activity. Precise kinetic characterization requires uniformity in the gas and catalyst bed composition. This limits the range of convecting devices to low conversion (generally <20%). While steady-state kinetics offer a snapshot of conversion, yield and apparent rates of the slow reaction steps, transient techniques offer much greater detail of rate processes and hence more information as to why certain catalyst compositions offer better performance. In this work, transient experiments in two transport regimes are compared: an advecting differential plug flow reactor (PFR) and a pure-diffusion temporal analysis of products (TAP) reactor. The decomposition of ammonia was used as a model reaction to test three simple materials: polycrystalline iron, cobalt and a bimetallic preparation of the two. These materials presented a wide range of activity and it was not possible to capture transient information in the advecting device for all samples at the same conditions while ensuring uniformity. We push the boundary for the theoretical estimates of uniformity in the TAP device and find reliable kinetic measurement up to 90% conversion. However, what is more advantageous from this technique is the ability to observe the time-dependence of the reaction rate rather than just singular points of conversion and yield. For example, on the iron sample we observed reversible adsorption of ammonia and on cobalt materials we identify two routes for hydrogen production. From the time-dependence of reactants and product, the dynamic accumulation was calculated. This was used to understand the atomic distribution of H and N species regulated by the surface of different materials. When ammonia was pulsed at 550 °C, the surface hydrogen/nitrogen, (H/N), ratios that evolved for Fe, CoFe and Co were 2.4, 0.25 and 0.3 respectively. This indicates that iron will store a mixture of hydrogenated species while materials with cobalt will predominantly store NH and N. While much is already known about iron, cobalt and ammonia decomposition, the goal of this work was to demonstrate new tools for comparing materials over a wider window of conversion and with much greater kinetic detail. As such, this provides an approach for detailed kinetic discrimination of more complex industrial samples beyond conversion and yield.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.