A study of ruthenium catalysts on oxide supports

Cattania, M.G.; Parmigiani, F.; Ragaini, V.

doi:10.1016/0039-6028(89)90880-7

Cited by 34 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Alincorporation increases the strength of Ru adsorption on the support and induces relatively small particle size and good dispersion of the loaded metal. 30,31 XPS spectra conrmed this characteristic (Fig. 4); XPS peaks around 280.3 eV of Ru 3p 5/2 spectra (corresponding to Ru 4+ and Ru 3+ or RuO 2 ) showed a shi to higher binding energies with increasing Al content in Si/Al-x samples, indicating an increase in the strength of the interaction between the metal and support.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 87%

Direct confinement of Ru nanoparticles inside nanochannels of large pore mesoporous aluminosilicate for Fischer–Tropsch synthesis

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 87%

Direct confinement of Ru nanoparticles inside nanochannels of large pore mesoporous aluminosilicate for Fischer–Tropsch synthesis

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The peak separation of Ru 3d was carried out between 277.5 eV and 292.5 eV according to the previous report by Cattania et al [33]. The binding energy of Ru 3d 5=2 of Ru(0) was referred to be 280.2 eV [33], and the Ru in the oxidized state was separated into RuO 2 , RuO 2 AE xH 2 O and RuOx. The binding energies of Ru 3d 5=2 of RuO 2 , RuO 2 AE xH 2 O and RuOx were referred to be 280.7 eV [32], 281.4 eV [34] and 282.5 eV$ [32], respectively.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The peaks of Ru 3d 3=2 of Ru(0), RuO 2 , RuO 2 AE xH 2 O and RuOx were set according to the assumption that the ratio of the peak area of Ru 3d 3=2 to Ru 3d 5=2 was 2:3 and the binding energy of Ru 3d 3=2 was shifted to 4.17 eV higher than that of Ru 3d 5=2 [32]. RuClx was not set in as the literature [33] because the Cl 2p peak was slight and it was difficult to assign trace RuClx in the oxidized Ru. The binding energy of C 1s peak for adventitious hydrocarbon was set at between 284.6 eV and 285.0 eV [35,36].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, the Al 2p line of 74.4 eV of the Al 2 O 3 support was used as an internal reference for determination of the binding energies [32]. The peak separation of Ru 3d was carried out between 277.5 eV and 292.5 eV according to the previous report by Cattania et al [33]. The binding energy of Ru 3d 5=2 of Ru(0) was referred to be 280.2 eV [33], and the Ru in the oxidized state was separated into RuO 2 , RuO 2 AE xH 2 O and RuOx.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Reaction and Surface Characterization Studies of Ru/Al2O3 Catalysts for CO Preferential Oxidation in Reformed Gas

Echigo¹,

Tabata²

2004

Catalysis Letters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In order to investigate the reasons the activation of a Ru/Al 2 O 3 catalyst by heating in a H 2 /N 2 mixed gas improves the CO preferential oxidation (PROX) activity, the oxidation state of the Ru on the catalyst surface was studied by using ESCA. As the ratio of Ru(0) to total Ru on the surface was increased, the temperature window of the Ru catalyst, where CO was reduced to below 10 ppm, was expanded to the lower temperature side. The activity of CO oxidation by O 2 of the Ru catalyst at lower temperatures was improved by increasing the ratio of Ru(0). However, the selectivity for CO oxidation hardly varied with the change in the surface Ru(0) ratio at these low temperatures. It is considered that O 2 activation on Ru(0) plays an essential role in CO PROX activity on the Ru catalyst at low temperatures.

show abstract

“…The actual oxidation state of the latter species is not well defined, being widely admitted that several Ru species, such as RuO x , RuCl x , RuO 2 ÁxH 2 O or RuO x H y , may coexist. [28][29][30][31][32] The Ru/M atomic ratio values are also shown in Table 2. The three TiO 2 -based samples (RuTi1, RuTi0.8 and RuTi0.8N) display similar Ru/M values (0.07-0.08), while that for the RuSA sample is significantly higher (1.24).…”

Section: Characterizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Support effects on the structure and performance of ruthenium catalysts for the Fischer–Tropsch synthesis

Carballo

Finocchio

Garcia

et al. 2011

Catal. Sci. Technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The influence of support and metal precursor on Ru-based catalysts has been studied in the\ud Fischer–Tropsch synthesis (FTS) combining flow reactor and quasi in situ infrared spectroscopy\ud experiments. A series of supported ruthenium catalysts (3 wt.%) have been prepared using two\ud different TiO2 (P25, 20% rutile and 80% anatase; Hombifine, 100% anatase) and SiO2Al2O3\ud (28% Al2O3) as supports and RuCl3nH2O as metal precursor. The catalysts were labeled as\ud RuTi0.8, RuTi1 and RuSA respectively. Another catalyst (RuTi0.8N) has been synthesized with\ud TiO2P25 and Ru(NO)(NO3)3. After thermal treatments in air at 723 K and hydrogen at 443 K,\ud ruthenium metal particles are agglomerated when pure anatase TiO2 and SiO2Al2O3 are used as\ud supports, leading to low active catalysts. In contrast, and despite the lower specific surface area of\ud TiO2P25 as compared to that of the other supports, well dispersed Ru particles are stabilized\ud on titania P25. Remarkably, electronic microscopy studies demonstrate that Ru is deposited\ud exclusively on the rutile phase of TiO2P25. The catalytic performance shown by all these\ud catalysts in FTS reactions follows the order: RuTi0.8 4 RuTi0.8N 4 RuSA c RuTi1. The same\ud trend is observed during quasi in situ FTS experiments conducted in an infrared (IR) spectroscopy\ud cell. The FTIR spectra of TiO2P25 supported samples show that both samples behave similarly\ud under the FTS reaction. This work shows that the structure of the support, rather than its specific\ud surface area or the Ru precursor, is the parameter that determines the dispersion of Ru particles,\ud hence their catalytic performance

show abstract

A study of ruthenium catalysts on oxide supports

Cited by 34 publications

References 9 publications

Direct confinement of Ru nanoparticles inside nanochannels of large pore mesoporous aluminosilicate for Fischer–Tropsch synthesis

Direct confinement of Ru nanoparticles inside nanochannels of large pore mesoporous aluminosilicate for Fischer–Tropsch synthesis

Reaction and Surface Characterization Studies of Ru/Al2O3 Catalysts for CO Preferential Oxidation in Reformed Gas

Support effects on the structure and performance of ruthenium catalysts for the Fischer–Tropsch synthesis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About