2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.memsci.2017.09.037
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Grain size control of ZIF-8 membranes by seeding-free aqueous synthesis and their performances in propylene/propane separation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2

Citation Types

2
47
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 60 publications
(49 citation statements)
references
References 39 publications
2
47
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The overall performances of LIPS membranes, in terms of propylene permeance and propylene/ propane selectivity, are among the best that have been reported for both ZIF-8 and ZIF-67 membranes ( Fig. 1D and table S1) (5,6,10,13,18,19,(23)(24)(25)(26)(27)(28).…”
mentioning
confidence: 60%
“…The overall performances of LIPS membranes, in terms of propylene permeance and propylene/ propane selectivity, are among the best that have been reported for both ZIF-8 and ZIF-67 membranes ( Fig. 1D and table S1) (5,6,10,13,18,19,(23)(24)(25)(26)(27)(28).…”
mentioning
confidence: 60%
“…The grain density observed here, in 10-12 min of growth, is an order of magnitude larger than that reported in the literature. 55 The grains become relatively less uniform at longer growth time ( Fig. 2g and h).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 91%
“…For the H 2 /CH 4 mixture, the H 2 ‐separation performance of the ZIF‐8/GONR/PES membrane (marked with red stars) surpassed those of previous ZIF‐8 membranes fabricated on polymeric supports (marked with blue diamonds) and was comparable to those of ZIF‐8 membranes fabricated on inorganic support [ 27,30–46 ] (marked with hollow circles) (Figure 3e and Table S1, Supporting Information). For the H 2 /C 3 H 8 mixture, however, the H 2 selectivity was drastically enhanced without sacrificing the hydrogen permeance, leading to ultrafast, selective H 2 separation performance, as marked with a red star in Figure 3f and Table S2, Supporting Information.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 82%