Advertisement

Catalysis Letters

, Volume 116, Issue 3–4, pp 155–160 | Cite as

Comparison of NO adsorbing ability and process on Pt/Mg/Al oxide catalysts prepared by different methods

  • Junhua Li
  • Wei Li
  • Shoufang Kang
  • Rui Ke
Article

Abstract

Pt/Mg/Al metal oxide catalysts were prepared by impregnation and co-precipitation methods, respectively. These samples were characterized by BET, XRD and NO-TPD; their NO X storage property and adsorbing intermediate species were investigated with NSC and FTIR. The results showed that the prepared methods exert significant influence on the physical structure properties and the adsorption abilities of NO. (Pt)/Mg/Al samples prepared by impregnation (IM) have larger specific areas and higher NO X storage capacity than (Pt)/Mg/Al catalysts prepared by co-precipitation (CP). The intermediate species of NO adsorbing process indicated that NO was firstly adsorbed as bridged nitrites both on Pt/Mg/Al (IM) and on Pt/Mg/Al (CP), then on Pt/Mg/Al (IM) the nitrites transferred into monodentate and bidentate nitrate species while on Pt/Mg/Al (CP) the nitrites only transferred into monodentate nitrate species.

Keywords

NOX NSR NOX storage capacity FTIR Pt/Mg/Al 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was financially supported by the National Natural Science foundation of China, and the National High-Tech Research and Development (863) Program of China (Grant No. 2006AA060301).

References

  1. 1.
    Takahashi N., Shinjoh H., Iijima T., Suzuki T., Yamazaki K., Yokota K., Suzuki H., Miyoshi N., Matsumoto S., Tanizawa T., Tanaka T., Tateishi S., Kasahara K. (1996) Catal. Today 27:63Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Castoldi L., Nova I., Lietti L., Forzatti P. (2004) Catal. Today 96: 43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Nova I., Castoldi L., Lietti L., Tronconi E., Forzatti P. (2002) Catal Today 75:431CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wei X., Liu X., Deeba M. (2005) Appl Catal B 58:41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Liu Z., Anderson J.A. (2004) J. Catal. 224:18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kabin K.S., Muncrief R.L., Harold M.P. (2004) Catal. Today 96:79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sedlmair Ch., Seshan K., Jentys A., Lercher J.A. (2002) Catal. Today 75:413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    N.W. Cant, M.J. Patterson (2002) Catal. Today 73:271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fanson P.T., Horton M.R., Nicholas W., Lauterbach J. (2003) Appl. Catal. B 46:393CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yamazaki K., Suzuki T., Takahashi N., Yokota K., Sugiura M. (2001) Appl. Catal. B 30:459CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    G. Centi, G. Firnasari, C. Gobbi, M. Livi, F. Trifiró, A. Vaccari. Catal. Today 73 (2002) 287.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fornasari G., Trifiró F., Vaccari A., Prinetto F., Ghiotti G., Centi G. (2002) Catal. Today 75:421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Westerberg B., Fridell E. (2001) J. Mol. Catal. A: Chem. 165:201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sedlmair C., Seshan K., Jentys A., Lercher J.A. (2003) J. Catal. 214:308CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Environment Science and EngineeringTsinghua UniversityBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations