RuO2 supported NaY zeolite catalysts: Effect of preparation methods on catalytic performance during aerobic oxidation of benzyl alcohol

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

Abstract The effects of preparation method for RuO 2 supported zeolite catalysts on the catalytic consequences during the aerobic oxidation of benzyl alcohol to benzaldehyde were investigated. Three preparation methods, i.e., (i) simultaneous crystallization of the zeolite framework in the presence of RuCl 3 (Ru(SC)/NaY), (ii) post ion-exchange with RuCl 3 on the zeolite framework (Ru(IE)/NaY), and (iii) post support of preformed Ru metal nanoparticles on the zeolite surface (Ru(PS)/NaY), were used to construct three different RuO 2 supported NaY zeolite catalysts. The catalyst performance was investigated as functions of the reaction time and temperature, in correlation with the structural changes of the catalysts, as analyzed by X-ray diffraction (XRD). The results revealed that the catalytic consequences were dramatically affected by the preparation methods. Although similar conversion was achieved with all three catalysts, the turnover frequency (TOF) differed. The Ru(PS)/NaY catalyst exhibited the highest TOF (33−48 h −1 ), whereas the other catalysts produced much lower TOFs (9−12 h −1 ). The Ru(PS)/NaY catalyst also had the highest activation energy ( E a ) of 48.39 kJ mol −1 , whereas the Ru(SC)/NaY and Ru(IE)/NaY catalysts had E a values of 18.58 and 24.11 kJ mol −1 , respectively. Notably, the Ru(PS)/NaY catalyst yielded a significantly higher pre-exponential factor of 5.22 × 10 5 h −1 , which is about 5 orders of magnitude larger than that of the Ru(SC)/NaY catalyst (7.15 × 10 0 h −1 ). This suggests that collision between benzyl alcohol and molecular oxygen was very intensive on the Ru(PS)/NaY catalyst, which explains the higher TOF of the Ru(PS)/NaY catalyst relative to the others in spite of the higher E a value of the former. In terms of recyclability, the pristine crystallinity of the zeolite framework was maintained in the Ru(SC)/NaY catalyst and the RuO 2 phase exhibited an insignificant loss of the initial activity up to three catalytic cycles, whereas Ru(PS)/NaY showed slight loss of activity and Ru(IE)/NaY showed a significant loss of activity due to the disappearance of the RuO 2 phase.