1991
DOI: 10.1016/0021-9517(91)90080-n
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The role of surface structure and dispersion in CO hydrogenation on cobalt

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

6
30
0

Year Published

1997
1997
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
4
4

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 157 publications
(36 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
6
30
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Iglesia et al established that neither the nature of the support nor the dispersion of Co particles influenced turnover frequency (TOF) of these catalysts, but it was proportional to the concentration of active sites on the surface [4][5][6]. Johnson et al [7] agree with the fact that TOF was not affected by dispersion, although CO conversion seemed to be strongly dependent on Co reducibility. However, Reuel and Bartholomew [8] or Bessell [9] exposed that both low metal-support interactions and high dispersion are required parameters to obtain a really active cobalt based catalyst.…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 64%
“…Iglesia et al established that neither the nature of the support nor the dispersion of Co particles influenced turnover frequency (TOF) of these catalysts, but it was proportional to the concentration of active sites on the surface [4][5][6]. Johnson et al [7] agree with the fact that TOF was not affected by dispersion, although CO conversion seemed to be strongly dependent on Co reducibility. However, Reuel and Bartholomew [8] or Bessell [9] exposed that both low metal-support interactions and high dispersion are required parameters to obtain a really active cobalt based catalyst.…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 64%
“…Indeed, the results reported by den Breejen et al [67] are issued from cobalt nanoparticles deposited on carbon nanofibers with peculiar prismatic planes, and thus, some specific interaction could also influence the FTS performance compared to the results reported on cobalt supported on other supports such as silica, alumina, or titania. Johnson et al [68] have reported that FTS can be structure-insensitive under certain reaction conditions and the FTS activity and selectivity were function of the chemical nature of the support instead of the cobalt dispersion and size. Similar results have also been reported by Borg et al [69] who observed no direct relationship between the FTS activity and the cobalt particle size.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[10] The results diverge over smaller Co particles, and some research groupsh ave reported ad ecreaseo ft he TOF with decreasing particle size, [6,7,9,14] whereas others do not observe this effect. [3,4,12,13] The cause for this discrepancy has been attributed to al arge range of phenomena such as ap referential oxidation or carbidization of small Co particles, difference in reducibility,f ormation of Co-support mixed compounds, or to an inappropriatem easurement of the surfaceC oa toms. For the latter issue, Yang et al have compared H 2 and CO chemisorption methods to determine the Co particles ize.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Numerous studies have been devoted to gain an understanding of the effect of the support and Co structure on the catalytic performance. [2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15] The precise influence of the catalyst variables remains unclear.T he effect of the Co particles ize on the activity and selectivity is still under debate.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%