Paper
RSC Advances
carbonaceous deposits is weakened, which is directly linked
with its poor catalytic stability.
References
1 N. Yoneda, S. Kusano, M. Yasui, P. Pujado and S. Wilcher,
Appl. Catal., A, 2001, 221, 253–265.
2 M. J. Howard, M. D. Jones, M. S. Roberts and S. A. Taylor,
Catal. Today, 1993, 18, 325–354.
3 A. Haynes, Adv. Catal., 2010, 53, 1–45.
4 X. F. Wu and H. Neumann, ChemCatChem, 2012, 4,
447–458.
5 G. J. Sunley and D. J. Watson, Catal. Today, 2000, 58,
293–307.
6 F. Li, B. Chen, Z. Huang, T. Lu, Y. Yuan and G. Yuan, Green
Chem., 2013, 15, 1600.
7 T. Blasco, M. Boronat, P. Concepcion, A. Corma, D. Law
and J. A. Vidal-Moya, Angew. Chem., 2007, 119, 4012–4015.
8 G. G. Volkova, L. M. Plyasova, A. N. Salanov, G. N. Kustova,
T. M. Yurieva and V. A. Likholobov, Catal. Lett., 2002, 80,
175–179.
9 P. Cheung, A. Bhan, G. J. Sunley and E. Iglesia, Angew.
Chem., Int. Ed., 2006, 45, 1617–1620.
10 P. Cheung, A. Bhan, G. J. Sunley, D. J. Law and E. Iglesia, J.
Catal., 2007, 245, 110–123.
11 A. Bhan, A. D. Allian, G. J. Sunley, D. J. Law and E. Iglesia, J.
Am. Chem. Soc., 2007, 129, 4919–4924.
12 A. Bhan and E. Iglesia, Acc. Chem. Res., 2008, 41, 559–567.
13 J. L. Liu, H. F. Xue, X. M. Huang, P. H. Wu, S. J. Huang, S.
B. Liu and W. J. Shen, Chin. J. Catal., 2010, 31, 729–738.
14 J. L. Liu, H. F. Xue, X. M. Huang, Y. Li and W. J. Shen,
Catal. Lett., 2010, 139, 33–37.
To elucidate the formation of carbonaceous species after
carbonylation, TPO profiles of the spent ZSM-35 samples were
acquired and shown in Fig. 9. Two main peaks at around 320
and 600 uC are observed on Z35. According to Shen et al.,13,14
the oxidation peak at 320 uC is mainly from the surface-bound
methyl and acetyls related to the formation of MA. The high
temperature peak at around 550 uC may be associated with the
heavy coke formed during the course of reaction. The hard
coke at high combustion temperature mainly consists of
aromatic species, especially those located in the 10 MR
channel. For comparison, the profile is deconvoluted into
four peaks using a Gaussian lineshape and the quantitative
analysis results are listed in Fig. 9. Compared with Z35, the
percentage of peak 4 increases from 13% to 21% on AT04
indicating that the capacity of coke species in the 10-MR
channel is enhanced after moderate alkaline treatment. In the
case of AT08, peak 4 shows a decrease in percentage in favor of
an intensity increase for peak 3. We could tentatively deduce
that the limitation effect on carbonaceous deposits of AT08 is
weakened due to the excessive extraction of silicon which is
directly linked with its poor catalytic stability. Definite
assignment to each line could not be achieved now and
relevant study is in progress.
´
´
´
15 M. Boronat, C. Martınez-Sanchez, D. Law and A. Corma, J.
Am. Chem. Soc., 2008, 130, 16316–16323.
16 M. Boronat, C. Martinez and A. Corma, Phys. Chem. Chem.
Phys., 2011, 13, 2603–2612.
5. Conclusions
Through varying the NaOH concentration in the range of 0.1–
0.8 M, a series of ZSM-35 zeolites with different porous
structures were prepared. The mildly alkali-treated ZSM-35
samples exhibited higher carbonylation activity than the
parent sample due to the impressive size decrease of the
deaggregated particles and removal of amorphous Si(Al) debris
on the crystal surface. An enhanced mass transfer behavior of
DME molecule was observed on the AT04 sample. Severe
treatment (AT08) leads to the excessive extraction of frame-
work silicon which weakens the transition state shape selective
and coke suppression functions. An enhanced number of
accessible acid sites is more important than the formation of
mesopores on ZSM-35 zeolites in the DME carbonylation
reaction.
17 E. F. Iliopoulou, S. D. Stefanidis, K. G. Kalogiannis, A.
A. Lappas, J. Martinez-Triguero, M. T. Navarro, A. L. Chica
and F. Rey, Green Chem., 2013, 15, 1647.
18 J. Perez-Ramirez, C. H. Christensen, K. Egeblad and J.
C. Groen, Chem. Soc. Rev., 2008, 37, 2530–2542.
19 J. C. Groen, T. Bach, U. Ziese, A. M. Paulaime-van Donk, K.
P. de Jong, J. A. Moulijn and J. Perez-Ramirez, J. Am. Chem.
Soc., 2005, 127, 10792–10793.
20 J. C. Groen, L. A. A. Peffer, J. A. Moulijn and J. Perez-
Ramirez, Chem.–Eur. J., 2005, 11, 4983–4994.
´
´
21 A. Bonilla, D. Baudouin and J. Perez-Ramırez, J. Catal.,
2009, 265, 170–180.
22 D. Verboekend, R. Caicedo-Realpe, A. Bonilla, M. Santiago
´
´
and J. Perez-Ramırez, Chem. Mater., 2010, 22, 4679–4689.
23 D. Massiot, F. Fayon, M. Capron, I. King, S. Le Calve,
B. Alonso, J. O. Durand, B. Bujoli, Z. H. Gan and
G. Hoatson, Magn. Reson. Chem., 2002, 40, 70–76.
Acknowledgements
24 L. J. M. van de Ven, J. G. Post, J. H. C. van Hooff and J.
W. de Haan, J. Chem. Soc., Chem. Commun., 1985, 214–216.
25 W. Li, X. G. Lei, G. Lem, A. E. McDermott, N. J. Turro, N.
M. Bottke and W. Adam, Chem. Mater., 2000, 12, 731–737.
We thank Mr. Xianchun Liu of Dalian Institute of Chemical
Physics, CAS for the help with MAS NMR measurements. We
are grateful for the financial support of the National Natural
Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 20903088 and
21006104).
ˇ
´
26 P. Sarv, B. Wichterlova and J. Cejka, J. Phys. Chem. B, 1998,
102, 1372–1378.
27 J. E. Lewis, C. C. Freyhardt and M. E. Davis, J. Phys. Chem.,
1996, 100, 5039–5049.
28 I. Kiricsi, C. Flego, G. Pazzuconi, W. O. Parker Jr, R. Millini,
C. Perego and G. Bellussi, J. Phys. Chem., 1994, 98,
4627–4634.
16556 | RSC Adv., 2013, 3, 16549–16557
This journal is ß The Royal Society of Chemistry 2013