Zhuonan Song1,2, Yi Huang1,2, Weiwei L Xu1,2, Lei Wang1,2, Yu Bao3, Shiguang Li4, Miao Yu1,2. 1. Department of Chemical Engineering, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC 29208. 2. SmartState Center of Catalysis for Renewable Fuels, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC 29208. 3. College of Applied Science and Technology, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY 14623. 4. Gas Technology Institute, 1700S. Mount Prospect Road, Des Plaines, IL 60018.
Abstract
Zeolites/molecular sieves with uniform, molecular-sized pores are important for many adsorption-based separation processes. Pore size gaps, however, exist in the current zeolite family. This leads to a great challenge of separating molecules with size differences at ~0.01 nm level. Here, we report a novel concept, pore misalignment, to form a continuously adjustable, molecular-sieving "gate" at the 5A zeolite pore entrance without sacrificing the internal capacity. Misalignment of the micropores of the alumina coating with the 5A zeolite pores was related with and facilely adjusted by the coating thickness. For the first time, organic molecules with sub-0.01 nm size differences were effectively distinguished via appropriate misalignment. This novel concept may have great potential to fill the pore size gaps of the zeolite family and realize size-selective adsorption separation.
Zeolites/molecular sieves with uniform, molecular-sized pores are important for many adsorption-based separation processes. Pore size gaps, however, exist in the current zeolite family. This leads to a great challenge of separating molecules with size differences at ~0.01 nm level. Here, we report a novel concept, pore misalignment, to form a continuously adjustable, molecular-sieving "gate" at the 5A zeolite pore entrance without sacrificing the internal capacity. Misalignment of the micropores of the alumina coating with the 5A zeolite pores was related with and facilely adjusted by the coating thickness. For the first time, organic molecules with sub-0.01 nm size differences were effectively distinguished via appropriate misalignment. This novel concept may have great potential to fill the pore size gaps of the zeolite family and realize size-selective adsorption separation.
Zeolites/molecular sieves are one of the most promising adsorbents that may help realize
true molecular-sieving separation, because of their uniform, molecular-sized pores
(0.3~1.3 nm) and high chemical, thermal, and mechanical stabilities1. Pore size gaps, however, exist in the current zeolite family, which
leads to the difficulty in separating molecules with small size/shape differences,
especially at the 0.01 nm level.Pore size of zeolites/molecular sieves can be adjusted by several techniques, including
ion exchange2, framework control34567, and zeolite
external surface modification8910. Ion exchanges have been used as an
effective way of adjusting the pore sizes of LTA (Linde Type A) zeolites2. The framework of some zeolites, such as zeolite rho, may deform substantially upon
adsorption of some molecules3. A molecular sieve, ETS-4, has been shown
to contract gradually through dehydration at elevated temperatures so that its effective
pore size can be adjusted at approximately 0.01 nm step4.
Recently, a novel method, called ADOR (assembly-disassembly-organization-reassembly),
was applied to chemically selectively remove germanium from germanosilicate zeolite UTL
in a top-down strategy to prepare a series of IPC zeolites with continuously tuneable
surface area and micropore volume567. Pore opening size of mordenite
zeolite was reduced at 0.1 nm level by chemical vapor deposition (CVD) of silica
coatings on the external surface of zeolites8. The CVD modified ZSM-5
zeolite showed increased shape selectivity of xylene isomers, and HZSM-5 zeolite showed
enhanced para-selectivity in the methylation of toluene910. But, the
pore opening reduction mechanism for CVD modified zeolite was not clear8910. Despite a large selection pool of zeolites/molecular sieves and
available techniques to adjust their pore sizes, not all desired pore sizes can be
obtained for target separations. This is especially the case for separating molecules
that are very close in size. In addition, pore modification and structure changes were
always realized by sacrificing adsorption capacity or internal cavity4111213. Here, we report, for the first time, a bottom-up approach
for precise pore mouth size adjustment for 5A zeolite from 0.5 to 0.46 nm
without sacrificing internal cavity by pore misalignment; organic molecules with size
differences as small as 0.01 nm were effectively distinguished by appropriate
misalignment.We used molecular layer deposition (MLD) to form a conformal hybrid aluminum alkoxide
(alucone) coating on the 5A zeolite surface (Supplementary Materials). The hybrid alucone coating was subsequently
calcined in air to remove the organic compound to generate a porous alumina coating14. MLD provides exquisite control of the coating thickness at the
sub-nanometer level and thus achieves conformal coating on substrates even with
high-aspect-ratio features1516171819. Figure
1a shows a transmission electron microscopy (TEM) image of 5A zeolite with 60
cycles of MLD; after calcination an approximately 20 nm thick coating was
deposited on the 5A zeolite surface, corresponding to a nominal porous alumina
deposition rate of 0.33 nm/cycle. The weight percentage of 60 cycles of MLD
coating on 5A zeolite is estimated to be < 2% by applying the coating
density19 and thickness, 5A zeolite solid density20,
and external surface area of 5A zeolite crystals, estimated from the average particle
size and shape (Figure S1 in Supplementary
Materials). X-ray photoelectron (XP) spectra (Fig. 1b) shows after
120 cycles of MLD, silicon (2p binding energy at 102.3 eV) in 5A zeolite can
hardly be seen due to the shorter excited electron mean free path than MLD coating
thickness; the MLD coatings are composed of alumina (Table S1 and Figure S2 in Supplementary Materials). X-ray diffraction (XRD) confirmed LTA
zeolite structure before and after MLD, and MLD coatings did not change zeolite
structure (Figure S3 in Supplementary
Materials). Brunauer–Emmett–Teller (BET) measurement and N2
sorption analysis show that 5A zeolites with and without MLD coatings had almost
identical surface area (343.5 ± 8.3 m2/g)
(Fig. 1c), and identical micropore volume
(0.20 cm3/g) (Fig. 1c); argon sorption
analysis further confirms there is no change in micropore volume after MLD coating
deposition (Figure S4e). This suggests
coatings were only on the external surface of 5A zeolite and the internal cavity of the
zeolite was maintained. We also measured vapor adsorption isotherm of the MLD precursor,
trimethyl aluminum (TMA), and found negligible adsorbed amounts (Figure S6 in Supplementary Materials). Therefore, MLD
coatings are expected to be only on the external surface of 5A zeolite, instead of
inside the zeolite pores. To further confirm the ultrathinMLD coating is on the 5A
zeolite surface and has negligible effect on the internal cavity of 5A zeolite, we also
measured CH4 adsorption isotherms on 5A zeolite and 5A zeolite with different
cycles of MLD coatings (Fig. 1d); almost identical CH4
adsorbed amounts were found, indicating ultrathinMLD coating did not enter zeolite
internal pores. These results demonstrate that ultrathin, porous MLD coatings were
deposited only on the external surface of 5A zeolite.
Figure 1
Characterization of 5A zeolite and 5A zeolite with molecular layer deposition
(MLD) coatings.
(a) Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) image of 5A-Zeolite-60.
(b) X-ray photoelectron spectra (XPS) of Si 2P of 5A zeolite and
5A zeolite with different cycles of MLD coating on 5A zeolite. (c)
BET surface area of 5A zeolite and 5A zeolite with different cycles of MLD
coatings (•), and micropore volume of 5A zeolite and 5A zeolite with
different cycles of MLD coatings (■). Error bar is given
automatically by Micromeritcs ASAP 2020 unit. (d) CH4
adsorption isotherms at 20 °C on 5A zeolite
(■), 5A-Zeolite-30 ( ○), and 5A-Zeolite-60
(∆). Solid black line is a fit of adsorption points of
CH4 on 5A zeolite by the Langmuir model. All MLD coatings
have been calcined in air following the procedure described in the supplementary information.
We measured vapor adsorption isotherms of organic molecules with different sizes/shapes
(critical diameter: ethanol, 0.450 nm; 1-propanol, 0.456 nm; 1-butanol,
0.463 nm; acetone, 0.479 nm; and 2-propanol, 0.490 nm (Figure S7 in Supplementary Materials)) to
explore the effective pore sizes (Figure S8
in Supplementary Materials). Figure 2a shows the sorption capacity
of different molecules on 5A zeolite and 5A zeolite with different cycles of MLD
coatings, corresponding to different coating thicknesses. 5A zeolite adsorbs all these
molecules because its pore size is larger than them. Also, 5A zeolite shows low ideal
adsorption selectivity for these molecules due to the small size differences of these
molecules and the similar adsorption strength, with the highest for ethanol over acetone
(~4). We found these organic molecules, from the largest molecule (2-propanol)
to the second smallest molecule (1-propanol), were excluded from the zeolite pores one
by one with the increase of MLD cycles, indicating effective pore size decreased
gradually. Figure 2b summarizes the pore size change with the
coating thickness, and a clear gradual decrease trend of the pore size can be seen. This
demonstrates the effective pore size can be precisely controlled at a step change of
approximately 0.01 nm by controlling the coating thickness or MLD cycles. In addition,
sorption capacity of the smallest molecule, ethanol, decreased only approximately 15%
with the increase of MLD cycles up to 60, while rejecting larger molecules. Two most
probable mechanisms may result in the observed effective pore size reduction: 1) the
decreasing micropore size in the MLD coating with the increase of MLD cycles; 2) the
reducing interface pores between the MLD coating and the 5A zeolite pores due to the
pore misalignment, as depicted in Fig. 2c, which slightly and
gradually reduces the zeolite pore entrance size or forms a molecular
“gate” at the entrance. We propose pore misalignment as the pore
reduction mechanism, whereas the first possibility is much less likely based on more
evidences discussed in the next paragraphs. In addition, due to the amorphous feature of
the MLD coating, we expect the extent of pore misalignment is not exactly the same above
all the zeolite pores, and thus a pore entrance size distribution is likely.
Figure 2
Exclusion of organic molecules with different sizes by 5A zeolite and 5A
zeolite with MLD coatings.
(a) Adsorption capacity of molecules on 5A zeolite and 5A zeolite with
different cycles of MLD coating: ethanol (□), 1-propanol (
○), 1-butanol (), acetone (), and
2-propanol (); equilibrium pressure is at 50% of the
saturation pressure of each component. Error bar shows standard deviation of
triplicate measurements. (b) Molecular “gate” sizes
with different thickness of microporous alumina coatings; the
“gate” size is defined as the average of the smallest
excluded molecule and the largest molecule that can be adsorbed; an excluded
molecule is defined as a molecule whose adsorbed amount is less than 10% of
that in 5A. (c) Schematic representation of the proposed pore size
reduction mechanism: misalignment of the micropores of the MLD coating with
5A zeolite crystal pores.
We conducted a series of experiments to investigate the pore reduction mechanism, as
discussed below. Figure 3a shows that after pre-adsorbing
2-propanol, the CH4 adsorbed amounts on 5A zeolite with 30 cycles of MLD
coating (5A-Zeolite-30, abbreviation will be used in the following description) did not
change and were essentially the same as those on bare 5A zeolite. However, 5A zeolite,
after pre-adsorbing 2-propanol, had negligible CH4 uptake. Apparently,
without the microporous coating 5A zeolite pores have been occupied by 2-propanol, while
with 30 cycles of MLD all the zeolite pores are available for CH4 adsorption.
This is consistent with the result in Fig. 2a, which shows
5A-Zeolite-30 successfully excluded 2-propanol. Although pre-adsorbed 2-propanol had
negligible effects on equilibrium CH4 uptake, it drastically influenced
CH4 uptake kinetics. Figure 3b shows that
CH4 uptake rate is almost the same on 5A zeolite and 5A-Zeolite-30. This
makes sense because the “gate” size (>0.47 nm) of 5A zeolite
with ultrathinMLD coating is too large to affect the CH4 (kinetic diameter:
0.38nm21) uptake rate. After pre-adsorbing 2-propanol on
5A-Zeolite-30 for 90 minute, CH4 uptake rate decreased approximately
50 times, as suggested by the diffusivity difference, calculated from the short time
update results22. Since 2-propanol can’t enter zeolite pores of
5A-Zeolite-30, the drastically slowed CH4 uptake rate must be due to the
blocking of MLD coating pores by pre-adsorbed 2-propanol. Therefore, we conclude MLD
coating pores must be larger than 2-propanol, but the “gate” size is
smaller than 2-propanol so that it can’t enter 5A zeolite pores. When a much
larger molecule, 2, 2-dimethylbutane (DMB) (kinetic diameter: 0.63 nm23), was used to pre-adsorb on 5A-Zeolite-30, the CH4 uptake
rate was hardly influenced. Apparently, DMB can’t be adsorbed in the MLD coating
pores and thus had negligible influence on CH4 uptake. In these uptake
experiments, the equilibrium CH4 adsorbed amounts (M∞) for
5A zeolite, 5A-Zeolite-30, and 5A-Zeolite-30 after pre-adsorbing 2-propanol and DMB were
very close to each other (0.70, 0.68, 0.66 and 0.69 mmol/g, respectively).
Therefore, comparison of CH4 uptake processes is fair. We also measured
ethanol adsorption kinetics on 5A zeolite and 5A zeolite with different cycles (30 and
60) of MLD coatings (Figure S9). Much slower
ethanol uptake rate after MLD coating was observed, but different thickness of MLD
coatings had negligible effect on ethanol uptake rate. This again suggests the major
transport resistance is not in the MLD coating layer.
Figure 3
Adsorption isotherms and kinetics of CH4 on 5A zeolite and
5A-Zeolite-30 at 20 °C.
(a) Adsorption isotherms of CH4 at 20 °C on
5A zeolite (solid black line), 5A zeolite with pre-adsorbed 2-propanol
(), and 5A-Zeolite-30 with pre-adsorbed 2-propanol
(■). Error bar shows standard deviation of triplicate measurements.
(b) CH4 adsorption kinetics on 5A zeolite (solid black
line), 5A-Zeolite-30 (dash red line), 5A-Zeolite-30 pre-adsorbed with
2,2-dimethyl butane (dot green line), and 5A-Zeolite-30 pre-adsorbed with
2-propanol (dot yellow line); Mt is adsorbed amount of
CH4 at time t, and M∞ is adsorbed amount
at equilibrium.
To further rule out the possibility that the narrowest pore or transport resistance is at
the external surface of the MLD coatings or in the MLD coatings, we crushed samples with
60 cycles of MLD coating (5A-Zeolite-60C) in an attempt to damage the MLD coating. TEM
image (Figure S10a in Supplementary
Materials) showed that after crushing the MLD coating was partially damaged
and showed irregular surface morphology. XP spectra (Figure S10b in Supplementary Materials) showed
drastically increased amount of exposed silicon, compared with that without crushing.
This again suggests the damage of MLD coating and thus is consistent with the TEM image.
However, vapor adsorption isotherms of 2-proponal on 5A-Zeolite-60C was essentially the
same as that before crushing (Figure S11 in
Supplementary Materials). This indicates crushing damaged the MLD coating but did not
change the interface between the MLD coating and 5A zeolite. Apparently, the narrowest
pores are neither on the external surface of MLD coatings nor in the MLD coatings, but
at the interface of the MLD coating and zeolite pores. These adsorption kinetics and
equilibrium results strongly support that the narrowest size of MLD coated 5A zeolite
must be at the interface between the MLD coating and the 5A zeolite pores and pore
misalignment is the actual mechanism. We speculate the extent of misalignment is related
with the thermal stress generated at the interface during calcination. Analytical
modelling study24 has shown that interfacial shear stress due to
thermomechnical loading increases with the increase of the adhesive/coating thickness,
and thus larger shift/displacement is expected with thicker coatings (also see analysis
in Figure S12 in Supplementary
Materials).The designable 5A zeolite with desired molecular-sieving “gate” offers a
new opportunity for separating small organic molecules based on size differences as
small as 0.01 nm. Figure 4a shows adsorption isotherms of
ethanol and 1-butanol on 5A-Zeolite-60, and an ideal selectivity as high as ~196
has been obtained, in strong contrast with ~4 for 5A zeolite, showing its
potential for extracting ethanol from 1-butanol, for example, in catalytic conversion of
ethanol into 1-butanol2526272829. In addition, 5A-Zeolite-30 may
be used for 1-butanol/acetone separation (Fig. 4b) in the second
important large-scale industrial fermentation, acetonebutanol ethanol (ABE)
fermentation30. 5A-Zeolite-20 may be used for acetone/2-propanol
separation (Fig. 4c) in the hydrogenation of acetone to
2-propanol31. These examples suggest 5A zeolite can be rationally
designed via appropriate pore misalignment by MLD to obtain desired molecular
“gate” sizes for size-selective adsorption separation. We also measured
50/50 ethanol/butanol liquid mixture adsorption on 5A zeolite and 5A-Zeolite-60 and
found that the adsorbed phase contains ~10% butanol in 5A zeolite but <0.5%
in 5A-Zeolite-60, indicating great potential of MLD coated 5A for molecular-sieving
separation of liquid mixtures.
Figure 4
Adsorption isotherms of organic molecules at
20 °C on 5A zeolite with different cycles of
MLD coatings.
(a) ethanol and 1-butanol on 5A-Zeolite-60; Error bar shows standard
deviation of triplicate measurements. (b) 1-butanol and acetone on
5A-Zeolite-30; (c) acetone and 2-propanol on 5A-Zeolite-20. P is the
vapor pressure, and P0 is the saturation pressure.
P0(Ethanol) = 50 Torr,
P0(1-Butanol) = 7 Torr,
P0(Acetone) = 201 Torr,
P0(2-Propanol) = 36 Torr.
In summary, we demonstrated a completely new concept, pore misalignment, to form a
size-screening “gate” on the 5A zeolite surface. The size of the
“gate” can be adjusted by changing microporous alumina coating
thickness, whereas the internal cavity of zeolites will be maintained. This novel
concept has great potential to be utilized to fill pore size gaps of the zeolite family
and to design zeolite-based molecular-sieving sorbents for selective separation of
molecules with very small size differences and may potentially be used for
size-selective catalysis using zeolites/molecular sieves.
Methods
The aluconeMLD coatings were prepared by using trimethyl aluminum and ethylene
glycol as precursors. Adsorption isotherms were measured by a volumetric method,
using a home-built adsorption system. The BET surface areas were measured by a
Micromeritcs ASAP 2020 unit. A Zeiss Ultra Plus FE-SEM was used to determine 5A
zeolite particle size and morphology. X-ray powder diffraction (XRD) was carried out
using a Rigaku MiniFlex II diffractometer with Cu Kα radiation. XP spectra
analysis was performed using a monochromatic Al Ka x-ray source. TEM images of
samples were recorded using a Hitachi H8000 TEM instrument. Further details on the
experimental methods can be found in the Supplementary Information.
Additional Information
How to cite this article: Song, Z. et al. Continuously Adjustable,
Molecular-Sieving “Gate” on 5A Zeolite for Distinguishing Small
Organic Molecules by Size. Sci. Rep.
5, 13981; doi: 10.1038/srep13981 (2015).
Authors: George R M Dowson; Mairi F Haddow; Jason Lee; Richard L Wingad; Duncan F Wass Journal: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl Date: 2013-07-10 Impact factor: 15.336
Authors: Wieslaw J Roth; Petr Nachtigall; Russell E Morris; Paul S Wheatley; Valerie R Seymour; Sharon E Ashbrook; Pavla Chlubná; Lukáš Grajciar; Miroslav Položij; Arnošt Zukal; Oleksiy Shvets; Jiří Cejka Journal: Nat Chem Date: 2013-06-02 Impact factor: 24.427
Authors: S M Kuznicki; V A Bell; S Nair; H W Hillhouse; R M Jacubinas; C M Braunbarth; B H Toby; M Tsapatsis Journal: Nature Date: 2001-08-16 Impact factor: 49.962