92
A. Martínez-Arias et al. / Journal of Catalysis 221 (2004) 85–92
ison of bridging nitrosyl species for both catalysts reveals
that, surprisingly, the 0.5% Pd catalyst appears to sustain a
greater amount of such species at low temperature (consider-
ing the grea−te1r extinction coefficient of the bicarbonate band
at 1439 cm with respect to that of the overlapping band
at 1654 cm−1 for this analysis [30]). NO reverse spillover
effects, which would be favoured when a higher amount of
support (i.e., for lower metal loading) is exposed, may also
play a role in this observation [13]. Nevertheless, the ob-
served results are compatible with the higher NO reduction
activity of the 1% Pd catalyst and apparently reflect the more
efficient NO dissociation over this catalyst within the bal-
ance of NO adsorption/dissociation processes taking place
on the surface of the catalysts.
(A.B.H.) for financial help under the “Ayudas para estancias
breves en centros de investigación extranjeros” program.
Thanks are due to Dr. R. Cataluña for the preparation of
some of the catalysts. Financial help by project CICyT (Ref.
MAT 2000-1467) is also acknowledged.
References
[1] E.S.J. Lox, B.H. Engler, in: G. Ertl, H. Knözinger, J. Weitkamp (Eds.),
Environmental Catalysis, Wiley–VCH, New York, 1999, p. 1.
[2] R.M. Heck, R.J. Farrauto, Appl. Catal. A 221 (2001) 443.
[3] A. Martínez-Arias, M. Fernández-García, A.B. Hungría, A. Iglesias-
Juez, K. Duncan, R. Smith, J.A. Anderson, J.C. Conesa, J. Soria,
J. Catal. 204 (2001) 238.
[4] Z. Hu, C.Z. Wan, Y.K. Lui, J. Dettling, J.J. Steger, Catal. Today 30
(1996) 83.
4. Conclusions
[5] J.R. González-Velasco, J.A. Botas, R. Ferret, M.P. González-Marcos,
J.-L. Marc, M.A. Gutiérrez-Ortiz, Catal. Today 59 (2000) 395.
[6] S. Tagliaferri, R.A. Köppel, A. Baiker, Appl. Catal. B 15 (1998) 159.
[7] J.H. Holles, M.A. Switzer, R.J. Davis, J. Catal. 190 (2000) 247.
[8] A. Martínez-Arias, M. Fernández-García, A. Iglesias-Juez, A.B. Hun-
gría, J.A. Anderson, J.C. Conesa, J. Soria, Appl. Catal. B 31 (2001)
51.
A combined catalytic activity in situ DRIFTS study
of stoichiometric CO–O2 and CO–O2–NO reactions over
PdO/γ -Al2O3 catalysts with different Pd loadings has been
carried out. Results for the CO–O2 reaction are in line with
many studies in the literature showing that the catalysts fol-
low typical Langmuir–Hinshelwood kinetics in which the
reaction is initially rate limited by CO desorption from the
metallic particles except for a sample with a very small Pd
loading for which the reaction onset is shifted to signifi-
cantly higher temperatures, in which case CO adsorption
may become the rate-determining step for the reaction. The
light-off profiles show certain irregularities at low reaction
temperatures which are attributed to the fact that the num-
ber of active sites undergoes a change during the course of
the reaction as a consequence of the process of formation
of metallic Pd particles. A comparison between the catalyst
activities for CO oxidation and NO reduction under stoi-
chiometric CO–O2–NO reveals significant differences for
NO reduction processes. These are explained on the basis of
different structural characteristics of the Pd particles formed
in each case following interaction with the reactant mix-
ture. In this respect, it is shown that NO dissociation (which
may be the rate-determining step under the employed con-
ditions) is most favoured over the larger Pd particles formed
for the highest loaded sample, as deduced from catalytic ac-
tivity results and DRIFTS analysis of the nature (redox state
and coordination number of the adsorption site) and the rela-
tive intensities of atop–bridging carbonyl or nitrosyl species
formed for each catalyst.
[9] D.R. Rainer, S.M. Vesecky, M. Koranne, W.S. Oh, D.W. Goodman,
J. Catal. 167 (1997) 234.
[10] N. Matthess, D. Schweich, B. Martin, F. Castagna, Top. Catal. 16/17
(2001) 119.
[11] M. Fernández-García, A. Martínez-Arias, A. Iglesias-Juez, A.B. Hun-
gría, J.A. Anderson, J.C. Conesa, J. Soria, J. Catal. 214 (2003) 220.
[12] K. Otto, L.P. Haack, J.E. deVries, Appl. Catal. B 1 (1992) 1.
[13] L. Piccolo, C.R. Henry, J. Mol. Catal. A 167 (2001) 181.
[14] R. Raval, G. Blyholder, S. Haq, D.A. King, J. Phys. Condens. Matter 1
(1989) SB165.
[15] X. Xu, P. Chen, D.W. Goodman, J. Phys. Chem. 98 (1994) 9242.
[16] S.M. Vesecky, P. Chen, X. Xu, D.W. Goodman, J. Vac. Sci. Technol.
A 13 (1995) 1539.
[17] K. Almusaiteer, S.C. Chuang, J. Catal. 184 (1999) 189.
[18] I.V. Yudanov, R. Sahnoun, K.M. Neyman, N. Rösch, J. Hoffmann, S.
Schauermann, V. Johánek, H. Unterhalt, G. Rupprechter, J. Libuda,
H.-J. Freund, J. Phys. Chem. B 107 (2003) 255, and references therein.
[19] X. Xu, D.W. Goodman, J. Phys. Chem. 97 (1993) 7711.
[20] K. Wolter, O. Seiferth, H. Kuhlenbeck, M. Bäumer, H.-J. Freund, Surf.
Sci. 399 (1998) 190.
[21] M. Frank, M. Bäumer, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2 (2000) 3723.
[22] T. Engel, G. Ertl, Adv. Catal. 28 (1979) 2.
[23] I. Meusel, J. Hoffmann, J. Hartmann, J. Libuda, H.-J. Freund, J. Phys.
Chem. B 105 (2001) 3567.
[24] P. Hollins, Surf. Sci. Rep. 16 (1992) 51.
[25] J. Libuda, I. Meusel, J. Hoffmann, J. Hartmann, L. Piccolo, C.R.
Henry, H.-J. Freund, J. Chem. Phys. 114 (2001) 4669.
[26] F. Duprat, Chem. Eng. Sci. 57 (2002) 901.
[27] F. Solymosi, J. Rasko, J. Catal. 63 (1980) 217.
Acknowledgments
[28] N. Macleod, R.M. Lambert, Chem. Commun. (2003) 1300.
[29] B. Hammer, J. Catal. 199 (2001) 171.
A.B.H. and A.I.-J. thank the Comunidad de Madrid for
grants under which this work has been carried out and
[30] A. Martínez-Arias, M. Fernández-García, A. Iglesias-Juez, J.A. An-
derson, J.C. Conesa, J. Soria, Appl. Catal. B 28 (2000) 29.