Activation of Al–Cu–Fe quasicrystalline surface: fabrication of a fine nanocomposite layer with high catalytic performance

Figures & data

Table 1. List of each samples’ pretreatments and surface areas.

Sample	Pretreatment	SBET(m^2 g^−1-cat)
BL^a	As cast (without treatment)	1.3
AL	After leaching	31.5
AL(873)	AL+calcination in air at 873 K	17.0
AL(H873)	AL(873)+reduction in H2 at 873 K	16.1
reAL(873)	AL(H873)+re-calcination at 873 K	16.2

a As cast Al₆₃Cu₂₅Fe₁₂ QC powder.

Figure 1 (A) Rate of H₂ production versus reaction temperature during SRM over different catalysts: (AL; •) uncalcined QC catalyst, (AL(873); ▴) QC catalyst following calcination in air at 873 K, (BL; ○) unleached QC and (COM; ⋄) commercial catalyst. (B) XRD patterns for QC catalysts after different treatments. (C) H₂-TPR profiles for AL, AL(873) and CuO samples obtained with heating rate of 5 K min⁻¹ in 5% H₂/Ar. (D) Rate of H₂ production versus reaction temperature for SRM over different catalysts: (○) AL, (△) (AL(H873); blue ▴) reduction in H₂ at 873 K and (AL(re873); red ▴) (blue ▴) followed by re-calcination in air at 873 K.

Figure 2 SEM images of surface of: (A) sample AL and (B) sample AL(873).

Figure 3 Cross-sectional TEM bright-field images of (A) sample AL and (B) sample AL(873). The SAED patterns were obtained from the corresponding regions indicated in (A) and (B).

Figure 4 Cross-sectional STEM images of sample AL(873); EDS elemental maps for Al, Cu, Fe and O.