Abstract
The application of membrane‐based separation processes for propylene/propane (C3H6/C3H8) is extremely promising and attractive as it is poised to reduce the high operation cost of the established low temperature distillation process, but major challenges remain in achieving high gas selectivity/permeability and long‐term membrane stability. Herein, a C3H6 facilitated transport membrane using trisilver pyrazolate (Ag3pz3) as a carrier filler is reported, which is uniformly dispersed in a polymer of intrinsic microporosity (PIM‐1) matrix at the molecular level (≈15 nm), verified by several analytical techniques, including 3D‐reconstructed focused ion beam scanning electron microscropy (FIB–SEM) tomography. The π‐acidic Ag3pz3 combines preferentially with π‐basic C3H6, which is confirmed by density functional theory calculations showing that the silver ions in Ag3pz3 form a reversible π complex with C3H6, endowing the membranes with superior C3H6 affinity. The resulting membranes exhibit superior stability, C3H6/C3H8 selectivity as high as ≈200 and excellent C3H6 permeability of 306 Barrer, surpassing the upper bound selectivity/permeability performance line of polymeric membranes. This work provides a conceptually new approach of using coordinatively unsaturated 0D complexes as fillers in mixed matrix membranes, which can accomplish olefin/alkane separation with high performance.
Keywords: C3H6/C3H8 separation, facilitated transport, mixed matrix membrane, trisilver complex
A novel trisilver complex with strong π‐acidity for coordination with olefins is successfully used to design a well‐dispersed mixed matrix membrane for efficient propylene/propane separation.

1. Introduction
Separation of propylene/propane (C3H6/C3H8) mixture represents a class of the most important and also the costliest olefin/paraffin separations in the chemical and petrochemical industry.[ 1 ] C3H6 is a prime olefin feedstock for petrochemical production and an essential building block for the manufacture of various chemicals, including polypropylene. The end use of C3H6 is governed by its purity, because high purity C3H6 (minimum 99.5 wt%, polymer‐grade specifications) is required for polymer production.[ 2 ] The purity of C3H6 primarily depends on the removal of C3H8, with which it is mixed. As the key physico‐chemical properties of C3H6 and C3H8 such as boiling point and molecular size are largely indistinguishable, highly energy‐intensive multiplate low temperature distillation is currently employed industrially to separate the mixture. It is reported that the low temperature separation of 1 ton propylene (>99%) from a propylene/propane mixture derived from steam cracking consumes ≈8.0 × 106 kJ energy, which amounts to 0.3% of the total global energy use for this petrochemical separation every year.[ 3 , 4 ] In 2016, one estimate of the global propylene production was 99 million tons and the expected demand growth rate, until 2025, is 4.0%/year.[ 5 ] The large capital expense and energy cost required for low temperature distillation have aroused extensive research interest for C3H6/C3H8 separation by alternative means.[ 6 ] Membrane‐based processes have been suggested as a way to replace or integrate low temperature distillation units while also lowering energy costs in the separation section.[ 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 ] It is estimated that the energy consumption of membrane separation for C3H6/C3H8 is only 40% that of low temperature distillation.[ 5 ] Therefore, research on more efficient C3H6/C3H8 separation technology is of great value as it has the potential to reduce world energy consumption.
Membrane‐based separation process has produced very encouraging results, specifically in terms of olefin/paraffin separations.[ 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 ] Recently, Lee et al.[ 19 ] found that a membrane with 11.3 GPU (1 GPU = 1 × 10−6 cm3 (STP)/cm2 s cmHg) of C3H6 permeability and a C3H6/C3H8 selectivity of 68 components is needed to replace a typical C3 distillation separation process. The greatest challenges for membrane technology are to achieve suitably high selectivity/permeability and long‐term operational stability because it is technically and practically feasible to replace the distillation column with membrane units that perform appropriately. However, the harsh operational conditions that membrane must withstand could result in performance loss.[ 20 , 21 ]
For the separation of C3H6/C3H8 and other gas pairs, the permselectivity of pure polymeric membranes are often limited by the selectivity/permeability trade‐off effect. Zeolites and carbon molecular sieve membranes face other difficulties in terms of economical and scalable fabrication, because they are inherently brittle.[ 22 , 23 ] On the other hand, silver salt‐doped facilitated transport membranes have been extensively studied and have demonstrated significant achievements for useful C3H6/C3H8 selectivity.[ 5 ] Through reversible interactions (π‐complexation) between Ag ions and C3H6, Ag ions acting as carriers can realize the efficient transport of C3H6 through the membranes. However, silver‐facilitated transport membranes have shown problems with long‐term stability, owing to the easy poisoning of Ag ions by impurities in the feed stream.[ 24 , 25 , 26 ]
Mixed‐matrix membranes (MMMs) are fabricated by dispersing selective fillers in processable polymer matrices, and are an effective strategy for improving the performance of membranes.[ 27 ] This strategy allows fabrication of a membrane with both enhanced separation performance and scalable fabrication, similar to that for simple, pure polymeric membranes.[ 28 ] In general, and for C3H6/C3H8 separation, MMMs require that the filler should have good compatibility with the polymer matrix, to minimize interfacial defects and nonideal structures. Chung et al. report a series of homogeneous nanocomposite membranes combined with sulfocalixarenes (SCAs) by molecular level dispersion.[ 29 , 30 ] The MMMs interfacial compatibility was significantly enhanced. Furthermore, strong interactions with C3H6 and/or appropriate filler pore size for molecular sieving of C3H6 from C3H8 are important. Facilitated membrane transport is achieved by a reversible chemical reaction or complexation combined with a diffusion process, driven by pressure. Typical reversible complexation processes include hydrogen‐bonding, acid–base interactions, chelation, clathration, and π bonding.[ 21 ] A majority of studies have focused on the direct utilization of silver salts as fillers for the preparation of MMMs, whereby porous polymers are frequently used as carriers; an example is AgBF4/PEO.[ 5 , 31 , 32 ] Facilitated transport membranes based on Ag+ have shown promise in propylene/propane separation, but the long‐term stability of Ag+ has precluded industrial adoption.[ 17 , 33 ]
Here we report facilitated C3H6 transport membranes based on a triangular trisilver metal ion pyrazolato complex (Ag3pz3, pz: pyrazole/pyrazole derivatives) through the MMM approach. Ag3pz3 has π‐acidity and thus is expected to selectively combine with π‐basic C3H6,[ 34 , 35 ] but this conceptual approach has not yet been explored in the field of membrane separation. Unlike MOFs, Ag3pz3 is a 0D molecule (≈10 Å) that is soluble in many organic solvents, making it possible to prepare membrane with a molecular‐level dispersion of these fillers.[ 36 ] In addition, the Ag3pz3 complex can be tailored to optimize π‐acidity and compatibility with the polymeric matrix. Therefore, Ag3pz3 is a promising material for fabricating C3H6/C3H8 separation membranes.
Here, we fabricate a new type of facilitated transport membrane for C3H6/C3H8 separation, derived from an Ag3pz3 complex with strong π‐acidity. To achieve simultaneously strong π‐acidity and good compatibility with the polymer matrix, a pyrazole (butyl 3,5‐dinitro‐1H‐pyrazole‐4‐carboxylate) with two electron‐withdrawing nitro‐ and one n‐butyl group is designed (Scheme S1, Supporting Information). The Ag+ in the complex can form a reversible π complex with C3H6 to facilitate C3H6 transport and achieve an efficient separation for the C3H6/C3H8 (Figure 1 ). Polymer of intrinsic microporosity (PIMs) contain both an internal through‐hole microporous structure and a high specific surface area of the microporous material, as well as strong thermal stability and solvent processability of the general polymer material.[ 37 , 38 ] The molecular structure of PIMs determines its microporous structure, which is unaffected by heat treatment or processing. PIMs' molecular self‐distortion and rigid molecular structure hinders the effective stacking of molecular chains formed an inherent microporous structure between molecular chains.[ 39 , 40 ] As a result, PIM‐1 was chosen as the polymer matrix for the production of facilitated transported membrane.
Figure 1.

Schematic diagram of the DFT optimized C3H6 and C3H8 in Ag3pz3. a) The synthesis of Ag3pz3 complex. b) The C3H6 adsorption energy during the transport process is −38.5 kJ mol−1. c) The C3H8 adsorption energy during the transport process is −4.4 kJ mol−1. (The distance is in Angstrom (Å))
2. The Fabrication of Ag3pz3
Ag3pz3 was synthesized from butyl‐3,5‐dinitro‐1H‐pyrazole‐4‐carboxylate and AgNO3 in methanol solvent at ambient temperature for 2 h (Figure 1a), which was characterized by FTIR, 13C NMR and 1H NMR and powder XRD (Figures S3–S5 and Table S1, Supporting Information). X‐ray analysis reveals that Ag3pz3 consists of three linear two‐coordinated silver atoms, each pair of which is bridged by a pyrazolyl ligand, forming a planar nine‐membered Ag3N6 ring (Figure S6, Supporting Information). The presence of strong electron‐withdrawing nitro and ester groups on pyrazolyl ring enhances the π‐acidity of Ag+, thus favoring the complexation between the Ag3pz3 and C3H6.[ 24 ]
To verify the complexing ability of π‐acidic Ag+ in the Ag3pz3 complex with C3H6 and C3H8, the possible adsorption configurations between Ag3pz3, C3H6, and C3H8, as well as their corresponding adsorption energies were calculated by density functional theory (DFT) (the DFT calculation method is given in the Supporting Information). First, the optimized structural information (Figure S7, Supporting Information) obtained from the DFT calculations is consistent with the experimental crystal structure (Figure S6, Supporting Information). Bader charge analysis results (Figure S8, Supporting Information) show that the Ag+ in Ag3pz3 is an important adsorption site with an average of about 0.6 donor electrons. The adsorption energies of C3H6 and C3H8 are −38.5 and −4.4 kJ mol−1, respectively, which are about an order of magnitude different. The interatomic distances of the adsorption molecules are illustrated in Figure 1b,c. The distances between the C3H6 and the single Ag+ are distinctly shorter than those of C3H8 because of the strong π complexing, thus confirming that Ag3pz3 adsorbs C3H6 much more readily than C3H8. In addition, DFT calculation also suggests that the center of the triangular Ag3pz3 molecule could be another adsorption site for C3H6/C3H8 separation, although less efficient (Figure S9, Supporting Information). Based on the DFT results, we propose possible transport mechanisms of the membrane: one main facilitating transport process for the reversible acid–base complexation of C3H6 via a π‐acidic single silver of Ag3pz3, and one synergistic transport process for the reversible acid–base complexation of C3H6 with the π‐acidic Ag3pz3.
3. The Prepartion of Facilitated Transport Membrane
The facilitated C3H6 transport membranes are prepared by incorporating Ag3pz3 nanocrystals into a microporous polymer matrix, polymer of intrinsic microporosity (PIM‐1).[ 41 , 42 ] The rigid ladder‐like polymer chain has sites of contortion, endowing PIM‐1 with microporosity, which result in high gas permeability and moderate selectivity. The butyl group on the pyrazolyl ring of Ag3pz3 serves to improve the solubility of the Ag3pz3 complex in polymer matrix and organic solvent.[ 43 ] Apart from solubilizing Ag3pz3 in organic solvents, the n‐butyl groups enhance the compatibility between Ag3pz3 and the PIM‐1 matrix, effectively minimizing interface defects in the Ag3pz3/PIM‐1 membrane. As shown in Figure 2d,e and Figure S11 (Supporting Information), the Ag3pz3 exhibits as a good dispersion in the PIM‐1 polymer matrix with a visually defect‐free Ag3pz3/PIM‐1 interface. Cross‐sectional TEM images of Ag3pz3/PIM‐1‐10 membrane indicate that the size of the Ag3pz3 complex is approximately 15 nm (Figure 2f,g; Figure S12, Supporting Information), and it achieves a molecular level dispersion in the PIM‐1 polymer matrix. The SAED of the Ag3pz3/PIM‐1‐10 membrane confirms that the structure of the Ag3pz3 complex retains integrity in the polymer. The chemical features of the PIM‐1 and Ag3pz3/PIM‐1 facilitated transport membrane is also verified by XRD and FTIR (Figure S11, Supporting Information).
Figure 2.

Design and fabrication of the Ag3pz3/PIM‐1 mixed matrix membrane: a) Schematic of the Ag3pz3/PIM‐1 facilitated transport membrane (the silver complex facilitates the transport of propylene and endows the membrane with high C3H6/C3H8 separation efficiency); b) Optical pictures of Ag3pz3/PIM‐1‐10 membrane and its casting solution; c–e) Cross‐sectional SEM images of Ag3pz3/PIM‐1‐10 membrane at various magnifications; f,g) Cross‐sectional TEM images of the Ag3pz3/PIM‐1‐10 membrane with different magnifications (The inset is the selected area electron diffraction (SAED) of the Ag3pz3/PIM‐1‐10 membrane).
To further explore the structural and physicochemical properties of the Ag3pz3 complex, alongside their dispersibility in the polymer matrix, which present promising features for their integration into advanced membrane materials for olefin/alkane separation, the internal structure of the Ag3pz3/PIM‐1 membrane was further analyzed. To investigate the internal structure of the Ag3pz3/PIM‐1‐10 membrane, 3D reconstruction and tomographic FIB‐SEM were used,[ 44 , 45 ] as shown in Figure 3 . A groove at the observation site was engraved by focused ion beam (FIB) on the upper membrane surface (Figure 3a) and a series of cross‐section SEM images were captured during the continuous FIB milling of thin slices (Figure 3b; Figure S13, Supporting Information). SEM cross‐sectional images show that Ag3pz3 complex is uniformly dispersed in the polymer matrix, which is consistent with the TEM results of ultrathin sections of the membrane. After aligning the SEM images obtained from the FIB sections, the imaged volumes were reconstructed in 3D. A complete tomogram is provided as Movie S1 (Supporting Information), while surface‐rendered views that have been divided into various phases are shown in Figure 3d and Figure S13 in the Supporting Information. From the results of the 3D reconstruction, the Ag3pz3 complex exhibited excellent dispersibility in the polymer. The volume size distribution results show that the volume of Ag3pz3 is ≈500 nm3 and the size distribution is relatively uniform (Figure S14, Supporting Information). UV–vis spectroscopy shows that Ag3pz3/PIM‐1 membranes have a broadband absorption between 200 and 300 nm. The wavelength ranges of absorption bands for different Ag3pz3/PIM‐1 membranes are listed in Table S4 (Supporting Information), which show that the number of absorption bands decline with decreasing Ag3pz3 content, with an accompanying blue shift.[ 46 ] The evident blue shift indicates the quantum size effect of the nano‐material, further verifying the small size of Ag3pz3 complex in the PIM‐1 matrix.[ 47 ] The Ag3pz3 size in the Ag3pz3/PIM‐1‐20 membrane becomes wider as the content of Ag3pz3 complex increases (Figure S12, Supporting Information) and this phenomenon is consistent with the quantum size effect.
Figure 3.

Tomographic FIB–SEM analysis of Ag3pz3/PIM‐1 mixed matrix membrane: a) Overview SEM image of a focused ion beam (FIB) carved trench on the surface of an Ag3pz3/PIM‐1‐10 membrane (The central area of the imaged cross‐section that was chosen for additional analysis is indicated by the yellow frame), b) The Ag3pz3/PIM‐1‐10 membrane’ cross‐sectional SEM 160th piece picture, c) 3D reconstruction of the Ag3pz3/PIM‐1‐10 membrane’ FIB‐SEM tomogram, d) The Ag3pz3/PIM‐1‐10 membrane’ segmented FIB‐SEM tomograms (Ag3pz3 particles are depicted in blue and the boxes' dimensions in the Figure 3d are 5.1:3.2:2.8 m in the x, y, and z directions).
4. The Obtained Membrane Separation Performance
Pure C3H6 and C3H8 gas permeation on PIM‐1 membranes with Ag3pz3 different wt% loadings, shown in Figure 4a, demonstrates that selectivity is greatly improved by the incorporation of Ag3pz3 complex. The permeability of C3H6 steadily decreases with increasing loading of Ag3pz3. This trend is the result of an acid–base reversible complexation process between π‐acidic Ag+ in Ag3pz3 and π‐basic C3H6. The interaction mechanism between the C3H6 and Ag+ called π‐bond complexation.[ 10 ] The π‐bond complexation occurs when the bonding orbital of C3H6 contributes electronic density to the vacant outermost orbital of Ag+ (5s), resulting in the formation of a σ bond. The second link created is a π bond established by the backdonation of the electronic density from the outermost atomic orbital 4d, which is electrically completed, to the C3H6’s π*‐ antibonding molecular orbital.[ 5 , 49 ] With increasing loading of Ag3pz3, π‐acidic Ag+ has multiple acid–base complexation steps with π‐basic C3H6 permeating in the membrane, thus decreasing the permeability of C3H6. However, compared with C3H6, the permeability of C3H8 is reduced more sharply. This may be attributed to two factors: One is that the dispersed Ag3pz3 complex (n‐butyl groups) may serve as a chain stiffener, stiffening the contorted ladder‐like chains and further inducing inefficient chain packing of the PIM‐1 matrix.[ 43 , 50 ] The other is that π‐acidic Ag+ does not complex with C3H8, thus requiring the C3H8 to bypass the Ag3pz3 and permeate through the PIM‐1 matrix (Figure 2a). As the loading of the Ag3pz3 complex increases, the permeability of C3H8 tends to stabilize. This is due to a combination of a longer pathway of C3H8 needed to bypass the complex, and a fewer number of bypassed complexes (the quantum size effect of the complex, i.e., as the content of the Ag3pz3 complex increases, the size of the Ag3pz3 complex increases). The mixed gas (C3H6/C3H8 50:50) separation performance was evaluated (Figure 4d). Compared with the pure gas separation performance, the mixed gas performance of the membrane decreased and the gas permeability increased, which indicated that the C3H6 transport the membrane was affected by other gases. In addition, the presence of C3H8 reduces the complexing ability of Ag+ to C3H6, thereby reducing the selectivity and increasing the permeability. Compared with bare PIM‐1 membrane, molecular dynamics simulation results show that the diffusion rate of C3H6 is increased, while the diffusion rate of C3H8 decreases in Ag3pz3/PIM‐1 (Figure 5 ; Figure S20, Supporting Information), which indicates that Ag3pz3 complex can effectively achieve the separation of C3H6/C3H8. The C3H6 and C3H8 sorption performance of the membranes was evaluated at 298 K. As shown in Figure S18 (Supporting Information), when compared to the bare PIM‐1 membrane's adsorption capacity to C3H6 and C3H8, the adsorption capacity of the Ag3pz3/PIM‐1‐x hybrid membrane to C3H6 and C3H8 is decreased with the Ag3pz3 loaded. The n‐butyl group of Ag3pz3 fills the pores and reduces the porosity and polymer chain spacing. Despite the complexation of Ag+ and C3H6, the total pore volume and specific surface area of the membrane is reduced (Figure S17, Supporting Information) resulting in fewer adsorption sites and a reduction in C3H6 adsorption capacity.
Figure 4.

Separation performance of Ag3pz3/PIM‐1 mixed matrix membrane: a) Single gas C3H6 permeability and C3H6/C3H8 selectivity correlated with various loadings (wt%) of Ag3pz3 complex in the membrane; b) The effect of temperature and pressure on C3H6/C3H8 permselectivity; c) Single gas C3H6, C3H8 permeability and ideal C3H6/C3H8 selectivity dependence with aging time of Ag3pz3/PIM‐1‐10 membrane; d) The performance benchmark based on the state‐of‐the‐art membranes for C3H6/C3H8 separation.[ 40 , 48 ] The benchmark data were listed in Tables S5, S6, S7, and S8 in the Supporting Information. The solid triangular symbols indicate polymeric membranes, whereas the solid circle symbols represent facilitated transport membranes; e) Long‐term stability of Ag3pz3/PIM‐1‐10 membrane under single gas conditions.
Figure 5.

Molecular dynamics (MD) simulation of C3H6 and C3H8 diffusion in membrane. Conformation diagram of a) C3H8 diffusion movement and c) C3H6 diffusion movement (c) at different moments (left PIM‐1, right Ag3pz3/PIM‐1). Concentration distribution diagram of b) C3H8 and d) C3H6 in Ag3pz3/PIM‐1 at different times.
To evaluate the potential of the membranes for industrial applications, the gas separation performance of Ag3pz3/PIM‐1‐10 membrane was investigated at different pressures and temperatures. Figure 4b shows that the C3H6 permeability decreases with increasing feed gas pressure, which may be caused by membrane plasticization. To further explore the effect of temperature on the reversible acid–base complexation process, the performance of Ag3pz3/PIM‐1‐10 at different temperatures was evaluated. The C3H6 permeability and the C3H6/C3H8 selectivity decrease with increasing temperature. (Figure S19, Supporting Information). Since the acid–base complexation is an exothermic process, this results in reduced C3H6 permeability at higher temperatures. For C3H8, there is a minimal temperature effect on permeability and thus, the C3H6/C3H8 selectivity decreases.
The aging behavior of Ag3pz3/PIM‐1‐10 was evaluated on a membrane stored in an ambient environment. Permeability of C3H6 initially dropped sharply during the first 60 d as the polymer segments underwent densification, and then the permeability gradually stabilized with extended time. Ag3pz3 has only a weak complexation with C3H8 in the facilitated transport process, and concomitantly reduces the permeability of C3H8 in the polymer matrix. Different from C3H6, the aging process of the Ag3pz3/PIM‐1‐10 membrane does not exert a significant effect on the permeability of C3H8. Therefore, the C3H6/C3H8 selectivity of the Ag3pz3/PIM‐1 membrane tends to remain stable in a long term after the initial decline.
To investigate the stability of Ag3pz3 in membranes after the long‐term stability test, the Ag3pz3 in the tested Ag3pz3/PIM‐1 membrane was collected (the detailed procedure is provided in the Supporting Information). The obtained post‐aging Ag3pz3 powder was dispersed in CD3CN for evaluation by 1H NMR spectroscopy (Figures S21 and S22, Supporting Information), and the structure of Ag3pz3 remained identical. Furthermore, subjecting Ag3pz3 to an ambient environment for one week resulted in no color change (Figure S23, Supporting Information), clearly showing that the stability of the Ag3pz3 complex is improved compared with silver(I) salts. In comparison, the silver salt has a visible color change. The long‐term stability of the Ag3pz3/PIM‐1 membrane was also evaluated for its suitability for industrial application (Figure 4e). The facilitated transport membranes have greater selectivity for olefin purification than some reported solids‐facilitated transport membranes and ionic liquid membranes (Figure S8, Supporting Information). In addition, comparing with some reported solids‐facilitated transport membranes, the Ag3pz3/PIM‐1 membrane has better long‐term stability (Tables S6 and S7, Supporting Information).
The C3H6/C3H8 separation performance of the facilitated transport membrane far surpasses the upper bound for polymeric membranes (Figure 4d).[ 48 ] Compared with polymeric membranes and mixed‐matrix membranes in previous studies, the C3H6/C3H8 separation performance of Ag3pz3/PIM‐1 membrane is significantly improved (Table S5, Supporting Information).
5. Conclusion
In summary, the separation of C3H6/C3H8 is achieved via π‐acids of the Ag+ in Ag3pz3 facilitated C3H6 transport based on reversible acid–base complexation. The long‐term stability of Ag+ in C3H6/C3H8 separation process can be effectively overcome by utilizing the Ag3pz3 complex. In addition, this present Ag3pz3‐based PIM‐1 facilitated transport membrane appears to have good interfacial compatibility with the polymer matrix, by introducing n‐butyl group. A suitable organic ligand is selected to regulate the π‐acidity of the silver metal ions in the complex to enhance the adsorption energy between C3H6 and Ag3pz3 complex.
FIB‐SEM tomography— Thermo Fisher (FEI) Helios G4, WD 4 mm, Helios SEM immersion mode, and TLD detector were used for the FIB‐SEM experiments. The FIB, which was running at 30 kV and 900 pA, ground off sections with a nominal thickness of 50 nm. Continuous cross‐sections exposed during milling were captured by using a 30 kV secondary electron detector and magnifications of 1200–50 000×, yielding between 80 and 160 individual SEM images. The image stack was aligned with the external features of the membrane surface using a correlation algorithm, and a y‐direction stretching operation was performed to compensate for perspective shortening caused by the tilt angle between the sample cross‐section and the SEM detector. The different phases (i.e., PIM‐1 or Ag3pz3) were segmented in Avizo to quantify the parameters of interest from the reconstructed FIB‐SEM tomograms (FEI Visualization Sciences Group). The Supporting Information contains more details on the experimental approach.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Supporting information
Supporting Information
Supporting Information
Acknowledgements
S.C. and X.F. contributed equally to this work. This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (nos. 21971225, 21873086, and 22001237), the Excellent Youth Foundation of Henan Scientific Committee (No. 222300420018) and the Key Scientific Research Project of Universities in Henan province (No. 21zx006). The authors gratefully thank Center of Advanced Analysis & Computational Science, Zhengzhou University for help with the characterization.
Cong S., Feng X., Guo L., Peng D., Wang J., Chen J., Zhang Y., Shen X., Yang G., Rational Design of Mixed Matrix Membranes Modulated by Trisilver Complex for Efficient Propylene/Propane Separation. Adv. Sci. 2023, 10, 2206858. 10.1002/advs.202206858
Contributor Information
Yatao Zhang, Email: zhangyatao@zzu.edu.cn.
Xiangjian Shen, Email: xjshen85@zzu.edu.cn.
Guang Yang, Email: yang@zzu.edu.cn.
Data Availability Statement
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
References
- 1. Sholl D. S., Lively R. P., Nat. News 2016, 532, 435. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2. Cadiau A., Adil K., Bhatt P. M., Belmabkhout Y., Eddaoudi M., Science 2016, 353, 137. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3. Ren T., Patel M., Blok K., Energy 2006, 31, 425. [Google Scholar]
- 4. Amghizar I., Vandewalle L. A., Van Geem K. M., Marin G. B., Engineering 2017, 3, 171. [Google Scholar]
- 5. Campos A. C. C., dos Reis R. A., Ortiz A., Gorri D., Ortiz I., Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2018, 57, 10071. [Google Scholar]
- 6. Zhang C., Dai Y., Johnson J. R., Karvan O., Koros W. J., J. Membr. Sci. 2012, 389, 34. [Google Scholar]
- 7. Park J., Kim K., Shin J. W., Tak K., Park Y. K., Can. J. Chem. Eng. 2017, 95, 2390. [Google Scholar]
- 8. Zarca R., Ortiz A., Gorri D., Biegler L. T., Ortiz I., J. Membr. Sci. 2018, 556, 321. [Google Scholar]
- 9. Xu L., Rungta M., Brayden M. K., Martinez M. V., Stears B. A., Barbay G. A., Koros W. J., J. Membr. Sci. 2012, 423, 314. [Google Scholar]
- 10. Safarik D. J., Eldridge R. B., Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 1998, 37, 2571. [Google Scholar]
- 11. Bernardo P., Drioli E., Golemme G., Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2009, 48, 4638. [Google Scholar]
- 12. Baker R. W., Low B. T., Macromolecules 2014, 47, 6999. [Google Scholar]
- 13. Amedi H. R., Aghajani M., Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2018, 57, 4366. [Google Scholar]
- 14. Antonio M. R., Tsou D. T., Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 1993, 32, 273. [Google Scholar]
- 15. Pollo L., Duarte L., Anacleto M., Habert A., Borges C., Braz. J. Chem. Eng. 2012, 29, 307. [Google Scholar]
- 16. Li Y., Wang S., He G., Wu H., Pan F., Jiang Z., Chem. Soc. Rev. 2015, 44, 103. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17. Ho W., Dalrymple D., J. Membr. Sci. 1994, 91, 13. [Google Scholar]
- 18. Kim Y. R., Lee J. H., Choi H., Cho W., Kang Y. S., J. Membr. Sci. 2014, 463, 11. [Google Scholar]
- 19. Lee U., Kim J., Chae I. S., Han C., Chem. Eng. Process. 2017, 119, 62. [Google Scholar]
- 20. Merkel T. C., Blanc R., Ciobanu I., Firat B., Suwarlim A., Zeid J., J. Membr. Sci. 2013, 447, 177. [Google Scholar]
- 21. Faiz R., Li K., Chem. Eng. Sci. 2012, 73, 261. [Google Scholar]
- 22. Kwon H. T., Jeong H.‐K., Lee A. S., An H. S., Lee J. S., J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2015, 137, 12304. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23. Cao Y., Zhang K., Sanyal O., Koros W. J., Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2019, 58, 12149. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24. Rungta M., Zhang C., Koros W. J., Xu L., AIChE J. 2013, 59, 3475. [Google Scholar]
- 25. Chae I. S., Kang S. W., Park J. Y., Lee Y. G., Lee J. H., Won J., Kang Y. S., Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2011, 50, 2982. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26. Fallanza M., Ortiz A., Gorri D., Ortiz I., J. Membr. Sci. 2013, 444, 164. [Google Scholar]
- 27. Vinh‐Thang H., Kaliaguine S., Chem. Rev. 2013, 113, 4980. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28. Liu G., Chernikova V., Liu Y., Zhang K., Belmabkhout Y., Shekhah O., Zhang C., Yi S., Eddaoudi M., Koros W. J., Nat. Mater. 2018, 17, 283. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29. Wu J., Liang C. Z., Naderi A., Chung T. S., Adv. Mater. 2022, 34, 2105156. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30. Wu J., Chung T. S., Small Methods 2022, 6, 2101288. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31. Zheng J., Lu Z., Wu K., Ning G., Li D., Chem. Rev. 2020, 120, 9675. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32. Kim J. H., Park S. M., Won J., Kang Y. S., J. Membr. Sci. 2005, 248, 171. [Google Scholar]
- 33. Kang S. W., Kim J. H., Char K., Kang Y. S., Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2006, 45, 4011. [Google Scholar]
- 34. Halcrow M. A., Dalton Trans. 2009,12, 2059. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35. Pozun Z. D., Tran K., Shi A., Smith R. H., Henkelman G., J. Phys. Chem. C 2011, 115, 1811. [Google Scholar]
- 36. Santra B., ChemistrySelect 2019, 4, 1866. [Google Scholar]
- 37. McKeown N. B., Makhseed S., Budd P. M., Chem. Commun. 2002, 23, 2780. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38. Yong W. F., Zhang H., Prog. Mater. Sci. 2021, 116, 100713. [Google Scholar]
- 39. Rose I., Bezzu C. G., Carta M., Comesaña‐Gándara B., Lasseuguette E., Ferrari M. C., Bernardo P., Clarizia G., Fuoco A., Jansen J. C., Hart K. E., Liyana‐Arachchi T. P., Colina C. M., McKeown N. B., Nat. Mater. 2017, 16, 932. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40. Liao K.‐S., Lai J.‐Y., Chung T.‐S., J. Membr. Sci. 2016, 515, 36. [Google Scholar]
- 41. Budd P. M., Elabas E. S., Ghanem B. S., Makhseed S., McKeown N. B., Msayib K. J., Tattershall C. E., Wang D., Adv. Mater. 2004, 16, 456. [Google Scholar]
- 42. Wang Z. G., Liu X., Wang D., Jin J., Polym. Chem. 2014, 5, 2793. [Google Scholar]
- 43. Schmid R., Monatsh. Chem. 2001, 132, 1295. [Google Scholar]
- 44. Uchic M. D., Holzer L., Inkson B. J., Principe E. L., Munroe P., MRS Bull. 2007, 32, 408. [Google Scholar]
- 45. Rodenas T., van Dalen M., García‐Pérez E., Serra‐Crespo P., Zornoza B., Kapteijn F., Gascon J., Adv. Funct. Mater. 2014, 24, 249. [Google Scholar]
- 46. Tsunekawa S., Fukuda T., Kasuya A., J. Appl. Phys. 2000, 87, 1318. [Google Scholar]
- 47. Sandomirskii V., J. Exp. Theor. Phys. 1967, 25, 101. [Google Scholar]
- 48. Wang Y., Ma X., Ghanem B. S., Alghunaimi F., Pinnau I., Han Y., Mater. Today Nano 2018, 3, 69. [Google Scholar]
- 49. Chatt J., Duncanson L., J. Chem. Soc. (Resumed) 1953, 586, 2939. [Google Scholar]
- 50. Yong W. F., Kwek K. H. A., Liao K.‐S., Chung T.‐S., Polymer 2015, 77, 377. [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Supplementary Materials
Supporting Information
Supporting Information
Data Availability Statement
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
