Two preparation methods and two metal salt precursors (chlorine containing and chlorine-free) were used to synthesize Ru/CeO₂ catalysts and their catalytic behaviour has been evaluated in combustion of propane, n-butane and isobutane mixture. In the first method, Ru nanoparticles (Ru NPs) deposited on CeO₂ were synthesized by a microwave-assisted polyol method using RuCl₃ as a metal precursor and ethylene glycol as a reducing agent. In the second, Ru/CeO₂ catalysts were prepared by traditional incipient wetness impregnation method using RuCl₃ or Ru(NO)(NO₃)₃. ICP-AES, N₂ adsorption-desorption, H₂-TPR, XRD, HRTEM and SEM-EDS techniques were used to characterize the catalysts. In all the Ru/CeO₂ catalysts only highly dispersed Ru nanoparticles (1–2 nm) were present. The catalytic data show that the preparation method and the nature of the metal precursor have a significant influence on catalytic performance of the Ru/CeO₂ catalysts. The VOC reactivity order (iso-butane > n-butane > propane) show that propane is the most difficult to oxidize. The Ru(NPs)/CeO₂ and impregnated Ru(N)/CeO₂ catalyst exhibited much higher activity and stability than that of impregnated Ru(Cl)/CeO₂. It was found that the Ru(NPs)/CeO₂ nano-catalyst was free of chlorine species although it had been prepared from RuCl₃. The differences in the activity have been ascribed to the presence of Cl⁻ ions on the Ru(Cl)/CeO₂ catalyst and to much better reducibility of the chlorine-free Ru(NPs) and Ru(N) catalysts. The Cl species have a negative impact on the redox properties of CeO₂, they have some influence on Ru agglomeration during long-term activity tests (50 h), and consequently, the chlorinated catalyst exhibited a poorer activity and stability compared with those of the Cl-free catalysts.

用两种制备方法和两种金属盐前体（含氯和无氯）合成Ru / CeO ₂催化剂，并在丙烷，正丁烷和异丁烷混合物的燃烧中评估了它们的催化性能。在第一种方法中，以RuCl ₃为金属前体，以乙二醇为还原剂，通过微波辅助多元醇法合成了沉积在CeO ₂上的Ru纳米颗粒（Ru NPs）。其次，采用RuCl ₃或Ru（NO）（NO ₃）₃通过传统的湿法浸渍法制备了Ru / CeO ₂催化剂。ICP-AES，N ₂吸附-解吸，H_使用2- TPR，XRD，HRTEM和SEM-EDS技术表征催化剂。在所有Ru / CeO ₂催化剂中，仅存在高度分散的Ru纳米颗粒（1-2 nm）。催化数据表明，金属前驱体的制备方法和性质对Ru / CeO ₂催化剂的催化性能有重要影响。VOC的反应顺序（异丁烷>正丁烷>丙烷）显示丙烷是最难氧化的。与浸渍Ru（Cl）/ CeO ₂相比，Ru（NPs）/ CeO ₂和浸渍Ru（N）/ CeO ₂催化剂具有更高的活性和稳定性。发现Ru（NPs）/ CeO ₂尽管它是由RuCl ₃制备的，但纳米催化剂不含氯。在活动的差异已经被归因于氯的存在^-离子在Ru（Cl）的/的CeO ₂催化剂，并在无氯钌（NPS）和Ru（N）的催化剂的更好的还原性。Cl种类对CeO ₂的氧化还原性能有负面影响，在长期活性试验（50 h）中它们对Ru的团聚有一定影响，因此，氯化的催化剂与CeO ₂相比，具有较差的活性和稳定性。无氯催化剂。