Interface tailoring of SnO2–TiO2 photocatalysts modified with anionic/cationic surfactants
Source abstract
Abstract
SnO2–TiO2 nanocomposites are prepared by growing TiO2 nanoparticles onto the preformed SnO2 nanoparticles. The SnO2 core nanoparticles ware obtained in the presence of two different surfactants, namely hexadecyltrimethyl ammonium bromide and polyethylene glycol 600 (PEG600), by chemical precipitation followed by a thermal treatment at 500 °C. The TiO2 was obtained directly on modified SnO2 nanoparticles by a sol–gel process. A sample without surfactants was prepared in the same conditions. The processes involved during annealing of precursors were revealed by TGA-FTIR. The crystalline and mesoporous structures of samples were evidenced by XRD, HRTEM and by N2 adsorption–desorption isotherms. XPS investigations highlighted the interface modifications due to the presence of cationic or anionic moieties resulted from the thermal decomposition of surfactants. Combined UPS and UV–Vis measurements allowed the determination of the oxidation energies, band gaps and energy bands alignment of nanocomposites. The photocatalytic activity based on reactive oxygen species (ROS) generation was studied toward degradation of RhB under visible-light irradiation and by the use of EPR coupled with spin-trapping technique. It was found that the generated ROS are only of ·OH type and, this specific process, is analyzed in terms of energy bands alignment.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Gas Sensing Nanomaterials and Sensors · TiO2 Photocatalysis and Solar Cells · Advanced Photocatalysis Techniques
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (61)
Show source-provided references
1. Zhang W, Zhang D, Liang Y (2019) Nanotechnology in remediation of water contaminated by poly- and perfluoroalkyl substances: a review. Environ Pollut 247:266–276. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2019.01.04510.1016/j.envpol.2019.01.045 ↗
2. Amin MT, Alazba AA, Manzoor U (2014) A review of removal of pollutants from water/wastewater using different types of nanomaterials. Adv Mater Sci Eng 825910:1–24. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/82591010.1155/2014/825910 ↗
3. Rodrıguez-Padron D, Puente-Santiago AR, Balu AM, Munoz-Batista MJ, Luque R (2019) Environmental catalysis: present and future. ChemCatChem 11:18–38. https://doi.org/10.1002/cctc.20180124810.1002/cctc.201801248 ↗
4. Alfano OM, Bahnemann D, Cassano AE, Dillert R, Goslich R (2000) Photocatalysis in water environments using artificial and solar light. Catal Today 58:199–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0920-5861(00)00252-210.1016/S0920-5861(00)00252-2 ↗
5. Byrne C, Subramanian G, Pillai SC (2018) Recent advances in photocatalysis for environmental applications. J Environ Chem Eng 6:3531–3555. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jece.2017.07.08010.1016/j.jece.2017.07.080 ↗
6. George R, Bahadur N, Singh N, Singh R, Verma A, Shukla A (2016) Environmentally benign TiO2 nanomaterials for removal of heavy metal ions with interfering ions present in tap water. Mater Today Proc 3:162–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2016.01.05110.1016/j.matpr.2016.01.051 ↗
7. Zhang HJ, Chen GH, Bahnemann DW (2009) Photoelectrocatalytic materials for environmental applications. J Mater Chem 19:5089–5121. https://doi.org/10.1039/B821991E10.1039/B821991E ↗
8. Li J, Wu N (2015) Semiconductor-based photocatalysts and photoelectrochemical cells for solar fuel generation: a review. Catal Sci Technol 5:1360–1384. https://doi.org/10.1039/C4CY00974F10.1039/C4CY00974F ↗
9. Malato S, Fernández-Ibáñez P, Maldonado M, Blanco J, Gernjak W (2009) Decontamination and disinfection of water by solar photocatalysis: recent overview and trends. Catal Today 147:1–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cattod.2009.06.01810.1016/j.cattod.2009.06.018 ↗
10. Nunes D, Pimentel A, Gonçalves A, Pereira S, Branquinho R, Barquinha P, Fortunato E, Martins R (2019) Metal oxide nanostructures for sensor applications. Semicond Sci Technol 34:043001-1–043001-60. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6641/ab011e10.1088/1361-6641/ab011e ↗
11. MiarAlipour S, Friedmann D, Scott J, Amal R (2018) TiO2/porous adsorbents: recent advances and novel applications. J Hazard Mater 341:404–423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2017.07.07010.1016/j.jhazmat.2017.07.070 ↗
12. Hao H, Shi JL, Xu H, Li X, Lang X (2019) N-hydroxyphthalimide-TiO2 complex visible light photocatalysis. Appl Catal B Environ 246:149–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apcatb.2019.01.03710.1016/j.apcatb.2019.01.037 ↗
13. Jung HJ, Kye SH, Kang HJ, Yang HJ, Yoo JB, Lee KH, Hur NH (2018) Sustainable photocatalytic activities of visible-light sensitive N-doped TiO2 microspheres with permeable silica shells. Appl Catal A Gen 558:9–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apcata.2018.03.00910.1016/j.apcata.2018.03.009 ↗
14. Shaham-Waldmann N, Paz Y (2016) Away from TiO2: a critical minireview on the developing of new photocatalysts for degradation of contaminants in water. Mater Sci Semicond Process 42:72–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mssp.2015.06.06810.1016/j.mssp.2015.06.068 ↗
15. Babu B, Kadam AN, Ravikumar RVSSN, Byon C (2017) Enhanced visible light photocatalytic activity of Cu-doped SnO2 quantum dots by solution combustion synthesis. J Alloy Compd 703:330–336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2017.01.31110.1016/j.jallcom.2017.01.311 ↗
16. Xie Y, Yu S, Zhong Y, Zhang Q, Zhou Y (2018) SnO2/graphene quantum dots composited photocatalyst for efficient nitric oxide oxidation under visible light. Appl Surf Sci 448:655–661. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsusc.2018.04.14510.1016/j.apsusc.2018.04.145 ↗
17. Kim HW, Na HG, Kwon YJ, Kang SY, Choi MS, Bang JH, Wu P, Kim SS (2017) Microwave-assisted synthesis of graphene–SnO2 nanocomposites and their applications in gas sensors. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 9:31667–31682. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.7b0253310.1021/acsami.7b02533 ↗
18. Ali AM, Ghazwani NA, Algarni H, Aismail A (2019) Structural, optical properties of ZnO doped SnO2 nanocomposites with enhanced photocatalytic performance under UV illumination. Mater Res Express 6:065026. https://doi.org/10.1088/2053-1591/ab0cdd10.1088/2053-1591/ab0cdd ↗
19. Jiang JJ, Mu Z, Xing HM, Wu QN, Yue XZ, Lin YH (2019) Insights into the synergetic effect for enhanced UV/visible-light activated photodegradation activity via Cu–ZnO photocatalyst. Appl Surf Sci 478:1037–1045. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsusc.2019.02.01910.1016/j.apsusc.2019.02.019 ↗
20. Meshram SP, Adhyapak PV, Amalnerkar DP et al (2016) Cu doped ZnO microballs as effective sunlight driven photocatalyst. Ceram Int 42:7482–7489. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2016.01.15410.1016/j.ceramint.2016.01.154 ↗
21. Lamba R, Umar A, Mehta SK, Kansal SK (2015) ZnO doped SnO2 nanoparticles heterojunction photo-catalyst for environmental remediation. J Alloy Compd 653:327–333. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2015.08.22010.1016/j.jallcom.2015.08.220 ↗
22. Huang ZF, Song J, Pan L, Zhang X, Wang L, Zou JJ (2015) Tungsten oxides for photocatalysis, electrochemistry, and phototherapy. Adv Mater 27:5309–5316. https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.20150121710.1002/adma.201501217 ↗
23. Liu J, Zhang Z, Wang Z, Tang M, Li J, Yi J et al (2017) Flower-like WO3/CoWO4/Co nanostructures as high performance anode for lithium ion batteries. J Alloy Comput 727:107–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2017.08.05710.1016/j.jallcom.2017.08.057 ↗
24. Hunge Y, Mahadik M, Moholkar A, Bhosale C (2017) Photoelectrocatalytic degradation of oxalic acid using WO3 and stratified WO3/TiO2 photocatalysts under sunlight illumination. Ultrason Sonochem 35:233–242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultsonch.2016.09.02410.1016/j.ultsonch.2016.09.024 ↗
25. Dong P, Hou G, Xi X, Shao R, Dong F (2017) WO3-based photocatalysts: morphology control, activity enhancement and multifunctional applications. Environ Sci Nano 4:539–557. https://doi.org/10.1039/C6EN00478D10.1039/C6EN00478D ↗
26. Margan P, Haghighi M (2018) Sono-coprecipitation synthesis and physicochemical characterization of CdO–ZnO nanophotocatalyst for removal of acid orange 7 from wastewater. Ultrason Sonochem 40:323–332. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultsonch.2017.07.00310.1016/j.ultsonch.2017.07.003 ↗
27. Zhang R, Wu H, Lin DD, Pan W (2009) Preparation of necklace-structured TiO2/SnO2 hybrid nanofibers and their photocatalytic activity. J Am Ceram Soc 92:2463–2466. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-2916.2009.03223.x10.1111/j.1551-2916.2009.03223.x ↗
28. Tian C, Zhang Q, Wu A, Jiang M, Liang Z, Jiang B, Fu H (2012) Cost-effective largescale synthesis of ZnO photocatalyst with excellent performance for dye photodegradation. Chem Commun 48:2858–2860. https://doi.org/10.1039/c2cc16434e10.1039/c2cc16434e ↗
29. Babu B, Koutavarapu R, Harish VVN, Shim J, Yoo K (2019) Novel in situ synthesis of Au/SnO2 quantum dots for enhanced visible-light-driven photocatalytic applications. Ceram Int 45:5743–5750. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2018.12.04010.1016/j.ceramint.2018.12.040 ↗
30. Ismail AA, Faisal M, Al-Haddad A (2018) Mesoporous WO3-graphene photocatalyst for photocatalytic degradation of methylene blue dye under visible light illumination. J Environ Sci 66:328–337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jes.2017.05.00110.1016/j.jes.2017.05.001 ↗
31. Daghrir R, Drogui P, Robert D (2013) Modified TiO2 for environmental photocatalytic applications: a review. Ind Eng Chem Res 52:3581–3599. https://doi.org/10.1021/ie303468t10.1021/ie303468t ↗
32. Marschall R (2014) Semiconductor composites: strategies for enhancing charge carrier separation to improve photocatalytic activity. Adv Funct Mater 24:2421–2440. https://doi.org/10.1002/adfm.20130321410.1002/adfm.201303214 ↗
33. Kumar SG, Rao KSRK (2017) Comparison of modification strategies towards enhanced charge carrier separation and photocatalytic degradation activity of metaloxide semiconductors (TiO2, WO3, ZnO). Appl Surf Sci 391:124–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsusc.2016.07.08110.1016/j.apsusc.2016.07.081 ↗
34. Chaudhuri RG, Paria S (2012) Core/shell nanoparticles: classes, properties, synthesis mechanisms, characterization, and applications. Chem Rev 112:2373–2433. https://doi.org/10.1021/cr100449n10.1021/cr100449n ↗
35. Garvey M, Panaitescu E, Menon L, Byrne C, Dervin S, Hinder SJ, Pillai SC (2016) Titania nanotube photocatalysts for effectively treating waterborne microbial pathogens. J Catal 344:631–639. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcat.2016.11.00410.1016/j.jcat.2016.11.004 ↗
36. Bak T, Nowotny MK, Sheppard LR, Nowotny J (2008) Effect of prolonged oxidation on semiconducting properties of titanium dioxide. J Phys Chem C 112:13248–13257. https://doi.org/10.1021/jp803020d10.1021/jp803020d ↗
37. Nowotny J, Bak T, Nowotny MK, Sheppard LR (2006) TiO2 surface active sites for water splitting. Phys Chem B 110:18492–18495. https://doi.org/10.1021/jp063699p10.1021/jp063699p ↗
38. Wei YL, Chen CL, Yuan GZ, Gao S (2016) SnO2 nanocrystals with abundant oxygen vacancies: preparation and room temperature NO2 sensing. J Alloy Compd 681:43–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2016.04.22010.1016/j.jallcom.2016.04.220 ↗
39. Boppella PMR, Manorama SV (2012) A facile and green approach for the controlled synthesis of porous SnO2 nanospheres: application as an efficient photocatalyst and an excellent gas sensing material. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 4:6252–6260. https://doi.org/10.1021/am301840s10.1021/am301840s ↗
40. Prakash K, Senthil Kumar P, Pandiaraj S, Saravanakumar K, Karuthapandian S (2016) Controllable synthesis of SnO2 photocatalyst with superior photocatalytic activity for the degradation of methylene blue dye solution. J Exp Nanosci 11:1138–1155. https://doi.org/10.1080/17458080.2016.118822210.1080/17458080.2016.1188222 ↗
41. Zhang R, Wu H, Lin DD, Pan W (2009) Preparation of necklace-structured TiO2/SnO2 hybrid nanofibers and their photocatalytic activity. J Am Ceram Soc 92:2463–2466. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-2916.2009.03223.x10.1111/j.1551-2916.2009.03223.x ↗
42. Toloman D, Pana O, Stefan M, Popa A, Leostean C, Macavei S, Silipas D, Perhaita I, Lazar MD, Barbu-Tudoran L (2019) Photocatalytic activity of SnO2–TiO2 composite nanoparticles modified with PVP. J Colloid Interface Sci 542:296–307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2019.02.02610.1016/j.jcis.2019.02.026 ↗
43. Gupta SM, Tripathi M (2012) A review on the synthesis of TiO2 nanoparticles by solution route. Cen Eur J Chem 10:279–294. https://doi.org/10.2478/s11532-011-0155-y10.2478/s11532-011-0155-y ↗
44. Popa A, Stefan M, Toloman D, Pana O, Mesaroş A, Leoştean C, Macavei S, Marincaş O, Suciu R, Barbu-Tudoran L (2018) Fe3O4–TiO2: Gd nanoparticles with enhanced photocatalytic activity and magnetic recyclability. Powder Technol 325:441–451. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.powtec.2017.11.04910.1016/j.powtec.2017.11.049 ↗
45. Kaleji BK, Sarraf-Mamoory R (2012) Nanocrystalline sol–gel TiO2–SnO2 coatings: preparation, characterization and photo-catalytic performance. Mater Res Bull 47:362–369. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.materresbull.2011.11.00210.1016/j.materresbull.2011.11.002 ↗
46. Crisan M, Braileanu A, Raileanu M, Crisan D, Teodorescu VS, Bârjega R, Marinescu VE, Madarasz J, Pokol G (2007) TiO2-based nanopowders obtained from different Ti-alkoxides. J Therm Anal Calorim 88:171–176. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10973-006-8125-x10.1007/s10973-006-8125-x ↗
47. Guo B, Liu Z, Hong L, Jiang H (2005) Sol–gel derived photocatalytic porous TiO2 thin films. Surf Coat Technol 198:24–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2004.10.05510.1016/j.surfcoat.2004.10.055 ↗
48. Govorek J, Kierys A, Gac W, Borowka A, Kusak R (2009) Thermal degradation of CTAB in as-synthesized MCM-41. J Therm Anal Calorim 96:375–382. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10973-008-9055-610.1007/s10973-008-9055-6 ↗
49. Sing KSW, Everett DH, Haul RAW, Moscou L, Pierotti RA, Rouquerol J, Siemieniewska T (1985) Reporting physissorption data for gas/solid systems with special reference to the determination of surface area and porosity. Pure Appl Chem 57:603–619. https://doi.org/10.1351/pac19855704060310.1351/pac198557040603 ↗
50. Ahmed MA, Abdel Messih MF, El-Hafez SF, Aliaa FEH, Khalifa MM (2017) Synthesis of metallic silver nanoparticles decorated mesoporous SnO2 for removal of methylene blue dye by coupling adsorption and photocatalytic processes. J Photochem Photobiol, A 346:77–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jphotochem.2017.05.04810.1016/j.jphotochem.2017.05.048 ↗
51. Jun Y, Casula MF, Sim JH, Kim SY, Cheon J, Alivisatos AP (2003) Surfactant-assisted elimination of a high energy facet as a means of controlling the shapes of TiO2 nanocrystals. J Am Chem Soc 125:15981–15985. https://doi.org/10.1021/ja036951510.1021/ja0369515 ↗
52. Dastan D, Londhe PU, Chaure NB (2014) Characterization of TiO2 nanoparticles prepared using different surfactants by sol–gel method. J Mater Sci: Mater Electron 25:3473–3479. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10854-014-2041-910.1007/s10854-014-2041-9 ↗
53. Leostean C, Stefan M, Pana O, Cadis AI, Suciu RC, Silipas TD, Gautron E (2013) Properties of Eu doped TiO2 nanoparticles prepared by using organic additives. J Alloys Compd 575:29–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2013.04.06710.1016/j.jallcom.2013.04.067 ↗
54. Stefan M, Popa A, Pana O, Leostean C, Toloman D, Lazar D, Pogacean F, Macavei S, Gutoiu S (2018) Efficient photocatalytic removal of RhB using magnetic Fe3O4–SnO2 nanocomposites containing Sn2+ interstitial impurities. J Mater Sci: Mater Electron 29:14132–14143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10854-018-9546-610.1007/s10854-018-9546-6 ↗
55. Su R, Bechstein R, Sø L, Vang RT, Sillassen M, Esbjornsson B, Palmqvist A, Besenbacher F (2011) How the anatase-to-rutile ratio influences the photoreactivity of TiO2. J Phys Chem C 115:24287–24292. https://doi.org/10.1021/jp208676810.1021/jp2086768 ↗
56. Li G, Richter CP, Milot RL, Cai L, Schmuttenmaer CA, Crabtree RH, Brudvig GW, Batista VS (2009) Synergistic effect between anatase and rutile TiO2 nanoparticles in dye-sensitized solar cells. Dalton Trans 45:10078–10085. https://doi.org/10.1039/b908686b10.1039/b908686b ↗
57. Lázaro-Martínez JM, Leal-Denis MF, Piehl LL, Rubín de Celis E, Buldain GY, Dall’-Orto VC (2008) Studies on the activation of hydrogen peroxide for color removal in the presence of a new Cu(II)-polyampholyte heterogeneous catalyst. Appl Catal B Environ 82:273–283. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apcatb.2008.01.03010.1016/j.apcatb.2008.01.030 ↗
58. Brezova V, Gabcova S, Dvoranova D, Stasko A (2005) Reactive oxygen species produced upon photoexcitation of sunscreens containing titanium dioxide (an EPR study). J Photochem Photobiol, B 79:121–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jphotobiol.2004.12.00610.1016/j.jphotobiol.2004.12.006 ↗
59. Leostean C, Pana O, Stefan M, Popa A, Toloman D, Senila M, Gutoiu S, Macavei S (2018) New properties of Fe3O4@SnO2 core shell nanoparticles following interface charge/spin transfer. Appl Surf Sci 427:192–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsusc.2017.07.26710.1016/j.apsusc.2017.07.267 ↗
60. Bedja I, Hotchandani S, Kamat PV (1994) Preparation and photoelectrochemical characterization of thin SnO2 nanocrystalline semiconductor films and their sensitization with bis(2,2′-bipyridine)(2,2′-bipyridine-4,4′-dicarboxylic acid)ruthenium(II) complex. J Phys Chem 98:4133–4140. https://doi.org/10.1021/j100066a03710.1021/j100066a037 ↗
61. Martin ST, Herrmann H, Choi W, Hoffmann MR (1994) Time-resolved microwave conductivity part 1: TiO2, photoreactivity and size quantization. J Chem Soc, Faraday Trans 90(21):3315–3322. https://doi.org/10.1039/FT994900331510.1039/FT9949003315 ↗