4.8 Article

Tailoring the Surface Chemistry of Activated Carbon Cloth by Electrochemical Methods

Journal

ACS APPLIED MATERIALS & INTERFACES
Volume 6, Issue 14, Pages 11682-11691

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/am502475v

Keywords

electro-oxidation; porous carbon materials; activated carbon fiber; functionalization; surface chemistry; surface modification

Funding

  1. MINECO [MAT2010-15273]
  2. FEDER [MAT2010-15273]
  3. MINECO through Juan de la Cierva program [JCI-2012-12664]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper presents a systematic study of the effect of the electrochemical treatment (galvanostatic electrolysis in a filter-press electrochemical cell) on the surface chemistry and porous texture of commercial activated carbon cloth. The same treatments have been conducted over a granular activated carbon in order to clarify the effect of morphology. The influence of different electrochemical variables, such as the electrode polarity (anodic or cathodic), the applied current (between 0.2 and 1.0 A) and the type of electrolyte (HNO3 and NaCl) have also been analyzed. The anodic treatment of both activated carbons causes an increase in the amount of surface oxygen groups, whereas the cathodic treatment does not produce any relevant modification of the surface chemistry. The HNO3 electrolyte produced a lower generation of oxygen groups than the NaCl one, but differences in the achieved distribution of surface groups can be benefitial to selectively tune the surface chemistry. The porous texture seems to be unaltered after the electro-oxidation treatment. The validity of this method to introduce surface oxygen groups with a pseudocapacitive behavior has been corroborated by cyclic voltammetry. As a conclusion, the electrochemical treatment can be easily implemented to selectively and quantitatively modify the surface chemistry of activated carbons with different shapes and morphologies.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available