4.7 Article

Tin oxide/graphene composite fabricated via a hydrothermal method for gas sensors working at room temperature

期刊

SENSORS AND ACTUATORS B-CHEMICAL
卷 173, 期 -, 页码 139-147

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.snb.2012.06.055

关键词

Gas sensor; Tin oxide; Graphene; Composite; Hydrothermal method; Room temperature sensing

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51073134]
  2. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [2011QNA4024]
  3. National 863 program of China [2006AA10Z215]
  4. Zhejiang Provincial Natural Science Foundation of China [Y4080128]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

SnO2/graphene (GN) composite was fabricated via a simple one-pot hydrothermal method with graphene oxide (GO) and SnCl2 as the precursors. The composite was characterized by Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy, Raman spectroscopy. X-ray diffraction patterns, scanning electron microscopy and high resolution transmittance electron microscopy. It exhibited 3D nanostructure in which flower-like microspheres consisting of SnO2 nanoflakes distributed among GN layers decorated with tiny SnO2 nanoparticles, and was featured with high surface area (94.9 m(2)/g). GO is supposed to act as a template in the hydrothermal process, promoting the preferential growth of SnO2 nanocrystals and preventing the agglomeration of SnO2 nanoparticles. NH3 sensing characteristics of the composite at room temperature were investigated, and found to closely relate to its composition and structure. Under optimal conditions, the composite displayed high response magnitude (15.9% for 50 ppm NH3), fast response (response and recovery time < 1 min), good reversibility and repeatability. Moreover, it exhibited small temperature coefficients in the range of 15-45 degrees C. The ability of detecting gas at good room temperature of the composite is proposed to relate to its high specific surface, good conductivity of GN and interactions between GN and SnO2. (C) 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据