4.7 Article

Effect of poling on piezocatalytic removal of muti-pollutants using BaTiO3

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN CERAMIC SOCIETY
卷 104, 期 4, 页码 1661-1668

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/jace.17578

关键词

antibacterial; BaTiO3; piezocatalytic; ferroelectric; piezoelectric

资金

  1. Tianjin Science and Technology Major Special Projects and Engineering Projects [18ZXSZSF00090, 17ZXSTSF00020]
  2. Ministry of Education Humanities and Social Sciences Research Planning Fund [18YJA630121]
  3. Tianjin Key R&D Plan Achievements Transformation Relay Support Project [18YFJLCG00140]
  4. Tianjin Municipal Education Commission Social Science Major Project [2018JWZD33]
  5. Research and Development and System Integration Application of Internet + Sudden Water Environmental Safety Accident Monitoring and Early Warning Technology [19JCTPJC57100]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BaTiO3 powder prepared via solid-state reaction route showed significantly increased bacterial catalytic behavior under ultrasonication, with 10% E coli survival in 60 minutes. The powder also demonstrated effective degradation of methylene blue, ciprofloxacin, and diclofenac, with degradation rates of around 92%, 85%, and 78% within 150 minutes, respectively.
The BaTiO3 powder was prepared via a solid-state reaction route. It was studied for the degradation of bacterial cells, dye, and pharmaceuticals waste using ultrasonically driven piezocatalytic effect. The bacterial catalytic behavior of poled BaTiO3 was remarkably increased during ultrasonication (10% E coli survival in 60 minutes). The structural damages were illustrated using scanning electron micrographs of bacterial cells which demonstrated morphological manifestations under different conditions. Methylene blue (MB dye), ciprofloxacin and diclofenac were also cleaned using the piezocatalytic effect associated with the poled BaTiO3 powder. Around 92, 85, and 78% of degradations were observed within 150 minutes duration for methylene blue, ciprofloxacin, and diclofenac, respectively.

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