4.7 Article

Influence of Pt decoration on the hydrogen storage performance of cup-stacked carbon nanotubes: A DFT study

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HYDROGEN ENERGY
卷 47, 期 92, 页码 39193-39203

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2022.09.088

关键词

CSCNTs; Pt decoration; Hydrogen adsorption; DFT

资金

  1. National Science Foundation of China
  2. [52076061]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The hydrogen adsorption behavior of cup-stacked carbon nanotubes decorated with platinum atoms at different positions of the conical graphene layer was investigated. The optimization results showed that the inside lower edge position had the best hydrogen adsorption parameters. The hydrogen adsorption at this position exhibited larger adsorption energy and bond length compared to other positions, and the platinum atom at this position had a significant polarization effect on the adsorbed hydrogen molecules.
The hydrogen adsorption behaviour of cup-stacked carbon nanotubes (CSCNTs) decorated with the platinum atom at four positions of the conical graphene layer (CGL) is investigated using density functional theory. The optimization shows that the inside lower edge position (IL) results have the best hydrogen adsorption parameters among the four positions. The Pt-H-2 distance is 1.54 angstrom, the H-H bond length (l(H-H)) is 1.942 angstrom, and the hydrogen adsorption energy (E-ads) is 1.51 eV. The hydrogen adsorption of CSCNTs decorated by Pt at the IL position also has larger E-ads and l(H-H) than the Pt-doped planar graphene, Pt-doped single-wall carbon nanotubes and Pt-doped carbon nanocones. The Pt atom at the IL position has a more significant polarization effect on the adsorbed H-2, it has trends to convert H-2 into two separate H atoms. While the hydrogen adsorption behaviour at other positions belongs to the Kubas coordination, the l(H-H) and the Eads increased not significantly. (C) 2022 Hydrogen Energy Publications LLC. Published by Elsevier Ltd. 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