4.6 Article

Synthesis and Investigation of Pure and Cu-Doped NiO Nanofilms for Future Applications in Wastewater Treatment Rejected by Textile Industry

期刊

CATALYSTS
卷 12, 期 9, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/catal12090931

关键词

NiO synthesis; spray pyrolysis; Cu-doping; nanograins; photocatalytic properties

资金

  1. DGRSDT-MESRS in the framework of the operating budget for PhD students [2019/2021]
  2. French National Agency of Research (ANR) [ANR-18-CE42-0016-02]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Pure and Cu-doped NiO films were synthesized and characterized. Cu-doping improved the structure, morphology, and photocatalytic properties of NiO films.
Pure and Cu-doped NiO films were synthesized via a soft chemical process. They were deposited on glass substrates heated to 400 degrees C. Different atomic percentage ratios (2, 4, 6, 8, and 10%) of Cu-doping were used. The prepared samples were characterized by several techniques such as X-ray diffraction for crystallographic study, SEM and AFM for microstructural and morphological properties, and UV-Visible spectroscopy for optical and photocatalytical analysis. XRD results of pure and Cu-doped NiO films indicated the formation of NiO polycrystalline phases under a cubic structure with a favored orientation along the (200) plane noticed in all sprayed films. SEM images revealed the formation of NiO nanoparticles of spherical forms whose sizes increase and agglomerate with increasing Cu-doping. At 10% Cu-doping, NiO agglomeration was extended to the whole surface. AFM images showed a textured and rough surface composed of NiO nanoparticles of average size varying from 16 to 10 nm depending on Cu-doping concentration. UV-visible spectroscopy confirmed the transparency of NiO films and their semiconducting character with a band gap ranging from 3.4450 eV to 2.8648 eV. The photocatalytical properties of pure and Cu-NiO films were enhanced by Cu-doping particles as revealed by the degradation of methylene blue (MB) solution subjected to irradiation.

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

4.6
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