4.4 Article

Super-hydrophilic anatase TiO2 thin film in-situ deposited by DC magnetron sputtering

期刊

THIN SOLID FILMS
卷 638, 期 -, 页码 9-16

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.tsf.2017.07.046

关键词

Superhydrophilicity; Anatase TiO2; (211) Facet; Water adsorption; Sputtering

资金

  1. National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) - Ministry of Education [NRF-2017R1D1A3B03030005]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The present work shows in-situ polycrystalline anatase TiO2 without annealing under the deposition condition of affluent oxygen partial pressure (>= 5.67, P-O2/P-Ar) by DC magnetron sputtering. The films tended to grow from the early random orientation to A(211) oriented polycrystalline as deposition time increases. As the oxygen gas flow rate was high, A(211) facet grew more. Therefore, oxygen partial pressure and the deposition time/thickness can be considered as the key parameters that promote the growth of A(211) facet. The study focus was the hydrophilicity due to A(211) facet measured in dark after initial one time UV exposure. The contact angle relaxation of super-hydrophilic TiO2 films was influenced by the humidity for dark storage time. The contact angle was measured after 24 h from the initial UV irradiation. The measured contact angle decreased somewhat linearly with the increase of the XRD intensity ratio of A(211)/A(101) up to 50%. When it was higher than 50%, the angle saturated. XPS analysis showed that the higher the XRD intensity ratio of A(211)/A(101), the larger the area of O ls (OH) band related to the dissociative adsorption of water. The relative amount of the surface hydroxyl group was found to be inversely proportional to the contact angle. ATR-FT1R spectra also showed that the water is adsorbed more on the formation of A(211) facet on the TiO2 surface. In summary, A(211) oriented TiO2 grains lead to dissociative adsorption of water and show better superhydrophilicity due to a sufficient amount of surface hydroxyl groups. (C) 2017 Published by Elsevier B.V.

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

4.4
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