4.7 Article

Effect of annealing ambience on the formation of surface/bulk oxygen vacancies in TiO2 for photocatalytic hydrogen evolution

期刊

APPLIED SURFACE SCIENCE
卷 428, 期 -, 页码 640-647

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.apsusc.2017.09.144

关键词

Single-electron-trapped oxygen vacancy; Surface oxygen vacancy; TiO2; Photocatalytic H-2 production; Annealing ambience

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21673066, 51702087, 21703054]
  2. Program for Science & Technology Innovation Talents [15HASTIT043]
  3. Innovative Research Team from University of Henan Province [16IRTSTHN015]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The surface and bulk oxygen vacancy have a prominent effect on the photocatalytic performance of TiO2. In this study, TiO2 possessing different types and concentration of oxygen vacancies were prepared by annealing nanotube titanic acid (NTA) at various temperatures in air or vacuum atmosphere. TiO2 with the unitary bulk single-electron-trapped oxygen vacancies (SETOVs) formed when NTA were calcined in air. Whereas, TiO2 with both bulk and surface oxygen vacancies were obtained when NTA were annealed in vacuum. The series of TiO2 with different oxygen vacancies were systematically characterized by TEM, XRD, PL, XPS, ESR, and TGA. The PL and ESR analysis verified that surface oxygen vacancies and more bulk oxygen vacancies could form in vacuum atmosphere. Surface oxygen vacancies can trap electron and hinder the recombination of photo-generated charges, while bulk SETOVs act as the recombination center. The surface or bulk oxygen vacancies attributed different roles on the photo-absorbance and activity, leading that the sample of NTA-A400 displayed higher hydrogen evolution rate under UV light, whereas NTA-V400 displayed higher hydrogen evolution rate under visible light because bulk SETOVs can improve visible light absorption because sub-band formed by bulk SETOVs prompted the secondary transition of electron excited. (C) 2017 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