4.8 Article

Exfoliation and restacking route to anatase-layered titanate nanohybrid with enhanced photocatalytic activity

期刊

CHEMISTRY OF MATERIALS
卷 14, 期 6, 页码 2486-2491

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/cm010815m

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A new microporous TiO2-pillared layered titanate has been prepared by hybridizing the exfoliated titanate with the anatase TiO2 nanosol. The stable colloidal nano-sheet was obtained by intercalating tetrabutylamine into the layered protonic titanate, H(x)Ti(2-x/4)rectangle(x/4)O(4).H2O (x = 0.67), with a lepidocrocite-like structure. The colloidal suspension of exfoliated titanate sheets was mixed with the monodispersed anatase TiO2 nanosol solution prepared by the hydrolysis of titanium isopropoxide with acetylacetone. The obtained nanohybrid was heated at 300 degreesC for 2 h in order to complete the grafting reaction of intercalated anatase TiO2 nanosol on the interlayer surface of layered titanate. According to the X-ray diffraction analysis and N-2 adsorption-desorption isotherms, it was found that the TiO2-pillared layered titanate showed a pillar height of similar to2 nm, a high surface area of similar to460 m(2)/g, and a pore size of similar to0.95 nm, indicating the formation of a microporous pillar structure. Its photocatalytic activity was evaluated by measuring the total volume of H-2 gas evolved during the irradiation of the catalyst suspensions in water. The H-2 gas evolution was found to increase from the layered titanate (cesium and protonic form) to the unsupported TiO2 (acac-TiO2) and the TiO2-pillared layered titanate, because the electron and hole recombination in the pillared system is thought to be effectively suppressed because of electron transfer between guest and host. A marked enhancement in the activity by ca. 40 times was obtained for TiO2-pillared layered titanate compared to pristine compounds such as layered titanate and anatase TiO2 nanosol when Pt (0.3 wt %) was doped on the surface of the sample.

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

4.8
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