4.7 Review

Development and evaluation of the efficiency of photocatalytic pavement blocks in the laboratory and after one year in the field

期刊

CONSTRUCTION AND BUILDING MATERIALS
卷 37, 期 -, 页码 310-319

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2012.07.073

关键词

Atmospheric pollution; Nitrogen oxides; Photocatalytic pavement blocks; Titanium dioxide

资金

  1. CNPq
  2. PRONEX/FAPESC Support Program
  3. CAPES

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Nitrogen oxides (NOx) are currently one of the main causes of poor air quality in large cities. A promising approach to reducing high concentrations of this pollutant is the photochemical conversion of NOx to nitrate ions (NO3-), using semiconductors like titanium dioxide (TiO2). This paper presents the results of a research study on the nano-modification of the surface of pavement blocks, with the aim of purifying the air in large cities through the degradation of NOx. To this aim, blocks were produced with a photocatalytic surface through the incorporation of titanium dioxide. Three photocatalytic mortar layer thicknesses (3, 6 and 10 mm) were tested, as well as two types of TiO2 (rutile and anatase) and three levels of TiO2 content incorporated (3%, 6% and 10%). After the evaluation of the photocatalytic efficiency in the laboratory, the photocatalytic pavement blocks were applied in the field and after one year in service the photocatalytic efficiency was reevaluated in the laboratory. The experimental results indicate the good efficiency of the new photocatalytic blocks in the degradation of NOx, which under certain conditions can reach a pollutant (NOx) conversion rate of up to 95%. However, after one year in the field the blocks showed a significant reduction in photocatalytic efficiency. It was also observed that the blocks with more porous surfaces showed better results for the rate of NOx degradation. Furthermore, by increasing the content of TiO2 greater efficiency can be obtained. (C) 2012 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