| Literature DB >> 28767085 |
Deqiang Zhao1,2, Wenwen Wang3, Wenjuan Zong4,5, Shimin Xiong6,7, Qian Zhang8,9, Fangying Ji10,11, Xuan Xu12,13.
Abstract
The band gaps of bismuth vanadate (BiVO₄) andEntities:
Keywords: bismuth sulfide; bismuth vanadate; heterojunction; hydrothermal method; pH value; photocatalysis
Year: 2017 PMID: 28767085 PMCID: PMC5578257 DOI: 10.3390/ma10080891
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Figure 1X-ray diffraction (XRD) patterns.
Figure 2Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) (a–d) of samples, HRTEM (e) of Sample-8.0, and Fourier–transform infrared (FT-IR) spectra (f) of Sample-8.0.
Figure 3Energy dispersive X-ray detector (EDX) spectra of all samples (a) and X-ray photoelectron spectra (XPS) spectra of Sample-8.0 (b–f): (b) survey XPS spectrum, (c) C 1s peaks, (d) V 2p3/2 and V 2p1/2 peaks, (e) O 1s peak, and (f) Bi 4f5/2, Bi 4f7/2 and S 2p peaks.
Sample composition based on EDX.
| Sample | Bi | V | O | S | C | Molar Ratio |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| wt % | wt % | wt % | wt % | wt % | BiVO4:Bi2S3 | |
| Sample-7.5 | 61.36 | 15.89 | 18.94 | 0.00 | 3.81 | / |
| Sample-8.0 | 76.04 | 14.50 | 2.26 | 3.69 | 3.51 | 7.42:1 |
| Sample-8.5 | 79.76 | 11.64 | 2.09 | 3.62 | 2.89 | 6.07:1 |
| Sample-9.0 | 78.75 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 17.67 | 3.58 | / |
Figure 4(a) UV-Vis diffuse reflectance spectra of samples; (b) Estimated band gaps of UV-Vis spectra of the samples; (c) Transient photocurrent response; (d) Photoluminescence (PL) spectra at an excitation wavelength of 280 nm.
Figure 5(a) Adsorption–desorption equilibrium test results; (b) Degradation of rhodamine B (RhB) using different catalysts under visible light irradiation; (c) Linear fit of the photocatalytic reaction and the reaction rate constant k; (d) Photocatalytic degradation of RhB reusing photocatalyst sample 8 after filtration; (e) EDX and SEM (inset) of sample 8 after recycling five times; (f) XRD of sample 8 after recycling five times.
Brunner−Emmet−Teller (BET) measurements of samples.
| Sample | Mean Pore Size (nm) | Pore Volume (cm3 g−1) | Specific Surface Area (m2 g−1) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sample-7.5 | 15.765 | 0.024 | 6.423 |
| Sample-8.0 | 15.462 | 0.021 | 19.527 |
| Sample-8.5 | 14.459 | 0.018 | 12.642 |
| Sample-9.0 | 17.265 | 0.030 | 21.165 |
Figure 6Scavenger effect of sample 8 photocatalyst.
Schematic 1Postulated mechanism for RhB degradation catalyzed with sample 8.0.