| Literature DB >> 29443459 |
Tingting Zhao1, Srinivas Gadipelli1, Guanjie He1, Matthew J Ward2, David Do3, Peng Zhang3, Zhengxiao Guo1.
Abstract
Noble-metal-free electrocatalysts are attractive for cathodicEntities:
Keywords: doping; electrochemistry; nanostructures; spinel phases; transition metals
Year: 2018 PMID: 29443459 PMCID: PMC5947553 DOI: 10.1002/cssc.201800049
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ChemSusChem ISSN: 1864-5631 Impact factor: 8.928
Scheme 1Synthetic process for a typical MCO@NCNTs sample, representing chemical functionalization of CNTs followed by surface anchoring of MCO nanocrystals.
Figure 1a) TEM image of MCO@NCNTs (inset: electron diffraction pattern). b) High‐resolution (HR) TEM image of MCO@NCNTs. c) Powder X‐ray diffraction (PXRD) results for CNTs, NCNTs, and MCO@NCNTs. X‐ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) elemental analysis of MCO@NCNTs: core‐level spectra of Co 2p (d) and Mn 2p (e), and the survey spectrum (f).
Figure 2a) ORR and b) OER LSV curves of MCO, NCNTs, MCO+NCNTs, MCO@NCNTs, and reference standards Pt/C and IrO2/C,49 on a rotating disk electrode (RDE) measured in O2‐saturated 0.1 m KOH at a scan rate of 10 mV s−1 and 1600 rpm (at room temperature, without IR compensation). c) Comparative ORR LSV curves of MCO@NCNTs and Pt/C on a rotating ring disk electrode (RRDE) in O2‐saturated 0.1 m KOH at 1600 rpm. The disk potential was scanned at 10 mV s−1 by maintaining the ring at 1.46 V versus a reversible hydrogen electrode (RHE). d) Percentage of peroxide formation (bottom) with respect to the total oxygen reduction products and electron‐transfer number, n (top), of MCO@NCNTs and Pt/C at various potentials based on the corresponding RRDE data.
A comparison of the bifunctional activities of MCO@NCNTs and their counterparts.
| Sample |
| Δ | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ORR benchmark[a] | OER benchmark[b] | [V] | |
| MCO | <0.1 | >1.9 | >2 |
| NCNTs | 0.56 | ≈1.00 | ≈1.40 |
| MCO+NCNTs | 0.70 | 1.74 | 1.04 |
| MCO@NCNTs | 0.76 | 1.70 | 0.94 |
| Pt/C | 0.79 | 1.92 | 1.13 |
[a] At j=−3 mA cm−2. [b] At j=10 mA cm−2.
Figure 3Electrocatalytic activity performance of MnCo3−O4@NCNTs on a glassy carbon electrode measured in O2‐saturated 0.1 m KOH. LSV curves of the a) ORR and b) OER at a scan rate of 10 mV s−1 and 1600 rpm. Chronoamperometry (CA) response curves of c) the ORR at 0.66 V versus RHE under 1600 rpm (inset: MnCo2O4@NCNTs for prolonged operation of 32 h) and d) the OER at 1.66 V versus RHE under 2500 rpm.
Figure 4a) Co and b) Mn K‐edge of MnCo3−O4@NCNTs, with x=0, 1, 1.5, 2, and 3, from XANES.
Figure 5TEM images of a) MCO@1NCNTs, b) MCO@2NCNTs, and c) MCO@3NCNTs. d) Thermogravimetric (TG) curves of MCO@NCNTs recorded at a constant heating rate of 3 °C min−1 under a flow of air. The reported mass loss is after baseline correction measured against an empty crucible. e) ORR and f) OER LSV curves of MCO@1NCNTs, MCO@2NCNTs, and MCO@3NCNTs on a glassy carbon electrode measured in O2‐saturated 0.1 m KOH, at a scan rate of 10 mV s−1 and rotating speed of 1600 rpm.
Figure 6a) XPS surveys of oxCNTs‐x h; oxygen content in at %. b) Normalized intensity of O 1s to sp2‐C of representative samples. c) ORR and d) OER LSV curves of HNO3‐x h (x=1, 2, 4, 6, and 12) on a glassy carbon electrode measured in O2‐saturated 0.1 m KOH, at a scan rate of 10 mV s−1 and rotating speed of 1600 rpm.