| Literature DB >> 30836632 |
Taehee Kim1, Vinayak G Parale2, Hae-Noo-Ree Jung3, Younghun Kim4, Zied Driss5, Dorra Driss6, Abdallah Bouabidi7, Souhir Euchy8, Hyung-Ho Park9.
Abstract
SnO₂ aerogel/reduced graphene oxide (rGO) nanocomposites were synthesized using the sol⁻gel method. A homogeneous dispersion of graphene oxide (GO) flakes in a tin precursor solution was captured in a three-dimensional network SnO₂ aerogel matrix and successively underwent supercritical alcohol drying followed by the in situ thermal reduction of GO, resulting in SnO₂ aerogel/rGO nanocomposites. The chemical interaction between aerogel matrix and GO functional groups was confirmed by a peak shift in the Fourier transform infrared spectra and a change in the optical bandgap of the diffuse reflectance spectra. The role of rGO in 3D aerogel structure was studied in terms of photocatalytic activity with detailed mechanism of the enhancement such as electron transfer between the GO and SnO₂. In addition, the photocatalytic activity of these nanocomposites in the methyl orange degradation varied depending on the amount of rGO loading in the SnO₂ aerogel matrix; an appropriate amount of rGO was required for the highest enhancement in the photocatalytic activity of the SnO₂ aerogel. The proposed nanocomposites could be a useful solution against water pollutants.Entities:
Keywords: SnO2 aerogel; graphene oxide; nanocomposite; photocatalysis; sol–gel method
Year: 2019 PMID: 30836632 PMCID: PMC6473939 DOI: 10.3390/nano9030358
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nanomaterials (Basel) ISSN: 2079-4991 Impact factor: 5.076
Figure 1(a) Brunauer–Emmett–Teller isotherms, (b) Barrett–Joyner–Halenda graph and (c) X-ray diffraction spectra of pristine SnO2 aerogel (PTO) and SnO2 aerogel/reduced graphene oxide (rGO) nanocomposites with different rGO loadings (0.05 wt.%: TGO05; 0.1 wt.%: TGO1; 0.3 wt.%: TGO3).
Textural properties and crystallite size of pristine SnO2 aerogel and SnO2 aerogel/reduced graphene oxide (rGO) nanocomposites with different rGO loadings.
| Graphene Content (wt.%) | Surface Area | Pore Volume (cm3 g−1) | Pore diameter | Average Crystallite Size (nm) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 117 | 0.49 | 17 | 3.48 |
| 0.05 | 131 | 0.62 | 19 | 3.42 |
| 0.1 | 147 | 0.69 | 18 | 3.46 |
| 0.3 | 157 | 0.57 | 15 | 3.35 |
Comparison of the effect of in situ annealing on the specific surface area of SnO2 aerogel, with and without the addition of graphene oxide.
| Graphene Content | Surface Area | Surface Area | Surface Area |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 199 | 117 | 84 |
| 0.05 | 277 | 131 | 75 |
| 0.1 | 314 | 147 | 73 |
| 0.3 | 359 | 157 | 92 |
Figure 2(a) Fourier transform infrared spectra and (b) their magnification in the low-wavenumber region for the pristine SnO2 aerogel (PTO) and the SnO2 aerogel/reduced graphene oxide (rGO) nanocomposites with different rGO loadings (0.05 wt.%: TGO05; 0.1 wt.%: TGO1; 0.3 wt.%: TGO3).
Figure 3Photoluminescence spectra of pristine SnO2 aerogel (PTO) and SnO2 aerogel/reduced graphene oxide (rGO) nanocomposites with different rGO loadings (0.05 wt.%: TGO05; 0.1 wt.%: TGO1; 0.3 wt.%: TGO3).
Figure 4Field-emission scanning electron microscopy images of: (a) pristine SnO2 aerogel (PTO); (b) SnO2 aerogel/reduced graphene oxide (rGO) nanocomposites with an rGO loading of 0.1 wt.% (TGO1); (c,d) magnification of red square areas in (b), showing the rGO incorporation in the SnO2 aerogel matrix; (e–h). The red arrows represent rGO sheets.
Figure 5(a) Diffuse reflectance spectra and (b) Kubelka–Munk plots for the calculated bandgaps of pristine SnO2 aerogel (PTO) and SnO2 aerogel/reduced graphene oxide (rGO) nanocomposites with an rGO loading of 0.1 wt.% (TGO1).
Figure 6Photocatalytic activities of pristine SnO2 aerogel (PTO) and SnO2 aerogel/reduced graphene oxide (rGO) nanocomposites with different rGO loadings (0.05 wt.%: TGO05; 0.1 wt.%: TGO1; 0.3 wt.%: TGO3), represented as (a) the degradation of methyl orange (MO) dye (in terms of concentration ratio C/C0, where C0 and C are the MO concentrations at initial time t0 and a given ultraviolet irradiation time t) and (b) its reaction rate during time.
Figure 7Schematic of MO dye photodegradation by using SnO2 aerogel/reduced graphene oxide nanocomposites under ultraviolet light.
Comparison of photocatalytic performance of SnO2 aerogel/rGO nanocomposite photocatalyst in this work with previously reported composite photocatalysts.
| Photocatalyst | Light Source/Pollutant | Experimental Condition | Photodegradation Efficiency | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SnO2 nanoparticles coated on MWCNT | 4 × 6 W fluorescent halogen lamps (254 nm), methyl orange | C: 1000 mg L−1; P: 20 mg L−1 | 45 min/94% | [ |
| Simonkolleite nanopetals with SnO2 | 3 × 8 W UV lamps (254 nm), rhodamine 6G | C: 500 mg L−1; P: 10 mg L−1 | 32 min /100% | [ |
| SnO2–graphene | 300 W mercury lamp, methyl orang and rhodamine B | C: 500 mg L−1; P: 20 mg L−1 | Methyl orange | [ |
| SnO2–CNT nanocomposites | 9 W eight UV–vis lamps (365 nm), methylene blue and methyl orange | C: 200 mg L−1; P: 20 ppm (methylene blue), 10 ppm (methyl orange) | Methylene blue 180 min/93% | [ |
| SnO2 aerogel/rGO nanocomposite | 40 W UV lamp (370 nm), methyl orange | C: 1 × 10−5 M; P: 100 mg L−1 | Methyl orange | This work |