| Literature DB >> 30874917 |
Longfei Song1,2, Linqu Luo1, Yan Xi1, Jianjun Song1, Ying Wang2, Liping Yang2,3, Anqi Wang2, Yunfa Chen2,3, Ning Han4,5, Fengyun Wang6,7.
Abstract
Although significant developments have been made in the low-concentration formaldehyde monitoring in indoor air by using gas sensors, they still suffer from insufficient performance for achieving ppb-level detection. In this work, <100> oriented Si nanowires (SiNWs) with high specific surface area were prepared via metal-assisted chemical etching method (MACE), and then were uniformly coated with graphene oxide (GO) followed by the subsequent reductive process in H2/Ar atmosphere at 800 °C to obtain reduced graphene oxide (RGO). The RGO coating (RGO@n-SiNWs) obviously enhances SiNWs sensitivity to low-concentration formaldehyde, benefiting from the increased specific surface area, the sensitization effect of RGO, and the formation of p-n junction between SiNWs and RGO. Specifically, RGO@n-SiNWs exhibits a high response of 6.4 to 10 ppm formaldehyde at 300 °C, which is about 2.6 times higher than that of pristine SiNWs (~ 2.5). Furthermore, the RGO@n-SiNWs show a high response of 2.4 to 0.1 ppm formaldehyde which is the largest permissive concentration in indoor air, a low detection limit of 35 ppb obtained by non-linear fitting, and fast response/recovery times of 30 and 10 s. In the meanwhile, the sensor also shows high selectivity over other typical interfering gases such as ethanol, acetone, ammonia, methanol, xylene, and toluene, and shows a high stability over a measurement period of 6 days. These results enable the highly sensitive, selective, and stable detection of low-concentration formaldehyde to guarantee safety of indoor environment.Entities:
Keywords: Formaldehyde; Reduced graphene oxide; Selectivity; Sensitivity; Si nanowires
Year: 2019 PMID: 30874917 PMCID: PMC6419648 DOI: 10.1186/s11671-019-2921-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nanoscale Res Lett ISSN: 1556-276X Impact factor: 4.703
Fig. 1a Top view, b zoomed-in top view, and c cross-sectional SEM images of n-SiNWs. d Cross-sectional SEM image of p-SiNWs. e TEM image of n-SiNWs. f HRTEM image of n-SiNWs together with the corresponding FFT. g SEM image of RGO@n-SiNWs with HF treatment. h Zoomed-in SEM image of RGO@n-SiNWs with HF treatment
Fig. 2a XRD patterns of n-/p-SiNWs and RGO@n-SiNWs. b Zoomed-in XRD patterns from 10 to 25 degree
Fig. 3a The responses of n-/p-SiNWs, RGO/n- and RGO@p-SiNWs to 10 ppm HCHO at 300 °C. b The response of n-SiNWs and RGO@n-SiNWs to 10 ppm HCHO at various temperatures. c The dynamic response of n-SiNWs and RGO@n-SiNWs from 0.1 to 10 ppm HCHO. d Non-linear fitting of the response of RGO@n-SiNWs at various HCHO concentrations
Fig. 4a Response and recovery time of n-SiNWs and RGO@n-SiNWs to 0.1 ppm HCHO. b The response of n-SiNWs and RGO@n-SiNWs for seven types of common VOCs (10 ppm) at 300 °C
Fig. 5Stability test of n-SiNWs and RGO@n-SiNWs for 0.1 ppm and 10 ppm
Fig. 6a Typical nitrogen adsorption isotherms of n-SiNWs and RGO@n-SiNWs. b Raman shift of n-SiNWs and RGO@n-SiNWs, and the zoomed-in Si-Si peaks as shown in inset
Fig. 7a XPS spectra of Si2p peaks for n-SiNWs and RGO@n-SiNWs. b XPS spectra of C1s peaks for n-SiNWs and RGO@n-SiNWs
Fig. 8a Schematic diagram of the mechanism of HCHO molecules detection. b The band structures diagram of the RGO/n-SiNW interface