| Literature DB >> 31308407 |
Jamshaid Rashid1,2, Nadia Parveen3, Aneela Iqbal4, Saif Ullah Awan5, Naseem Iqbal6, Shamraiz Hussain Talib7, Naveed Hussain8, Bilal Akram7, Ata Ulhaq9, Bilal Ahmed9, Ming Xu10.
Abstract
Visible light active g-C3N4(0.94)/Entities:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31308407 PMCID: PMC6629633 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-46544-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1(a) Top and (b) side view of fully optimized structure of graphitic carbon nitride.
Figure 2XRD patterns of (a) pristine g-C3N4, CeO2 and g-C3N4/CeO2 composites and (b) pristine Fe3O4, g-C3N4/CeO2 (5%) and ternary nanocomposites.
Figure 3Respective SEM and TEM images (a,b) pristine g-C3N4, (c,d) CeO2, (e,f) Fe3O4, (g,h) binary composite g-C3N4 + 5%CeO2 (GC5) and (i,j) ternary nanocomposite g-C3N4 + 5%CeO2 + 1%Fe3O4 (GCF1) photocatalysts.
Figure 4Elemental mapping of prepared pristine and nanocomposite photocatalysts.
Figure 5Resolved Raman Spectra of –gC3N4 nanosheets composite series.
Figure 6High resolution XPS spectra of GCF1vs GCF5 (a,b) C-1s, (c,d) N-1s, (e,f) Ce-3d, and (g,h) Fe-2p peaks.
Figure 7(a) Diffuse reflectance spectra and (inset) band gap energy calculated for GCN, CeO2, GC5 and GCF1; Room temperature photoluminescence spectra of: (b) pristine g-C3N4 nanosheets; (c) CeO2 nanosheets; (d) binary composite g-C3N4/CeO2 nanosheets. (e) Ternary composites of g-C3N4/CeO2/Fe3O4 nanosheets.
Figure 8(i) Single Ce atom, (ii) CeO2 and (iii) Fe3O4 doped on graphitic carbon nitride (g/C3N4) monolayer. (a) Optimized geometry. (b) Charge density differences, for the contour plots, the charge accumulation regions are rendered in green. The contour value of the charge difference density is ±0.05 a.u. and (c) The spin-polarized partial density of states (PDOS) projected on TDOS (black), C-2s (black) and C-2p (red), N-2s (black) and N-2p (red), Ce-6s (black) and Ce-4f (cyan), O-2s (black) and O-2p (red) and Fe-4s (black), Fe-4p (red) and Fe-3d (blue) states. The Fermi level is set to zero.
Figure 9Photocatalytic 2-CP degradation using pristine and modified nanomaterials.
Figure 10Photocatalytic activity influenced by; (a) initial 2-CP concentration; (b) catalyst dosage; (c) variable solution pH; (d) catalysts reusability.
Kinetic constant values explaining the effect of catalyst dose, pH and 2-CP concentration over ternary nanocomposite GCF1.
| Experiment | Conditions | First order | Second order | Zero order | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| k (min−1) | R2 | k (min−1) | R2 | k(min−1) | R2 | ||
| aEffect of 2-CP conc. (mg L−1) | 25 |
| 0.9726 | 0.0047 | 0.7527 | 0.1173 | 0.9613 |
| 50 | 0.0060 | 0.9991 | 0.0002 | 0.9838 | 0.1711 | 0.9765 | |
| 75 | 0.0038 | 0.9813 | 0.00007 | 0.9654 | 0.2068 | 0.9856 | |
| bEffect of pH | 5 |
| 0.9799 | 0.0002 | 0.9305 | 0.1549 | 0.9940 |
| 4 | 0.0055 | 0.9956 | 0.0002 | 0.9656 | 0.1510 | 0.9930 | |
| 3 | 0.0049 | 0.9983 | 0.0002 | 0.9816 | 0.1427 | 0.9893 | |
| 6 | 0.0044 | 0.9962 | 0.0002 | 0.9807 | 0.1316 | 0.9933 | |
| 7 | 0.0026 | 0.994 | 0.00007 | 0.9831 | 0.0979 | 0.9977 | |
| 8 | 0.0014 | 0.9871 | 0.00003 | 0.9837 | 0.0586 | 0.9887 | |
| 9 | 0.001 | 0.9897 | 0.00002 | 0.992 | 0.0442 | 0.9865 | |
| cEffect of catalyst conc. (g L−1) | 1.5 | 0.006 | 0.9991 | 0.0002 | 0.9838 | 0.1711 | 0.9765 |
| 1.0 | 0.0053 | 0.9994 | 0.0002 | 0.9846 | 0.1703 | 0.9873 | |
| 2.0 | 0.0031 | 0.9989 | 0.00009 | 0.9948 | 0.1163 | 0.9927 | |
| 0.5 | 0.0027 | 0.964 | 0.00007 | 0.9449 | 0.1052 | 0.9755 | |
a(Catalyst dosage: 1 g L−1, Solution pH = 5).
b(2-CP initial concentration: 50 mg L−1; Catalyst dosage: 1 g L−1).
c(2-CP = 50 mg L−1, pH = 5).
Figure 11(a) UV-Visible absorption spectra of 2-CP degradation over GCF1. (b) Influence of reactive species scavenging on photocatalytic activity; (c) GC Analysis results.