| Literature DB >> 31590359 |
Teresa J Bandosz1, Alfonso Policicchio2, Marc Florent3, Po S Poon4, Juan Matos5,6.
Abstract
Hybrids containing approximately equal amounts of P25 TiO2 and S-doped porous carbons were prepared using a water-based slurry mixing method. The materials were extensively characterized by adsorption of nitrogen, potentiometric titration, thermal analysis in air and in helium, XRD, XPS and SEM. The collected results showed the significant blockage of carbon micropores by TiO2 particles deposited on their outer surface. The formation of a new interface, especially for the S-rich samples, might also contribute to the porosity alteration. Analysis of surface chemistry suggested the presence of Ti-S bonds with an involvement of sulfur from thiophenic species in the carbon phase. The latter, especially when polymer-derived, was mainly deposited on the TiO2 nanoparticles. Formation of Ti-S stabilized sulfur and increased the ignition temperature of the hybrids, especially those with a high content of sulfur, in comparison with the ignition temperature of carbons. The surfaces of hybrid with S-containing carbons was also thermally very stable and of basic chemical nature. The formation of interfacial structures Ti-C was detected by XPS analysis suggesting a partial reduction of the Ti.Entities:
Keywords: S-doped carbon; TiO2; hybrids; interface; porosity; surface chemistry
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31590359 PMCID: PMC6804183 DOI: 10.3390/molecules24193585
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Figure 1(A) TG and (B) DTG curves in air for the hybrids studied.
Figure 2(A) DTG curves in helium; (B) m/z thermal profiles for the initial samples; (C) m/z thermal profiles for the H2S-treated samples.
Figure 3(A) Nitrogen adsorption isotherms; (B) Pore size distributions.
Figure 4Comparison between the measured and hypothetical values: (A) surface area; (B) pore volumes of the hybrids.
Figure 5XRD diffraction patterns for the T/C hybrids studied.
Figure 6(A) Proton binding curves; (B) Comparison of measured and hypothetical numbers of surface groups.
Figure 7SEM images. (A) T/BAX; (B) T/C1; (C) T/C2; (D) T/BAX-S; (E) T/C1-S; (F) T/C2-S.
Figure 8Deconvolution of C 1s, O 1s, S 2p and Ti 2p3/2 core energy level spectra. In the case of S 2p, the 2p3/2 and 2p1/2 contributions (differ by 1.19 eV) are marked with the corresponding colors.
Content of elements on the surface (in italic; in at. %) and the results of the deconvolution of C 1s, O 1s, S 2p and Ti 2p3/2.
| Energy, eV | Bond Assignment | T/BAX | T/BAX-S | T/C1 | T/C1-S | T/C2 | T/C2-S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C 1 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| 284.8 | C-(C, S) (graphitic carbon) | 63.1 | 50.9 | 49.3 | 28.4 | 38.1 | 57.8 |
| 286.1 | C-O, C-H (phenolic, alcoholic, etheric) | 24.1 | 35.5 | 34.4 | 51.7 | 38.3 | 19.3 |
| 287.0 | C=O (carbonyl or quinone) | 10.0 | 9.3 | 11.4 | 15.8 | 15.6 | 12.7 |
| 288.0 | O-C=O (carboxyl or ester) | 2.8 | 4.3 | 4.9 | 4.1 | 4.6 | 7.8 |
| 289.0 | π-π * |
|
|
|
| 3.4 | 2.4 |
| O 1 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| 530.9 | TiO2 | 63.9 | 53.2 | 55.9 | 59.2 | 60.0 | 63.1 |
| 532.4 | O=C/O=S (in carboxyl/carbonyl or sulfoxides/sulfones) | 12.8 | 18.4 | 14.5 | 11.7 | 13.2 | 20.5 |
| 533.5 | O-C/O-S (in phenol/epoxy or thioesters/sulfonic) | 14.8 | 19.6 | 17.6 | 19.6 | 18.1 | 16.4 |
| 534.5 | -O- (in water or chemisorbed oxygen species) | 8.5 | 8.8 | 12.0 | 9.5 | 8.7 | --- |
| S 2 |
|
|
|
| |||
| 163.4 | Ti-S | --- | --- | 41.5 | 44.0 | 20.1 | 75.0 |
| 164.6 | R-S-S-, C-S-C (in bisulfides/thiophenes configurations) | --- | --- | --- | --- | 10.0 | 8.9 |
| 166.8 | C-S-O, R2-S=O/R-SO2-R (in sulfoxides, sulfones) | --- | --- | 13.4 | |||
| 168.8 | Sulfonic acid | --- | --- | 58.5 | 56.0 | 56.5 | 16.1 |
| Ti 2 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| 459.5 | TiO2 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
Figure 9(A) Tauc plots for indirect allowed transitions. (B) Indirect optical band gaps of the different materials.