Taisiya O Kozlova1,2, Alexander E Baranchikov2, Daniil A Kozlov1,2, Andrey V Gavrikov2, Gennady P Kopitsa3,4, Alexey D Yapryntsev2, Konstantin B Ustinovich2, Alexis Chennevière5, Vladimir K Ivanov2. 1. Lomonosov Moscow State University, Leninskie Gory, 1, Moscow, 119991, Russia. 2. Kurnakov Institute of General and Inorganic Chemistry of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Leninsky prospect, 31, Moscow, 119991, Russia. 3. Petersburg Nuclear Physics Institute of National Research Centre "Kurchatov Institute", Leningradskaya oblast, mkr. Orlova roshcha, 1, Gatchina 188300, Russia. 4. Grebenshchikov Institute of Silicate Chemistry of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Naberezhnaya Adm. Makarova, 2, St. Petersburg, 199034, Russia. 5. Université Paris Saclay, Laboratoire Léon Brillouin, CEA-CNRS, CEA Saclay, Cedex, Gif-sur-Yvette 91191, France.
Abstract
Ceric hydrogen phosphate gels possess a very unique spatial organization, being nearly amorphous materials with a fibrous structure. Using a sol-gel approach, we succeeded in preparing bulky gels containing as much as 20,000 molecules of water per cerium atom. Supercritical treatment of these gels made it possible to obtain the first ultralight monolithic noncarbonaceous aerogels with a density as low as 1 mg/cm3.
Ceric hydrogen phosphate gels possess a very unique spatial organization, being nearly amorphous materials with a fibrous structure. Using a sol-gel approach, we succeeded in preparing bulky gels containing as much as 20,000 molecules of water per cerium atom. Supercritical treatment of these gels made it possible to obtain the first ultralight monolithic noncarbonaceous aerogels with a density as low as 1 mg/cm3.
Aerogels are unique
materials possessing a specific spatial structure,
which gives rise to a high specific surface area, ultrahigh porosity,
adjustable density ranges, low thermal conductivity and permittivity,
low speed of sound propagation, and so forth.[1] To date, many aerogel materials have been obtained,[2] withthe greatest attention in recent years focused on
ultralight carbonaceous aerogels (density 1–10 mg/cm3), primarily graphene or graphene oxide-based aerogels, as well as
ultralight renewable and biodegradable aerogel materials obtained
from plant cell biomass.[3−10] Also, single representatives of extremely light carbonaceous aerogels
have been reported with a density of less than 1 mg/cm3.[11−13]Inorganic aerogels usually possess a higher density than carbonaceous
aerogels. Typical examples are silica aerogels[14] and aerogels based on other metal oxides (Al2O3, SnO2, TiO2, etc.).[15−19] In most cases, the structure of inorganic aerogels obtained using
template-free approaches (e.g., using a conventional sol–gel
method) represents a three-dimensional open network assembled using
metal oxide NPs.In the past few years, a brand new family of
ultralight noncarbonaceous
inorganic aerogels, namely, 1D aerogels, has been discovered. Current
examples include nanowire aerogels based on cryptomelane manganese
oxide (K2–Mn8O16) and TiO2,[20] hydroxyapatite,[21] individual metals,[22,23] SiC,[24] and others with densities of less
than 10 mg/cm3. Recent advances in engineering 1D aerogel
materials and their specific properties are extensively discussed
elsewhere.[25−27] Often, electrospinning,[28] CVD, or template-assisted approach methods are used to achieve ultralow
densities of inorganic noncarbonaceous materials, but these methods
are laborious and poorly scalable.[29,30] Recently,
we have succeeded in the synthesis of the first 1D inorganic phosphate
aerogels, namely, ceric hydrogen phosphate aerogels, by direct sol–gel
synthesis, which involves mixing of a cerium-containing hydrogen phosphate
solution withwater followed by supercritical drying of wet gels.[31] The resulting monolithic aerogels had a relatively
low density of 10 mg/cm3.In our opinion, 1D cericphosphate aerogels possess a significant
potential for further density reduction by engineering their structures.
We assume that we can obtain much looser structures by changing the
packing density of ceric hydrogen phosphate fibers. Such an effect
could be achieved by increasing the gelator volume, which was successfully
demonstrated by Mondal et al.[32] using the
example of AgVO3 gels. However, in the Ce+4–H3PO4 system, the addition of extra water as a gelator
results in fast precipitation instead of gelation, which prevents
the production of monolithic aerogels.In this study, we have
further analyzed the conditions for the
formation of ultralight monolithic ceric hydrogen phosphate lyogels
by extending the range of the inorganic gelators used. As a result,
our one-pot, template-free approach has provided additional opportunities
for the design of the ceric hydrogen phosphate aerogel structure and
allowed us to obtain the first monolithic all-inorganic aerogel with
a density as low as 1 mg/cm3.
Results and Discussion
Determination
of the Conditions for the Formation of Monolithic
Cerium-Containing Phosphate Gels
Earlier, we showed[31] that monolithic cerium-containing phosphate
gels (CePg) were formed by the addition of distilled water to a cerium-containing
phosphate solution (CePs, [Ce] = 0.1 M) at CePs: H2O volume
ratios of 1:2–1:10; however, they are destroyed during ageing
if the volume ratio of CePs: H2O is higher than 1:6. Supercritical
drying of the gel obtained at CePs: H2O volume ratio =
1:4 afforded an aerogel with a geometric density of about 10 mg/cm3.[31] Interestingly, the formation
of gels in the Ce4+–PO43––H2O system was first reported more than 50 years
ago (see ref[33−35]); however, the chemical composition of these gels
and the mechanism of their formation are still unclear. König
and Meyn[36] suggested that a compound of
the composition (Ce–O–Ce)(HPO4)3·H2O precipitates from a concentrated phosphoric
acid solution of Ce4+ upon dilution withwater, postulating
the presence of (Ce–O–Ce)6+ ions in the solid
phase that also exist in solution. Brandel et al.[37] represented the (Ce–O–Ce)(HPO4)3·H2O formula as Ce2(PO4)2HPO4·2H2O. The paper
by Lebedev and Kulyako provides a comprehensive analysis of ceric
and cerous phosphate complexes in concentrated orthophosphoric acid.
They demonstrated that the Ce4+ ion in concentrated H3PO4 is strongly coordinated withphosphate ligands,
mostly H2PO4–.[38] In the solid state, the strong coordination
of Ce(III) and Ce(IV) withphosphate ligands ensures high stability
of well-known cerium(III) phosphates (monaziteCePO4 and
rhabdophaneCePO4·xH2O)[39−41] and a series of recently synthesized cerium(IV) phosphates (Ce2(PO4)2HPO4·H2O, Ce(PO4)1.5(H2O)(H3O)0.5(H2O)0.5, (NH4)2Ce(PO4)2·H2O, K2Ce(PO4)2, Na10Ce2(PO4)6, K4CeZr(PO4)4, and (NH4)[CeF2(PO4)]).[42−49]To understand the mechanism of ceric phosphate gel formation,
it is reasonable to take into account similar studies on thorium phosphate
gels, since Ce(IV) is a chemical analog of Th(IV)[50−52] due to the
proximity of their ionic radii (for CN = 8, the ionic radii are 97
and 105 pm for Ce(IV) and Th(IV), respectively[53]). Parmar et al.[54] conducted
a detailed study of the gels obtained by mixing solutions of thoriumnitrate with dilute phosphoric acid. They found that when these solutions
are mixed, a thorium phosphate precipitate forms and nitric acid is
released. After shaking the mixture, the precipitate was peptized.
Upon ageing, this colloidal solution formed a firm transparent gel.
Parmar et al. supposed that the formation of gels is associated withthe tendency of thorium phosphate to hydrate and the tendency of resulting
colloidal particles to agglomerate.Herein, we have suggested
that upon the addition of water, the
P–O–H groups in ceric phosphate complexes dissociate,
forming both free H3O+ and negatively charged
ceric hydrogen phosphate moieties. Being a nucleophile, the latter
can react with neutral complexes, forming Ce–[PO4]–Ce bridges. Obviously, the formation of any bridging structures
is the first stage in the growth of the gel network. When water is
added to ceric phosphate solutions, the formation of a gel network
occurs almost instantaneously, which is most likely due to a sharp
increase in the number of dissociated P–O–H groups,
because of the increase in pH. We assume that the use of inorganic
acid solutions instead of water would affect the acidity of the solution,
reducing the concentration of nucleophilic ceric hydrogen phosphate
anions in the reaction media; therefore, gel formation will occur
more slowly and in a controlled manner. In a similar way, according
to the early observations of Parmar et al.,[54] the addition of mineral acids to a solution of thorium phosphate
at certain concentrations slowed down gel setting, which is likely
to take place for cerium(IV) phosphates as well. Our preliminary studies
showed that mixing concentrated orthophosphoric acid with aqueous
solutions of inorganic acids (2–3 M concentration) taken in
the range from a single to a 40-fold volume excess reduces the pH
value by 0.1–1.5, compared to diluting concentrated H3PO4 withwater in the same volumetric ratios.To
check whether the use of mineral acids instead of water will
actually have an impact on the gelation process, a series of cerium-containing
phosphate solutions was prepared with [Ce] = 0.01, 0.05, 0.1, 0.2,
0.4, 0.6, and 0.8 M (the highest possible concentration in accordance
with our experimental data). Distilled water, or 3 M aqueous solutions
of nitric/phosphoric acid, or a 2 M aqueous solution of sulfuric acid
was added to cerium-containing phosphoric acid solutions; preliminary
experiments showed that when more concentrated sulfuric acid was used,
gelation did not take place for a long period of time.Predictably,
gelation upon the addition of acid solutions was slower
than in the case of water-induced gelation. After the addition of
nitric or phosphoric acid solutions, the gel network typically began
to form during the first 10 min, and this time decreased with an increase
in the concentration of CePs, withthe gel strengthening process predominantly
taking place within a day. When a solution of sulfuric acid was used,
only the initial gel network formation took several hours.We
also used different volumes of the gelator to find the minimum
and maximum ratios of CePs to the gelator required for the formation
of a monolithic gel (Figure ). The volume ratio of solutions varied from 1:0.5 to 1:100.
Figure 1
Appearance
of products obtained by mixing 0.6 M cerium-containing
phosphate solution with 3 M HNO3 solution in various volume
ratios; 5 min after mixing (above) and 1 day after mixing (below).
Appearance
of products obtained by mixing 0.6 M cerium-containing
phosphate solution with 3 M HNO3 solution in various volume
ratios; 5 min after mixing (above) and 1 day after mixing (below).When 3 M H3PO4 or 3 M HNO3 was
used, monolithic gels were formed in a wide range of concentrations
of the initial solutions and CePs: acid solution volume ratios (up
to 1:50 and 1:40, respectively) (Figure a,b). Note that the gelation time differed
drastically when 3 M H3PO4 or 3 M HNO3 was added to the ceric phosphate solution. In particular, upon the
addition of 3 M HNO3 (CePs:acid solution = 1:8 v/v), gel
formation proceeded in approximately 30 min, while upon the addition
of 3 M H3PO4 (withthe same volume ratio), the
gel was formed in approximately 1 min.
Figure 2
Conditions for the formation
of monolithic cerium-containing phosphate
gels depending on the molar ratios of cerium and phosphate in the
final mixture. Solutions for gelation: (a) 3 M H3PO4, (b) 3 M HNO3, (c) H2O, and (d) 2 M
H2SO4. Red dashed line indicates the highest
possible cerium concentration in the reaction mixture.
Conditions for the formation
of monolithic cerium-containing phosphate
gels depending on the molar ratios of cerium and phosphate in the
final mixture. Solutions for gelation: (a) 3 M H3PO4, (b) 3 M HNO3, (c) H2O, and (d) 2 M
H2SO4. Red dashed line indicates the highest
possible cerium concentration in the reaction mixture.When distilled water was added to CePs, a monolithic gel
was obtained
only with volume ratios CePs: distilled water = 1:3–1:8, regardless
of the CePs concentration (Figure c). When 2 M H2SO4 solution was
added to CePs, a monolithic gel was formed only in a narrow concentration
range of the initial cerium-containing phosphate solution (Figure d). Most likely,
the differences in the gelation process when using HNO3 and H2SO4 can be explained by the fact that
nitrate ions are weak complexing agents,[55] while sulfate ions can compete withphosphate ions in the formation
of complexes withcerium.[56,57]Thus, it was
shown that under the same conditions, using the same
initial concentration of CePs but different solutions for gelation,
monolithic gels of different volumes are formed. This, in turn, directly
determines the density of the aerogels synthesized from the wet gels
by supercritical drying. Since the use of H3PO4 and HNO3 solutions made it possible to obtain monolithic
gels of the largest volume relative to the volume of CePs used, we
chose these acids for the subsequent synthesis of ultralight aerogels.
Production of Ceric Hydrogen Phosphate Aerogels
Monolithic
gels, obtained by mixing CePs ([Ce] = 0.1 M) with a 3 M aqueous solution
of HNO3 in a volume ratio of CePs: acid solution = 1:8
and 1:20, or with a 3 M aqueous solution of H3PO4 in a volume ratio of CePs: acid solution = 1:8, 1:20, and 1:50,
were used to prepare a series of aerogels. The gels were aged for
2 days and then transferred into a container withacetonitrile to
replace the solvent. Acetonitrile was replaced daily for 1 week. The
samples were then supercritically dried in CO2. The labeling
of the obtained aerogels is presented in Table .
Table 1
Synthesis Parameters
and Labeling
of the Samples
labeling
CePN_8
CePP_8
CePN_20
CePP_20
CePP_50
acid
HNO3
H3PO4
HNO3
H3PO4
H3PO4
volume ratio CePs: acid
solution
1:8
1:8
1:20
1:20
1:50
Supercritical drying
in CO2 successfully afforded the
monolithic aerogels (Figure ). The aerogels demonstrated no significant shrinkage, proving
the strength of the gel network.
Figure 3
Appearance of aerogels (a) CePN_8, (b)
CePN_20, (c) CePP_8, (d)
CePP_20, and (e) CePP_50.
Appearance of aerogels (a) CePN_8, (b)
CePN_20, (c) CePP_8, (d)
CePP_20, and (e) CePP_50.The geometric density of CePN_8 and CePP_8 aerogels (calculated
as the ratio of aerogel mass to volume) amounted to about 5.5 mg/cm3, the density of CePN_20 and CePP_20 aerogels was about 2.2
mg/cm3, and the density of the CePP_50 aerogel was found
to be only 1 mg/cm3, which corresponds to the density of
air under ambient conditions (1.2 mg/cm3). The porosity
of the aerogels, calculated by the previously published method,[58] for all samples exceeded 99%. The mechanical
strength of the samples was sufficient enough to preserve their shape
for at least several months and to handle them without special caution.According to the X-ray diffraction (XRD) data, the aerogels had
a nearly amorphous structure, withthe most intense peak at 7.8°2θ
corresponding to an interplanar distance of 1.1 nm (Figure S1). In a number of previous works, similar diffraction
patterns have been observed for poorly crystalline materials based
on fibrous cerium(IV) phosphates;[59−64] the presence of a broad peak at low 2θ angles was assigned
to the layered structure of the materials. A detailed analysis of
the XRD data (Figure S1) showed the presence
of low intensity peaks that can be attributed to a rhabdophane structure
(CePO4·xH2O). The estimation
of rhabdophane content (using the integral intensities of rhabdophane
and ceric phosphate gel diffraction patterns) resulted in <5% rhabdophane
content for all the aerogel samples. Most probably, a minor admixture
of rhabdophane was formed due to the partial reduction of Ce(IV) by
acetonitrile at the solvent exchange stage of aerogel preparation.
This assumption is confirmed by X-ray diffraction patterns of cericphosphate gels washed with distilled water (instead of acetonitrile)
and dried under ambient conditions (Figure S1), where no rhabdophane peaks are present.The IR spectra for
all aerogels were identical and were typical
for rare earthphosphates[65−68] (Figure S2). The bands
in the region of 1120–990 cm–1 correspond
to the asymmetric stretching ν3 vibrations, and the
bands in the region of 980–900 cm–1 correspond
to the symmetrical stretching ν1 vibrations of P–O
bonds in the phosphate groups. The splitting of these bands suggests
that the PO4-groups in the structure of aerogels were directly
coordinated withcerium ions.[69] The region
of 650–440 cm–1 in the IR spectra correspond
to the deformation vibrations δ(O–P–O), and the
band in the region of 415 cm–1 was assigned to the
Ce–O stretching vibrations.[43,69,70]Absorption bands in the region of 3500(br.)
cm–1 and at 1630(s.) cm–1 characterized
the stretching
vibrations of OH groups and the deformation vibrations of H–O–H
in water molecules, respectively.[37] The
band at 2390 cm–1 was assigned to CO2 vibrations.[71] The band at 1225 cm–1 most likely referred to the vibrations of P–O–H.[43]According to EDX analysis, the average
Ce:P molar ratio for all
of the studied aerogels amounted to ∼1:2. Aerogels consisted
of spontaneously oriented, interweaving nanofibers with an average
diameter of about 40 nm (Figure ).
Figure 4
Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) data of aerogels: (a)
CePN_8,
(b) CePN_20, (c) CePP_8, (d) CePP_20, and (e) CePP_50; (f) size distribution
of the aerogel fiber width calculated from the SEM data. Solid lines
correspond to the results of data fitting using a log-normal distribution
function. The mean value and standard deviation were 37.9 and 19.5
nm, 42.7 and 22.1 nm, 32.8 and 10.5 nm, 38.2 and 17.4 nm, and 35.0
and 10.4 nm for CePN_8, CePN_20, CePP_8, CePP_20, and CePP_50, respectively.
Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) data of aerogels: (a)
CePN_8,
(b) CePN_20, (c) CePP_8, (d) CePP_20, and (e) CePP_50; (f) size distribution
of the aerogel fiber width calculated from the SEM data. Solid lines
correspond to the results of data fitting using a log-normal distribution
function. The mean value and standard deviation were 37.9 and 19.5
nm, 42.7 and 22.1 nm, 32.8 and 10.5 nm, 38.2 and 17.4 nm, and 35.0
and 10.4 nm for CePN_8, CePN_20, CePP_8, CePP_20, and CePP_50, respectively.According to transmission electron microscopy (TEM)
data, the aerogels
were composed of fibers of various diameters, up to 5 nm (Figure S3). The observed microstructure is characteristic
to 1D inorganic aerogels for which, however, the fiber diameter and
uniformity, depending on the type of material and method of preparation,
can vary greatly. In particular, Jung et al.,[20] by varying the precursor composition, obtained aerogels consisting
of TiO2 nanofibers with either a 5–10 or 50–60
nm diameter, which, however, did not directly affect the density of
the final material. Interestingly, there are reported examples of
1D aerogels with an average fiber diameter exceeding 200 nm and, at
the same time, with an ultralow density of up to 0.15 mg/cm3.[28]Figure S4 shows the full nitrogen adsorption–desorption
isotherms for CePP_8, CePN_8, and CePN_20 samples. They are characterized
by capillary condensation hysteresis and, according to the IUPAC classification,
belong to type IV. The hysteresis corresponds to the H3 type, which
may indicate the presence of slitlike pores.[72] A sharp bend of the adsorption curve at a partial pressure of about
1 is most likely due to the presence of macropores. The specific surface
values for all samples differed slightly and amounted to about 60
m2/g (Table ). An increase in the volume ratio of CePs: acid solution from 1:8
to 1:20 during the synthesis of lyogels led to a significant increase
in the specific pore volume in the obtained aerogels, as evidenced
by an increase in the absolute values of adsorption in the region
of high partial pressures and the value of hysteresis. Small values
of the Brunauer–Emmett–Teller (BET) constant indicate
the absence of micropores[58] (Table ).
Table 2
Microstructure
Characteristics of
the Samples as Derived from the Analysis of the Complete Nitrogen
Adsorption–Desorption Isotherms Using the BET and Barrett–Joyner–Halenda
(BJH) Models
labeling
SBET,
m2/g
C constant
(BET)
pore volume
(BJH, desorption curve), cm3/g
pore diameter
(BJH, desorption curve), nm
CePP_8
63
18
0.21
1.7
CePN_8
55
24
0.22
2.0
CePN_20
64
19
1.75
1.7
The structure of aerogels was further
analyzed by small-angle neutron
scattering. The experimental dependences of the macroscopic differential
cross-section dΣ(q)/dΩ of small-angle neutron scattering
on the momentum transfer are presented in Figure . The experimental dependence was described
using a two-level scattering model including the Porod and Guinier
regions:[73]
Figure 5
Small-angle neutron scattering
(SANS) differential cross-section
dΣ(q)/dΩ for the samples of ceric phosphate aerogels CePP_8
and CePN_8. Fitting of the experimental data is shown as solid red
lines.
Small-angle neutron scattering
(SANS) differential cross-section
dΣ(q)/dΩ for the samples of ceric phosphate aerogels CePP_8
and CePN_8. Fitting of the experimental data is shown as solid red
lines.According to small-angle neutron
scattering (SANS), the scattering
curves for CePP_8 and CePN_8 aerogels contained two Guinier regions,
characterized by gyration radii Rg and Rs, corresponding
to the small and large values of the momentum transfer q. The approximation parameters are presented in Table . The SANS data indicated that the aggregates
of the colloidal particles in the gels had a fractal or smooth surface.[74] Most likely, the gel formation mechanism does
not involve mass-fractal aggregation of individual particles.In the case of CePP_8 aerogel, the first level corresponding to
the region of large values of q > 0.1 Å–1 was characterized by scattering centers with a gyration
radius Rs = 1.2 nm, which formed aggregates
with a gyration radius Rg = 33 nm (the
region of small values of q < 0.02 Å–1). The fractal dimension of the surface Ds = 6 – P = 2.04 corresponds to a smooth surface.The CePN_8 aerogel contained scattering centers characterized by
gyration radii Rs = 9.6 nm and Rg = 73.8 nm.
The fractal dimension of the aerogel surface amounted to Ds = 2.32 (Table ).
The differences in the gyration radii of the primary scattering centers
(which can be ascribed to the elementary building units of the gels)
are in line withthe general principles of the sol–gel chemistry.
Gel formation includes competing processes of nucleation and growth
of colloidal particles and their condensation. Rapid condensation
of colloidal particles results in a gel constructed of very small
elementary units (the so-called polymer gels). In the case of slow
condensation, colloidal particles grow larger resulting in the so-called
colloidal gels. For the CePN_8 sample, the gelation time was ∼30
times higher than that for the CePP_8 sample, so the gyration radius
of the elementary units in the CePN_8 sample is consistently larger
(> 9 nm) than that in the CePP_8 sample (∼1 nm).
Table 3
Approximation Parameters of Small-Angle
Neutron Scattering Data for Ceric Phosphate Aerogels
parameter
CePP_8
CePN_8
gyration radius Rg, nm
33.0 ± 0.1
73.8 ± 0.7
fractal dimension Ds
2.04 ± 0.02
2.32 ± 0.02
gyration radius Rs, nm
1.2 ± 0.2
9.6 ± 0.3
Thus, SEM, TEM, BET/BJH, and SANS
data together indicated that
cerium-containing phosphate aerogels were composed of quasi-one-dimensional
fibers. Their unique structure allowed for varying fiber packing density
in a wide range by changing the interfiber distance. It is this feature
that makes it possible to build ultralight, highly porous, monolithic
materials.
Conclusions
Cerium-containing phosphate
gels can be obtained using a one-pot,
template-free method, without the use of any organic gelators due
to the aggregation of flexible inorganic fibers into a strong network
using a conventional sol–gel process. Optimal conditions were
established for obtaining monolithic ceric hydrogen phosphate lyogels,
depending on the type of the inorganic gelator and the ratio “CeP
solution: gelator solution”. We have demonstrated that the
CeP framework is capable of retaining a huge amount of liquid (in
the wet gels, up to 20,000 water molecules per cerium atom) and serves
as a perfect starting material for the production of ultralight aerogels.
Supercritical drying of lyogels synthesized using 3 M aqueous solutions
of HNO3 and H3PO4 results in the
formation of monolithic cerium-containing phosphoric aerogels. The
fibrous 1D structure of the obtained aerogels was confirmed by a set
of analytical methods, which also revealed that the total pore volume
in the final product increased several times with an increase in the
ratio of ≪CeP solution: gelator solution≫. It was found
that using 3 M orthophosphoric acid as the gelator with a ratio of
CeP solution: 3 M H3PO4 solution = 1:50 at CeP
concentration = 0.1 M makes it possible to obtain a purely inorganicceric hydrogen phosphate aerogel with a density as low as 1 mg/cm3.
Experimental Section
The following materials were used
as received, without further
purification: Ce(NO3)3·6H2O
(99%, Aldrich #238538), aqueous ammonia (25 wt %, extrapure grade,
Khimmed, Russia), orthophosphoric acid (85 wt % aq, ρ = 1.689
g/cm3, analytical grade, Khimmed, Russia), nitric acid
(68 wt % aq, ρ = 1.409 g/cm3, extrapure grade, Khimmed,
Russia), sulfuric acid (92 wt % aq, ρ = 1.824 g/cm3, extrapure grade, Khimmed, Russia), and distilled or deionized (18
MΩ) water.The synthesis of the initial cerium-containing
phosphoric acid
solutions with [Ce] = 0.01, 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, and 0.8 M was
carried out according to a procedure reported earlier.[75] A sample of nanocrystalline (4–5 nm)
cerium dioxide obtained by precipitation from Ce(NO3)3·6H2O[76] was dissolved
in a concentrated orthophosphoric acid at 80 °C. The lyogels
were obtained by adding gelators (distilled water or aqueous solutions
of nitric (3 M), orthophosphoric (3 M), or sulfuric (2 M) acids) to
a cooled, cerium-containing phosphoric acid solution.Supercritical
drying of lyogels was performed using a modified
Waters RESS/SAS system. This system consisted of a high-pressure pump,
an electrical preheater, a 500 mL high-pressure vessel equipped with
a basket and an electrical heater, an automatic back pressure regulator
(ABPR) and a cyclone gas–liquid separator. The drying procedure
was as follows. Approximately 50 mL of methanol was poured into the
basket of the extraction vessel. A wet gel was gently placed into
this methanol layer. The vessel was sealed and heated to 40 °C
and then filled withCO2. At the initial stage, the ABPR
was closed; when the working pressure reached the desired value (150
bar), the back pressure regulator was opened and a steady flow regime
was established. The CO2 flow rate was 5 g/min. The gel
was flushed withCO2 for 8 h. After that, the ABPR was
closed and its needle was manually set to a position allowing a low
depressurization rate. Slow depressurization took about 6 h.Powder X-ray diffraction patterns were recorded with a Bruker D8
Advance diffractometer using Cu Kα1,2 radiation in
the 2θ range of 3–60°, at a 2θ step of 0.02°,
and a counting time of 0.3 s per step.The FTIR spectra of the
samples were recorded with a Bruker ALPHA
spectrometer, in a range of 400–4000 cm–1, in an attenuated total reflectance mode.The microstructure
(determined by SEM) and the chemical composition
(determined by energy dispersive X-ray (EDX) analysis) of the samples
were analyzed with a Carl Zeiss NVision 40 high-resolution scanning
electron microscope equipped with an Oxford Instruments X-MAX (80
mm2) detector, operating at an accelerating voltage of
1–20 kV. SEM images were recorded using an Everhart–Thornley
detector (SE2) at 2 kV accelerating voltage.The structure of
the samples was studied by means of TEM with a
Leo912 AB Omega analytical transmission electron microscope. TEM images
were recorded at an accelerating voltage of 100 kV in a bright-field
mode.The specific surface area of the aerogels was measured
using the
low-temperature nitrogen adsorption method with a QuantaChrome Nova
4200B analyzer. The samples were degassed at 80 °C in a vacuum
for 16 h prior to analysis. Based on the data obtained, the specific
surface area of the samples was calculated using the Brunauer–Emmett–Teller
(BET) model. The calculation of the pore size distribution was carried
out on the basis of nitrogen desorption isotherms according to the
Barrett–Joyner–Halenda (BJH) method.SANS was
analyzed using a PAXY beamline (Laboratoire Leon Brillouin,
CEA-CNRS, Saclay, France). The measurements were made at two neutron
wavelengths, λ = 8.5 and 5 Å, withthree samples of detector
distances 1, 5, and 5 m, which made it possible to measure neutron
scattering intensity within the momentum transfer range 1.5·10–3 < q < 3·10–1 Å–1. The scattered neutrons were detected
with a two-dimensional position-sensitive BF3 detector.
The acquired two-dimensional isotropic spectra were azimuthally averaged
and preprocessed using PASiNET software.[77] All the measurements were made at room temperature.
Authors: T A Schaedler; A J Jacobsen; A Torrents; A E Sorensen; J Lian; J R Greer; L Valdevit; W B Carter Journal: Science Date: 2011-11-18 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Christoph Ziegler; André Wolf; Wei Liu; Anne-Kristin Herrmann; Nikolai Gaponik; Alexander Eychmüller Journal: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl Date: 2017-09-22 Impact factor: 15.336
Authors: A D Yapryntsev; A E Baranchikov; A V Churakov; G P Kopitsa; A A Silvestrova; M V Golikova; O S Ivanova; Yu E Gorshkova; V K Ivanov Journal: RSC Adv Date: 2021-09-09 Impact factor: 4.036