| Literature DB >> 34095652 |
Durgasha C Poudyal1, Rajshree Dugani1, Banendu Sunder Dash1, Manjiri Dhavale1, Ashis Kumar Satpati2, Santosh K Haram1.
Abstract
The composite ofEntities:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34095652 PMCID: PMC8173555 DOI: 10.1021/acsomega.1c00114
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ACS Omega ISSN: 2470-1343
Figure 1FTIR spectra recorded for the individual RGO, GO, and GCN samples and their hybrids, viz., rRGO-GCN and GO-GCN. The relevant bands are marked for more clarity.
Figure 2FESEM of (A) Pt/GO-GCN, (B) Pt–Sn/GO-GCN, (C) Pt/rGO-GCN, and (D) Pt–Sn/rGO-GCN. In the micrographs (A–C), the agglomeration of metal nanoparticles on edge sites is noted. (D) Uniform distribution of Pt–Sn NPs.
Figure 3TEM images for (A) Pt/GO-GCN and (B) Pt–Sn/rGO-GCN. (C,D) Respective lattice fringes.
Figure 4XPS recorded on the Pt–Sn/rGO-GCN composite. (A) Survey scan and (B) Pt 4f region of Pt/GO-GCN and Pt–Sn/rGO-GCN, respectively. (C) Sn 3d region. The circles are experimental data and black lines are fitting from deconvolution analysis (red, green, and blue lines).
Figure 5(A) Raman spectra and (B) powder XRD recorded for (a) Pt/GO-GCN, (b) Pt/rGO-GCN, (c) P–Sn/GO-GCN, and (d) Pt–Sn/rGO-GCN hybrids.
Figure 6Cyclic voltammograms recorded for the composites, Pt–Sn/rGO-GCN, Pt/GO-GCN, Pt/rGO-GCN, and Pt–Sn/GO-GCN, and commercial catalyst (ETEK, Pt 20%). (A) Measurements were carried out on a blank solution of 0.5 M H2SO4 and (B) solution containing 1.0 M methanol and 0.5 M H2SO4. If and Ib are the peak anodic current in forward and reverse swipe, respectively.
Figure 7Multicycled voltammograms recorded in 1 M methanol and 0.5 M H2SO4 for (A) Pt–Sn/rGO-GCN and (B) Pt/GO-GCN after various cycle intervals from 1st to 100th cycle. The scan rate was 50 mV/s. (C) Chronamperometry recorded at a step potential of 0.7 V (vs NHE) for all the abovementioned samples. (D) Mass current density values obtained for these samples from the forward anodic peak in CV at the 100th cycle are presented in terms of the histogram.