| Literature DB >> 35492623 |
V Manikandan1, Iulian Petrila2, S Vigneselvan3, R S Mane4, Bogdan Vasile5, Raghu Dharmavarapu6, Stefan Lundgaard6, Saulius Juodkazis6, J Chandrasekaran7.
Abstract
Herein, we report the chemiresistive gas and humidity sensing properties of pristine and nickel-doped tin oxide (Ni-SnO2) gas sensors prepared by a microwave-assisted wet chemical method. The structural and optical properties are characterised using X-ray diffraction, scanning electron microscopy, scanning transmission electron microscopy, ultraviolet spectroscopy, Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy, and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy. The structural elucidation and morphology analyses confirm a particle size of 32-46 nm, tetragonal rutile crystal structure and small cauliflower-type surface appearance. Nickel doping can tune the structure of NPs and morphology. The tested carbon dioxide gas and humidity sensing properties reveal a rapid sensing performance with high-to-moderate sensitivity. Also, the materials favour gas sensing because their sensitivity is enhanced with the increase in nickel concentration. The sensing results suggest that nickel is a vibrant metal additive to increase the gas sensitivity of the sensor. However, nickel doping decreases the electron density and increases the oxygen vacancies. Ultimately, the gas sensor produces highly rapid sensing with a response time of 4 s. This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry.Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 35492623 PMCID: PMC9048456 DOI: 10.1039/c9ra09579a
Source DB: PubMed Journal: RSC Adv ISSN: 2046-2069 Impact factor: 4.036
Comparison of the Ni-SnO2 sensor with some recently reported CO2 sensors
| S. no. | Materials | Gas | Gas concentration | Operating temperature | Response | Sensitivity | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | BaTiO3 | CO2 | 10 000 ppm | 550 °C | — | 1.25 |
|
| 2 | Ca-ZnO | CO2 | 5000 ppm | 300 °C | 120 s | 10 |
|
| 3 | CoAl2O4 | CO2 | 100 ppm | 400 °C | 46 s | 0.43 |
|
| 4 | SnO2 | CO2 | 5000 ppm | 279 °C | 180 s | 48 |
|
| 5 | La2O3 | CO2 | 350 ppm | 321 °C | 105 s | 65 |
|
| 6 | Pd-La2O3 | CO2 | 500 ppm | 250 °C | 50 s | 28 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fig. 1XRD patterns of pristine SnO2 and Ni-SnO2 NPs.
XRD and sensing parameters of pristine and nickel-doped tin oxide nanoparticles
| Material Ni-SnO2 | CO2 gas sensor | Humidity sensor | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Concentration | Particle size (nm) | Res. time (s) | Rec. time (s) | Sensitivity ( | Res. time (s) | Rec. time (s) | Sensitivity |
| SnO2 ( | 46.70 | 29 | 40 | 62.31 | 41 | 68 | 81.98 |
| Ni-SnO2 ( | 32.17 | 21 | 24 | 71.53 | 49 | 71 | 78.11 |
| Ni-SnO2 ( | 42.32 | 04 | 13 | 73.29 | 54 | 84 | 72.03 |
Fig. 2(a) SEM images of pristine SnO2 and (b and c) Ni-SnO2 NPs.
Fig. 3(a and b) STEM images of pristine SnO2 and (c–f) Ni-SnO2 NPs.
Fig. 4(a and b) XPS spectra of pristine SnO2 and (c–h) Ni-SnO2 NPs.
Fig. 5(a–c) FT-IR spectra of pristine and Ni-SnO2 NPs.
Fig. 6(a) Absorption, (b) band gap energy and (c) photoluminescence spectra of pristine SnO2 and Ni-SnO2 NPs.
Fig. 7(a and b) Resistance of pristine SnO2 and Ni-SnO2 sensors in air and gas versus temperatures. (c) Dynamic response of pristine SnO2 and Ni-SnO2 sensors.
Fig. 8Sensitivity change of pristine SnO2 and Ni-SnO2 sensors with (a) gas concentration, (b) time and (c) temperature.
Fig. 9(a) Resistance towards humidity, (b) sensitivity towards RH (%), (c) sensitivity towards time of pristine SnO2 and Ni-SnO2 NPs.