4.7 Article

Formation of an intermediate band in the energy gap of TiO2 by Cu-N-codoping: First principles study and experimental evidence

期刊

SOLAR ENERGY MATERIALS AND SOLAR CELLS
卷 125, 期 -, 页码 120-126

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.solmat.2014.02.032

关键词

Photocatalytic and photovoltaic material; Co-doped anatase TiO2; Density functional theory; Electronic and optical properties

资金

  1. Department of Science and Technology, New Delhi (India) [SR/FTP/PS-063/2011]
  2. PAT-project ENAM in cooperation
  3. Istituto PCB of CNR (Italy)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

First principles calculations are performed to study the electronic and optical properties of Cu-doped, N-doped and (Cu+2N)-co-doped anatase TiO2. Strong hybridization between Cu 3d and N 2p orbitals above the valence band leads to the formation of an isolated intermediate band (IB) deep in the band gap of pure TiO2. The new energetic features, predicted by DFT, have been experimentally confirmed using UV-vis-NIR spectroscopy. In particular, the diffuse reflectance spectrum of the co-doped TiO2 sample shows the presence of two edges which confirm the existence of IB in the band gap. This IB in the band gap of TiO2 is responsible for high visible light absorption through a two-step optical transition between valence and conduction bands via the IB. In mono-doped samples, only a reduction of the band gap is observed which is consistent with the first-principles calculations. X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy of mono- and co-doped TiO2 samples establishes the chemical states of several atomic elements and especially clarifies the key presence of O-vacancies leading to a new position of conduction band minima. The presence of broad IB and the absence of dopant energy levels close to the conduction band minimum in (Cu+2N)-co-doped TiO2 qualify it to be an efficient material for photovoltaic conversion, photocatalytic water splitting, and photocatalytic degradation of pollutants. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据