4.8 Article

An Experimental Insight into the Structural and Electronic Characteristics of Strontium-Doped Titanium Dioxide Nanotube Arrays

期刊

ADVANCED FUNCTIONAL MATERIALS
卷 24, 期 43, 页码 6783-6796

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/adfm.201401760

关键词

-

资金

  1. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL)
  2. Florida State University Research Foundation
  3. National High Magnetic Field Laboratory [NSF-DMR-0654118]
  4. State of Florida
  5. American Chemical Society Petroleum Research Fund [50934-DNI10]
  6. U.S. National Science Foundation [OISE-1103827]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The possibility of in situ doping during electrochemical anodization of titania nanotube arrays is demonstrated and the mechanism and variations in structural and electronic characteristics of the nanotube arrays as after doping is systematically explored. In the presence of strontium as the dopant, bulk analysis shows strontium mainly incorporated into the lattice of TiO2. Surface analysis, however, reveals phase segregation of SrO in the TiO2 matrix at high Sr doping levels. The near edge X-ray absorption fine structure (NEXAFS) spectroscopy analysis reveals that Sr2+ doping only alters the Ti and O ions interaction in the TiO2 lattice on the surface with no effect on their individual charge states. An in-depth understanding of the dopant incorporation mechanism and distribution into TiO2 nanotube arrays is achieved using high resolution transmission electron microscopy (HRTEM) and the high angle annular dark-field scanning transmission electron microscopy (HAADF-STEM) coupled with the electron energy loss spectroscopy (EELS) measurements on the surface and bulk of the nanotubes. Upon their use to photoelectrochemically split water, the Sr-doped TiO2 nanotube film shows incident photon conversion efficiencies (IPCE) as high as 65%. The enhanced light activity in conjunction with the ordered one-dimensional morphology makes the fabricated films promising candidates for water photoelectrolysis.

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

4.8
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