4.7 Article

A first-principles calculation on the electronic properties of Si/N-codoped TiO2

期刊

APPLIED SURFACE SCIENCE
卷 257, 期 7, 页码 3000-3006

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.apsusc.2010.10.107

关键词

Si/N-codoping; First-principles; Electronic properties

资金

  1. State Key Laboratory of Coal Conversion (SKLCC) [2008BWZ011]
  2. National Nature Science Foundation of China [10835008]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To deeply understand the effects of Si/N-codoping on the electronic structures of TiO2 and confirm their photocatalytic performance, a comparison theoretical study of their energetic and electronic properties was carried out involving single N-doping, single Si-doping and three models of Si/N-codoping based on first-principles. As for N-doped TiO2, an isolated N 2p state locates above the top of valence band and mixes with O 2p states, resulting in band gap narrowing. However, the unoccupied N 2p state acts as electrons traps to promote the electron-hole recombination. Using Si-doping, the band gap has a decrease of 0.24 eV and the valence band broadens about 0.30 eV. These two factors cause a better performance of photocatalyst. The special Si/N-codoped TiO2 model with one O atom replaced by a N atom and its adjacent Ti atom replaced by a Si atom, has the smallest defect formation energy in three codoping models, suggesting the model is the most energetic favorable. The calculated energy results also indicate that the Si incorporation increases theNconcentration in Si/N-codoped TiO2. This model obtains the most narrowed band gap of 1.63 eV in comparison with the other two models. The dopant states hybridize with O 2p states, leading to the valence band broadening and then improving the mobility of photo-generated hole; the N 2p states are occupied simultaneously. The significantly narrowed band gap and the absence of recombination center can give a reasonable explanation for the high photocatalytic activity under visible light. (C) 2010 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