Gas sensing properties of Ti0.2V1.8CTx/V2O5 nanocomposite

Capa

Citar

Texto integral

Acesso aberto Acesso aberto
Acesso é fechado Acesso está concedido
Acesso é fechado Acesso é pago ou somente para assinantes

Resumo

A method for the preparation of nanocomposite containing Ti0.2V1.8CTx MXene core and titanium-doped vanadium oxide surface layers as a result of relatively low-temperature partial oxidation of MXene multilayer - two-dimensional vanadium-titanium carbide has been developed. It is shown that during oxidation in air atmosphere of initial Ti0.2V1.8CTx at temperature 250°С, in general, the microstructure of accordion-like aggregates with some increase in porosity of their constituent layers and increase in their thickness due to the formation of V2O5 is preserved. At the same time, preservation of the MXene structure with a decrease in the interplanar spacing from 10.3 (initial powder Ti0.2V1.8CTx) to 7.3 Å was observed. Raman spectroscopy confirmed the formation of vanadium oxide. Kelvin-probe force microscopy data revealed that the formation of Ti0.2V1.8CTx/V2O5 nanocomposite results in a decrease in the work function from 4.88 (Ti0.2V1.8CTx) to 4.68 eV. The chemosensor properties towards a range of gaseous analytes (H2, CO, NH3, NO2, C6H6, C3H6O, CH4, C2H5OH and O2) have been comprehensively studied for Ti0.2V1.8CTx/V2O5 layers coated using the microplotter printing. At increased detection temperatures (125–200°С), high sensitivity to oxygen (10% O2) and NO2 (100 ppm) is observed; there are notable responses to humidity (50% RH) throughout the 25–200°С temperature range. At room temperature, good response to acetone, ethanol and ammonia is observed.

Texto integral

Acesso é fechado

Sobre autores

E. Simonenko

Kurnakov Institute of General and Inorganic Chemistry of the Russian Academy of Sciences

Autor responsável pela correspondência
Email: ep_simonenko@mail.ru
Rússia, Moscow, 119991

A. Mokrushin

Kurnakov Institute of General and Inorganic Chemistry of the Russian Academy of Sciences

Email: ep_simonenko@mail.ru
Rússia, Moscow, 119991

I. Nagornov

Kurnakov Institute of General and Inorganic Chemistry of the Russian Academy of Sciences

Email: ep_simonenko@mail.ru
Rússia, Moscow, 119991

V. Sapronova

Kurnakov Institute of General and Inorganic Chemistry of the Russian Academy of Sciences; D.I. Mendeleev Russian Chemical and Technological University

Email: ep_simonenko@mail.ru
Rússia, Moscow, 119991; Moscow, 125047

Yu. Gorban

Kurnakov Institute of General and Inorganic Chemistry of the Russian Academy of Sciences; D.I. Mendeleev Russian Chemical and Technological University

Email: ep_simonenko@mail.ru
Rússia, Moscow, 119991; Moscow, 125047

Ph. Gorobtsov

Kurnakov Institute of General and Inorganic Chemistry of the Russian Academy of Sciences

Email: ep_simonenko@mail.ru
Rússia, Moscow, 119991

T. Simonenko

Kurnakov Institute of General and Inorganic Chemistry of the Russian Academy of Sciences

Email: ep_simonenko@mail.ru
Rússia, Moscow, 119991

N. Simonenko

Kurnakov Institute of General and Inorganic Chemistry of the Russian Academy of Sciences

Email: ep_simonenko@mail.ru
Rússia, Moscow, 119991

N. Kuznetsov

Kurnakov Institute of General and Inorganic Chemistry of the Russian Academy of Sciences

Email: ep_simonenko@mail.ru
Rússia, Moscow, 119991

Bibliografia

  1. Kang H., Cho S., Ryu J. et al. // Adv. Funct. Mater. 2020. V. 30. № 27. https://doi.org/10.1002/adfm.202002486
  2. Goschnick J. // Microelectron. Eng. 2001. V. 57–58. P. 693. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-9317(01)00553-6
  3. Pazniak H., Plugin I.A., Loes M.J. et al. // ACS Appl. Nano Mater. 2020. V. 3. № 4. P. 3195. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsanm.9b02223
  4. Mao Z., Wang J., Gong Y. et al. // Micromachines. 2018. V. 9. № 11. P. 606. https://doi.org/10.3390/mi9110606
  5. Khorramifar A., Karami H., Lvova L. et al. // Sensors. 2023. V. 23. № 12. P. 5716. https://doi.org/10.3390/s23125716
  6. Persaud K., Dodd G. // Nature. 1982. V. 299. № 5881. P. 352. https://doi.org/10.1038/299352a0
  7. Yang B., Myung N.V., Tran T. // Adv. Electron. Mater. 2021. V. 7. № 9. P. 2100271. https://doi.org/10.1002/aelm.202100271
  8. Schroeder V., Evans E.D., Wu Y.-C.M. et al. // ACS Sensors. 2019. V. 4. № 8. P. 2101. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssensors.9b00825
  9. Fedorov F.S., Simonenko N.P., Trouillet V. et al. // ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces. 2020. V. 12. № 50. P. 56135. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.0c14055
  10. Li G., Zhu X., Liu J. et al. // Chemosensors. 2023. V. 11. № 4. P. 251. https://doi.org/10.3390/chemosensors11040251
  11. Germanese D., D’Acunto M., Magrini M. et al. // Sensors & Transducers. 2017. V. 215. № 8. P. 19.
  12. Wilson A. // Metabolites. 2015. V. 5. № 1. P. 140. https://doi.org/10.3390/metabo5010140
  13. van der Sar I.G., Wijbenga N., Nakshbandi G. et al. // Respir. Res. 2021. V. 22. № 1. P. 246. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12931-021-01835-4
  14. Güntner A.T., Koren V., Chikkadi K. et al. // ACS Sensors. 2016. V. 1. № 5. P. 528. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssensors.6b00008
  15. Jeong S.Y., Kim J.S., Lee J.H. // Adv. Mater. 2020. V. 32. Is. 51. https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.202002075
  16. Wei Z., Xiao X., Wang J. et al. // Sensors. 2017. V. 17. № 11. P. 2500. https://doi.org/10.3390/s17112500
  17. Nake A., Dubreuil B., Raynaud C. et al. // Sens. Actuators, B: Chem. 2005. V. 106. № 1. P. 36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.snb.2004.05.034
  18. Simonenko N.P., Fisenko N.A., Fedorov F.S. et al. // Sensors (Switzerland). 2022. V. 22. № 3247. P. 1. https://doi.org/10.3390/s22093473
  19. Bax C., Bernasconi R., Massironi F. et al. // J. Electrochem. Soc. 2021. V. 168. № 4. P. 047513. https://doi.org/10.1149/1945-7111/abf7e7
  20. Alshammari A.S., Alenezi M.R., Lai K.T. et al. // Mater. Lett. 2017. V. 189. P. 299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matlet.2016.11.033
  21. Zhu Y., Yu L., Wu D. et al. // Sens. Actuators, A: Phys. 2021. V. 318. P. 112434. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sna.2020.112434
  22. Dai Y., Huang J., Zhang H. et al. // Sens. Actuators, B: Chem. 2019. V. 281. P. 746. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.snb.2018.11.014
  23. Zazoum B., Bachri A., Nayfeh J. // Materials (Basel). 2021. V. 14. № 21. P. 6603. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14216603
  24. Li N., Jiang Y., Xiao Y. et al. // Nanoscale. 2019. V. 11. № 44. P. 21522. https://doi.org/10.1039/C9NR06751E
  25. Ravi Kumar Y., Deshmukh K., Kovářík T. et al. // Coord. Chem. Rev. 2022. V. 461. P. 214502. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccr.2022.214502
  26. Sett A., Rana T., Rajaji U. et al. // Sens. Actuators, A: Phys. 2022. V. 338. P. 113507. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sna.2022.113507
  27. Tan W.C., Ang K. // Adv. Electron. Mater. 2021. V. 7. № 7. https://doi.org/10.1002/aelm.202001071
  28. Lazanas A.C., Prodromidis M.I. // Microchim. Acta. 2021. V. 188. № 1. P. 6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00604-020-04674-0
  29. Gómez I.J., Alegret N., Dominguez-Alfaro A. et al. // Chemistry (Easton). 2021. V. 3. № 4. P. 1314. https://doi.org/10.3390/chemistry3040095
  30. Cao J., Chen Q., Wang X. et al. // Research. 2021. V. 2021. https://doi.org/10.34133/2021/9863038
  31. Choi S.-J., Kim I.-D. // Electron. Mater. Lett. 2018. V. 14. № 3. P. 221. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13391-018-0044-z
  32. Wu M., He M., Hu Q. et al. // ACS Sensors. 2019. V. 4. № 10. P. 2763. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssensors.9b01308
  33. Lee E., VahidMohammadi A., Prorok B.C. et al. // ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces. 2017. V. 9. № 42. P. 37184. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.7b11055
  34. Simonenko E.P., Simonenko N.P., Mokrushin A.S. et al. // Nanomaterials. 2023. V. 13. № 5. P. 850. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano13050850
  35. Kim S.J., Koh H.J., Ren C.E. et al. // ACS Nano. 2018. V. 12. № 2. P. 986. ttps://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.7b07460
  36. Shuvo S.N., Ulloa Gomez A.M., Mishra A. et al. // ACS Sensors. 2020. V. 5. № 9. P. 2915. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssensors.0c01287
  37. Li X., An Z., Lu Y. et al. // Adv. Mater. Technol. 2022. V. 7. № 3. P. 2100872. https://doi.org/10.1002/admt.202100872
  38. Majhi S.M., Ali A., Greish Y.E. et al. // ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. 2022. V. 4. № 8. P. 4094. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsaelm.2c00717
  39. Sun Q., Wang J., Wang X. et al. // Nanoscale. 2020. V. 12. № 32. P. 16987. https://doi.org/10.1039/C9NR08350B
  40. Wu M., An Y., Yang R. et al. // ACS Appl. Nano Mater. 2021. V. 4. № 6. P. 6257. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsanm.1c01059
  41. Majhi S.M., Ali A., Greish Y.E. et al. // Sci. Rep. 2023. V. 13. № 1. P. 3114. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-30002-6
  42. Guo L., Han H., Li Y. et al. // Appl. Phys. Lett. 2023. V. 123. № 1. P. 013901. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0156402
  43. Zhang Y., Jiang Y., Duan Z. et al. // Sens. Actuators, B: Chem. 2021. V. 344. № 2. P. 130150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.snb.2021.130150
  44. Lee E., VahidMohammadi A., Yoon Y.S. et al. // ACS Sensors. 2019. V. 4. № 6. P. 1603. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssensors.9b00303
  45. Wu M., An Y., Yang R. et al. // ACS Appl. Nano Mater. 2021. V. 4. № 6. P. 6257. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsanm.1c01059
  46. Liu P., Xu H., Wang X. et al. // J. Collоid Interface Sci. 2024. V. 655. P. 364. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2023.11.027
  47. Chen K., Guan Y., Tan L. et al. // Appl. Surf. Sci. 2023. V. 617. P. 156575. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsusc.2023.156575
  48. Feng K., Li Y., Xu C. et al. // Electrochim. Acta. 2023. V. 444. P. 142022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electacta.2023.142022
  49. Zhao W., Yang Y., Deng Q. et al. // Adv. Funct. Mater. 2023. V. 33. № 5. https://doi.org/10.1002/adfm.202210037
  50. Zhang Y., Cao J., Yuan Z. et al. // Small. 2022. V. 18. № 30. P. 2202313. https://doi.org/10.1002/smll.202202313
  51. Simonenko N.P., Glukhova O.E., Plugin I.A. et al. // Chemosensors. 2022. V. 11. № 1. P. 7. https://doi.org/10.3390/chemosensors11010007
  52. Wang X., Gong L., Li Z. et al. // J. Mater. Chem. A. 2023. V. 11. № 14. P. 7690. https://doi.org/10.1039/D2TA07917H
  53. Mokrushin A.S., Nagornov I.A., Averin A.A. et al. // Chemosensors. 2023. V. 11. № 2. P. 142. https://doi.org/10.3390/chemosensors11020142
  54. Kuang D., Wang L., Guo X. et al. // J. Hazard. Mater. 2021. V. 416. P. 126171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2021.126171
  55. Liang D., Song P., Liu M. et al. // Ceram. Int. 2022. V. 48. № 7. P. 9059. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2021.12.089
  56. Fan C., Shi J., Zhang Y. et al. // Nanoscale. 2022. V. 14. № 9. P. 3441. https://doi.org/10.1039/D1NR06838E
  57. Gasso S., Mahajan A. // ACS Sensors. 2022. V. 7. № 8. P. 2454. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssensors.2c01213
  58. Simonenko E.P., Nagornov I.A., Mokrushin A.S. et al. // Materials (Basel). 2023. V. 16. № 13. P. 4506. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma16134506
  59. Simonenko N.P., Glukhova O.E., Plugin I.A. et al. // Chemosensors. 2022. V. 11. № 1. P. 7. https://doi.org/10.3390/chemosensors11010007
  60. Badie S., Dash A., Sohn Y.J. et al. // J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 2021. V. 104. № 4. P. 1669. https://doi.org/10.1111/jace.17582
  61. Roy C., Banerjee P., Bhattacharyya S. // J. Eur. Ceram. Soc. 2020. V. 40. № 3. P. 923. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeurceramsoc.2019.10.020
  62. Luo W., Liu Y., Wang C. et al. // J. Mater. Chem. C. 2021. V. 9. № 24. P. 7697. https://doi.org/10.1039/D1TC01338F
  63. Liu A., Yang Q., Ren X. et al. // Ceram. Int. 2020. V. 46. № 5. P. 6934. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2019.11.008
  64. Simonenko E.P., Simonenko N.P., Nagornov I.A. et al. // Russ. J. Inorg. Chem. 2022. V. 67. № 5. P. 705. https://doi.org/10.1134/S0036023622050187
  65. Matthews K., Zhang T., Shuck C.E. et al. // Chem. Mater. 2022. V. 34. № 2. P. 499. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemmater.1c03508
  66. Mokrushin A.S., Gorban Y.M., Averin A.A. et al. // Biosensors. 2023. V. 13. № 4. P. 445. https://doi.org/10.3390/bios13040445
  67. Mokrushin A.S., Gorban Y.M., Nagornov I.A. et al. // Russ. J. Inorg. Chem. 2022. V. 67. № 12. P. 2099. https://doi.org/10.1134/S0036023622601520
  68. Nagornov I.A., Mokrushin A.S., Simonenko E.P. et al. // Russ. J. Inorg. Chem. 2022. V. 67. № 4. P. 539. https://doi.org/10.1134/S0036023622040143
  69. Wyckoff R.W.G. // Cryst. Struct. 1963. V. 1. P. 85.
  70. Etzkorn J., Ade M., Hillebrecht H. // Inorg. Chem. 2007. V. 46. № 18. P. 7646. https://doi.org/10.1021/ic700382y
  71. Yusupov K., Björk J., Rosen J. // Nanoscale Adv. 2023. V. 5. № 15. P. 3976. https://doi.org/10.1039/D2NA00830K
  72. Hart J.L., Hantanasirisakul K., Lang A.C. et al. // Nat. Commun. 2019. V. 10. № 1. P. 522. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-08169-8
  73. Mokrushin A.S., Nagornov I.A., Averin A.A. et al. // Chemosensors. 2023. V. 11. № 2. P. 142. https://doi.org/10.3390/chemosensors11020142
  74. Evans H.T., Mrose M.E. // Am. Mineral. 1955. V. 40. № 9–10. P. 861.
  75. Enjalbert R., Galy J. // Acta Crystallogr., Sect. C: Cryst. Struct. Commun. 1986. V. 42. № 11. P. 1467. https://doi.org/10.1107/S0108270186091825
  76. Pauling L., Sturdivant J.H. // Z. Krist. - Cryst. Mater. 1928. V. 68. № 1–6. P. 239. https://doi.org/10.1524/zkri.1928.68.1.239
  77. Grey I.E., Li C., Madsen I.C. et al. // Mater. Res. Bull. 1988. V. 23. № 5. P. 743. https://doi.org/10.1016/0025-5408(88)90040-2
  78. Meagher E.P., Lager G.A. // Can. Mineral. 1979. V. 17. P. 77.
  79. Kim Y., Gkountaras A., Chaix-Pluchery O. et al. // RSC Adv. 2020. V. 10. № 42. P. 25266. https://doi.org/10.1039/d0ra00842g
  80. Champagne A., Shi L., Ouisse T. et al. // Phys. Rev. B. 2018. V. 97. № 11. P. 1. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.97.115439
  81. Ureña-Begara F., Crunteanu A., Raskin J.P. // Appl. Surf. Sci. 2017. V. 403. P. 717. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsusc.2017.01.160
  82. Frank O., Zukalova M., Laskova B. et al. // Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2012. V. 14. № 42. P. 14567. https://doi.org/10.1039/c2cp42763j
  83. Shvets P., Dikaya O., Maksimova K. et al. // J. Raman Spectrosc. 2019. V. 50. № 8. P. 1226. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrs.5616
  84. Tolosa A., Fleischmann S., Grobelsek I. et al. // ACS Appl. Energy Mater. 2018. V. 1. № 8. P. 3790. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsaem.8b00572
  85. Simonenko E.P., Simonenko N.P., Nagornov I.A. et al. // Russ. J. Inorg. Chem. 2022. V. 67. № 11. P. 1850. https://doi.org/10.1134/S0036023622601222
  86. Gorobtsov P.Y., Mokrushin A.S., Simonenko T.L. et al. // Materials. 2022. V. 15. № 7837. P. 1. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15217837
  87. Meyer J., Zilberberg K., Riedl T. et al. // J. Appl. Phys. 2011. V. 110. № 3. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3611392
  88. Gorobtsov P.Y., Simonenko T.L., Simonenko N.P. et al. // Colloids Interfaces. 2023. V. 7. № 1. P. 20. https://doi.org/10.3390/colloids7010020
  89. Mansfeldova V., Zlamalova M., Tarabkova H. et al. // J. Phys. Chem. C. 2021. V. 125. № 3. P. 1902. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpcc.0c10519

Arquivos suplementares

Arquivos suplementares
Ação
1. JATS XML
Baixar
2. Fig. 1. X-ray diffraction patterns of the initial powder of the MAX phase Ti0.2V1.8AlC (1), the resulting multilayer maxene Ti0.2V1.8CTx (2), as well as products formed as a result of heating to a temperature of 600 °C in the mode of thermal analysis in argon (3) and air (4) currents.

Baixar (290KB)
Metadados
3. Fig. 2. Microstructure of Maxena Ti0.2V1.8CTx aggregates according to SEM data.

Baixar (219KB)
Metadados
4. Fig. 3. Microstructure of the accordion-like maxene Ti0.2V1.8CTx, according to TEM data.

Baixar (447KB)
Metadados
5. Fig. 4. DSC (red) and TGA (green) curves of the Maxene sample Ti0.2V1.8CTx obtained as a result of thermal analysis in argon (a) and air (b) currents.

Baixar (227KB)
Metadados
6. 5. Maxene T0.2V1.8CTx Raman spectra recorded in situ when heated to preset temperatures in an air atmosphere.

Baixar (569KB)
Metadados
7. 6. X-ray image (a) and Raman spectrum (b) of partially oxidized receptor material with the formation of the Ti0.2V1.8CTx/V2O5 nanocomposite; the inset shows the region 2q = 4.5°-15°.

Baixar (331KB)
Metadados
8. 7. Microstructure of the Ti0.2V1.8CTx/V2O5 nanocomposite obtained as a result of partial oxidation of maxene Ti0.2V1.8CTx.

Baixar (789KB)
Metadados
9. Figure 8. Dependence of the electrical resistance of the Ti0.2V1.8CTx/V2O5 nanocomposite on temperature (a), as well as its selectivity diagram for various gases at specified operating temperatures (b), dynamic response upon detection of 100 ppm NO2 (c) and 10% O2 (d) at detection temperatures of 125-200°C.

Baixar (387KB)
Metadados
10. Fig. 9. Change in coating resistance Ti0.2V1.8CTx/V2O5 at 100 ppm acetone, ethanol and ammonia (a) and corresponding dynamic responses at room temperature detection (b).

Baixar (194KB)
Metadados

Declaração de direitos autorais © Russian Academy of Sciences, 2024