Heat-pulse assisted NH3 gas sensing based on cuprous oxide nanoparticles anchored on reduced graphene oxide nanosheets
- 196 Downloads
Abstract
In this report, reduced graphene oxide (RGO)–cuprous oxide (Cu2O) nanocomposites are prepared as sensing layer via a combination of hydrothermal method and airbrush technology for NH3 gas detection at low temperature (≤ 100 °C). A variety of characterization techniques such as SEM, TEM, XRD, FTIR and XPS were employed to probe morphological and componential properties of the obtained nanocomposites. By introducing a 70 °C heat pulse with duration period of 5 s (i.e., 5 s@70 °C) upon the beginning of NH3 desorption, it was noteworthy that the as-prepared sensors eventually showed a full and swift recovery within 26 s, which was considerably improved in comparison to a partial and sluggish one (77% recovery within 10 min) in absence of this treatment. Moreover, a good repeatability was achieved toward seven consecutive 150 ppm NH3 exposures, accompanied with a negligible baseline drift. Temperature-dependent sensing performances demonstrated that RGO–Cu2O sensors exhibited an enhanced sensing response one order of magnitude larger than pure RGO counterparts at each temperature (25, 60, and 100 °C), wherein 60 °C was considered as the optimal operation temperature. A modest selectivity toward NH3 was revealed against numerous interference gases.
Notes
Acknowledgements
This work was partially supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 61704014), Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (Grant Nos. 106112016CDJXY120006 and 0903005203275) and National Key Research and Development Program of China (Grant No. 2016YFF0102802).
References
- 1.Y. Zhou, X. Lin, Y. Wang et al., Sens. Actuators B-Chem. 240, 870 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 2.H.J. Kim, J.H. Lee, Sens. Actuators B-Chem. 192, 607 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 3.Y. Li, Y. Zhong, Y. Zhang et al., Sens. Actuators B-Chem. 206, 735 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 4.F. Schedin, A.K. Geim, S.V. Morozov, et al., Nat. Mater. 6, 652 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 5.Y. Dan, Y. Lu, N.J. Kybert et al., Nano Lett. 9, 1472 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.V. Dua, S.P. Surwade, S. Ammu et al., Angew. Chem. Int. Edit. 49, 2154 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.A. Lipatov, A. Varezhnikov, P. Wilson et al., Nanoscale 5, 5426 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.S.M. Hafiz, R. Ritikos, T.J. Whitcher et al., Sens. Actuators B-Chem. 193, 692 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.J.H. Kim, W.S. Chang, D. Kim et al., Adv. Mater. 27, 157 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.S.S. Varghese, S. Lonkar, K.K. Singh et al., Sens. Actuators B-Chem. 218, 160 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.F. Gu, R. Nie, D. Han et al., Sens. Actuators B-Chem. 219, 94 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.Y. Zhou, G. Xie, T. Xie et al., Appl. Phys. Lett. 105, 033502 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.Y. Zhou, Y. Jiang, T. Xie et al., Sens. Actuators B-Chem. 203, 135 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.Q.T. Tran, H.T.M. Hoa, D.H. Yoo et al., Sens. Actuators B-Chem. 194, 45 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 15.D.H. Wang, Y. Hu, J.J. Zhao et al., J. Mater. Chem. A 2, 17415 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.Z.B. Aziza, Q. Zhang, D. Baillargeat, Appl. Phys. Lett. 105, 254102 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 17.S.M.M. Zanjani, M.M. Sadeghi, M. Holt et al., Appl. Phys. Lett. 108, 033106 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 18.Z. Sun, D. Huang, Z. Yang et al., IEEE Electr. Device Lett. 36, 1376 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 19.Q. Feng, X. Li, J. Wang et al., Sens. Actuators B-Chem. 222, 864 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 20.P.G. Su, L.Y. Yang, Sens. Actuators B-Chem. 223, 202 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 21.Y. Niu, W. Jiao, R. Wang et al., J. Mater. Chem. A 4, 8198 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 22.H. Meng, W. Yang, K. Ding et al., J. Mater. Chem. A 3, 1174 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 23.X. Li, Y. Zhao, X. Wang et al., Sens. Actuators B-Chem. 230, 330 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 24.H. Tai, Z. Yuan, W. Zheng et al., Nanoscale Res. Lett. 11, 130 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 25.Y. Zhou, G. Liu, X. Zhu et al., Ceram. Int. 43, 8372 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 26.K. Chen, D. Xue, CrystEngComm. 14, 8068 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 27.Y. Sui, W. Fu, H. Yang et al., Cryst. Growth Des. 10, 99 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 28.X. Liang, L. Gao, S. Yang et al., Adv. Mater. 21, 2068 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 29.C.J. Murphy, Science 298, 2139 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 30.H. Long, A.H. Trochimczyk, T. Pham et al., Adv. Funct. Mater. 26, 5158 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 31.Y. Zhou, G. Liu, X. Zhu et al., Sens Actuators B-Chem. 251, 280 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 32.H. Liu, T. Kuila, N.H. Kim et al., J. Mater. Chem. A 1, 3739 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 33.Y. Gao, L.Q. Liu, S.Z. Zu et al., ACS Nano 5, 2134 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 34.Y. Wen, H. Ding, Y. Shan, Nanoscale 3, 4411 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 35.K. Borgohain, N. Murase, S. Mahamuni, J. Appl. Phys. 92, 1292 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 36.B.X. Li, T.X. Liu, L.Y. Hu et al., J. Phys. Chem. Solids 74, 635 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 37.B. Li, H. Cao, G. Yin et al., J. Mater. Chem. 21, 10645 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 38.N. Barsan, U. Weimar, J. Electroceram. 7, 143 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 39.A.A. Balandin, S. Ghosh, W. Bao et al., Nano Lett. 8, 902 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 40.K.I. Bolotin, K.J. Sikes, J. Hone et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 096802 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 41.V.E. Dorgan, M.H. Bae, E. Pop, Appl. Phys. Lett. 97, 082112 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 42.Q. Shao, G. Liu, D. Teweldebrhan et al., Appl. Phys. Lett. 92, 202108 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar