Journal of Nanoparticle Research

, Volume 13, Issue 6, pp 2641–2651

Ultrafine α-Fe2O3 nanoparticles grown in confinement of in situ self-formed “cage” and their superior adsorption performance on arsenic(III)

  • Wenshu Tang
  • Qi Li
  • Caifu Li
  • Shian Gao
  • Jian Ku Shang
Research paper

Abstract

Without the addition of surfactants or templates, ultrafine α-Fe2O3 nanoparticles were successfully synthesized by a solvent thermal process at low temperature. During the synthesis, in situ self-formed “cage” of crystallized NaCl confined the growth of α-Fe2O3 nanoparticles in both the precipitation and solvent thermal processes, resulting in the creation of well-crystallized α-Fe2O3 nanoparticles with an average particle size about 4–5 nm and a high-specific surface area of ~162 m2/g. High resolution TEM investigations provided clear evidences of the in situ self-formation of NaCl “cage” during the synthesis and its confinement effect on the growth of α-Fe2O3 nanoparticles. The superior performance of these α-Fe2O3 nanoparticles on the adsorption of arsenite(III) (As) from aqueous environment was demonstrated with both lab-prepared and natural water samples at near neutral pH environment when compared with previously reported removal effects of As(III) by Fe2O3. This unique approach may also be utilized in the synthesis of other ultrafine metal oxide nanoparticles for a broad range of technical applications.

Keywords

α-Fe2O3 Nanoparticles Solvent thermal process In situ self-formed “Cage” Arsenic(III) adsorption Hematite 

References

  1. Almeida TP, Fay M, Zhu YQ, Brown PD (2009) Process map for the hydrothermal synthesis of α-Fe2O3 nanorods. J Phys Chem C 113:18689–18698CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amini M, Abbaspour KC, Berg M, Winkel L, Hug SJ, Hoehn E, Yang H, Johnson C (2008) Statistical modeling of global geogenic arsenic contamination in groundwater. Environ Sci Technol 42:3669–3675CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Asefa T, Lennox RC (2005) Synthesis of gold nanoparticles via electroless deposition in SBA-15. Chem Mater 10:2481–2483CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ashkarran AA, Zad AI, Mahdavi SM, Ahadian MM (2010) Photocatalytic activity of ZnO nanoparticles prepared via submerged arc discharge method. Appl Phys A 100:1097–1102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barrett EP, Joyner LG, Halenda PH (1951) The determination of pore volume and area distributions in porous substances. I. Computations from nitrogen isotherms. J Am Chem Soc 73:373–380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Deb P, Basumallick A, Chatterjee P, Sengupta SP (2001) Preparation of α-Fe2O3 nanoparticles from a nonaqueous precursor medium. Scripta Mater 45:341–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dixit S, Hering J (2003) Comparison of arsenic(V) and arsenic(III) sorption onto iron oxide minerals: implications for arsenic mobility. Environ Sci Technol 37:4182–4189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Giménez J, Martínez M, Pablo JD, Rovira M, Duro L (2007) Arsenic sorption onto natural hematite, magnetite, and goethite. J Hazard Mater 141:575–580CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Greene ME, Chiaramonti AN, Christenen ST, Cao LX (2005) Controlled nanoscale morphology of hematite (0001) surface grown by chemical vapor transport. Adv Mater 17:1765–1768CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hou B, Wu YS, Wu LL, Shi YC, Zou K, Gai HD (2006) Hydrothermal synthesis of cubic ferric oxide particles. Mater Lett 60:3188–3191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Huo L, Li W, Lu L, Cai H, Xi S, Wang J, Zhao B, Shen Y, Lu Z (2000) Preparation, structure, and properties of three-dimensional ordered α-Fe2O3 nanoparticulate film. Chem Mater 12:790–794CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hyeon T, Lee SS, Park J, Chung YH, Na HB (2001) Synthesis of highly crystalline and monodisperse maghemite nanocrystallites without a size-selection process. J Am Chem Soc 123:12798–12801CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Jiao H, Jiao GS (2009) Hydrothermal synthesis and characterization of monodisperse α-Fe2O3 nanoparticles. Mater Lett 63:2725–2727CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Jing ZH (2006) Fabrication and gas sensing properties of Ni-doped gamma-Fe2O3 by anhydrous solvent method. Mater Lett 60:3315–3318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ko I, Kim JY, Kim KW (2004) Arsenic speciation and sorption kinetics in the As-hematite-humic acid system. Colloids Surf A 234:43–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Liu XM, Fua SY, Xiao HM, Huang CJ (2005) Preparation and characterization of shuttle-like α-Fe2O3 nanoparticles by supermolecular template. J Solid State Chem 178:2798–2803CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Liu L, Kou HZ, Mo WL, Liu HJ, Wang YQ (2006) Surfactant-assisted synthesis of α-Fe2O3 nanotubes and nanorods with shape-dependent magnetic properties. J Phys Chem B 110:15218–15223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Liu XH, Qiu GZ, Yan AG, Wang Z, Li XG (2007) Hydrothermal synthesis and characterization of α-FeOOH and α-Fe2O3 uniform nanocrystallines. J Alloys Compd 433:216–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Manning BA, Hunt ML, Amrhein C, Yarmoff J (2002) Arsenic(III) and Arsenic(V) reactions with zerovalent iron corrosion products. Environ Sci Technol 36:5455–5461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mohan D, Pittman CU (2007) Arsenic removal from water/wastewater using adsorbents-a critical review. J Hazard Mater 142:1–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Muller R, Dutz S, Hergt R, Schmidt C, Steinmetz H, Zeisberger M (2007) Hysteresis losses in iron oxide nanoparticles prepared by glass crystallization or wet chemical precipitation. J Magn Magn Mater 310:2399–2401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ni SB, Lin SM, Pan QT, Yang F, Huang K, Wang HY, He DY (2009) Synthesis of core-shell α-Fe2O3 hollow micro-spheres by a simple two-step process. J Alloys Compd 478:876–879CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Nordstrom DK (2002) Public health-worldwide occurrences of arsenic in ground water. Science 296:2143–2145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Redman A, Macalady D, Ahmann D (2002) Natural organic matter affects arsenic speciation and sorption onto hematite. Environ Sci Technol 36:2889–2896CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Rich CH, Biggs ML, Smith AH (1998) Lung and kidney cancer mortality associated with arsenic in drinking water in cordoba, Argentina. Int J Epidemiol 27:561–569CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ristic M, Music S, Godec M (2006) Properties of γ-FeOOH, α-FeOOH and α-Fe2O3 particles precipitated by hydrolysis of Fe3+ ions in perchlorate containing aqueous solutions. J Alloys Compd 417:292–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Sadakane M, Takahashi C, Kato N, Ogihara H, Nodasaka Y, Doi Y (2007) Three-dimensionally ordered macroporous (3DOM) materials of spinel-type mixed iron oxides; synthesis, structural characterization, and formation mechanism of inverse opals with a skeleton structure. Bull Chem Soc Jpn 80:677–685CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Smith AH, Lingas EO, Rahman M (2000) Contamination of drinking-water by arsenic in Bangladesh: a public health emergency. Bull World Health Organ 78:1093–1103Google Scholar
  29. Sun ZY, Yuan HQ, Liu ZM, Han BX, Zhang XR (2005) A highly efficient chemical sensor material for H2S: α-Fe2O3 nanotubes fabricated using carbon nanotube templates. Adv Mater 17:2993–2997CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Tang B, Wang G, Zhou LH, Ge JC, Cui L (2006) Facile route to α-FeOOH and α-Fe2O3 nanorods and magnetic property of α-Fe2O3 nanorods. J Inorg Chem 45:5196–5200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Wang Y, Jing ZH, Wu SH (2006) Preparation and gas sensing properties of pure and doped γ-Fe2O3 by an anhydrous solvent method. Sens Actuators B 113:177–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Wang W, Howe JY, Gu BH (2008) Structure and morphology evolution of hematite (α-Fe2O3) nanoparticles in forced hydrolysis of ferric chloride. J Phys Chem C 112:9203–9207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Wang B, Song YM, Ren WZ, Xu WY, Cui HT (2009) Low temperature transformation from γ-Fe2O3 to Ti doped α-Fe2O3 nanoparticles through an epoxide assisted sol–gel route. J Sol-Gel Sci Technol 51:119–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Woo K, Lee HJ, Ahn JP, Park YS (2003) Sol–gel mediated synthesis of Fe2O3 nanorods. Adv Mater 15:1761–1764CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Xia YJ, Liu J (2004) An overview on chronic arsenism via drinking water in FIR China. Toxicology 198:25–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Yang LX, Liang Y, Chen H, Kong LY, Jiang W (2008) Facile hydrothermal route to the controlled synthesis of α-Fe2O3 1-D nanostructures. Bull Mater Sci 31:919–923CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Zana R, Schmidt J, Talmon Y (2005) Tetrabutylammonium alkyl carboxylate surfactants in aqueous solution: self-association behavior, solution nanostructure, and comparison with tetrabutylammonium alkyl sulfate surfactants. Langmuir 21:11628–11636CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Zaspalis V, Pagana A, Sklari S (2007) Arsenic removal from contaminated water by iron oxide sorbents and porous ceramic membranes. Desalination 217:167–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Zhang H, Wang WW, Li H, Meng SL, Li DQ (2008) A strategy to prepare ultrafine dispersed Fe2O3 nanoparticles. Mater Lett 62:1230–1233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Zhong LS, Hu JS, Liang HP, Cao AM, Song WG, Wan LJ (2006) Self-assembled 3D flowerlike iron oxide nanostructures and their application in water treatment. Adv Mater 18:2426–2431CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wenshu Tang
    • 1
  • Qi Li
    • 1
  • Caifu Li
    • 1
  • Shian Gao
    • 1
  • Jian Ku Shang
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Materials Center for Water Purification, Institute of Metal ResearchChinese Academy of SciencesShenyangPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.Department of Materials Science and EngineeringUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignUrbanaUSA

Personalised recommendations