Subsequently, the clean FTO substrate was placed into the Teflon-

Subsequently, the clean FTO learn more substrate was placed into the Teflon-liner. The synthesis PXD101 process was conducted in an electric oven, and the reaction temperature and time were 180°C and 6 h, respectively, for most of the experiments. After that, the autoclave was cooled, and the FTO substrate was taken out and rinsed

with DI water. Finally, the sample was annealed at 450°C in quartz tube furnace (Thermo Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA) for 2 h in the air to remove the organic reactant and enhance the crystallization of the nanorods. For the synthesis of pristine TiO2 nanorods, the process was all the same, except for the elimination of the Sn precursor. The white nanorods film was detached from the FTO substrate with a blade and then added into ethanol followed by sonication for about 20 min. After that, two drops of the ultrasonically dispersed solution were dropped onto the copper grid and dried by heating in the ambient air for examination. To distinguish the samples with different doping levels, the Sn/TiO2 NRs were marked in the form of Sn/TiO2-a%, where a% is the molar ratio of SnCl4/TBOT. The morphology and lattice structure of the nanorods were examined by the field-emission scanning electron microscopy (FESEM, JSM-7600 F, JEOL, Akishimashi, Tokyo, Japan) and field-emission transmission electron microscopy (FTEM, Tecnai G2 F30, FEI, Hillsboro, OR, USA). The

energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDX) combined with FSEM and FTEM was employed to detect the element composition of Sn/TiO2 NRs. To further determine the crystal structure and possible phase changes after introducing Sn doping, the crystal SYN-117 manufacturer structure was examined with X-ray diffraction (XRD, PW3040/60, PANalytical, Almelo, The Netherlands). Moreover, X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS, VG Multilab 2000 X, Thermo Electron Corp., Waltham, MA, USA) was employed to determine the chemical composition and states of the nanorods. The binding energy of the C 1 s (284.6 eV) was used for the energy calibration, as estimated for an ordinary surface contamination of samples handled

under ambient conditions. To measure the performance of photoelectrochemical (PEC) water splitting, the exposed FTO was covered with a layer of silver paste and connected to Cu wires with solder. The silver paste, solder, edge and Succinyl-CoA some part of the film were sealed with polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) or epoxy, in which only a well-defined area about 1 cm2 of the white film was exposed to the electrolyte. A glass vessel filled with 400 mL 1 M KOH was used as the PEC cell, and a class AAA solar simulator (Oriel 94043A, Newport Corporation, Irvine, CA, USA) with the light intensity of 100 mW/cm2 was used as light source. The photocurrent and electrochemical impedance spectra were collected by electrochemical station (AUTOLAB PGSTAT302N, Metrohm Autolab, Utrecht, The Netherlands).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>