2021
DOI: 10.1021/acsanm.1c03089
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Hierarchical MnO2 Nanosheets Grown on Cotton Fabric as a Flexible and Washable Solar Evaporator for Seawater Desalination

Abstract: Solar vapor generation is a renewable and hopeful technology for obtaining freshwater from underground water, dyeing wastewater, and seawater. Herein, hierarchical MnO2 nanosheets grown on cotton fabric (Mn-CF) have been developed for solar-driven water evaporation. Black MnO2 nanosheets and nanoflowers are in situ chemically deposited on cotton fabric (CF), which leads to a solar absorption ability as high as 95% from 300 to 2500 nm. Due to the synergistic effect of the super-hydrophilic CF and hierarchical M… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

1
25
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 30 publications
(26 citation statements)
references
References 64 publications
1
25
0
Order By: Relevance
“…5e represents the comparative evaporation rates and photothermal conversion efficiencies of the four developed evaporating systems, where MnO 2 NWs/polyurethane foam achieved 1.32 kg m −2 h −1 , while the MnO 2 @PPy solar evaporator exhibited an excellent evaporation rate of 1.69 kg m −2 h −1 compared to other MnO 2 /PPy-based solar steam generators. 32–34 The photothermal conversion efficiency of the MnO 2 @PPy solar-driven evaporation system was measured using the following equation: 35 h LV = λ + C Δ T where ṁ v represents the evaporation rate under incident solar energy ( q i ), h LV shows the overall enthalpy change from the liquid to vapor phase together with a practical heat and enthalpy phase change, and λ is the latent heat of phase change, which differs at different temperatures, usually 2430 and 2256 kJ kg −1 at 30 °C and 100 °C, respectively. C denotes the specific heat capacity of water (4.2 kJ kg −1 K −1 ) and Δ T is the steady change in water temperature.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…5e represents the comparative evaporation rates and photothermal conversion efficiencies of the four developed evaporating systems, where MnO 2 NWs/polyurethane foam achieved 1.32 kg m −2 h −1 , while the MnO 2 @PPy solar evaporator exhibited an excellent evaporation rate of 1.69 kg m −2 h −1 compared to other MnO 2 /PPy-based solar steam generators. 32–34 The photothermal conversion efficiency of the MnO 2 @PPy solar-driven evaporation system was measured using the following equation: 35 h LV = λ + C Δ T where ṁ v represents the evaporation rate under incident solar energy ( q i ), h LV shows the overall enthalpy change from the liquid to vapor phase together with a practical heat and enthalpy phase change, and λ is the latent heat of phase change, which differs at different temperatures, usually 2430 and 2256 kJ kg −1 at 30 °C and 100 °C, respectively. C denotes the specific heat capacity of water (4.2 kJ kg −1 K −1 ) and Δ T is the steady change in water temperature.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The MnO 2 @PPy solar steam generator exhibited an efficient mass change (1.69 kg m −2 ) under one sun, which is higher than that of other MnO 2 -based solar evaporators. 32,33 Furthermore, the time-dependent mass change was recorded under different solar irradiances (up to 3 kW m −2 ), as shown in Fig. S8 (ESI †).…”
Section: Convective Solar Evaporatormentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The evaporation rate of PDA‐CF and CuS‐PDA‐CF are compared with previously reported CF‐based solar steam generators as shown in Figure 6A. Such as MWCNTs‐COOH/CF, 31 PPy/CF, 32 Mxene/CNT/CF, 33 TBFF‐PDA‐PPy/CF, 34 Soot/CF, 35 Mn‐CF, 36 RGO/CF, 37 MWCNTs‐COON/BN‐PDA/CF, 18 CsxWO 3 /CF 38 and CNT/CF 19 . Despite CuS‐PDA‐CF acquiring a 1.50 kg m −2 h −1 evaporation rate, it is still in the middle to upper range, and it has a very simple manufacturing procedure with a low cost.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 85%