2012
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcis.2012.06.017
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Porous CuO superstructure: Precursor-mediated fabrication, gas sensing and photocatalytic properties

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
31
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 64 publications
(32 citation statements)
references
References 63 publications
1
31
0
Order By: Relevance
“…To 1000 ppm ethanol, ethyl-acetate, acetone, xylene, and toluene at 260 • C, the CuO flower sensor has responses of 4.0, 4.6, 3.8, 3.6, and 2.8, respectively, while the CuO nanosheet sensor possesses relatively low responses of 3.0, 2.3, 2.7, 2.2, and 1.6. Furthermore, the response of the CuO flower sensor is slightly higher or comparable to that of other CuO-based sensors such as CuO nanowires [38], belt-like CuO nanoparticles [39], porous CuO superstructures [40], nanoparticle-aggregated CuO hollow spheres [41], and nanorod-assembled CuO flowers [42]. For example, our CuO flower-based sensor (4.0) exhibits a slightly higher response to 1000 ppm ethanol at the optimum temperature compared to the CuO nanowires (1.27) [38], belt-like CuO nanoparticles (2.39) [39], and nanoparticle-aggregated CuO hollow spheres (3.0) [41], respectively.…”
Section: Gas Sensing Properties Of Cuo Nanostructure Sensorsmentioning
confidence: 71%
“…To 1000 ppm ethanol, ethyl-acetate, acetone, xylene, and toluene at 260 • C, the CuO flower sensor has responses of 4.0, 4.6, 3.8, 3.6, and 2.8, respectively, while the CuO nanosheet sensor possesses relatively low responses of 3.0, 2.3, 2.7, 2.2, and 1.6. Furthermore, the response of the CuO flower sensor is slightly higher or comparable to that of other CuO-based sensors such as CuO nanowires [38], belt-like CuO nanoparticles [39], porous CuO superstructures [40], nanoparticle-aggregated CuO hollow spheres [41], and nanorod-assembled CuO flowers [42]. For example, our CuO flower-based sensor (4.0) exhibits a slightly higher response to 1000 ppm ethanol at the optimum temperature compared to the CuO nanowires (1.27) [38], belt-like CuO nanoparticles (2.39) [39], and nanoparticle-aggregated CuO hollow spheres (3.0) [41], respectively.…”
Section: Gas Sensing Properties Of Cuo Nanostructure Sensorsmentioning
confidence: 71%
“…According to [6] in the absence of H 2 O 2 , no obvious degradation of organic dye is observed with CuO nanocatalyst under visible light irradiation even by long irradiation time. However, in the presence of H 2 O 2 and CuO nanoparticles the degradation is obvious.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…CuO nanostructures are promising materials for various applications including materials for solar cells [2], bio-sensors [3], photodetectors [4], gas sensors [5], photocatalysis [6][7][8][9] et al It is known that important physical and chemical properties of the nanocrystals are strongly dependent on their sizes, shapes and type of structures. Therefore the employment of controlled synthesis of nanostructured material is crucial in the obtaining of materials with predetermined properties.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The CuO NPs were equilibrated with dye solution in dark condition to account for any adsorption phenomenon. Aer attaining equilibration in dark, all the batches of the dye solution treated with respective concentrations of photocatalysts were exposed to sunlight and the kinetics of the photocatalytic degradation studied in view of Langmuir-Hinshelwood model given as: 34,35 4a, which demonstrated increase in the % adsorption with the increase in the concentration of photocatalyst.…”
Section: Photocatalytic Dye Degradationmentioning
confidence: 99%