Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-c52kr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T04:40:46.494Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Effect of transition metal ion doping on photocatalytic properties of In–Ti oxides

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 November 2015

Mrinal Rajesh Pai*
Affiliation:
Chemistry Division, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Mumbai 400085, India
Atindra Mohan Banerjee
Affiliation:
Chemistry Division, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Mumbai 400085, India
Shymala Rajkumar Bharadwaj
Affiliation:
Chemistry Division, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Mumbai 400085, India
*
a) Address all correspondence to this author. e-mail: mrinalr@barc.gov.in, mrinalpai9@gmail.com

Abstract

Nominal compositions of In2Ti1−x Tmx O5−δ, (0.0 ≤ x ≤ 0.2 and Tm = Fe3+ and Cr3+) were synthesized by ceramic route and characterized by relevant techniques. In2Ti1−x Fex O5−δ samples were single phased isomorphic with In2TiO5 phase while Cr substitution has resulted in mixed phased compositions. Dynamic light scattering experiments showed the increase in proportion of smaller sized particles with the increase in extent of Fe substitution. Mössbauer spectra revealed that Fe exists in +3 oxidation state in substituted oxides. The band gap decreased from 3.2 (In2TiO5) to 2.1 eV (In2Ti0.8Fe0.2Ox−δ) and to 1.9 eV in case of Cr substitution (In2Ti0.8Cr0.2O5−δ) attributed to participation of Fe 3d/Cr 3d levels. Photocatalytic H2 generation was evaluated over the substituted oxides from water–methanol mixtures under UV–visible irradiation. The decreasing order of photocatalytic activity is as follows: 20% Fe (mol%) > 10% Fe > indium titanate ≈ 20% Cr > 10% Cr. The loading of Pt as cocatalyst on surface of most active photocatalyst, In2Ti0.8Fe0.2Ox−δ further enhanced the photocatlytic H2 yield.

Information

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2015 
Figure 0

FIG. 1. XRD patterns of unsubstituted In2TiO5 (a), substituted oxides, In2Ti1−xFexO5−δ (b-d) and In2Ti1−xCrxO5−δ (e-f). XRD peak # XRD lines due to Cr0.286Ti0.714O1.857 phase. (a) In2TiO5, (b) x = 0.1 Fe, (c) x = 0.15 Fe, (d) x = 0.2 Fe, (e) x = 0.1 Cr and (f) x = 0.2 Cr.

Figure 1

TABLE I. N2-BET surface area and crystallite size from Scherer equation using XRD line width for In2Ti1−xTmxO5−δ (Tm = Fe3+, Cr3+) samples calcined at 1000 °C as a function of x.

Figure 2

FIG. 2. Particle size distribution observed by DLS experiments for In2Ti1–xTmxO5–δ (Tm = Fe3+, Cr3+) oxides for different values of x. (a) In2TiO5, (b) x = 0.05 Fe, (c) x = 0.1 Fe, (d) x = 0.2 Fe and (e) x = 0.1 Cr.

Figure 3

FIG. 3. FTIR spectra of (a) In2TiO5, (b) In2Ti0.9Fe0.05O5–δ and (c) In2Ti0.85Fe0.15O5–δ.

Figure 4

FIG. 4. Mössbauer spectra of In2Ti1–xFexO5–δ samples under ambient conditions.

Figure 5

TABLE II. Parameters derived from Mössbauer spectra of InTi1−xFexO5−δ (x = 0.1 and 0.2) oxides.

Figure 6

FIG. 5. XPS spectra of In2Ti0.8Cr0.2O5–δ photocatalyst (a) In3+, (b) Cr3+ and (c) Ti4+.

Figure 7

FIG. 6. Diffuse reflectance UV–Vis spectra of In2Ti1−xTmxO5−δ (Tm = Fe3+, Cr3+) photocatalysts.

Figure 8

TABLE III. Band gap (Eg) measurements using diffuse reflectance spectra of In2Ti1−xTmxO5−δ (Tm = Fe3+, Cr3+) samples calcined at 1000 °C as a function of x.

Figure 9

FIG. 7. Time courses of photocatalytic H2 generated over undoped In2TiO5 (a), In2Ti1−xFexO5−δ as a function of values of x = 0.1 (b), 0.2 (c), and In2Ti1−xCrxO5−δ,x = 0. 1 (d), 0.2 (e) and in presence of Pt as cocatalyst, Pt−In2Ti0.8Fe0.2O5−δ (1% w/w) (f) Reaction conditions: 0.1 g catalyst, water + methanol (33% v/v), evacuated and irradiated under water cooled medium-pressure mercury light source.