Research ArticlesNo Access

Structurally engineered TiO₂–SiO₂ monolithic designs for the enhanced photocatalytic degradation of organic textile dye pollutants

T. V. L. Thejaswini

Chemistry Division, Vellore Institute of Technology-University, Chennai 600127, Tamil Nadu, India

Search for more papers by this author

D. Prabhakaran

Department of Chemistry, Vellore Institute of Technology-University, Vellore 632014, Tamil Nadu, India

E-mail Address: prabhakaran.d@vit.ac.in

Corresponding author.

Search for more papers by this author

, and

M. Akhila Maheswari

Department of Chemistry, Vellore Institute of Technology-University, Vellore 632014, Tamil Nadu, India

Search for more papers by this author

https://doi.org/10.1142/S1793604717500060Cited by:9 (Source: Crossref)

Abstract

The rapid removal of organic textile dye (Acid Red-85) using mesoporous TiO₂–SiO₂ monoliths as photocatalyst material has been studied. The 7:3 mole% ratios of TiO₂ and SiO₂ within the framework provided a well-ordered cage-like monolithic design with high surface area and pore volume that facilitated faster and efficient degradation of the dye effluents. The photocatalyst has been characterized using XRD, TEM-SAED, UV–Vis-DRS, PL, TGA and BET analysis. The influence of various photocatalytic operational parameters, such as solution pH, dopant stoichiometry, catalyst dosage, dye concentration, kinetics, photo-oxidizers, etc., which could influence on the degradation efficiency, has been studied.

Keywords:

References

1. K. Nakata and A. J. Fujishima, Photochem. Photobiol. C., Photochem. Rev. 13, 169 (2012). Web of Science, Google Scholar
2. R. Daghrir, P. Drogui and D. Robert, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 52, 3581 (2013). Web of Science, Google Scholar
3. J. Schneider et al., Chem Rev., 114, 9919 (2014). Web of Science, Google Scholar
4. S. G Kumar and L. G. Devi, J. Phys. Chem. A 115, 13211 (2011). Web of Science, Google Scholar
5. X. Wang et al., Langmuir 21, 2552 (2005). Web of Science, Google Scholar
6. H. Zhu et al., J. Phys. Chem. B. 1081, 20038 (2004). Web of Science, Google Scholar
7. G. L. Drikoh et al., ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces. 4, 4123 (2012). Web of Science, Google Scholar
8. A. Y. Shan, T. I. M. Ghazi and S. A. Rashid, Appl. Catal. A. 389, 1 (2010). Web of Science, Google Scholar
9. H. Yang, Catal. Today 216, 90 (2013). Web of Science, Google Scholar
10. A. Koreniuk et al., Micropor. Mesopor. Mater. 229, 98 (2016). Web of Science, Google Scholar
11. S.-T. Wang et al., Anal. Chem. 84, 7763 (2012). Web of Science, Google Scholar
12. G. Zu et al., ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 7, 5400 (2015). Web of Science, Google Scholar
13. I. Lazar et al., Appl. Surf. Sci. 356, 521 (2015). Web of Science, Google Scholar
14. D. Li et al., J. Hazard. Mater. 285, 398 (2015). Web of Science, Google Scholar
15. J. Zhang et al., Mater. Lett. 129, 50 (2014). Web of Science, Google Scholar
16. T. V. L. Thejaswini and D. Prabhakaran, Int. J. Nanosci. 15, 1660012 (2016). Link, Web of Science, Google Scholar
17. N. Pujari et al., Key Eng. Materials. 706, 94 (2016). Google Scholar
18. M. Tasbihi et al., J. Surf. Interface. Mater. 2, 267 (2014). Google Scholar