Next Article in Journal
Exposure to Nanoplastic Particles Enhances Acinetobacter Survival, Biofilm Formation, and Serum Resistance
Previous Article in Journal
Engineered Nanomaterials for Improving the Nutritional Quality of Agricultural Products: A Review
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Enhanced Gas Sensitivity of Au-Decorated Flowery WSe2 Nanostructures

1
College of Physics and Electronic Information, Yunnan Normal University, Kunming 650500, China
2
Yunnan Provincial Key Laboratory for Photoelectric Information Technology, Yunnan Normal University, Kunming 650500, China
3
Key Laboratory of Advanced Technique & Preparation for Renewable Energy Materials, Ministry of Education, Yunnan Normal University, Kunming 650500, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Nanomaterials 2022, 12(23), 4221; https://doi.org/10.3390/nano12234221
Submission received: 4 November 2022 / Revised: 23 November 2022 / Accepted: 23 November 2022 / Published: 27 November 2022
(This article belongs to the Section Nanocomposite Materials)

Abstract

:
With the continuous improvement in material life, people are paying more and more attention to air quality; therefore, it is critical to design efficient and stable gas sensor devices. In this work, a flowery WSe2 nanostructure and its nanocomposite (Au@WSe2) decorated with Au nanoparticles were fabricated by the hydrothermal method. The performance of a resistive sensor with flowery WSe2 and Au@WSe2 sensors was evaluated by detecting volatile organic compounds such as ethanol, isoamylol, n-butyl alcohol, isopropanol, isobutanol and n-propanol. The results show that Au-nanoparticle-decorated flowery WSe2 can decrease the optimal working temperature from 215 °C to 205 °C and significantly enhance the response of flowery WSe2. The response values to isoamylol are the highest (as high as 44.5) at a low gas concentration (100 ppm), while the response values to ethanol are the highest (as high as 178.5) at a high gas concentration (1000 ppm) among the six different alcohols. Moreover, the response is steady and repeatable. The results demonstrate that the Au@WSe2 substrate has good responsiveness and selectivity, which makes it a promising candidate for gas detection.

1. Introduction

Gas sensors are playing an increasingly vital role in life [1], industry environmental protection [2], combustion control [3], automobile exhaust detection [4], drunk driving inspection, anesthesia monitoring [5,6] and other fields. Within the transition metal disulfide (TMD) family [7], the novel graphene-like layered [8,9] material WSe2 [10] has recently received much attention as an emerging nanomaterial due to its outstanding properties, such as a large volume ratio, excellent electrical conductivity, sensitive surface, small bandgap, and high stability [11,12]. The WSe2 material proved to be a relatively stable semiconductor among TMD materials, with an indirect bandgap of about 1.2 eV [13], which can be used as an effective material for field-effect transistor channels [12,14].
In recent years, lots of gas sensors based on noble metal and semiconductor composite nanomaterials have been investigated since the noble metal nanoparticles (NPs) can improve the adsorption capacity of the gas-sensitive material surface to the target gas molecules and thus change the resistance. For example, Liu et al. [15] reported that the sensitivity of Au@SnO2 was three times higher than that of the pure SnO2 sensor and exhibited an excellent response/recovery time. Peng et al. [16] decorated a ZnO nanostructure with 6% Au NPs and found that the composite sensor has about a nine-fold enhancement in its gas response to 100 ppm acetone at 280 °C compared to pristine ZnO. Li et al. [17] reported that the sensitivity of the Au@LaFeO3 gas sensor to 100 ppm ethanol is 27 times higher than that of the pure LaFeO3 sensor at an optimal operating temperature. In our previous work, we also found that the response of the Au@CuO sensor is seven times higher than that of the pure CuO sensor exposed to 1000 ppm ethanol [18]. Therefore, noble metal NPs can improve the sensitivity of the gas sensor as well as its response/recovery characteristics. To the best of our knowledge, a gas sensor based on the Au-NP-decorated flowery WSe2 nanostructure has not been reported yet.
In this paper, to investigate the gas sensitivity of flowery WSe2 nanostructures with/without Au NP decoration, six different alcohols were tested before and after the Au decoration of the flowery WSe2 sensor. The results indicated that the response to the six alcohols was enhanced after the Au NP decoration of the flowery WSe2 sensor, in which the response of Au@WSe2 nanocomposites (NCs) to ethanol, n-butyl alcohol and n-propanol were significantly enhanced compared to the pure flowery WSe2 sensor. At a low concentration of gas (100 ppm), the response of Au@WSe2 NCs to isoamylol displayed the largest response value (~45). However, at a high concentration of gas (1000 ppm), the response of Au@WSe2 NCs to ethanol displayed the largest response value (~178.5). The results show that Au@WSe2 NCs have a better response and selection performance as well as higher sensitivity to the target gas at the optimal temperature.

2. Experimental Section

Hydrothermal synthesis is considered an effective preparation method to fabricate semiconductor nanostructures due to its advantages of low cost, easy operation and good dispersibility [19]. In this work, we synthesized flowery WSe2 and Au@WSe2 NCs by hydrothermal synthesis and layer-by-layer self-assembly technology for alcohol gas detection.

2.1. Chemicals and Materials

Se (purity ≥ 99.9%), Na2WO4 (purity ≥ 99.0%), NaBH4 (purity ≥ 98.0%), NaBH4 (purity ≥ 98%), HAuCl4·4H2O, Ethanol (purity ≥ 99.5%), Isoamylol (purity ≥ 99.7%), N-butyl Alcohol (purity ≥ 99.5%), Isopropanol (purity ≥ 99.5%), Isobutanol (purity ≥ 99.5%) and n-propanol (purity ≥ 99.5%) were all purchased from Tianjin Sailboat Chemical Reagent Technology Co., Ltd. (Tianjin, China).

2.2. The Synthesis of Flowery WSe2 and Au@WSe2 NCs

Flowery WSe2 was prepared by a one-step solvothermal method using Se and NaWO4 as raw materials, NaBH4 as a reducing agent and N, N-dimethylformamide (DMF) as a solvent. Se (0.66 g, 0.0084 mole) and NaBH4 (0.2 g, 0.0053 mole) were dispersed sequentially into DMF, stirred uniformly to obtain a mixed solution, which was transferred to a 100 mL reaction kettle and reacted at 200 °C for 48 h. The reaction product (black material) was collected by filtration and then washed several times with deionized water and ethanol, followed by drying to obtain the flowery WSe2 nanostructures. The specific process is shown in Figure 1a. During the synthesis of Au@WSe2 NCs, an appropriate amount of WSe2 powder was dispersed in deionized water, and then 3 mL of PVP aqueous solution and 1 mL of HAuCl4·H2O solution were added successively and fully stirred for 3 min, and then 4 mL of C6H8O6 with a concentration of 0.01mol/L was quickly added with a syringe as a reducing agent solution. After stirring for 3 h, the mixed solution was centrifuged and dried to obtain Au@WSe2 NCs, as shown in Figure 1b.

2.3. Construction of the Sensors

The preparation details of the gas sensors are as follows. Firstly, the Au electrode surfaces were cleaned with acetone, ethanol and deionized water. Then, 0.002 g of sample powder and 100 μL of deionized water were mixed into a grinding bowl and ground for 2 min, and 8–10 μL of the extracted mixed sample solution was uniformly smeared onto 15 mm × 10 mm Au electrodes with a brush [20]. The electrode line width and electrode spacing were about 0.5 mm and 1 mm, respectively (as shown in Figure S1a). The areas of sensitive layers of WSe2 and Au@WSe2 gas sensors were both 10 mm × 10 mm (as shown in Figure S1b). Finally, the gold electrode coated with the sample was placed on a hot table and heated at 230 °C for 24 h to test the gas sensor.

2.4. Measurement

The sensing properties of the gas sensors were tested using a gas-sensing analysis system (Beijing Elite Tech Co., Ltd., Beijing, China) at the desired gaseous volatile organic compound (VOC) concentrations. The whole process was completed in the CGS-1TP system, which is composed of the main engine, heating platform and gas chamber. The sensor was placed on the heating platform in the closed chamber, and the loop between the electrode and the system was connected. The evaporation temperature of the pan was set to the same value as that of the VOC. When the temperature of the heating platform reached the set value, the sensing resistance dropped to a constant value. The volatile organic solution was then injected into the chamber’s evaporating dish, and the resistance of the device was converted into a visible pattern on the system’s computer. The experimental data were collected by an intelligent gas-sensitive analysis system.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Characterizations

Figure 2 shows the X-ray diffraction (XRD) patterns of Au@WSe2 NCs. It can be seen that some characteristic diffraction peaks correspond to the crystal planes (002), (100), (102), (103), (006) and (110) according to the standard PDF card (JCPDS 38-1388) of the hexagonal WSe2 crystal, and some characteristic peaks correspond to the crystal planes (111), (200), (220) and (311) according to the standard PDF card (JCPDS 04-0784) of Au. No additional characteristic diffraction peaks are observed, indicating that flowery WSe2 was successfully decorated with Au NPs, forming a composite [21]. The sharp and clear diffraction peaks indicate that the prepared Au@WSe2 NCs have good crystallinity.
Figure 3 shows the X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) spectra of flowery WSe2 and Au@WSe2 NCs. In order to study each peak of the spectrum more accurately, we fitted the peaks of the main elements with a Gaussian distribution. For pure flowery WSe2, the Se 3d spectrum is divided into 54.38 eV and 55.38 eV [22] (as shown in Figure 3a), which correspond to the 3d5/2 and 3d3/2 orbitals of Se [23], respectively. The spectral peaks for the W 4f7/2 and W 4f5/2 doublets are located at 31.8 eV and 34.1 eV [24] (as shown in Figure 3b), respectively, which are consistent with the previously reported values for pure WSe2 [25]. Figure 3c–e show the XPS energy spectra of Se, W and Au in Au@WSe2 NCs. It can be seen in Figure 3c that the binding energies of the two different peaks located at 54.0 eV and 55.08 eV are Se 3d5/2 and Se 3d3/2, respectively. Compared with the peak position of Se 3d of pure flowery WSe2, the peaks of Se 3d5/2 and Se 3d3/2 in the Au@WSe2 NCs are shifted by 0.38 eV and 0.3 eV, respectively. The binding energies of the two initial peaks of W 4f7/2 and W 4f5/2 are still located at 31.8 eV and 34.1 eV, respectively, as shown in Figure 3d. Figure 3e shows the XPS image of Au 4f. The binding energies for the Au 4f7/2 and Au 4f5/2 doublets are located at 83.68 eV and 87.38 eV, respectively, which is in good agreement with previous reports [18], indicating that flowery WSe2 was successfully decorated with Au NPs without introducing impurities.
In order to further study the microstructure and interfacial state of the fabricated WSe2 samples, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), transmission electron microscopy (TEM) and high-resolution TEM (HRTEM) were performed. Figure S2 shows an overview image of an ensemble of the flowery WSe2 nanostructures. Figure 4a illustrates that the synthesized WSe2 has a loose three-dimensional flower-like structure, which is formed by two-dimensional layered nanosheets. As can be seen in Figure 4b, flowery WSe2 only curled at the petal edge, which increased the thickness of the layer. This structure not only provides a larger specific surface area but also provides more active sites for the gas to react on the material surface. Moreover, the coiled petal structure gives the stacked three-dimensional flowery structure a larger interstitial surface and exposes more active sites at the edges, which provides the possibility of rapid gas adsorption and desorption [26]. Figure 4c shows obvious lattice fringes on the flowery WSe2 surface with a lattice spacing of 0.260 nm, which matches the lattice plane of (102). Flowery WSe2 was reduced to Au@WSe2 NCs by the in situ reduction of the HAuCl4·4H2O solution, as displayed in Figure 4d. As can be seen, Au NPs are tightly attached to the surface of flowery WSe2. Further analysis by TEM indicated that the diameter of the Au NPs is about 40 nm, as shown in Figure 4e. The HRTEM images show that the lattice fringes of Au (111) and WSe2 (102) planes were observed with lattice spacings of 0.236 and 0.260 nm (as shown in Figure 4f), respectively, indicating that the Au NPs and flowery WSe2 are well combined in the Au@WSe2 NCs.

3.2. Gas-Sensing Properties

Figure 5 shows the response curve of pure flowery WSe2 and Au@WSe2 NC sensors to ethanol at a concentration of 1000 ppm as a function of temperature (T) [27]. The response of the sensor can be calculated by S = Ra/Rg, where Rg is the resistance of the target gas, and Rg is the resistance of the sensor in the target gas [28]. Obviously, the optimal working temperature was reduced from 215 °C to 205 °C, and the response was effectively improved when flowery WSe2 was decorated with Au NPs, which is beneficial in prolonging the service life as well as reducing the energy consumption of the device.
The sensing properties for six different alcohols (ethanol, isoamylol, n-butyl alcohol, isopropanol, isobutanol and n-propanol) were investigated when using the flowery WSe2 sensor with/without Au NP decoration. Figure 6 shows the response of pure flowery WSe2 and Au@WSe2 NC sensors to different gas concentrations at the optimal operating temperature. The results show that the response to the six different alcohols increases with the increase in gas concentration. The response of flowery WSe2 was significantly enhanced when it was decorated with Au NPs. At a low gas concentration (100 ppm), the enhancement effect toward ethanol, isoamylol, n-butyl alcohol and n-propanol was particularly significant: their response values were nearly 6.3, 6.5, 7.7 and 12 times greater than those of pure flowery WSe2, respectively, as shown in Figure 7a. For isoamylol, the response values were as high as 44.5. At a high gas concentration (1000 ppm), the response values for the pure flowery WSe2 gas sensor to ethanol, isoamylol, n-butyl alcohol, isopropanol, isobutanol and n-propanol were only 23.2, 41.82, 7.05, 4.43, 25.53 and 8.03, respectively. However, the corresponding response values increased to 178.5, 75, 78, 15, 56.9 and 96.5 for the Au@WSe2 NC sensor, respectively, as shown in Figure 7b. The enhancement effect of ethanol, n-butyl alcohol and n-propanol was particularly significant: their response values were nearly 8, 11 and 12 times greater than those of pure flowery WSe2, respectively. For ethanol, the response values were as high as 178.5. Therefore, Au@WSe2 NCs have a good selectivity for ethanol at a high gas concentration, while they have a good selectivity for isoamylol at a low gas concentration.
To check the repeatability and stability of the gas sensor, we measured the responses of pure flowery WSe2 and Au@WSe2 NC sensors to 1000 ppm ethanol, as shown in Figure S3 and Figure 8. It was found that the responses of the two gas sensors were relatively steady, and their repeatability was extremely favorable after a detection period of 30 days.
We also investigated the response/recovery characteristics of pure flowery WSe2 and Au@WSe2 NC sensors for 1000 ppm ethanol at their corresponding optimal operating temperatures, as shown in Figure 9. The response (recovery) time is defined as the time required to rise (fall) to 90% (10%) of the maximum response value. By contrast, the recovery time decreased from 19.97 s to 5.12 s upon exposure to 1000 ppm ethanol with Au NP decoration, which indicates that the Au@WSe2 NC sensor has excellent response/recovery behavior.
We also compared Au@WSe2 NCs with previously reported sensors, as shown in Table 1. It can be seen that our Au@WSe2 NC sensor has a better performance than the reported sensors. Hence, the prepared Au@WSe2 NCs have great potential for gas detection (especially for ethanol and isoamylol) in practical applications.

3.3. Sensing Mechanism

The sensing mechanism can be described as an adsorption–oxidation–desorption process, which results in a change in the resistance of the sensor. When the gas sensor is exposed to the air, oxygen molecules will be adsorbed on the sensor surface and capture electrons from the conduction band of the semiconductor to form adsorbed oxygen ions ( O 2 ( a d s ) or O ( a d s ) ). The reaction process is outlined below:
O 2 ( a d s ) + e -     O 2 ( a d s )   ( 3 - 1 )
O 2 ( a d s ) + e -     2 O ( a d s )   ( 3 - 2 )
At this time, a depletion layer will form on the surface of the semiconductor, which will significantly decrease the carrier concentration and cause an increase in the resistance.
When the gas sensor is exposed to a reducing gas such as ethanol, the ionized oxygen will react with the reducing gas on the material surface and release electrons back to the conduction band, giving rise to a reduction in the resistance. The reaction can be described as follows.
C 2 H 5 OH   ( gas ) + O ( a d s )   C 2 H 4 O + H 2 O + e -   ( 3 - 3 )
C 2 H 5 OH   ( gas ) + 3 O 2 ( a d s )   2 CO 2 + 3 H 2 O + 3 e -   ( 3 - 4 )
Compared with pure flowery WSe2, the gas sensitivity of Au@WSe2 NCs is significantly improved. The mechanism of the enhanced response of Au-NP-decorated flowery WSe2 can be explained from the following aspects. (1) The work function of Au (5.1 eV) is larger than that of WSe2 (3.61 eV) [35], which results in an electron transfer from WSe2 to Au NPs, and a Schottky potential barrier is formed at the interface. The potential barrier results in an increase in the resistance of the gas sensor. Moreover, the accumulation of electrons on the surface of Au NPs leads to the adsorbed oxygen molecules more readily forming oxygen ions ( O 2 ( a d s ) or O ( a d s ) ). (2) Because of the chemical spillover effect [36,37], more active adsorption sites are generated on Au NPs, and the formed oxygen ions adsorbed on Au will spread to WSe2. When the sensor contacts alcohols, the ionized oxygen will react with the reducing gas on the WSe2 surface and release electrons back to WSe2, giving rise to a reduction in the resistance and the enhancing the sensor response, as shown in Figure 10. (3) Furthermore, Au NPs promote the reaction on the surface of flowery WSe2 and reduce the activation energy for oxygen molecule cleavage, thus reducing the optimal operating temperature [38].

4. Conclusions

In this study, we successfully prepared flowery WSe2 and Au@WSe2 NC sensors and further explored the sensing characteristics of the two devices. The results show that Au-NP-decorated flowery WSe2 displays a lower optimal working temperature (205 °C) than that of the pure flowery WSe2 sensor (215 °C); meanwhile, the response to alcohols was also significantly enhanced. The flowery WSe2 sensor responses to ethanol, n-butyl alcohol and n-propanol at 1000 ppm were 23.20, 7.05 and 8.03, respectively. After being decorated with Au NPs, the responses to ethanol, n-butyl alcohol and n-propanol at 1000 ppm were 178.5, 78.0 and 96.45, respectively, which are 8, 11 and 12 times larger than those of the pure flowery WSe2 sensor. At a low gas concentration (100 ppm), the enhancement effect of ethanol, isoamylol, n-butyl alcohol and n-propanol was particularly significant: their response values were nearly 6.3, 6.5, 7.7 and 12 times greater than those of pure flowery WSe2, respectively. For isoamylol, the response values were as high as 44.5. Therefore, Au@WSe2 NCs have a good selectivity for ethanol at a high gas concentration, while they have a good selectivity for isoamylol at a low gas concentration. The Au/WSe2 NC sensor has a short response/recovery time and good repeatability, selectivity and stability for ethanol and isoamylol.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/nano12234221/s1, Figure S1: (a) The deposited electrodes and (b) covered contact area; Figure S2: The SEM image of an ensemble of the flowery WSe2 nanostructures; Figure S3: The reproducibility test of (a) pure WSe2 and (b) Au@WSe2 based sensors to 1000 ppm ethanol gas at their optimal operating temperature.

Author Contributions

Experimental methodology, X.Z.; data curation, X.Z.; writing—original draft, X.Z.; formal analysis, Q.T., Q.W., P.Y. and Y.L.; resources, Q.T., Q.W. and Y.L.; investigation, Q.T.; writing—review and editing, Q.W.; supervision, Y.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 11864046 and 11764046), the Basic Research Program of Yunnan Province (Nos. 202001AT070064 and 202101AT070124), and Spring City Plan: The High-level Talent Promotion and Training Project of Kunming (2022SCP005).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Gong, H.; Hu, J.; Wang, J.; Ong, C.; Zhu, F. Nano-crystalline Cu-doped ZnO thin film gas sensor for CO. Sens. Actuators B Chem. 2006, 115, 247–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Tsujita, W.; Yoshino, A.; Ishida, H.; Moriizumi, T. Gas sensor network for air-pollution monitoring. Sens. Actuators B Chem. 2005, 110, 304–311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Donarelli, M.; Ottaviano, L. 2D materials for gas sensing applications: A review on graphene oxide, MoS2, WS2 and phosphorene. Sensors 2018, 18, 3638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  4. Poulopoulos, S.; Samaras, D.; Philippopoulos, C. Regulated and unregulated emissions from an internal combustion engine operating on ethanol-containing fuels. Atmos. Environ. 2001, 35, 4399–4406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Huang, H.; Zhou, J.; Chen, S.; Zeng, L.; Huang, Y. A highly sensitive QCM sensor coated with Ag+-ZSM-5 film for medical diagnosis. Sens. Actuators B Chem. 2004, 101, 316–321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Mohammadfam, I.; Zarei, E. Safety risk modeling and major accidents analysis of hydrogen and natural gas releases: A comprehensive risk analysis framework. Int. J. Hydrogen. 2015, 40, 13653–13663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Ko, K.Y.; Park, K.; Lee, S.; Kim, Y.; Woo, W.J.; Kim, D.; Song, J.-G.; Park, J.; Kim, H. Recovery improvement for large-area tungsten diselenide gas sensors. ACS Appl. Mater. Inter. 2018, 10, 23910–23917. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Cheng, Y.; Wang, K.; Qi, Y.; Liu, Z. Chemical vapor deposition method for graphene fiber materials. Acta Phys.-Chim. Sin. 2022, 38, 2006046. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Zheng, W.; Xiong, X.F.; Lin, R.C.; Zhang, Z.J.; Xu, C.H.; Huang, F. Balanced Photodetection in One-Step Liquid-Phase-Synthesized CsPbBr3 Micro-/Nanoflake Single Crystals. ACS Appl. Mater. Inter. 2018, 10, 1865–1870. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Sun, M.; Chou, J.-P.; Yu, J.; Tang, W. Effects of structural imperfection on the electronic properties of graphene/WSe2 heterostructures. J. Mater. Chem. C 2017, 5, 10383–10390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Jeon, D.; Kang, Y.; Kim, T. Observing the layer-number-dependent local dielectric response of WSe2 by electrostatic force microscopy. J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 2020, 11, 6684–6690. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Abbasi, A.; Sardroodi, J.J. Investigation of the adsorption of ozone molecules on TiO2/WSe2 nanocomposites by DFT computations: Applications to gas sensor devices. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2018, 436, 27–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Zhang, S.; Li, R.; Yao, Z.; Liao, P.; Li, Y.; Tian, H.; Wang, J.; Liu, P.; Guo, J.; Liu, K. Laser annealing towards high-performance monolayer MoS2 and WSe2 field effect transistors. Nanotechnology 2020, 31, 30LT02. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Sun, Y.; He, N.; Wang, Y.; Yuan, Q.; Wen, D. Multilevel memory and artificial synaptic plasticity in P(VDF-TrFE)-based ferroelectric field effect transistors. Nano Energy 2022, 98, 107252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Liu, Y.; Li, X.; Wang, Y.; Li, X.; Cheng, P.; Zhao, Y.; Dang, F.; Zhang, Y. Hydrothermal synthesis of Au@ SnO2 hierarchical hollow microspheres for ethanol detection. Sens. Actuators B Chem. 2020, 319, 128299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Peng, C.; Liu, Y. Enhanced acetone sensing characteristics by decorating Au nanoparticles on ZnO flower-like structures. Appl. Phys. A 2013, 111, 1151–1157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Li, F.; Wang, S.; Wu, Z.; Xiong, X.; Li, J.; Zhou, J.; Gao, X. Excellent ethanol sensor based on LaFeO3 modified with gold nanoparticles. J. Mater. Sci.-Mater. El. 2021, 32, 27587–27595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Cheng, M.; Li, W.; Li, C.; Wang, Q.; Tan, Q.; Yang, W.; Liu, Y. Photochemical sensitive study of Au@CuO flower-like materials. Sens. Actuators B Chem. 2021, 348, 130644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Zhang, Z.-W.; Li, Q.-H.; Qiao, X.-Q.; Hou, D.; Li, D.-S. One-pot hydrothermal synthesis of willow branch-shaped MoS2/CdS heterojunctions for photocatalytic H2 production under visible light irradiation. Chin. J. Catal. 2019, 40, 371–379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Rao, Z.-M.; Xie, J.-Y.; Liu, L.-J.; Zeng, Y.-Y. Cai, W.-L. Study on gaseous methanol sensor utilizing cataluminescence of TiO2-Y2O3 powder. Acta Chim. Sin. 2007, 65, 532–536. [Google Scholar]
  21. Mi, H.; Zhou, Q.; Zeng, W. A density functional theory study of the adsorption of Cl2, NH3, and NO2 on Ag3-doped WSe2 monolayers. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2021, 563, 150329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Yu, B.; Zheng, B.; Wang, X.; Qi, F.; He, J.; Zhang, W.; Chen, Y. Enhanced photocatalytic properties of graphene modified few-layered WSe2 nanosheets. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2017, 400, 420–425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Pan, W.; Zhang, Y.; Zhang, D. Self-assembly fabrication of titanium dioxide nanospheres-decorated tungsten diselenide hexagonal nanosheets for ethanol gas sensing application. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2020, 527, 146781. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Guo, R.; Han, Y.; Su, C.; Chen, X.; Zeng, M.; Hu, N.; Su, Y.; Zhou, Z.; Wei, H.; Yang, Z. Ultrasensitive room temperature NO2 sensors based on liquid phase exfoliated WSe2 nanosheets. Sens. Actuators B Chem. 2019, 300, 127013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Selin, C. Expectations and the Emergence of Nanotechnology. Sci. Technol. Hum. Val. 2007, 32, 196–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Xu, J.; Wei, Z.; Zhang, S.; Wang, X.; Wang, Y.; He, M.; Huang, K. Hierarchical WSe2 nanoflower as a cathode material for rechargeable Mg-ion batteries. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 2021, 588, 378–383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Chen, W.; Liu, Y.; Qin, Z.; Wu, Y.; Li, S.; Gong, N. Improved ethanediol sensing with single Yb ions doped SnO2 nanobelt. Ceram. Int. 2016, 42, 10902–10907. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Yan, X.; Yang, W.; Li, C.; Liu, L.; Liu, Y. CdS Micrometer Hollow Spheres for Detecting Alcohols Except Methanol with Strong Anti-interference Ability. ACS Omegar. 2021, 7, 1468–1476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Yang, C.; Xie, J.; Lou, C.; Zheng, W.; Liu, X.; Zhang, J. Flexible NO2 sensors based on WSe2 nanosheets with bifunctional selectivity and superior sensitivity under UV activation. Sens. Actuators B Chem. 2021, 333, 129571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Yang, C.; Xiao, F.; Wang, J.; Su, X. 3D flower-and 2D sheet-like CuO nanostructures: Microwave-assisted synthesis and application in gas sensors. Sens. Actuators B Chem. 2015, 207, 177–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Ge, W.; Jiao, S.; Chang, Z.; He, X.; Li, Y. Ultrafast response and high selectivity toward acetone vapor using hierarchical structured TiO2 nanosheets. ACS Appl. Mater. Inter. 2020, 12, 13200–13207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Wang, C.; Sun, R.; Li, X.; Sun, Y.; Sun, P.; Liu, F.; Lu, G. Hierarchical flower-like WO3 nanostructures and their gas sensing properties. Sens. Actuators B Chem. 2014, 204, 224–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Liu, Y.; Jiao, Y.; Zhang, Z.; Qu, F.; Umar, A.; Wu, X. Hierarchical SnO2 nanostructures made of intermingled ultrathin nanosheets for environmental remediation, smart gas sensor, and supercapacitor applications. ACS Appl. Mater. Inter. 2014, 6, 2174–2184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Wongrat, E.; Chanlek, N.; Chueaiarrom, C.; Samransuksamer, B.; Hongsith, N.; Choopun, S. Low temperature ethanol response enhancement of ZnO nanostructures sensor decorated with gold nanoparticles exposed to UV illumination. Sens. Actuators A-Phys. 2016, 251, 188–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Chen, C.-H.; Wu, C.-L.; Pu, J.; Chiu, M.-H.; Kumar, P.; Takenobu, T.; Li, L.-J. Hole mobility enhancement and p-doping in monolayer WSe2 by gold decoration. 2D Mater. 2014, 1, 034001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  36. Lee, J.-S.; Katoch, A.; Kim, J.-H.; Kim, S.S. Effect of Au nanoparticle size on the gas-sensing performance of p-CuO nanowires. Sens. Actuators B Chem. 2016, 222, 307–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Mabelet, L.; Malonda-Boungou, B.; Mabiala-Poaty, H.; Raji, A.; M’Passi-Mabiala, B. Energetics, electronic and magnetic properties of monolayer WSe2 doped with pnictogens, halogens and transition-metal (4d, 5d) atoms: An ab-initio study. Physica E 2020, 124, 114161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Zeb, S.; Sun, G.; Nie, Y.; Cui, Y.; Jiang, X. Synthesis of highly oriented WO3 nanowire bundles decorated with Au for gas sensing application. Sens. Actuators B Chem. 2020, 321, 128439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Diagram of prepared (a) WSe2 and (b) Au@WSe2 NC sensors.
Figure 1. Diagram of prepared (a) WSe2 and (b) Au@WSe2 NC sensors.
Nanomaterials 12 04221 g001
Figure 2. XRD patterns of Au@WSe2 NCs.
Figure 2. XRD patterns of Au@WSe2 NCs.
Nanomaterials 12 04221 g002
Figure 3. (a,b) XPS analysis of flowery WSe2; (ce) XPS analysis of Au@WSe2 NCs.
Figure 3. (a,b) XPS analysis of flowery WSe2; (ce) XPS analysis of Au@WSe2 NCs.
Nanomaterials 12 04221 g003
Figure 4. (ac) SEM and HRTEM images of flowery WSe2; (df) SEM and HRTEM images of Au@WSe2 NCs.
Figure 4. (ac) SEM and HRTEM images of flowery WSe2; (df) SEM and HRTEM images of Au@WSe2 NCs.
Nanomaterials 12 04221 g004
Figure 5. The response vs. temperature of (a) pure flowery WSe2 and (b) Au@WSe2 NCs to ethanol at 1000 ppm, respectively.
Figure 5. The response vs. temperature of (a) pure flowery WSe2 and (b) Au@WSe2 NCs to ethanol at 1000 ppm, respectively.
Nanomaterials 12 04221 g005
Figure 6. The responses of pure flowery WSe2 and Au@WSe2 NC sensors to diverse gases at various concentrations. (a) Ethanol, (b) isoamylol, (c) n-butyl alcohol, (d) isopropanol, (e) isobutanol and (f) n-propanol.
Figure 6. The responses of pure flowery WSe2 and Au@WSe2 NC sensors to diverse gases at various concentrations. (a) Ethanol, (b) isoamylol, (c) n-butyl alcohol, (d) isopropanol, (e) isobutanol and (f) n-propanol.
Nanomaterials 12 04221 g006
Figure 7. Comparison of sensing performance of Au@WSe2 NCs sensor for six alcohols at (a) 100 ppm and (b) 1000 ppm.
Figure 7. Comparison of sensing performance of Au@WSe2 NCs sensor for six alcohols at (a) 100 ppm and (b) 1000 ppm.
Nanomaterials 12 04221 g007
Figure 8. The repeatability and stability of the sensor.
Figure 8. The repeatability and stability of the sensor.
Nanomaterials 12 04221 g008
Figure 9. Response and recovery times of pure flowery (a) WSe2 and (b) Au@WSe2 NCs for 1000 ppm ethanol at their optimal operating temperatures.
Figure 9. Response and recovery times of pure flowery (a) WSe2 and (b) Au@WSe2 NCs for 1000 ppm ethanol at their optimal operating temperatures.
Nanomaterials 12 04221 g009
Figure 10. Sensing mechanism of Au@WSe2 NCs toward ambient air and ethanol gas.
Figure 10. Sensing mechanism of Au@WSe2 NCs toward ambient air and ethanol gas.
Nanomaterials 12 04221 g010
Table 1. Comparison of key parameters between reported sensors and Au@WSe2 NCs sensor.
Table 1. Comparison of key parameters between reported sensors and Au@WSe2 NCs sensor.
Sensing MaterialsTarget GasOperating Temperature (°C)Concentration (ppm)ResponseRef.
WSe2 nanosheetsEthanolRT301.2 a[23]
WSe2 nanosheets
WSe2 nanosheets
NO2
NO2
RT
RT
10
0.05
5.36 a
5.06 a
[29]
[24]
Flowery CuO Ethanol26010004 b[30]
Flowery TiO2Acetone33025033.72 a[31]
Flowery WO3NO2900.08152 b[32]
Flowery SnO2Ethanol_10029.7 a[33]
WSe2@TiO2 NCsEthanolRT10042.8 a[23]
Au@CuO NCsEthanol100100095.3 b[18]
Au@ZnO NCsEthanol12510001.42 a[34]
Au@SnO2 NCs Ethanol24010023.93 a[15]
Flowery WSe2Ethanol (isoamylol)2151000
(100)
23.2
(6.8)
This work
Au@ flowery WSe2Ethanol (isoamylol)2051000
(100)
178.5
(44.5)
This
work
a Response = Ra/Rg; b Response = Rg/Ra.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Zhang, X.; Tan, Q.; Wang, Q.; Yang, P.; Liu, Y. Enhanced Gas Sensitivity of Au-Decorated Flowery WSe2 Nanostructures. Nanomaterials 2022, 12, 4221. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano12234221

AMA Style

Zhang X, Tan Q, Wang Q, Yang P, Liu Y. Enhanced Gas Sensitivity of Au-Decorated Flowery WSe2 Nanostructures. Nanomaterials. 2022; 12(23):4221. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano12234221

Chicago/Turabian Style

Zhang, Xia, Qiuhong Tan, Qianjin Wang, Peizhi Yang, and Yingkai Liu. 2022. "Enhanced Gas Sensitivity of Au-Decorated Flowery WSe2 Nanostructures" Nanomaterials 12, no. 23: 4221. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano12234221

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop