Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T13:57:40.041Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The structure of water on rutile TiO2(110) for applications in solar hydrogen production: towards a predictive model using hybrid-exchange density functional theory

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 May 2013

M. Patel ,
G. Mallia  and
N. M. Harrison
M. Patel
Affiliation:
Thomas Young Centre, Department of Chemistry, Imperial College London, UK
G. Mallia
Affiliation:
Thomas Young Centre, Department of Chemistry, Imperial College London, UK
N. M. Harrison
Affiliation:
Thomas Young Centre, Department of Chemistry, Imperial College London, UK STFC Daresbury Laboratory, Daresbury, Warrington, UK
Get access

Abstract

Periodic hybrid-exchange density functional theory (DFT) simulations are used to develop a predictive model of the structure of water on the rutile TiO2(110) surface (Θ ≤ 1 ML). A description of the adsorbed species is given: dissociated water molecules and either mixed or dissociative dimers. The behaviour of the adsorbates is rationalised by considering both direct intermolecular and surface-mediated interactions. Some of these results are then compared with those from water adsorption on the rutile SnO2(110) sur- face, isostructural to TiO2(110). Lastly, the electronic structure of the surface in contact with monolayer water (Θ = 1 ML) reveals the contributions of adsorbate states involved in the photocatalytic reaction that controls the water oxidation process.

Keywords

adsorptioncatalyticTi
Type
Articles
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 1542: Symposium G – Electrochemical Interfaces for Energy Storage and Conversion— Fundamental Insights from Experiments to Computations , 2013 , mrss13-1542-g10-03
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Grätzel, M., Nature 414, 338 (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, R. H., J. Electrochem. Soc. 127, 228 (1980).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salvador, P., Prog. in Surf. Sci. 86, 41 (2011).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henrich, V. E. and Cox, P. A., The Surface Science of Metal Oxides (Cambridge University Press, 1994).Google Scholar
Batzill, M., Energy Environ. Sci. 4, 3275 (2011).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sun, C., Liu, L., Selloni, A., Lu, G., and Smith, S., J. Mater. Chem. 20, 10319 (2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindan, P. J. D., Harrison, N. M., and Gillan, M. J., Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 762 (1998).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seiyama, K. F. T., Kato, A. and Nagatani, M., Anal. Chem. 34, 1502 (1962).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Batzill, M., Sensors 6, 1345 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dovesi, R., Saunders, V. R., Roetti, C., Orlando, R., Zicovich-Wilson, C. M., Pascale, F., Civalleri, B., Doll, K., Harrison, N. M., Bush, I. J., et al. ., CRYSTAL09, Universit`a di Torino (Torino, 2010).Google Scholar
Muscat, J., Harrison, N. M., and Thornton, G., Phys. Rev. B 59, 2320 (1999).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Habgood, M. and Harrison, N., Surf. Sci. 602, 1072 (2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feller, D., J. Comp. Chem. 17, 1571 (1996).3.0.CO;2-P>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Becke, A. D., J. Chem. Phys. 98, 5648 (1993).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muscat, J., Wander, A., and Harrison, N., Chemical Physics Letters 342, 397 (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, G. T. L., Zhang, C. and Michaelides, A., Phys. Rev. B 82, 161415 (2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patel, M., Mallia, G., Liborio, L., and Harrison, N. M., Phys. Rev. B 86, 045302 (2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burdett, J. K., Hughbanks, T., Miller, G. J., Richardson, J. W., and Smith, J. V., J. Am. Chem. Soc. 109, 3639 (1987).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labat, F., Baranek, P., Domain, C., Minot, C., and Adamo, C., J. Chem. Phys. 126, 154703 (2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scaranto, J., Mallia, G., and Harrison, N., Comp. Mater. Sci. 50, 2080 (2011).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tang, H., Levy, F., Berger, H., and Schmid, P. E., Phys. Rev. B 52, 7771 (1995).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reciprocal space sampling for the bulk structure was performed on a Pack-Monkhorst net with a shrinking factor IS=8 along each periodic direction. The predicted structural parameters for bulk TiO2 are:abulk=bbulk= 4.639Å, cbulk = 2.979Å and u = 0.306. For bulk SnO2, abulk=bbulk= 4.822Å, cbulk = 3.254Å and u = 0.307. These structures agree well with experiment [18] and are consistent with that predicted in previous calculations [19].Google Scholar
The corresponding TiO2 and SnO2 lattice parameters are as follows. TiO2: aslab = 2.979Å, bslab = 6.561Å; SnO2: aslab = 3.254Å, bslab = 6.820Å.Google Scholar
The counter-poise correction to the BE was applied to take into account the basis set superposition error (BSSE) [20].Google Scholar
The respective shrinking factors [8,8], [4,8], [4,8], [2,8], [8,4], and [4,4] were adopted in order to ensure consistent k-space sampling.Google Scholar
The calculated band gap of the clean TiO2(110) surface is 2.90 eV, which is in good agreement with the experimental gap of 3.03 eV (polarised optical transmission measurements) [21].Google Scholar
The calculated band gap of the clean SnO2(110) surface is 2.80 eV.Google Scholar
This work made use of the high performance computing facilities of Imperial College London and - via membership of the UK’s HPC Materials Chemistry Consortium funded by EPSRC (EP/F067496) - of HECToR, the UK’s national high-performance computing service, which is provided by UoE HPCx Ltd at the University of Edinburgh, Cray Inc and NAG Ltd, and funded by the Office of Science and Technology through EPSRC’s High End Computing Programme.Google Scholar