Surfactant-Assisted Electrodeposition of Mn Oxides As Promising ORR/Oer Bifunctional Non-PGM Electrocatalysts: Factorial Design Study of the Electrodeposition Parameters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Development of novel bifunctional electrocatalysts with high electrocatalytic activity and durability for both oxygen reduction and evolution reactions (ORR and OER) is of outmost importance to grasp the full potential of the regenerative H2-O2 fuel cells and metal-air batteries (e.g., Zn-air, Al-air, Mg-air, Li-air) as beneficial energy conversion and storage devices. Manganese oxides have been on the spotlight as an attractive catalyst material due to cost-competitiveness, environmentally friendliness, natural abundance as well as excellent reactivity for ORR and to some extent for OER (1, 2). The physicochemical and electrochemical properties of MnOx are highly dependent on its morphology and crystallographic nature (3). The aim of this work is to provide a systematic study on finding an active nanostructured manganese oxide for both ORR and OER via anodic electrodeposition method. A comprehensive study have been performed to investigate the main and interaction effects of key electrodeposition factors that significantly influence the electrosynthesis of manganese oxides, i.e. Mn2+ concentration (C), applied anodic potential (E), temperature (T), surfactant type and concentration (S), on the bifunctional activity of MnOx using a two-level half-fraction factorial design. Sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) as anioinc, hexadecyl-trimethyl-ammonium bromide (CTAB) as cataionic and Triton X-100 as non-ionic surfactants were used in this study to electro-synthesize the nanostructured MnOx. Surface characterization methods including XPS and SEM has been employed to analyze morphology and Mn valance of the synthesized electrocatalysts. Fig. 1 shows the surface plots of three different responses studied here for the electrodeposited manganese oxides in presence of Triton X-100, correlating them to the most important factors and two-factor interactions based on the Pareto plots of estimates. The highest ORR mass activity can be achieved at high surfactant concentration and low temperature (Fig. 1-A). Moreover, low applied anodic potential was found to further improve the ORR mass activity of the electrodeposited samples. The same trend was observed for highest OER mass activity as it appeared at low applied anodic potential, high surfactant concentration and low temperature (Fig. 1-B). The lowest ORR/OER potential window of below 600 mV can be obtained at high surfactant concentration, low applied anodic potential but high temperature (Fig. 1-C). The temperature seems to be a defining factor for the bifunctional characteristics of electrodeposited manganese oxides with high temperatures providing low ORR/OER potential window while low temperatures lead to high ORR/OER electrocatalytic activities. References: 1. P. H. Benhangi, A. Alfantazi and E. Gyenge, Electrochimica Acta, 123, 42 (2014). 2. P. Hosseini-Benhangi, M. A. Garcia-Contreras, A. Alfantazi and E. L. Gyenge, Journal of The Electrochemical Society, 162, F1356 (2015). 3. Y. Chabre and J. Pannetier, Prog. Solid State Ch., 23, 1 (1995). Figure 1
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".