Electrochemical nucleation and growth model of MoS2 for hydrogen evolution reaction

The electrochemical nucleation of MoS 2 from a mixture of sodium molybdate dihydrate (Na 2 MoO 4 ·2H 2 O) and sodium sulphide (Na 2 S·xH 2 O) aqueous solution on Cu substrate has been investigated. The nucleation and formation of molybdenum sulphide were investigated employing cyclic voltammetry and...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of analytical science and technology 2024-12, Vol.15 (1), p.53-12
Hauptverfasser: Reddy, Venumbaka Maneesh, Chandra, Marepally Bhanu, Gengan, Saravanan, Duraisamy, Selvakumar
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:The electrochemical nucleation of MoS 2 from a mixture of sodium molybdate dihydrate (Na 2 MoO 4 ·2H 2 O) and sodium sulphide (Na 2 S·xH 2 O) aqueous solution on Cu substrate has been investigated. The nucleation and formation of molybdenum sulphide were investigated employing cyclic voltammetry and chronoamperometry studies. The experimental i–t curves observed at various overpotentials were compared to theoretical curves derived for the two limiting situations of the 3D instantaneous/progressive nucleation and growth model, as reported by Scharifker and Hills. The outcome of electrodeposition potential on nucleation rate (A) and nucleation density (N) was calculated from the current–time transients and SEM morphology obtained at − 1.1 V (5.75 × 10 14 and 1.86 × 10 15 ) was compared with − 0.9 V, − 1.0 V, and − 1.2 V, respectively. The investigation of the initial stages of the transient current–time relationships developed for MoS 2 electrodeposition specified that film formation occurred progressively initially and instantaneous nucleation during the course of time. A HPMoS 2 with an average size of 5–65 nm was obtained at -1.1 V and exhibited superior performance towards the hydrogen evolution reaction compared to samples obtained at − 0.9 V, − 1.0 V, and − 1.2 V.
ISSN:2093-3134
2093-3371
DOI:10.1186/s40543-024-00466-w