Sulfur- and Nitrogen-Doped Titania Biomaterials via APCVD

A comparison between two of the best performing photocatalysts in a series of nitrogen‐ and sulfur‐doped titania visible light photocatalysts prepared by atmospheric pressure (AP)CVD is made against a sample of pure undoped titania. This study compares the ability of the samples to photo‐oxidize ste...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inChemical vapor deposition Vol. 16; no. 1-3; pp. 50 - 54
Main Authors Dunnill, Charles W., Aiken, Zoie A., Pratten, Jonathan, Wilson, Michael, Parkin, Ivan P.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Weinheim WILEY-VCH Verlag 01.03.2010
WILEY‐VCH Verlag
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:A comparison between two of the best performing photocatalysts in a series of nitrogen‐ and sulfur‐doped titania visible light photocatalysts prepared by atmospheric pressure (AP)CVD is made against a sample of pure undoped titania. This study compares the ability of the samples to photo‐oxidize stearic acid and kill Escherichia coli bacteria using white light sources commonly found in UK hospitals. It is shown that both nitrogen‐ and sulfur‐doped photocatalysts are bioactive with extraordinarily similar properties though the nitrogen‐doped samples are found to perform very slightly better than the sulfur‐doped samples. These materials are suggested for use as anti‐microbial surfaces in healthcare environments and as self‐cleaning glass. A comparison between two of the best performing photocatalysts in a series of nitrogen‐ and sulfur‐doped titania visible light photocatalysts prepared by atmospheric pressure (AP)CVD is made against a sample of pure undoped titania. This study compares the ability of the samples to photo‐oxidize stearic acid and kill Escherichia coli bacteria using white light sources commonly found in UK hospitals. It is shown that both nitrogen‐ and sulfur‐doped photocatalysts are bioactive with extraordinarily similar properties though the nitrogen‐doped samples are found to perform very slightly better than the sulfur‐doped samples. These materials are suggested for use as anti‐microbial surfaces in healthcare environments and as self‐cleaning glass.
Bibliography:ark:/67375/WNG-T1CJQBN3-L
This article is part of a special section on Biomaterials
istex:3794A061F203FB0AA8D2DEDEE832A82446CDB2BE
ArticleID:CVDE200906836
ObjectType-Article-2
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-1
content type line 23
ISSN:0948-1907
1521-3862
DOI:10.1002/cvde.200906836