The Journal of
the Korean Journal of Metals and Materials

The Journal of
the Korean Journal of Metals and Materials

Monthly
  • pISSN : 1738-8228
  • eISSN : 2288-8241

Editorial Office





ZnO nanoparticles, Microwave irradiation, NO2 gas, Selectivity, Gas sensor, Sensing mechanism

1. INTRODUCTION

Nitrogen oxide(IV) (NO2) is a highly oxidizing gas commonly produced by fossil fuel burning, forest fires, and industrial and motor vehicles[1], leading to air pollution[2], acid rain, and smog[3,4]. Exposure to this gas causes eye irritation, headache, hearing damage, respiratory disorders[5,6], and even premature deaths[7]. Also, asthma in children could be related to NO2 pollution[8]. Furthermore, there is a direct relationship between the NO2 amount and COVID-19 infection severity[9]. On the other hand, NO2 is a biomarker for lung infection[10]. Therefore, from different perspectives, its detection is of importance.

Resistive gas sensors, based on the resistance change upon exposure to gas, are among the most popular types of gas sensors for NO2 detection[11], due to their high response and stability, fast dynamics, simple fabrication, and low price[12]. They are mostly realized from metal oxide semiconductors, with ZnO being highly popular among them. ZnO is an n-type semiconductor with an Eg of 3.37 eV, high electron mobility, and good thermal and chemical stability. Furthermore, it is highly available with low cost, no toxicity, and can be easily synthesized[13]. However, it has high sensing temperature and poor selectivity in its pristine form[14]. There are various strategies, such as doping[15,16], composite making[17,18], noble metal decoration[19,20], and high-energy irradiation[21,22], to improve its performance in NO2 gas sensing. In this regard, irradiation of the sensing material with high-energy beams has such advantages as the possibility to apply after the material synthesis, generation of structural defects in it, and high control over the energy and duration of the irradiation beams[23].

Among various irradiation techniques, microwave (MW) irradiation is highly available, cheap, and needs no vacuum[24]. Microwaves are electromagnetic waves in the frequency range of 300 MHz to 300 GHz. They can internally heat metal oxides[25,26]. MW irradiation, which delivers high energy over a short duration, can be used during or after the synthesis of material[27,28]. Therefore, MW irradiation time is critically important, which can induce different amonuts of defects such as oxygen vacancies[29].

Previously, Gui et al.[30] prepared ZnO nanoparticles (NPs) in an MW chemical reactor for NO2 gas sensing at various temperatures, and the sensor fabricated at 180 °C showed a response to 4-5 ppm NO2 at 120 °C. Kim et al.[31] applied MW irradiation for 1 min on a ZnO-graphene composite and reported a response of ~12.5 to only 1 ppm NO2 at 300 °C. However, as far as we know, there are few studies on the impact of MW irradiation time on the NO2 response of ZnO NPs.

Therefore, ZnO NPs were irradiated with MWs for 1, 3, 5, and 7 min to study the impact of the irradiation time on the NO2 response of fabricated gas sensors. Various characterization techniques were applied to the irradiated samples, and the one irradiated for 5 min revealed most structural defects. Also, the sensor MW-irradiated for 5 min had the highest response of 11.25 to 2 ppm NO2 and 34.63 to 10 ppm NO2. The improved response of the optimal sensor was related to the generation of structural defects and the formation of ZnO-ZnO homojunctions and ZnO-Zn(OH)2 heterojunctions.

2. EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES

2.1. Microwave irradiation of ZnO NPs

Initially, 2 g of commercial ZnO NPs (Daejung Chemical & Metals Co., Ltd, South Korea) were put in an alumina crucible and irradiated for 1, 3, 5, and 7 min with 30-s intervals in an MW oven (MW22CA, LG, South Korea) at a frequency of 2.45 GHz and a power of 1000 W. The MW process was carried out in a high relative humidity (RH) atmosphere (~90%). Figure 1 (a) schematically shows the experimental steps for the preparation of the MW-irradiated ZnO NPs.

2.2. Materials Characterization

The morphology of ZnO NPs was investigated using fieldemission scanning electron microscopy (FE-SEM; JEOL) and fieldemission transmission electron microscopy (FE-TEM; Titan G2 ChemiSTEM Cs Probe). Energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) and high-angle annular dark-field scanning transmission electron microscopy (HAADF-STEM) were used to explore the chemical compositions. The phase of the NPs was analyzed by X-ray diffraction (XRD; SmartLab, Rigaku, Japan) using Cu Kα2 radiation (λ=1.544398 Å). Also, low-angle XRD (Empyrean, PANalytical B.V., Netherlands) was performed using Cu Kα1 radiation (λ=1.5405 Å). X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS; K-Alpha plus, Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc.) was used to investigate the chemical states of elements. The work function of samples was determined using UV photoelectron spectroscopy (UPS; Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc.). Finally, photoluminescence (PL) analysis was measured at an excitation wavelength of 325 nm using a He-Cd laser to study the lattice defects of the powders. Brunauer-Emmett-Teller (BET) surface area was calculated using N2 adsorption-desorption curves obtained using Quadrasorb evo. (Quantachrome Instruments).

2.3. Gas sensing measurements

Initially, the ZnO NPs were mixed with ethanol and spray-deposited on an alumina substrate equipped with Au/Ni electrodes at 80 ℃ using an airbrush spray gun to fabricate gas sensors. The spraying was performed three times at a pressure of 0.025 MPa. Alumina substrate with dimensions of 5 mm × 5 mm × 1 mm was used in this study. The electrodes were composed of Ni (3 μm) and Au (50 nm). The electrode lines had the width and spacing of 0.2 mm and 0.5 mm, respectively (Figure 1 (b)).

The gas-sensing characteristics were explored at different temperatures using a gas sensing system (Figure 1 (b)). The gas had a fixed flow rate of 500 SCCM set by mass flow controllers, with dry air used as the background gas. The resistances of the sensors were continuously recorded using a source meter (2450, Keithley Instruments, OH, USA). The resistance in the air (Ra) and target gas (Rg) were used to calculate the response as R= Rg/Ra for NO2 and R=Ra/Rg for other gases. The response time (tres) and the recovery time (trec) were defined as the time for the resistance to reach 90% of its final resistance in the presence of NO2 and its subsequent stoppage, respectively.

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

3.1. characterization studies

Figure 2 (a) displays SEM views of the pristine ZnO NPs, and the inset presents the lower-magnification SEM image. In general, ZnO NPs have a rectangular-like morphology with widths of ~100-150 nm and lengths of ~200-400 nm. Even though they are somewhat agglomerated together, it seems that most ZnO NPs have access to air, and therefore, gas molecules can be easily adsorbed on them[32,33]. Figure 2 (b-e) displays SEM images of the ZnO NPs MW-irradiated for 1, 3, 5, and 7 min, respectively. The insets display the corresponding lower-magnification SEM images. Overall, the morphology and size of ZnO NPs were not changed after the MW irradiation, and all samples revealed almost similar morphology.

Figure 3 (a) gives XRD patterns of the pristine and MW-irradiated ZnO NPs at different times. All NPs showed well-crystalline diffraction peaks, matching with JCPDS File No. 36-1451, which confirms the presence of crystalline ZnO with wurtzite structure[34]. No peaks related to impurity phases were detected, confirming the high purity of both the pristine and MW-irradiated ZnO NPs. After the irradiation, the ZnO phase and relative intensity of the peaks were not changed.

Figure 3 (b) indicates the O 1s core-level XPS plot of the pristine ZnO NPs and those MW-irradiated at different times. For the sample irradiated for 5 min, there is a small shift (0.1 eV) to lower binding energies. This is due to defects such as surface oxygen vacancies induced by MW irradiation[35].

Figure 3 (c) presents the UPS spectra of the pristine and MW-irradiated ZnO NPs at different times. Based on the Ecut-off values in high kinetic energy regions and using the procedure described in[36], work function values for the pristine ZnO NPs and those MW-irradiated for 1, 3, 5, and 7 min were obtained to be 4.05, 4.05, 4.1, 4.2, and 4.15 eV, respectively (Figure 3 (d)). Therefore, the sample irradiated for 5 min showed the largest work function.

Figure 3 (e) indicates the PL spectra of the pristine and MW-irradiated ZnO NPs. The PL spectra of the ZnO NPs indicated two emission bands in the UV (389 nm) and visible (400-650 nm) regions. The first peak corresponds to the near band-edge emission of ZnO, which was related to the radiative recombination of free excitons and involved free excitons, donor/acceptor pairs, and excitons bound to acceptors, donors, and their electron satellites[37,38]. Also, the deep-level emission at ~520nm (2.44eV) was due to the oxygen vacancies in ZnO[38]. Figure 3 (f) displays the normalized intensity of the PL spectra of samples at a wavelength of ~520 nm. Higher intensity means more defects. With MW irradiation time, the intensity of peaks increased, and the sample irradiated for 5 min showed the highest intensity and thus most defects.

Figure 4 (a) displays a high-magnification TEM view of the pristine ZnO NPs, and Figure 4 (b) offers the corresponding selected area electron diffraction (SAED) pattern. It was taken along the [111] zone and shows a spotty pattern, confirming the single crystalline nature of the ZnO NPs. Also, we indexed the spots related to ( 1 ¯ 01), ( 1 ¯ 10) and (01 1 ¯ ) crystalline planes of ZnO. Figure 4 (c) gives a high-resolution TEM (HR-TEM) view of ZnO, in which the spacings of 2.87 and 2.51 Å between the parallel fringes can be related to the spacing between crystalline planes of ( 1 ¯ 10) and ( 1 ¯ 01), respectively. The inset in Figure 4 (c) manifests the fast Fourier transform (FFT) pattern of the crystalline ZnO. Figure 4 (d) displays a high-magnification TEM image of the ZnO NPs MW-irradiated for 5 min, and Figure 4 (e) shows the relevant SAED pattern taken along the [110] zone. The pattern is spotty, which again confirms the single crystalline nature of the ZnO NPs. We indexed the spots related to the and crystalline planes of ZnO. Figure 4 (f) displays an HR-TEM image of ZnO NPs MW-irradiated for 5 min, where the spacings of 2.45 and 4.44 Å between the parallel fringes can be related to the crystalline planes of and , respectively, which correspond to Zn(OH)2. The inset in Figure 4 (f) yields the FFT pattern of crystalline ZnO. It can be deduced that MW irradiation partially converted ZnO to Zn(OH)2. This can be due to the high RH (~90%) in the MW chamber and water adsorption on the ZnO. However, Zn(OH)2 was scarce, so it was not detected by XRD.

Figure 5 (a-c) exhibits the HAADF color mapping of the pristine ZnO NPs, in which both Zn and O elements are evenly dispersed over the entire surface of the ZnO NPs. Also, in Figure 5 (e), the HAADF elemental spectrum taken from Figure 5 (d) displays the weight and atomic percentages of Zn and O elements (17.25 and 82.75 wt.% for Zn and O, respectively). Figure 5 (f-h) exhibits the HAADF color mapping of the ZnO NPs MW-irradiated for 5 min. Similar to the pristine ZnO NPs, both Zn and O are uniformly distributed over the surface of the ZnO NPs. Also, in Figure 5 (j), the HAADF elemental spectrum taken from Figure 5 (i) confirms that the weight percentages of Zn and O were 10.69 and 89.31, respectively. This demonstrates that after MW irradiation, the amount of oxygen decreased due to evaporation, resulting in oxygen vacancy defects.

BET surface areas of pristine and MW-irradiated (5 min) sensors were obtained using adsorption-desorption curves N2 adsorption-desorption curves (Figure 6 (a-b)). While pristine ZnO NPs showed a BET surface area of 5.461 m2/g, after 5 min MW irradiation it increased to 6.057 m2/g. This demonstrates higher amounts of adsorption sites for gas molecules after MW irradiation.

3.2. Gas sensing studies

Figure 7 (a-e) presents the dynamic resistance curves of ZnO NPs with 5-minutes microwave irradiation to 10 ppm of NO2 at 50-300 °C. At low temperatures, the base resistance was very high, in the range of Giga ohm, and no meaningful response was obtained due to the high noise level, as shown in Figure 7 (a, b). At 300 °C, even though the base resistance decreased, no noticeable sensing signal was recorded-again, due to the high noise level. As shown in Figure 7 (c), at 150 °C, the base resistance was still very high with much noise. However, the sensor showed a signal in the presence of NO2 from Figure 7 (d), at 200 °C, the base resistance decreased and a response was recorded, yet the sensor still exhibited some noise in Figure 7 (c,d). Therefore, at all the above-mentioned temperatures, the sensor performance was not acceptable. However, as shown in Figure 7 (e), the sensor exhibits a low noise level and a pronounced sensing response at 250 °C.

Figure 8 (a-e) presents the dynamic response curves of the pristine ZnO NPs and those MW-irradiated for 1, 3, 5 and, 7 min to 2-10 ppm NO2 at 250 °C. Based on the sensing curves, we calculated the responses (Table 1) and plotted the calibration curves (Figure 8 (f)).

The responses of the pristine ZnO sensor and those fabricated from the ZnO NPs MW-irradiated for 1, 3, 5, and 7 min to 2 ppm NO2 at 250 °C were 6.0, 5.5, 8.43, 11.25, and 7.8, respectively. Overall, the sensor MW-irradiated for 5 min exhibited the highest output to all NO2 concentrations. In the next step, we obtained the response curves of the ZnO gas sensor MW-irradiated for 5 min to 2 ppm H2S, H2, NH3, C2H5OH and C6H6 gases at 250 °C (Figure 9 (a-e)).

Based on these graphs, a selectivity histogram was constructed, as shown in Figure 9 (f). The responses of the optimal sensor to 2 ppm H2S, H2, NH3, C2H5OH, C6H6 and NO2 gases were 1.68, 1.25, 1.15, 1.27, 1.17 and 11.25. This confirmed the excellent selectivity of the optimal gas sensor to NO2.

Several factors affected the selectivity to NO2 gas (i) NO2 gas has a high electron affinity (2.28 eV) and can directly adsorb electrons from the sensor surface, while other gases need to react with adsorbed oxygen species to generate sensing signal. (ii) the presence of nitrogen with one unpaired electron can lead to participatation in bond formation with surface elements in ZnO[39].

Figure 10 (a-e) yields the sensing plots of fresh and 3-month-preserved gas sensors to NO2 at 250 °C. Based on these graphs, calibration curves were plotted in Figure 10 (f). The response is notably reduced after three months. This maybe due to the adsorption of water molecules while keeping in the laboratoary.

Figure 11 (a-e) indicates the sensing plots of optimal gas sensor to various concentrations of NO2 at 250 °C and in the presence of 30% and 60% RH, respectively. Based on these graphs, plotted the calibration curves, as shown in Figure 11 (f). Under humid conditions, the water molecules were adsorbed on the sensor surface and reduced the number of available adsorption sites on it[40]. Hence, less gas could be adsorbed on the sensor in humid conditions.

To study the response of the optimal sensor to various levels of RH, we exposed the pristine and optimal sensor to 10-60% RH at 250 °C, with the dynamic response curves given in Figure 12 (a-f), respectively. The responses of the pristine ZnO sensor to 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, and 60% RH were 2.60, 2.90, 2.94, 3.01, 3.08, and 3.15, respectively. On the other hand, the responses of the optimal sensor to the same RH levels were 3.08, 3.13, 3.55, 3.89, 3.65, and 4.02, respectively. Hence, compared to the original values, in both cases, the response of sensors increased with growing humidity.

3.3 Sensing mechanism

In resistive gas sensors, variations of the sensor resistance occur due to the adsorption of gases[41]. At first, oxygen molecules with high electron affinity become adsorbed on the sensor surface in air and take electrons[42]:

(1)
O 2 ( g ) O 2 ( ads ) + e - O 2 - ( ads ) + e - 2 O -

Temperature is a desecive factor and at low temperatures O2 ions are dominant species, while at high temperatures O ions are the dominant species. At 250 °C, the dominant species are O ions[43]. The abstraction of electrons generates an electron depletion layer on the ZnO NPs. In an NO2 atmosphere, NO2 molecules directly abstract electrons from the ZnO NPs[44]:

(2)
NO 2 ( g ) NO 2 ( ads ) ,
(3)
NO 2 ( ads ) + e - NO 2 - ( ads ) .

Furthermore, the reaction of NO2 (ads) with adsorbed oxygen species is likely[44]:

(4)
NO 2 - ( ads ) + 2 O - + e - NO 2 ( g ) + 2 O 2 - .

Hence, further abstraction of the electrons by NO2 gas leads to an increase of the resistance in the presence of NO2 gas.

Furthermore, in contact points between the ZnO NPs, ZnO-ZnO homojunctions are formed in the air and upon exposing to NO2 gas, the height of homojunction barriers changes, leading to the sensor's resistance modulation (Figure 13)[45].

However, the pristine ZnO sensor showed a lower response to NO2 compared to the optimal one. For the optimal gas sensor, in addition to the above mechanisms, the oxygen vacancy defects generated from MW irradiation, play an important role as favorable adsorption sites for gases[46]. Based on XPS and PL analyses, the sensor MW-irradiated for 5 min revealed most oxygen vacancies, which eventually led to improved NO2 gas response. Furthermore, as evidenced by the HR-TEM image, some Zn(OH)2 was generated as a result of MW irradiation at the high RH. Therefore, ZnO-Zn(OH)2 heterojunctions were formed in air and upon injection of NO2 gas. These heterojunctions increased the baseline resistance (Ra) due to the formation of additional potential barriers at the interface. Upon exposure to NO2, the modulation of these barrier heights contributed significantly to the sensing signal (Figure 13). Besides, according to the UPS analysis, the work function of the optimal sensor (4.2 eV) exceeded those of other sensors. This means that MW irradiation for 5 min had the best effect on the electrical properties of this material, eventually leading to enhanced NO2 response.

4. CONCLUSIONS

In brief, MW irradiation for 1, 3, 5, and 7 min was performed on ZnO NPs to investigate its effect on the NO2 gas response of fabricated sensors. Based on SEM/TEM analyses, MW irradiation did not change the phase and morphology of the ZnO NPs. However, based on XPS studies, some structural defects were generated in ZnO NPs after the MW irradiation. At 250 °C, the pristine ZnO NP sensor had a response of 6.0 to 2 ppm NO2, while after the MW irradiation for 5 min, the response increased to 11.25. Furthermore, the optimal sensor exhibited high selectivity and good stability even after three months. Boosted NO2 response after MW irradiation was related to the formation of structural defects, ZnO-ZnO homojunctions, and ZnO-Zn(OH)2 heterojunctions. Future studies can be directed toward the functionalization of ZnO NPs to further enhance the sensing output.

Notes

[1] ACKNOWLEDGMENT

This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Ministry of Science and ICT (MSIT) (RS-2021-NR060108). This research also was supported by Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Education (RS-2024-00462882 and RS-2024-00462805). This work also was supported by Korea Environment Industry & Technology Institute (KEITI) through R&D Project for Intelligent Optimum Reduction and Management of Industrial Fine Dust Program, funded by Korea Ministry of Environment (MOE)(2022003580003).

REFERENCES

1 
Feng Z., Wang H., Zhang Y., Han D., Cheng Y., Jian A., Sang S., Sens. Actuator B-Chem,396, 134629 (2023)Google Search
2 
Govind A., Bharathi P., Mohan M.K., Archana J., Harish S., Navaneethan M., J. Environ. Chem. Eng,11, 110056 (2023)Google Search
3 
Liu X., Zhang H., Shen T., Sun J., Ceram. Int,50, 2459 (2024)Google Search
4 
Fang H., Shang E., Wang D., Ma X., Zhao B., Han C., Zheng C., Sens. Actuator B-Chem,393, 134277 (2023)Google Search
5 
Malathi B., Aysha Parveen R., Nakamura A., Archana J., Navaneethan M., Harish S., Sens. Actuator B-Chem,403, 135083 (2024)Google Search
6 
Liu T., Jia X., Qiao L., Yang J., Wang S., Li Y., Shao D., Feng L., Song H., Sens. Actuator B-Chem,390, 133908 (2023)Google Search
7 
Wang D., Han C., Zheng C., Fang H., Xu D., Zhao H., Sens. Actuator B-Chem,387, 133833 (2023)Google Search
8 
Anenberg S.C., Mohegh A., Goldberg D.L., Kerr G.H., Brauer M., Burkart K., Hystad P., Larkin A., Wozniak S., Lamsal L., Lancet Planet. Health,6, (2022)Google Search
9 
Paital B., Agrawal P.K., Environ. Chem. Lett,19, 25 (2021)Google Search
10 
Mokrushin A.S., Gorban Y.M., Averin A.A., Gorobtsov P.Y., Simonenko N.P., Lebedinskii Y.Y., Simonenko E.P., Kuznetsov N.T., Biosensors,13, 445 (2023)Google Search
11 
Ko J.-K., Park I.-H., Shim Y.-S., Hong K.T., Kwon K.C., Korean J. Met. Mater,62, 142 (2024)Google Search
12 
Heo S.G., Kim S., Seo S.-J., Sim J.J., Shin J., Mirzaei A., Choi M.S., Korean J. Met. Mater,62, 631 (2024)Google Search
13 
Nagarjuna Y., Hsiao Y.-J., Sens. Actuator B-Chem,401, 134891 (2024)Google Search
14 
Kang Y., Yu F., Zhang L., Wang W., Chen L., Li Y., Solid State Ion,360, 115544 (2021)Google Search
15 
Sankar Ganesh R., Patil V.L., Durgadevi E., Navaneethan M., Ponnusamy S., Muthamizhchelvan C., Kawasaki S., Patil P.S., Hayakawa Y., Chem. Phys. Lett,734, 136725 (2019)Google Search
16 
Sanger A., Kang S.B., Jeong M.H., Kim C.U., Baik J.M., Choi K.J., ACS Appl. Electron. Mater,1, 1261 (2019)Google Search
17 
Bonyani M., Zebarjad S.M., Janghorban K., Kim J.-Y., Kim H.W., Kim S.S., Chemosensors,10, 388 (2022)Google Search
18 
Bai S., Han J., Meng J.C., Sun L., Sun J., Zhao Y., Tang P., Luo R., Li D., Chen A., Sens. Actuator B-Chem,339, 129720 (2021)Google Search
19 
Ponnuvelu D.V., Dhakshinamoorthy J., Prasad A.K., Dhara S., Kamruddin M., Pullithadathil B., ACS Appl. Nano Mater,3, 5898 (2020)Google Search
20 
Chen X., Shen Y., Zhou P., Zhong X., Li G., Han C., Wei D., Li S., Sens. Actuator B-Chem,289, 160 (2019)Google Search
21 
Anbalagan A.k., Gupta S., Kumar R.R., Tripathy A.R., Chaudhary M., Haw S.-C., Murugesan T., Lin H.-N., Chueh Y.-L., Tai N.-H., Sens. Actuator B-Chem,369, 132255 (2022)Google Search
22 
Shin K.Y., Mirzaei A., Oum W., Yu D.J., Kang S., Kim E.B., Kim H.M., Kim S.S., Kim H.W., Sens. Actuator BChem,374, 132808 (2023)Google Search
23 
Majhi S.M., Mirzaei A., Navale S., Kim H.W., Kim S.S., Nanoscale,13, 4728 (2021)Google Search
24 
Bang J.H., Lee N., Mirzaei A., Choi M.S., Na H.G., Jin C., Oum W., Shin S., Choi H.S., Park H., Choi Y., Jeon H., Kim H.W., Ceram. Int,45, 7723 (2019)Google Search
25 
Singh V., Kumar P., Sanghi R., Prog. Polym. Sci,37, 340 (2012)Google Search
26 
Tyagi V.K., Lo S.-L., Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev,18, 288 (2013)Google Search
27 
Kim Y.-S., Rai P., Yu Y.-T., Sens. Actuator B-Chem,186, 633 (2013)Google Search
28 
Shingange K., Tshabalala Z.P., Ntwaeaborwa O.M., Motaung D.E., Mhlongo G.H., J. Colloid Interface Sci,479, 127 (2016)Google Search
29 
Lin J., Sun S., Luo J., Cui C., Ma R., Fang L., Liu X., Waste Manage,128, 200 (2021)Google Search
30 
Gui Y.-H., Tu Y.-S., Guo H.-S., Qin X.-Y., Tian K., Qin X.-M., Guo D.-J., Guo X., Mater. Sci. Eng. B-Adv. Funct. Solid-State Mater,299, 117031 (2024)Google Search
31 
Kim H.W., Kwon Y.J., Mirzaei A., Kang S.Y., Choi M.S., Bang J.H., Kim S.S., Sens. Actuator B-Chem,249, 590 (2017)Google Search
32 
Ge C., Xie C., Hu M., Gui Y., Bai Z., Zeng D., Mater. Sci. Eng. B-Solid State Mater. Adv. Technol,141, 43 (2007)Google Search
33 
Lee J., Choi Y., Park B. J., Han J. W., Lee H.-S., Park J. H., Lee W., J. Adv. Ceram,11, 769 (2022)Google Search
34 
Omran A.M.E., J. Drug Deliv. Sci. Technol,79, 104000 (2023)Google Search
35 
Wang Z., Lin R., Huo Y., Li H., Wang L., Adv. Funct. Mater,32, 2109503 (2022)Google Search
36 
Kim J.-H., Mirzaei A., Kim H.W., Kim S.S., Sens. Actuator B-Chem,267, 597 (2018)Google Search
37 
Raji R., Gopchandran K.G., J. Sci,2, 51 (2017)Google Search
38 
Ji J., Colosimo A.M., Anwand W., Boatner L.A., Wagner A., Stepanov P.S., Trinh T.T., Liedke M.O., Krause-Rehberg R., Cowan T.E., Selim F.A., Sci Rep,6, 31238 (2016)Google Search
39 
Choi M.S., Kim M.Y., Mirzaei A., Kim H.-S., Kim S.-i., Baek S.-H., Won Chun D., Jin C., Hyoung Lee K., Appl. Surf. Sci,568, 150910 (2021)Google Search
40 
Kim J.-H., Mirzaei A., Kim H. W., Wu P., Kim S.S., Sens. Actuator B-Chem,293, 210 (2019)Google Search
41 
Arafat M.M., Dinan B., Akbar S.A., Haseeb A.S.M.A., Sensors,12, 7207 (2012)Google Search
42 
Li Q., Zeng W., Li Y., Sens. Actuator B-Chem,359, 131579 (2022)Google Search
43 
Mirzaei A., Kim J.-H., Kim H.W., Kim S.S., Sens. Actuator B-Chem,258, 270 (2018)Google Search
44 
Zhang B., Bao N., Wang T., Xu Y., Dong Y., Ni Y., Yu P., Wei Q., Wang J., Guo L., Xia Y., J. Alloy. Compd,867, 159076 (2021)Google Search
45 
Kim J.-H., Mirzaei A., Kim H.W., Kim S.S., ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces,11, 24172 (2019)Google Search
46 
Al-Hashem M., Akbar S., Morris P., Sens. Actuator BChem,301, 126845 (2019)Google Search

Figures and Table

Fig. 1.

Schematics of (a) the microwave irradiation of ZnO NPs, (b) fabrication of gas sensors and gas sensing measurement.

../../Resources/kim/KJMM.2025.63/kjmm-2025-63-8-594f1.jpg
Fig. 2.

Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) images of (a) the pristine ZnO NPs and those microwave-irradiated for (b) 1, (c) 3, (d) 5, and (e) 7 min. Insets show the corresponding lower-magnification SEM images.

../../Resources/kim/KJMM.2025.63/kjmm-2025-63-8-594f2.jpg
Fig. 3.

(a) X-ray diffraction patterns of the ZnO NPs-pristine and microwave-irradiated for different times, (b) X-ray photoelectron spectra of O 1s core-level of the pristine ZnO NPs and those MW-irradiated for different times. (c) Ultraviolet photoelectron spectra of the pristine and microwave-irradiated ZnO NPs at different times, (d) and calculated work function values. (e) Photoluminescence (PL) spectra of the pristine and microwave-irradiated ZnO NPs. (f) Normalized intensity of the PL spectra at a wavelength of 520 nm.

../../Resources/kim/KJMM.2025.63/kjmm-2025-63-8-594f3.jpg
Fig. 4.

(a) Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) image, (b) selected area electron diffraction (SAED) pattern, and (c) high-resolution TEM image of the pristine ZnO NPs. (d) TEM image, (e) SAED pattern, and (f) high-resolution TEM image of the ZnO NPs microwave-irradiated for 5 min. Insets in (c) and (f) show the corresponding fast Fourier transform patterns.

../../Resources/kim/KJMM.2025.63/kjmm-2025-63-8-594f4.jpg
Fig. 5.

(a-c) High-angle annular dark-field scanning transmission electron microscopy (HAADF) color mapping and (d-e) elemental spectrum of the pristine ZnO NPs. (f-h) HAADF color mapping and (i-j) elemental spectrum of the ZnO NPs microwave-irradiated for 5min.

../../Resources/kim/KJMM.2025.63/kjmm-2025-63-8-594f5.jpg
Fig. 6.

N2 adsorption-desorption isotherm curves of (a) pristine ZnO NPs and (b) ZnO NPs MW-irradiated for 5 min.

../../Resources/kim/KJMM.2025.63/kjmm-2025-63-8-594f6.jpg
Fig. 7.

Dynamic resistance curve of the ZnO NPs with microwave-irradiated for 5 min to 10 ppm of NO2 at (a) 50, (b) 100, (c) 150, (d) 200, (e) 250, and (f) 300 °C.

../../Resources/kim/KJMM.2025.63/kjmm-2025-63-8-594f7.jpg
Fig. 8.

Dynamic response curves of the pristine ZnO NPs and those microwave-irradiated for 1-7 min to (a) 10, (b) 8, (c) 6, (d) 4, and (e) 2 ppm of NO2 at 250 °C. (f) Corresponding calibration curves of the sensors.

../../Resources/kim/KJMM.2025.63/kjmm-2025-63-8-594f8.jpg
Fig. 9.

Dynamic response curves of (a) the pristine ZnO sensor and the ZnO sensor microwave-irradiated for 5 min to various levels of relative humidity at 250 °C.

../../Resources/kim/KJMM.2025.63/kjmm-2025-63-8-594f9.jpg
Fig. 10.

Dynamic response curves to (a) H2S, (b) H2, (c) NH3, (d) C2H5OH and (e) C6H6 of ZnO gas sensor microwave-irraidated for 5 min to 2 ppm. (f) Corresponding histogram of the sensors.

../../Resources/kim/KJMM.2025.63/kjmm-2025-63-8-594f10.jpg
Fig. 11.

Dynamic response graph of ZnO MW 5m of fresh sample and after 3 months to (a) 10, (b) 8, (c) 6, (d) 4, (e) 2 ppm of NO2 gas. (f) Corresponding calibration curves of the sensors.

../../Resources/kim/KJMM.2025.63/kjmm-2025-63-8-594f11.jpg
Fig. 12.

Dynamic response graph of ZnO MW 5 m to (a) 10, (b) 8, (c) 6, (d) 4, (e) 2 ppm of NO2 gas under RH 0-60%. (f) Corresponding calibration curves of the sensors.

../../Resources/kim/KJMM.2025.63/kjmm-2025-63-8-594f12.jpg
Fig. 13.

Schematic diagram of the reaction of ZnO and Zn(OH)2 with NO2 target gas.

../../Resources/kim/KJMM.2025.63/kjmm-2025-63-8-594f13.jpg
Table 1.

Response value of ZnO NPs and those microwave-irradiated for 1-7 min to 2-10 ppm of NO2 at 250 °C.

Sensor Conc (ppm) Pristine MW 1m MW 3m MW 5m MW 7m
2 6.0 5.5 8.43 11.25 7.8
4 11.86 11.8 10.11 22.75 15.36
6 12.92 16.39 10.69 28.46 17.48
8 11.73 19.26 13.32 30.06 18.22
10 14.74 22.83 13.64 34.63 21.56