Next Article in Journal
Effectiveness of a Selective Etching Technique in Reducing White Spots Formation around Lingual Brackets: A Prospective Cohort Clinical Study
Next Article in Special Issue
The Effect of RF Sputtering Temperature Conditions on the Structural and Physical Properties of Grown SbGaN Thin Film
Previous Article in Journal
ZnOTe Compounds Grown by DC-Magnetron Co-Sputtering
Previous Article in Special Issue
Improving Transport Properties of GaN-Based HEMT on Si (111) by Controlling SiH4 Flow Rate of the SiNx Nano-Mask
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Coatings
Volume 11
Issue 5
10.3390/coatings11050571
coatings-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Enhanced Methanol Oxidation Activity of PtRu/C100−xMWCNTsx (x = 0–100 wt.%) by Controlling the Composition of C-MWCNTs Support

by
Dang Long Quan
1,2,3 and
Phuoc Huu Le
4,*
1
Faculty of Applied Science, Ho Chi Minh City University of Technology (HCMUT), 268 Ly Thuong Kiet Street, District 10, Ho Chi Minh City 700000, Vietnam
2
Vietnam National University Ho Chi Minh City, Linh Trung Ward, Thu Duc District, Ho Chi Minh City 700000, Vietnam
3
Department of Physics, College of Natural Sciences, Can Tho University, Can Tho City 900000, Vietnam
4
Department of Physics and Biophysics, Faculty of Basic Sciences, Can Tho University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 179 Nguyen Van Cu Street, Can Tho City 94000, Vietnam
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Coatings 2021, 11(5), 571; https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings11050571
Submission received: 1 April 2021 / Revised: 29 April 2021 / Accepted: 11 May 2021 / Published: 14 May 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Recent Advances in the Growth and Characterizations of Thin Films)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
PtRu nanoparticles decorated on carbon-based supports are of great interest for direct methanol fuel cells (DMFCs). In this study, PtRu alloy nanoparticles decorated on carbon Vulcan XC-72 (C), multi-walled carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs), and C-MWCNTs composite supports were synthesized by co-reduction method. As a result, PtRu nanoparticles obtained a small mean size (dmean = 1.8–3.8 nm) with a size distribution of 1–7 nm. We found that PtRu/C60MWCNTs40 possesses not only high methanol oxidation activity, but also excellent carbonaceous species tolerance ability, suggesting that C-MWCNTs composite support is better than either C or MWCNTs support. Furthermore, detailed investigation on PtRu/C100−xMWCNTsx (x = 10–50 wt.%) shows that the current density (Jf), catalyst tolerance ratio (Jf/Jr), and electron transfer resistance (Ret) are strongly affected by C-MWCNTs composition. The highest Jf is obtained for PtRu/C70MWCNTs30, which is considered as an optimal electrocatalyst. Meanwhile, both PtRu/C70MWCNTs30 and PtRu/C60MWCNTs40 exhibit a low Ret of 5.31–6.37 Ω·cm2. It is found that C-MWCNTs composite support is better than either C or MWCNTs support in terms of simultaneously achieving the enhanced methanol oxidation activity and good carbonaceous species tolerance.

1. Introduction

Currently, green energy research is more urgent than ever due to environmental pollution and the gradual depletion of fossil energy. As a green and clean electric power source, fuel cells are able to directly transform chemical energy into electrical energy, and used as power generation in portable, stationary, and transportation applications [1,2,3]. Among various types of fuel cells, direct methanol fuel cells (DMFCs) have been considered as a promising energy source owing to their low operation temperature (below 100 °C), operation safety, superior specific energy, and durability [3,4]. The commercialization of DMFCs requires further reducing the cost and increasing the performance of the electrode catalyst. However, precious and expensive metal catalyst (i.e., Pt or Pt alloy) has been generally used as the catalyst for methanol oxidation reaction (MOR) in DMFCs [5,6,7,8,9,10]. Moreover, carbon monoxide (CO) gas released in MOR poisons Pt catalyst and limits the performance of DMFCs. In order to solve these problems, various Pt-based alloys have been developed to reduce Pt usage and enhance the catalyst activity, including PtRu [11,12], PtCo [13], PtMo [14], PtRuNi [15], PtRuMo [16], etc. Among the catalyst systems, PtRu is well known, owing to its superior performance in preventing the poisoning of the Pt surface by CO gas. It is because Ru forms an oxygenated species at lower potentials than that of Pt, and thus Ru promotes the oxidation of CO gas produced during MOR [17].
Membrane electrode assembly (MEA), which is the main component of DMFCs, has a significant effect on fuel cell performance. An effective anode catalyst is one of the prerequisites for an ideal MEA [18]. In DMFCs, supporting materials (or substrates) for catalysts play a certain important role that can significantly affect the catalyst activity. Carbon black (CB) is commonly used for supporting catalyst nanoparticles in DMFCs because of its large specific surface area and high electrical conductivity [19], but it poses several drawbacks—poor corrosion resistance and limitation of mass transfer due to its dense structure [20]. Carbon nanotubes (CNTs) with high chemical stability and high electrical and thermal conductivities are considered as an excellent support material [21]. Indeed, the catalysts/CNTs possess 1.3–1.6 times greater methanol oxidation activity than that of catalysts/Vulcan carbon [22,23,24]. However, the electrical and thermal conductivities at CNT–CNT inter-tube junctions are at least an order of magnitude lower than those of individual CNTs [25,26]. In recent years, the development of carbon-based nanomaterial supports with different structures–morphologies to enhance DMFCs performance has attracted much attention. Graphene, carbon xerogels, carbon nanofiber, mesoporous carbon, and functionalized or doped carbon supports exhibited the enhancements in methanol oxidation efficiency as compared to the traditional carbon supports [22,23,24,27,28,29,30,31,32,33]. Interestingly, PtRu nanoclusters decorated on three-dimensional porous composite support of graphene sheets (GS) and CNTs presented ~3.2 times higher current intensity than the catalysts on carbon substrate, which was attributed to the decreased aggregation of metallic nanoparticles in the PtRu/GS-CNT [24]. In addition, Yang et al. reported that Pt nanoparticles decorated on a composite support of 10 wt.% MWCNTs and CB resulted in an enhanced power density of 1.5 and 2 times greater than those of the Pt catalyst on MWCNTs- and CB-supports, respectively [34]. Moreover, MWCNTs support showed better durability than CB support [34]. These results suggest that, besides developing catalyst materials, studies on composite carbon-based supporting nanomaterials are a new promising approach toward further enhancement of DMFCs performance.
In this study, PtRu alloy nanoparticles synthesized by a co-reduction method were decorated on C100−xMWCNTsx composites with various mixing weight percentages (i.e., x = 0–100 wt.%). The structure and morphology of the PtRu/C100−xMWCNTsx (x = 0–100 wt.%) samples were studied by X-ray diffraction (XRD) and transmission electron microscope (TEM) analyses. The effect of MWCNTs content on the electrocatalytic activity of the nanomaterials was investigated by cyclic voltammetry (CV) and electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) analyses. This study provides the optimal composition of C-MWCNTs support for the enhanced catalytic activity of PtRu/C-MWCNTs, and gains insight into the support role to the overall performance of an electrocatalyst.

2. Materials and Methods

PtRu/C100−xMWCNTsx (x = 0, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, and 100 wt.%) were synthesized using the following procedure. First, solutions containing C100−xMWCNTsx (x = 0, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, and 100 wt.%) were prepared by mixing accurate amounts of the commercial C (carbon Vulcan XC-72, Fuelcellstore, College Station, TX, USA) and MWCNTs (>95%, OD: 10–20 nm, US Research Nanomaterials, Inc., Houston, TX, USA) with 10 mL deionized (DI) water in an ultrasonic bath for 15 min. Noticeably, since the pristine MWCNTs lacks bonding sites, namely –COOH, =O, and –OH groups, the deposition of metal nanoparticles on the surface of MWCNTs is difficult. Thus, it requires functionalizing MWCNTs to keep metal nanoparticles on its surface by several developed methods [35,36,37]. The common method is the treatment of MWCNTs with HNO3 and H2SO4 acids under suitable time and temperature to activate MWCNTs. To our knowledge, MWCNTs are activated effectively under refluxing condition in 65% HNO3 and 98% H2SO4 acids (1:1) at 50 °C for 5 h. Next, 30 mL ethylene glycol and 15 mL sulfuric acid (H2SO4 98%) solutions were added to the C100−xMWCNTsx solutions, and the mixture solutions were then stirred at 170 °C for 30 min.
The PtRu precursor solutions were prepared by mixing 3.5 mL H2PtCl6·6H2O 0.02 M and 3.5 mL RuCl3·xH2O 0.02 M (corresponding to 13 mg Pt and 7 mg Ru, the atomic ratio of Pt:Ru = 1:1) in an ultrasonic bath for 15 min. Next, the mixture of PtRu precursor solution was slowly dropped into the C100−xMWCNTsx solutions, following by a sprinkle of 0.2 M NaBH4 solution. The pH solution was adjusted to 10 by using 10 M NaOH. The mixture was stirred at room temperature for 8 h. Finally, the PtRu/C100−xMWCNTsx (x = 0, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, and 100 wt.%) products were collected by filtration, washed thoroughly with DI water, and dried overnight at 90 °C. The H2PtCl6·6H2O, RuCl3·xH2O, H2SO4 98%, HNO3 65%, NaBH4, CH3OH, and NaOH were purchased from Merck KGaA of Darmstadt, Germany. The mass of each support type, Pt and Ru metals, and their proportions in each sample are listed in Table 1.
The crystalline orientations of the nanomaterials were studied via XRD analysis using Bruker D8 and Cu Kα (1.5406 Å) radiation. Structural characterization at atomic scale was performed by using a TEM (JEOL JEM1010, Hanoi, Vietnam). A three-electrode test cell configuration using an Ag/AgCl reference electrode was used for electrochemical analyses. The electrolyte was a mixture solution of 0.5 M H2SO4 98% and 1.0 M CH3OH. The working electrode was made using 4 mg of catalytic powder (Pt and Ru masses were 0.52 mg and 0.28 mg, respectively) mixed with 1 mL of 2-propanol (Merck, Darmstadt, Germany) in an ultrasonic bath. Afterward, the catalytic powder was swept onto 1 cm2 carbon paper using Nafion 117 binder solution (Aldrich, Darmstadt, Germany). The carbon paper was then scanned into catalytic powder, which was assembled in a sealed plastic frame with a blank area of 1 cm2. This active area was completely immersed in the electrolyte during CV measurements. CV curves were recorded using an Autolab 302N system (Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam) within a potential range of −0.2–1.2 V vs. Ag/AgCl (3M KCl) at a scan rate of 50 mV·s−1. Electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) measurements were performed using the same system with a potential amplitude of ±10 mV in a frequency range of 0.1–100 kHz.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Effect of Catalyst Supports on Structure–Composition and Methanol Oxidation Performance of PtRu/C100−xMWCNTsx (x = 0, 40, 100%)

Figure 1 shows the XRD patterns of PtRu/C, PtRu/MWCNTs, and PtRu/C60MWCNTs40. Clearly, the XRD patterns of all three types of nanomaterials are similar, whose peaks can be indexed to the (111), (200), (220), and (311) planes of a face-centered cubic (f.c.c) lattice structure of platinum. In addition, the patterns of the hexagonal closest packed (h.c.p) structure of ruthenium should be included inside these diffraction peaks, namely Ru (002) at 42.2°, Ru (101) at 44.1°, Ru (110) at 69.5°, and Ru (112) at 84.8°. In addition, a broad diffraction peak at approximately 26° is attributed to hexagonal graphite structure [C (002)], suggesting that these supports could have good electrical conductivity [38]. The present XRD results confirm for the PtRu alloy on C-based supports, and they are similar to those results reported in [39,40,41]. It was found in a PtRu alloy that if Ru content in PtRu alloy is lower than 60 wt.%, the alloys will stay in the f.c.c structure of platinum; inversely, if Ru content in PtRu alloy is higher than 60 wt.%, the PtRu alloy will exhibit h.c.p structure of ruthenium [40,41]. Since the XRD patterns matched better with the f.c.c structure of platinum, the Ru content in the PtRu alloys in this study should be lower than 60 wt.%. Furthermore, no XRD peak shift was observed, thus the composition of PtRu should be stable among the prepared samples.
Figure 2 shows the typical TEM images and the particle size distribution histograms of PtRu/C, PtRu/MWCNTs, and PtRu/C60MWCNTs40. Obviously, PtRu nanoparticles were well distributed and decorated on the C100−xMWCNTsx (x = 0, 40, 100%) supports. All the samples had narrow size distributions and small mean values (dmean) of 2.4 ± 0.2, 3.8 ± 0.1, and 2.2 ± 0.1 nm for PtRu/C, PtRu/MWCNTs, and PtRu/C60MWCNTs40, respectively (Figure 2). It is known that particle size of catalysts can affect the methanol oxidation activity of PtRu alloy catalysts. It is plausible that when the present PtRu sizes with dmean between 2.2 ± 0.1 and 3.8 ± 0.1 nm are close to the reported optimal PtRu size of ~3 nm, high methanol oxidation activity is achieved [42]. Importantly, the uniformities in size and distribution of PtRu nanoparticles among the samples investigated were sufficient to allow for studying the compositional effects of C100−xMWCNTsx supports on the electrocatalytic activity of PtRu/C100−xMWCNTsx (x = 0–100 wt.%), as described in a later section. Interestingly, by considering both dmean values and the upper tails of the size distributions, the C60MWCNTs40 composite support with high porosity likely hinders the growth of PtRu nanoparticles. This finding agreed well with that in [11], in which the mesoporous carbon support was found to restrict the crystal growth of PtRu nanoparticles.
Cyclic voltammograms (CV) of PtRu/C, PtRu/MWCNTs, and PtRu/C60MWCNTs40 are shown in Figure 3a,b. These samples exhibited different current density (J); the peak current density values of forward and reverse scans (Jf and Jr) and Jf/Jr ratio were determined and are listed in Table 2. The Jf (Jr) values are 21.6 (6.0) mA/mgPtRu, 67.0 (36.0) mA/mgPtRu, and 65.4 (19.4) mA/mgPtRu for PtRu/C, PtRu/MWCNTs, and PtRu/C60MWCNTs40, respectively. Obviously, PtRu/C had lowest Jf value, while PtRu/MWCNTs and PtRu/C-MWCNTs achieved Jf values more than three times higher. In contrast, the PtRu/C obtained the highest Jf/Jr ratio of 3.6, and PtRu/C60MWCNTs40 also reached a high Jf/Jr value of 3.4, whereas PtRu/MWCNTs exhibited a low Jf/Jr ratio of 1.9. The Jf/Jr ratio is used to describe the catalyst tolerance to carbonaceous species accumulation [43]. The larger Jf/Jr value indicates a better CO resistant catalyst. In MOR, CO is a critical intermediate that reduces both fuel cell potential and energy conversion efficiency. A forward scan is attributable to methanol oxidation, forming Pt-adsorbed carbonaceous intermediates (e.g., carbon monoxide). The adsorbed carbon monoxide causes a suppression of the electrocatalyst activity. The reverse oxidation peak is attributed to the additional oxidation of the adsorbed carbonaceous species to carbon dioxide (CO2) [44].
Based on these results, the best carbonaceous species tolerance ability (Jf/Jr = 3.6) was achieved in the PtRu/C. For the support effect, the Jf value of PtRu/MWCNTs is higher than that of PtRu/C (Figure 3a and Table 2), which could be attributed to the higher porosity and better catalyst dispersion–distribution of MWCNTs support than those of C support [21]. However, the carbonaceous species tolerance ability of PtRu/MWCNTs (Jf/Jr = 1.9) is very limited. Nevertheless, PtRu/C60MWCNTs40 can simultaneously achieve a high Jf of 52.3 mA·cm−2 (or 65.4 mA/mgPtRu) and a high Jf/Jr ratio of 3.4. This means that PtRu/C60MWCNTs40 possesses not only high MOR activity, but also excellent carbonaceous species tolerance ability, suggesting that the composite of C-MWCNTs support is better than either C or MWCNTs support. Thus, it is necessary to further optimize the composite composition of C100−xMWCNTsx with x = 10–50 wt.% toward achieving the highest methanol oxidation activity and excellent carbonaceous species tolerance ability, as described in the next section.
Figure 3c shows the Nyquist plot curves of PtRu/C, PtRu/MWCNTs, and PtRu/C60MWCNTs40 at a potential of 0.8 V (vs. Ag/AgCl). Although the Nyquist curves of the samples do not show full semicircles, it is still clear that the total complex impedance Z of the samples has a decreasing order of PtRu/MWCNTs < PtRu/C < PtRu/C60MWCNTs40. For quantitative analysis of the EIS data, we employed the Randles equivalent circuit model to fit the plots with one semicircle [45], whose model was also used to fit the EIS data of Fe2O3 films [46], Pt–MnO2 nanoparticles decorated on reduced graphene oxide sheets [47], and carbon-supported Ru-Pt nanoparticles [48]. The circuit included the electron transfer resistance (Ret), solution resistance (Rs), and double layer capacity (Cdl). The circular fits with the Randles circuit yield Ret values of 7.39, 11.19, and 6.37 Ω.cm2 for PtRu/C, PtRu/MWCNTs, and PtRu/C60MWCNTs40, respectively. The lowest Ret was obtained for PtRu/C60MWCNTs40, indicating composite C-MWCNTs support offered excellent electron transfer that was attributed to the highest current density at 0.8 V. The highest electrocatalytic activity and the smallest Ret of PtRu/C60MWCNTs40 indicates that the composite of C-MWCNTs is a superior support over either C or MWCNTs.
These results can be explained by considering the structure–morphology of the three types of supports. Indeed, MWCNTs are chemically inert, so PtRu nanoparticles will be unable to stick well on the tube walls if MWCNTs are not treated. In this study, after being treated with 98% H2SO4 + 65% HNO3 at 50 °C for 5 h, functional groups =O, –OH, –COOH are formed on the surfaces of MWCNTs, and consequently PtRu nanoparticles resides on these functional groups (Figure 4). Although commercial carbon Vulcan XC-72 has high porosity, it clumps easily and reduces the surface area if this C support is used in a large quantity. The blending of carbon Vulcan XC-72 with the activated MWCNTs allows dispersed C sheets/ bulks into the gaps between MWCNTs (Figure 4). Therefore, this composite support can exhibit high porosity and large surface area. Consequently, the deposition of PtRu nanoparticles on C-MWCNTs will be easier and distributed more evenly, which is attributed to the enhanced methanol oxidation catalytic efficiency (Figure 4). Furthermore, C-MWCNTs support can combine the advantages but limit the disadvantages of each component (i.e., C, MWCNTs).

3.2. Effect of MWCNTs Percentage (x = 10–50 wt.%) in PtRu/C100−xMWCNTsx Samples on the Methanol Oxidation Activity

To determine the most suitable C-MWCNTs supports, a series of PtRu/C100−xMWCNTsx (x = 10–50 wt.%) were prepared and characterized. The PtRu/C100−xMWCNTsx samples had the same amount of PtRu nanoparticles with 20 wt.% and Pt/Ru atomic ratio of 1; meanwhile, the C100−xMWCNTsx supports had various weight percentages of MWCNTs (x) from 10 to 50%. Figure 5 shows TEM images and particle size distributions of the PtRu/C100−xMWCNTsx samples. It can be seen clearly that Vulcan XC-72 carbon substrate was dispersed into MWCNTs. In addition, PtRu nanoparticles were deposited and evenly distributed on both carbon Vulcan XC-72 and MWCNTs for all the samples. Moreover, particle size distribution of all the samples was in the range 1–6 nm with the peak of the distribution at 2 nm. Intriguingly, when the MWCNTs content was small (x = 10 wt.%) or large (x = 50 wt.%), the particle sizes were less uniform with wider size distribution as compared to those of the other three samples (x = 20–40 wt.%).
Figure 6a,b present the CV curves of PtRu/C100−xMWCNTsx (x = 10–50 wt.%) in the electrolyte solution. Clearly, the MWCNTs content strongly affected the current density of PtRu/C100−xMWCNTsx samples. The value of Jf, Jr, and Jf/Jr ratio are summarized in Table 3. The Jf and Jr of PtRu/C100−xMWCNTsx increased when x increased from 10% to 30%, and then decreased with further increasing the MWCNTs weight percentage (x = 40–50 wt.%). The PtRu/C70MWCNTs30 obtained the highest Jf value, 115.8 mA/mgPtRu (92.6 mA·cm−2), or achieving the highest MOR activity. Meanwhile, PtRu/C90MWCNTs10 obtained the highest Jf/Jr value of 4.4, and PtRu/C80MWCNTs20 exhibited a high Jf/Jr of 4.0, whose values were higher than that of PtRu/C (Jf/Jr = 3.6, Table 2 and Table 3), indicating that C100−xMWCNTsx (x = 10–20 wt.%) achieved the enhanced carbonaceous species tolerance. Moreover, Figure 6c shows the Nyquist plot of PtRu/C100−xMWCNTsx (x = 10–50 wt.%) at a potential of 0.8 V (vs. Ag/AgCl). The semicircle of PtRu/C70MWCNTs30 and PtRu/C60MWCNTs40 are smaller as compared with that of the other samples. By fitting the semicircles with the Randles equivalent circuit model, PtRu/C70MWCNTs30 has the smallest Ret, 5.31 Ω·cm2 (Table 3). Owing to reaching the highest electrocatalytic activity and the smallest Ret, PtRu/C70MWCNTs30 is proposed as the best sample.
Table 4 summarizes the methanol oxidation activity results of PtRu nanoparticles decorated on various carbon-related supports in the literature and in this study, in which current density (Jf) and current density ratio (Jf/JfC) are used to evaluate the activity. Here, Jf/JfC is the ratio between Jf of the present sample and JfC of the conventional carbon-supported PtRu nanoparticle sample in each reference and in this study; thus Jf/JfC indicates the current density enhancement of a particular sample relative to the conventional PtRu/C. By observing Jf/JfC > 1 in Table 4, CNTs or MWCNTs, graphene-related, or composite support generally exhibited the enhancements in methanol oxidation activity over the conventional carbon-supported sample. In other words, PtRu catalytic materials on the modified supports or composite supports present higher catalytic results than samples using traditional carbon support (e.g., 82.7 mA·cm−2 for PtRu/N-CNTs vs. 27.5 mA·cm−2 for PtRu/CB [23]; and 136.7 mA·mg−1 for PtRu/CTNs-GS vs. 42.7 mA·mg−1 for PtRu/C [24]). In our study, the current intensity of catalyst with PtRu nanoparticles deposited on C70MWCNTs30 composite support is 5.35 times higher than that of Vulcan XC-72 carbon support. Therefore, C70MWCNTs30 composite support is recommended to use in the electrodes of DMFC.

4. Conclusions

PtRu alloy nanoparticles decorated on C, MWCNTs, and C-MWCNTs supports for high-performance methanol oxidation were synthesized by co-reduction method. The synthesized PtRu/C100−xMWCNTsx (x = 0–100 wt.%) exhibited the crystal structure closed to the f.c.c lattice structure of platinum with (111), (200), (220), and (311) preferred orientations. In addition, PtRu nanoparticles obtained a narrow size distribution and a small mean size (dmean = 1.8–3.8 nm). For the support effects, PtRu/C-MWCNTs offered higher Jf (or higher electrocatalytic activity) and lower Ret than those of PtRu/C and PtRu/MWCNTs. In addition, PtRu/C-MWCNTs has high Jf/Jr values, which means good carbonaceous species tolerance ability. To optimize the C-MWCNTs composition, PtRu/C100−xMWCNTsx (x = 10–50 wt.%) were synthesized and characterized. The highest Jf, 115.8 mA/mgPtRu, was obtained for PtRu/C70MWCNTs30, which was considered an optimal nanomaterial system. Meanwhile, both PtRu/C70MWCNTs30 and PtRu/C60MWCNTs40 exhibited low resistances with Ret of 5.31–6.37 Ω·cm2. The results of this study demonstrate that C-MWCNTs composite support is better than either C or MWCNTs support; significant enhancements in methanol oxidation activity and carbonaceous species tolerance ability can be achieved by controlling the MWCNTs content in C-MWCNTs support.

Author Contributions

D.L.Q. performed the experiments, analyzed the data, and wrote the first draft; P.H.L. revised and edited the paper, and supervised the project. Both authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research is funded by Ho Chi Minh City University of Technology (HCMUT), VNU-HCM, under grant number BK-SDH-2021-2080906, and Vietnam National Foundation for Science and Technology Development (NAFOSTED) under Grant No. 103.02-2019.374.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

We acknowledge the support of time and facilities from Ho Chi Minh City University of Technology (HCMUT), VNU-HCM, Can Tho University, and Can Tho University of Medicine and Pharmacy for this study.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Bokach, D.; de la Fuente, J.L.G.; Tsypkin, M.; Ochal, P.; Endsjø, I.C.; Tunold, R.; Sunde, S.; Seland, F. High-temperature electrochemical characterization of Ru core Pt shell fuel cell catalyst. Fuel Cells 2011, 11, 735–744. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Zhao, S.; Yin, H.; Du, L.; Yin, G.; Tang, Z.; Liu, S. Three dimensional N-doped graphene/PtRu nanoparticle hybrids as high performance anode for direct methanol fuel cells. J. Mater. Chem. A 2014, 2, 3719–3724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Almeida, T.S.; Garbim, C.; Silva, R.G.; De Andrade, A.R. Addition of iron oxide to Pt-based catalyst to enhance the catalytic activity of ethanol electrooxidation. J. Electroanal. Chem. 2017, 796, 49–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Lu, X.; Hu, J.; Foord, J.S.; Wang, Q. Electrochemical deposition of Pt–Ru on diamond electrodes for the electrooxidation of methanol. J. Electroanal. Chem. 2011, 654, 38–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Moura, A.S.; Fajín, J.L.C.; Mandado, M.; Cordeiro, M.N.D.S. Ruthenium-platinum catalysts and direct methanol fuel cells (DMFC): A review of theoretical and experimental breakthroughs. Catalysts 2017, 7, 47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  6. Liu, M.; Zhang, R.; Chen, W. Graphene-supported nanoelectrocatalysts for fuel cells: Synthesis, properties, and applications. Chem. Rev. 2014, 114, 5117–5160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Muthuswamy, N.; de la Fuente, J.L.G.; Tran, D.T.; Walmsley, J.; Tsypkin, M.; Raaen, S.; Sunde, S.; Rønning, M.; Chen, D. Ru@Pt core–shell nanoparticles for methanol fuel cell catalyst: Control and effects of shell composition. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2013, 38, 16631–16641. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Arun, A.; Gowdhamamoorthi, M.; Ponmani, K.; Kiruthika, S.; Muthukumaran, B. Electrochemical characterization of Pt–Ru–Ni/C anode electrocatalyst for methanol electrooxidation in membraneless fuel cells. RSC Adv. 2015, 5, 49643–49650. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Ávila-García, I.; Ramírez, C.; Hallen López, J.M.; Arce Estrada, E.M. Electrocatalytic activity of nanosized Pt alloys in the methanol oxidation reaction. J. Alloy. Compd. 2010, 495, 462–465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Salgado, J.R.C.; Paganin, V.A.; Gonzalez, E.R.; Montemora, M.F.; Tacchini, I.; Anson, A.; Salvador, M.A.; Ferreira, P.; Figueiredo, F.M.L.; Ferreira, M.G.S. Characterization and performance evaluation of Pt–Ru electrocatalysts supported on different carbon materials for direct methanol fuel cells. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 2013, 38, 910–920. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Liu, Z.; Lee, J.Y.; Chen, W.; Han, M.; Gan, L.M. Physical and electrochemical characterizations of microwave-assisted polyol preparation of carbon-supported PtRu nanoparticles. Langmuir 2004, 20, 181–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Neto, A.O.; Dias, R.R.; Tusi, M.M.; Linardi, M.; Spinacé, E.V. Electro-oxidation of methanol and ethanol using PtRu/C, PtSn/C and PtSnRu/C electrocatalysts prepared by an alcohol-reduction process. J. Power Sources 2017, 166, 87–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Baronia, R.; Goel, J.; Tiwari, S.; Singh, P.; Singh, D.; Singh, S.P.; Singhal, S.K. Efficient electro-oxidation of methanol using PtCo nanocatalysts supported reduced graphene oxide matrix as anode for DMFC. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 2017, 42, 10238–10247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Maya-Cornejo, J.; Garcia-Bernabé, A.; Compañ, V. Bimetallic Pt-M electrocatalysts supported on single-wall carbon nanotubes for hydrogen and methanol electrooxidation in fuel cells applications. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 2018, 43, 872–884. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Wang, Z.N.; Huo, S.H.; Zhou, P.X. Rich-grain-boundary PtRuNi with network structure as efficient catalysts for methanol oxidation reaction. Int. J. Electrochem. Sci. 2019, 14, 10576–10581. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Wang, Z.B.; Zuo, P.J.; Yin, G.P. Investigations of compositions and performance of PtRuMo/C ternary catalysts for methanol electrooxidation. Fuel Cells 2009, 9, 106–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Ramli, Z.A.C.; Kamarudin, S.K. Platinum-based catalysts on various carbon supports and conducting polymers for direct methanol fuel cell applications: A review. Nanoscale Res. Lett. 2018, 13, 1–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Rambabu, G.; Bhat, D.S.; Figueiredo, F.M. Carbon nanocomposite membrane electrolytes for direct methanol fuel cells—A concise review. Nanomaterials 2019, 9, 1292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  19. Yaldagard, M.; Jahanshahi, M.; Seghatoleslami, N. Carbonaceous nanostructured support materials for low temperature fuel cell electrocatalysts—A review. World J. Nano Sci. Eng. 2013, 3, 121–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Maass, S.; Finsterwalder, F.; Frank, G.; Hartmann, R.; Merten, C. Carbon support oxidation in PEM fuel cell cathodes. J. Power Sources 2008, 176, 444–451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Kannan, R.; Pillai, V.K. Applications of carbon nanotubes in polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cells. J. Indian Inst. Sci. 2009, 89, 425–436. [Google Scholar]
  22. Cui, Z.; Liu, C.; Liao, J.; Xing, W. Highly active PtRu catalysts supported on carbon nanotubes prepared by modified impregnation method for methanol electro-oxidation. Electrochim. Acta 2008, 53, 7807–7811. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Fard, H.F.; Khodaverdi, M.; Pourfayaz, F.; Ahmadi, M.H. Application of N-doped carbon nanotube-supported Pt–Ru as electrocatalyst layer in passive direct methanol fuel cell. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 2020, 45, 25307–25316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Wang, Y.S.; Yang, S.Y.; Li, S.M.; Tien, H.W.; Hsiao, S.T.; Liao, W.H.; Liu, C.H.; Chang, K.H.; Ma, C.C.M.; Hu, C.C. Three-dimensionally porous graphene–carbon nanotube composite-supported PtRu catalysts with an ultrahigh electrocatalytic activity for methanol oxidation. Electrochim. Acta 2013, 87, 261–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Hu, L.; Hecht, D.S.; Grüner, G. Percolation in transparent and conducting carbon nanotube networks. Nano Lett. 2004, 4, 2513–2517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Do, J.W.; Chang, N.N.; Estrada, D.; Lian, F.; Cha, H.; Duan, X.J.; Haasch, R.T.; Pop, E.; Girolami, G.S.; Lyding, J.W. Solution-mediated selective nanosoldering of carbon nanotube junctions for improved device performance. ACS Nano 2015, 9, 4806–4813. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Alegre, C.; Calvillo, L.; Moliner, R.; González-Expósito, J.A.; Guillén-Villafuerte, O.; Huerta, M.M.; Pastor, E.; Lázaro, M.J. Pt and PtRu electrocatalysts supported on carbon xerogels for direct methanol fuel cells. J. Power Sources 2011, 196, 4226–4235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Kang, S.; Lim, S.; Peck, D.H.; Kim, S.K.; Jung, D.H.; Hong, S.H.; Jung, H.G.; Shul, Y. Stability and durability of PtRu catalysts supported on carbon nanofibers for direct methanol fuel cells. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 2012, 37, 4685–4693. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Maiyalagan, T.; Alaje, T.O.; Scott, K.K. Highly stable Pt–Ru nanoparticles supported on three-dimensional cubic ordered mesoporous carbon (Pt–Ru/CMK-8) as promising electrocatalysts for methanol oxidation. J. Phys. Chem. C 2012, 116, 2630–2638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Lee, S.H.; Kakati, N.; Jee, S.H.; Maiti, J.; Yoon, Y.S. Hydrothermal synthesis of PtRu nanoparticles supported on graphene sheets for methanol oxidation in direct methanol fuel cell. Mater. Lett. 2011, 65, 3281–3284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Reddy, G.V.; ORaghavendra, P.; Ankamwar, B.; Chandana, P.S.; Kumar, S.S.; Sarma, L.S. Ultrafine Pt–Ru bimetallic nanoparticles anchored on reduced graphene oxide sheets as highly active electrocatalysts for methanol oxidation. Mater. Chem. Front. 2017, 1, 757–766. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Zhao, J.; Zhang, L.; Xue, H.; Wang, Z.; Hu, H. Methanol electrocatalytic oxidation on highly dispersed platinum–ruthenium/graphene catalysts prepared in supercritical carbon dioxide–methanol solution. RSC Adv. 2012, 2, 9651–9659. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Cheng, Y. Highly effective and CO-tolerant PtRu electrocatalysts supported on poly(ethyleneimine) functionalized carbon nanotubes for direct methanol fuel cells. Electrochim. Acta 2013, 99, 124–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Yang, Z.; Berber, M.R.; Nakashima, N. Design of polymer-coated multi-walled carbon nanotube/carbon black-based fuel cell catalysts with high durability and performance under non-humidified condition. Electrochim. Acta 2015, 170, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  35. Hsu, N.Y.; Chien, C.C.; Jeng, K.T. Characterization and enhancement of carbon nanotube-supported PtRu electrocatalyst for direct methanol fuel cell applications. Appl. Catal. B 2008, 84, 196–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Zhang, S.; Shao, Y.; Yin, G.; Lin, Y. Carbon nanotubes decorated with Pt nanoparticles via electrostatic self-assembly: A highly active oxygen reduction electrocatalyst. J. Mater. Chem. 2010, 20, 2826–2830. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Zhao, Y.; Fan, L.; Ren, J.; Hong, B. Electrodeposition of Pt–Ru and Pt–Ru–Ni nanoclusters on multi-walled carbon nanotubes for direct methanol fuel cell. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2014, 39, 4544–4557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Giordano, N.; Passalacqua, E.; Pino, L.; Arico, A.S.; Antonucci, V.; Vivaldi, M.; Kinoshita, K. Analysis of platinum particle size and oxygen reduction in phosphoric acid. Electrochim. Acta 1991, 36, 1979–1984. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Antolini, E. Formation of carbon-supported PtM alloys for low temperature fuel cells: A review. Mater. Chem. Phys. 2003, 78, 563–573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Antolini, E.; Giorgi, L.; Cardellini, F.; Passalacqua, E. Physical and morphological characteristics and electrochemical behaviour in PEM fuel cells of PtRu/C catalysts. J. Solid State Chem. 2001, 5, 131–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  41. Arico, A.S.; Antonucci, P.L.; Modica, E.; Baglio, V.; Kim, H.; Antonucci, V. Effect of Pt–Ru alloy composition on high-temperature methanol electro-oxidation. Electrochim. Acta 2002, 47, 3723–3732. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Takasu, Y.; Itaya, H.; Iwazaki, T.; Miyoshi, R.; Ohnuma, T.; Sugimoto, W.; Murakami, Y. Size effects of ultrafine Pt–Ru particles on the electrocatalytic oxidation of methano. Chem. Commun. 2001, 4, 341–342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Liu, Z.; Ling, X.Y.; Su, X.; Lee, J.Y. Carbon-supported Pt and PtRu nanoparticles as catalysts for a direct methanol fuel cell. J. Phys. Chem. B 2004, 108, 8234–8240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Manoharan, R.; Goodenough, J.B. Methanol oxidation in acid on ordered NiTi. J. Mater. Chem. 1992, 2, 875–887. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Randles, J.E.B. Kinetics of rapid electrode reactions. Discuss. Faraday Soc. 1947, 1, 11–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Wickman, B.; Fanta, A.B.; Burrows, A.; Hellman, A.; Wagner, J.B.; Iandolo, B. Iron oxide films prepared by rapid thermal processing for solar energy conversion. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  47. Vilian, A.T.E.; Rajkumar, M.; Chen, S.M.; Hu, C.C.; Boopathi, K.M.; Chu, C.W. High electrocatalytic performance of platinum and manganese dioxide nanoparticle decorated reduced graphene oxide sheets for methanol electro-oxidation. RSC Adv. 2014, 4, 41387–41397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Dang, Q.L.; Nguyen, T.M.; Truong, N.V.; Le, P.H.; Long, N.V. Investigation of carbon supported Ru–Pt nanoparticles for high–performance electrocatalytic oxidation of methanol. Int. J. Electrochem. Sci. 2017, 12, 10187–10198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Coatings 11 00571 g001 550
Figure 1. XRD patterns of PtRu/C, PtRu/MWCNTs, and PtRu/C60MWCNTs40.
Figure 1. XRD patterns of PtRu/C, PtRu/MWCNTs, and PtRu/C60MWCNTs40.
Coatings 11 00571 g001
Coatings 11 00571 g002 550
Figure 2. TEM images and particle size distributions of (a) PtRu/C, (b) PtRu/MWCNTs, and (c) PtRu/C60MWCNTs40.
Figure 2. TEM images and particle size distributions of (a) PtRu/C, (b) PtRu/MWCNTs, and (c) PtRu/C60MWCNTs40.
Coatings 11 00571 g002
Coatings 11 00571 g003 550
Figure 3. (a,b) Cyclic voltammograms (CV) of PtRu/C, PtRu/MWCNTs, and PtRu/C60MWCNTs40 with current density units of mA·cm−2 and mA/mgPtRu. (c) EIS Nyquist plots of the samples in a frequency range from 0.1 Hz to 100 kHz. The electrolyte was a mixture solution of 0.5 M H2SO4 and 1.0 M CH3OH.
Figure 3. (a,b) Cyclic voltammograms (CV) of PtRu/C, PtRu/MWCNTs, and PtRu/C60MWCNTs40 with current density units of mA·cm−2 and mA/mgPtRu. (c) EIS Nyquist plots of the samples in a frequency range from 0.1 Hz to 100 kHz. The electrolyte was a mixture solution of 0.5 M H2SO4 and 1.0 M CH3OH.
Coatings 11 00571 g003
Coatings 11 00571 g004 550
Figure 4. Schematic diagram of PtRu nanoparticles deposited on C-MWCNTs composite support, where Vulcan XC-72 carbon dispersed into the gaps between activated MWCNTs.
Figure 4. Schematic diagram of PtRu nanoparticles deposited on C-MWCNTs composite support, where Vulcan XC-72 carbon dispersed into the gaps between activated MWCNTs.
Coatings 11 00571 g004
Coatings 11 00571 g005 550
Figure 5. TEM images and particle size distributions of (a) PtRu/C90MWCNTs10, (b) PtRu/C80MWCNTs20, (c) PtRu/C70MWCNTs30, (d) PtRu/C60MWCNTs40, and (e) PtRu/C50MWCNTs50.
Figure 5. TEM images and particle size distributions of (a) PtRu/C90MWCNTs10, (b) PtRu/C80MWCNTs20, (c) PtRu/C70MWCNTs30, (d) PtRu/C60MWCNTs40, and (e) PtRu/C50MWCNTs50.
Coatings 11 00571 g005
Coatings 11 00571 g006 550
Figure 6. (a,b) Cyclic voltammograms of PtRu/C90MWCNTs10, PtRu/C80MWCNTs20, PtRu/C70MWCNTs30, PtRu/C60MWCNTs40, and PtRu/C50MWCNTs50 with current density units of mA·cm−2 and mA/mgPtRu. (c) Nyquist plots of the EIS for these samples in a frequency range from 0.1 Hz to 100 kHz. The electrolyte was a mixture solution of 0.5 M H2SO4 and 1.0 M CH3OH.
Figure 6. (a,b) Cyclic voltammograms of PtRu/C90MWCNTs10, PtRu/C80MWCNTs20, PtRu/C70MWCNTs30, PtRu/C60MWCNTs40, and PtRu/C50MWCNTs50 with current density units of mA·cm−2 and mA/mgPtRu. (c) Nyquist plots of the EIS for these samples in a frequency range from 0.1 Hz to 100 kHz. The electrolyte was a mixture solution of 0.5 M H2SO4 and 1.0 M CH3OH.
Coatings 11 00571 g006
Table
Table 1. Detailed preparation conditions of the catalytic samples investigated.
Table 1. Detailed preparation conditions of the catalytic samples investigated.
SampleC-MWCNTs SupportPt and Ru Metal
Carbon Vucal XC-72 Mass
(mg)		MWCNTs Mass
(mg)		Mass Ratio of C and C-MWCNTs
(wt.%)		Mass Ratio of MWCNTs and C-MWCNTs
(wt.%)		Mass Ratio of C-MWCNTs and Sample
(wt.%)		Pt Mass
(mg)		Ru Mass
(mg)		Mass Ratio of Pt + Ru and Sample
(wt.%)
PtRu/C80010008013720
PtRu/MWCNTs08001008013720
PtRu/C90MWCNTs1072890108013720
PtRu/C80MWCNTs20641680208013720
PtRu/C70MWCNTs30562470308013720
PtRu/C60MWCNTs40483260408013720
PtRu/C50MWCNTs50404050508013720
Table
Table 2. Electrochemical parameters of PtRu/C, PtRu/MWCNTs, and PtRu/C60MWCNTs40.
Table 2. Electrochemical parameters of PtRu/C, PtRu/MWCNTs, and PtRu/C60MWCNTs40.
SampleJfJrJf/JrRet
(mA·cm−2)(mA/mgPtRu)(mA·cm−2)(mA/mgPtRu)–(Ω·cm2)
PtRu/C17.321.64.86.03.67.39
PtRu/MWCNTs53.667.028.836.01.911.19
PtRu/C60MWCNTs4052.365.415.519.43.46.37
Table
Table 3. Electrochemical parameters of PtRu/C90MWCNTs10, PtRu/C80MWCNTs20, PtRu/C70MWCNTs30, PtRu/C60MWCNTs40, and PtRu/C50MWCNTs50.
Table 3. Electrochemical parameters of PtRu/C90MWCNTs10, PtRu/C80MWCNTs20, PtRu/C70MWCNTs30, PtRu/C60MWCNTs40, and PtRu/C50MWCNTs50.
SampleJfJrJf/JrRet
(mA/cm2)(mA/mgPtRu)(mA/cm2)(mA/mgPtRu)–(Ω·cm2)
PtRu/C90MWCNTs1029.837.36.78.44.429.2
PtRu/C80MWCNTs2052.866.013.516.94.06.16
PtRu/C70MWCNTs3092.6115.842.953.62.25.31
PtRu/C60MWCNTs4052.365.415.519.43.46.37
PtRu/C50MWCNTs5038.648.39.712.13.98.87
Table
Table 4. Comparison of CV results of the selected studies of PtRu nanoparticles decorated on novel carbon-related substrates in the literature and in this study. Current density ratio (Jf/JfC) is the ratio between Jf of a PtRu/modified support and the Jf of a PtRu/conventional carbon support in each reference and in this study.
Table 4. Comparison of CV results of the selected studies of PtRu nanoparticles decorated on novel carbon-related substrates in the literature and in this study. Current density ratio (Jf/JfC) is the ratio between Jf of a PtRu/modified support and the Jf of a PtRu/conventional carbon support in each reference and in this study.
SampleSupport MaterialMeasurement ConditionEvaluate PerformanceReference
Current Density (Jf)Current Density Ratio (Jf/JfC)
PtRu/E-Tek
PtRu/CX		Vulcan XC-72R
Carbon xerogels		2 M CH3OH + 0.5 M H2SO4, 0.02 V·s−10.29 mA·cm−2
0.36 mA·cm−2		–
1.44		[27]
PtRu/C
PtRu 70%/CNF		Carbon
Carbon nanofiber		1 M CH3OH + 0.5 M H2SO4, 2 mV·s−1340 mA·cm−2
390 mA·cm−2		–
1.15		[28]
PtRu/XC-72
PtRu/CMK-8-II		Vulcan XC-72R Mesoporous Carbon1 M CH3OH + 0.5 M H2SO4, 50 mV·s−127 mA·cm−2
60 mA·cm−2		–
2.22		[29]
PtRu/C
PtRu/CNTs		Vulcan XC-72R
Carbon nanotube		1 M CH3OH + 0.5 M H2SO4, 20 mV·s−122.5 mA·cm−2
33.5 mA·cm−2		–
1.49		[22]
PtRu/CB
PtRu/CNT
PtRu/N-CNTs		Carbon
Carbon nanotube
Carbon nanotube doping N		1 M CH3OH + 0.5 M H2SO4, 50 mV s−127.5 mA·cm−2
44.1 mA·cm−2
82.7 mA·cm−2		–
1.60
3.00		[23]
PtRu/C
PtRu/CNTs
PtRu/GS
PtRu/CTNs-GS		Carbon
Carbon nanotubes
Graphene sheet
Carbon nanotubes + Graphene sheet		1 M CH3OH + 0.5 M H2SO4, 20 mV·s−142.7 mA·mg−1
56.0 mA·mg−1
78.7 mA·mg−1
136.7 mA·mg−1		–
1.31
1.84
3.20		[24]
PtRu/C
PtRu/RGO		Carbon
Reduced graphene oxide (RGO)		0.5 M H2SO4 + 1 M CH3OH430 mA·mg−1
570 mA·mg−1		–
1.33		[31]
PtRu/C
PtRu/FGSs		Carbon
Functionalized graphene sheets		1 M CH3OH + 0.5 M H2SO4, 50 mV·s−18.21 mA·cm−2
14.05 mA·cm−2		–
1.71		[32]
PtRu/C
PtRu/MWCNTs
PtRu/C70MWCNTs30		Carbon Vulcan XC-72
Multi-walled carbon nanotubes
C + MWCNTs 		1 M CH3OH + 0.5 M H2SO4, 50 mV·s−117.3 mA·cm−2
53.6 mA·cm−2
92.6 mA·cm−2		–
3.10
5.35		Our results
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Quan, D.L.; Le, P.H. Enhanced Methanol Oxidation Activity of PtRu/C100−xMWCNTsx (x = 0–100 wt.%) by Controlling the Composition of C-MWCNTs Support. Coatings 2021, 11, 571. https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings11050571

AMA Style

Quan DL, Le PH. Enhanced Methanol Oxidation Activity of PtRu/C100−xMWCNTsx (x = 0–100 wt.%) by Controlling the Composition of C-MWCNTs Support. Coatings. 2021; 11(5):571. https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings11050571

Chicago/Turabian Style

Quan, Dang Long, and Phuoc Huu Le. 2021. "Enhanced Methanol Oxidation Activity of PtRu/C100−xMWCNTsx (x = 0–100 wt.%) by Controlling the Composition of C-MWCNTs Support" Coatings 11, no. 5: 571. https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings11050571

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop