RGO/PDA/Bi12O17Cl2–TiO2 composite membranes based on Bi12O17Cl2–TiO2 heterojunctions with excellent photocatalytic activity for photocatalytic dyes degradation and oil–water separation

  • Zongxue YuEmail author
  • XiaoFang Feng
  • Xia Min
  • XiuHui Li
  • LiangYan Shao
  • HaoJie Zeng


In the study, the reduced graphene oxide/graphitic Bi12O17Cl2–TiO2 heterojunctions sheet membrane(RGO/PDA/Bi12O17Cl2–TiO2) was fabricated by the dopamine modification and assembling the RGO/PDA/Bi12O17Cl2–TiO2 composites on the surface of commercial CA(cellulose acetate) membrane to degrade methylene blue (MB) and p-chlorophenol (4-CP) to harmless products. These membrane materials were comprehensively characterized by X-ray diffraction (XRD), field emission scanning electron microscopy (SEM), transmission electron microscopy (TEM), X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) and UV–vis diffuse reflectance spectra (DRS). The results showed that RGO/PDA/Bi12O17Cl2–TiO2 nanofiber membrane exhibited extremely high degradation performance with a good distribution of RGO/PDA/Bi12O17Cl2–TiO2 on the CA nanofiber membrane surface. Besides, the complete photodegradation of 100 mL MB (15 mg L−1) solution and 100 mL 4-CP (15 mg L−1) solution with artificial visible-light was achieved after 100 min and 160 min, respectively. The RGO/PDA/Bi12O17Cl2–TiO2-CA composite membrane revealed the ability of continuous and simultaneous flow-through separation of oil/water emulsion and degradation of soluble organic dye under visible-light irradiation in a short time. Moreover, the nanofiber membranes exhibited excellent stability and reusability for MB-containing oil–water mixed emulsion separation has great potential to be applied in industrial application.



  1. 1.
    F. Çiçek et al., Low cost removal of reactive dyes using wheat bran. J. Hazard. Mater. 146(1), 408–416 (2007)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    N.M. Aboamera et al., An effective removal of organic dyes using surface functionalized cellulose acetate/graphene oxide composite nanofibers. Cellulose 25(7), 4155–4166 (2018)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    A.B.A. Mohamed, H. Eleuch, Generation and robustness of bipartite non-classical correlations in two nonlinear microcavities coupled by an optical fiber. J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 35(1), 47–53 (2018)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    J. Tolia, M. Chakraborty, Z.V.P. Murthy, Photoluminescence of photocatalytic degradaded malachite green dye by using Mn-doped ZnS (2011)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    H. Yu et al., Recent advances in visible-light-responsive photocatalysts for hydrogen production and solar energy conversion–from semiconducting TiO2 to MOF/PCP photocatalysts. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 15(32), 13243–13253 (2013)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Y. Qi et al., Graphitic carbon nitride compound photocatalyst. Progr. Chem. 27(1), 38–46 (2015)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    L. Zhang et al., Photocatalytic activity of attapulgite–BiOCl–TiO2 toward degradation of methyl orange under UV and visible light irradiation. Mater. Res. Bull. 66, 109–114 (2015)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    X. Wu et al., Nanoparticle-assembled thin film with amphipathic nanopores for organic solvent nanofiltration. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces. 11(19), 17804–17813 (2019)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Y. Bao et al., Pore-functionalized ceramic membrane with isotropically impregnated cobalt oxide for sulfamethoxazole degradation and membrane fouling elimination: Synergistic effect between catalytic oxidation and membrane separation. Appl. Catal. B 254, 37–46 (2019)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    H.J. Won et al., Super-resolution mapping of photogenerated electron and hole separation in single metal-semiconductor nanocatalysts. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 136(4), 1398–1408 (2014)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    R. Yuan et al., Surface chlorination of TiO2-based photocatalysts: a way to remarkably improve photocatalytic activity in both UV and visible region. Acs Catal. 1(3), 200–206 (2013)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    S. Liu, J. Yu, M. Jaroniec, Anatase TiO2 with dominant high-energy {001} facets: synthesis, properties, and applications. Chem. Mater. 23(18), 4085–4093 (2011)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    T.M. Triantis et al., Photocatalytic degradation and mineralization of microcystin-LR under UV-A, solar and visible light using nanostructured nitrogen doped TiO. J. Hazard. Mater. 211–212(2), 196–202 (2012)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    D. Chen, A.K. Ray, Removal of toxic metal ions from wastewater by semiconductor photocatalysis. Chem. Eng. Sci. 56(4), 1561–1570 (2001)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    S. Malato et al., Decontamination and disinfection of water by solar photocatalysis: recent overview and trends. Catal. Today 147(1), 1–59 (2009)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    F. Chen et al., Photocatalytic oxidation for antimicrobial control in built environment: a brief literature overview. Build. Environ. 45(8), 1747–1754 (2010)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    A.U. Pawar et al., Crystal facet engineering of ZnO photoanode for the higher water splitting efficiency with proton transferable nafion film. Nano Energy 20, 156–167 (2016)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Y. Liu et al., Enhancement of the photoelectrochemical performance of WO3 vertical arrays film for solar water splitting by gadolinium doping. J. Phys. Chem. C 119(27), 14834–14842 (2015)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    J. Zhu et al., Energy Environ. Sci. 3, 987 (2013)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    N.D.D. Diby et al., Enhanced photoelectrochemical performance for hydrogen generation via introducing Ti3+ and oxygen vacancies into TiO2 nanorod arrays. J. Mater. Sci. 29(23), 20236–20246 (2018)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    J. Wang et al., Cu2O/TiO2 heterostructure nanotube arrays prepared by an electrodeposition method exhibiting enhanced photocatalytic activity for CO2 reduction to methanol. Catal. Commun. 46, 17–21 (2014)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    M. Stucchi et al., Surface decoration of commercial micro-sized TiO2 by means of high energy ultrasound: a way to enhance its photocatalytic activity under visible light. Appl. Catal. B 178, 124–132 (2015)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    J. Wen et al., Photocatalysis fundamentals and surface modification of TiO2 nanomaterials. Chin. J. Catal. 36(12), 2049–2070 (2015)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    F. Xu et al., Au nanoparticles modified branched TiO2 nanorod array arranged with ultrathin nanorods for enhanced photoelectrochemical water splitting. J. Alloys Compd. 693, 1124–1132 (2017)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    X. Feng et al., Vertically aligned single crystal TiO2 nanowire arrays grown directly on transparent conducting oxide coated glass: synthesis details and applications. Nano Lett. 8(11), 3781–3786 (2008)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    C.B. Collins et al., Stimulated emission from the recombining afterglow of an electron-beam discharge in several atmospheres of helium. Appl. Phys. Lett. 24(5), 245–247 (1974)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    M. Senthilnanthan et al., Visible light responsive ruthenium-doped titanium dioxide for the removal of metsulfuron-methyl herbcide in aqueous phase. Sep. Purif. Technol. 75(3), 415–419 (2010)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    M. Reza Gholipour et al., Nanocomposite heterojunctions as sunlight-driven photocatalysts for hydrogen production from water splitting. Nanoscale 7(18), 8187–8208 (2015)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    G. Yang et al., Promotion effect of Bi species in Cu/Bi/MCM-41 catalysts for 1,4-butynediol synthesis by ethynylation of formaldehyde. React. Kinet. Mech. Catal. 127(1), 425–436 (2019)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    X. Zhang et al., Generalized one-pot synthesis, characterization, and photocatalytic activity of hierarchical BiOX (X = Cl, Br, I) nanoplate microspheres. J. Phys. Chem. C 112(3), 747–753 (2008)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    X. Xiao, J. Jiang, L. Zhang, Selective oxidation of benzyl alcohol into benzaldehyde over semiconductors under visible light: The case of Bi12O17Cl2 nanobelts. Appl. Catal. B 142–143(5), 487–493 (2013)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    K.-L. Zhang et al., Study of the electronic structure and photocatalytic activity of the BiOCl photocatalyst. Appl. Catal. B 68(3), 125–129 (2006)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Z. Song et al., Improved photocatalytic degradation of perfluorooctanoic acid on oxygen vacancies-tunable bismuth oxychloride nanosheets prepared by a facile hydrolysis. J. Hazard. Mater. 377, 371–380 (2019)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    C.Y. Wang et al., Photocatalytic degradation of bisphenol A by oxygen-rich and highly visible-light responsive Bi12O17Cl2 nanobelts. Appl. Catal. B 200, 659–665 (2016)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    H. Gan, G. Zhang, Y. Guo, Facile in situ synthesis of the bismuth oxychloride/bismuth niobate/TiO2 composite as a high efficient and stable visible light driven photocatalyst. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 386(1), 373–380 (2012)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    K. Mi-Gyeong et al., Pharmaceutical applications of graphene-based nanosheets. Curr. Pharm Biotechnol. 14(12), 1016–1026 (2014)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    H. Tang et al., Two-dimensional carbon leading to new photoconversion processes. Chem. Soc. Rev. 43(13), 4281–4299 (2014)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Y. Bu et al., Highly efficient photocatalytic performance of graphene-ZnO quasi-shell-core composite material. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces. 5(23), 12361–12368 (2013)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    X.L. Li et al., Hydrophilic nanofiltration membranes with self-polymerized and strongly-adhered polydopamine as separating layer. Chin. J. Polym. Sci. 30(2), 152–163 (2012)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    N. Liu et al., Ultralight free-standing reduced graphene oxide membranes for oil-in-water emulsions separation. J. Mater. Chem. A 3(40), 20113–20117 (2015)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    C. Feng et al., Nanoscale polydopamine (PDA) meets π–π interactions: an interface-directed coassembly approach for mesoporous nanoparticles. Langmuir 32(46), 12119–12128 (2016)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    G. Tang et al., Novel 3D flowerlike BiOCl 0.7 Br 0.3 microspheres coupled with graphene sheets with enhanced visible-light photocatalytic activity for the degradation of rhodamine B. Ceram. Int. 42(5), 5607–5616 (2016)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Y.C. Huang, F.S. Tsai, S.J. Wang, Preparation of TiO2 nanowire arrays through hydrothermal growth method and their pH sensing characteristics. Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 53(53), 2 (2014)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    C. Ji et al., High-yield preparation of graphene oxide from small graphite flakes via an improved Hummers method with a simple purification process. Carbon 81(1), 826–834 (2015)Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    X.Y. Chen et al., Controlled synthesis of bismuth oxo nanoscale crystals (BiOCl, Bi12O17Cl2, α-Bi2O3, and (BiO)2Co3) by solution-phase methods. J. Solid State Chem. 180(9), 2510–2516 (2007)Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    J. Zhu et al., Characterization of Fe–TiO2 photocatalysts synthesized by hydrothermal method and their photocatalytic reactivity for photodegradation of XRG dye diluted in water. J. Mol. Catal. A 216(1), 35–43 (2004)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    K.L. Li et al., Synthesis of BiOBr, Bi3O4Br, and Bi12O17Br2 by controlled hydrothermal method and their photocatalytic properties. J. Taiwan Inst. Chem. Eng. 45(5), 2688–2697 (2014)Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Z. Yu et al., A mussel-inspired method to fabricate a novel reduced graphene oxide/Bi12O17Cl2 composites membrane for catalytic degradation and oil/water separation. Polym. Adv. Technol. 30(1), 101–109 (2019)Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    C. Borrás et al., Study of the oxidation of solutions of -chlorophenol and -nitrophenol on Bi-doped PbO electrodes by UV-Vis and FTIR in situ spectroscopy. Electrochim. Acta 49(4), 641–648 (2004)Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Y. Liu et al., A polydopamine-modified reduced graphene oxide (RGO)/MOFs nanocomposite with fast rejection capacity for organic dye. Chem. Eng. J. 359, 47–57 (2019)Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Y. Gao et al., Combustion synthesis of graphene oxide–TiO2 hybrid materials for photodegradation of methyl orange. Carbon 50(11), 4093–4101 (2012)Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    P. Pulišová et al., Thermal behaviour of titanium dioxide nanoparticles prepared by precipitation from aqueous solutions. J. Therm. Anal. Calorim. 101(2), 607–613 (2010)Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    L. Stobinski et al., Graphene oxide and reduced graphene oxide studied by the XRD, TEM and electron spectroscopy methods. J. Electron Spectrosc. Relat. Phenom. 195(15), 145–154 (2014)Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Y. Shu et al., Preparation of novel mesoporous photocatalyst Bi4O5Br2/SBA-15 with Enhanced Visible-Light Catalytic Activity. Open J. Appl. Sci. 08(11), 532–544 (2018)Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    H. Huang et al., In situ assembly of BiOI@Bi12O17Cl2 p-n junction: charge induced unique front-lateral surfaces coupling heterostructure with high exposure of BiOI 001 active facets for robust and nonselective photocatalysis. Appl. Catal. B 199, 75–86 (2016)Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Y. Xia et al., Construction of novel Cu2O/PbBiO2Br composites with enhanced photocatalytic activity. J. Mater. Sci. 30(10), 9843–9854 (2019)Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    S. Wei et al., Two-dimensional graphene Oxide/MXene composite lamellar membranes for efficient solvent permeation and molecular separation. J. Membr. Sci. 582, 414–422 (2019)Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    H. Abadikhah et al., High flux thin film nanocomposite membrane incorporated with functionalized TiO2@reduced graphene oxide nanohybrids for organic solvent nanofiltration. Chem. Eng. Sci. 204, 99–109 (2019)Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Y. Gao, M. Hu, B. Mi, Membrane surface modification with TiO2-graphene oxide for enhanced photocatalytic performance. J. Membr. Sci. 455, 349–356 (2014)Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    L. Shi et al., Enhanced photocatalytic activity of Bi12O17Cl2 nano-sheets via surface modification of carbon nanotubes as electron carriers. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 519, 1 (2018)Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    F. Li et al., A Mussel-inspired method to fabricate reduced graphene oxide/g-C3N4 composites membranes for catalytic decomposition and oil-in-water emulsion separation. Chem. Eng. J. 322, 33–45 (2017)Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    X. Pan et al., Comparing graphene-TiO2 nanowire and graphene-TiO2 nanoparticle composite photocatalysts. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces. 4(8), 3944 (2012)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.College of Chemistry and Chemical EngineeringSouthwest Petroleum UniversityChengduPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.Oil & Gas Field Applied Chemistry Key Laboratory of Sichuan ProvinceSouthwest Petroleum UniversityChengduPeople’s Republic of China
  3. 3.State Key Laboratory of Oil & Gas Reservoir Geology and ExploitationSouthwest Petroleum UniversityChengduPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations