Table 4 Comparison of CTAB-NiO, ZnO, and SnO2 morphologies and gas sensing potential.

From: Performance comparison of CTAB-modified NiO, ZnO, and SnO2 sensors for CO and CH4 detection in environmental and health applications

Material

Observed morphology (from FESEM)

Gas sensing advantages

Limitations

Overall potential

Ref.

NiO

Aggregated nanoparticles with hierarchical rough/porous surfaces

High surface area, more adsorption sites, enhanced sensitivity (due to CTAB surfactant effect)

Agglomeration may block inner surfaces, slower recovery if pores are not open

Very good for high sensitivity

32

ZnO

Well-defined, uniform hexagonal grains, smooth surfaces

Good crystallinity, stable electrical response, fast charge transport

Lower surface area, fewer active sites for adsorption

Good for stability and reproducibility

33

SnO2

Large agglomerates composed of fine nanoparticles with rough texture

Many adsorption sites, porous multi-scale structure, high gas diffusion

Inner pores may be inaccessible if too densely packed

Excellent for high sensitivity and gas diffusion

34

Back to article page