Skip to main content
. 2023 Oct 8;23(19):8322. doi: 10.3390/s23198322

Table 3.

Comparison of gas-sensing parameters of TiO2-B nanobelt sensor with other reported TiO2-based C3H6O sensors.

Material Synthesis Route Working Tempt. (°C) Response (Ra/Rg) C3H6O (ppm) Res. Time
(Tres) (s)
Rec. Time
(Trec) (s)
The Lowest Detection Limit (ppm) Ref.
TiO2 porous NPs Hydrothermal 275 13.9 100 11 14 - [52]
TiO2 NPs Matrix-assisted pulsed laser deposition 400 6 100 240 - 20 [53]
Nanoporous TiO2 Hydrothermal 370 25.97 500 13 8 20 [54]
Ag-TiO2 nanobelts Hydrothermal 260 28.25 500 6 8 0.8 [55]
TiO2 nanorods Electrospun 500 13 300 12 6 - [56]
TiO2-B nanorods Hydrothermal 320 2.3 100 3 180 - [57]
TiO2-B nanobelts Hydrothermal 150 12.7 50 324 1320 0.7 This work