Issue

Vol. 38 No. 10 (2026): Vol 38, Issue 10, 2026

Copyright (c) 2026 Mohd Hafiz Jali, MOHAMMAD HAZIQ BOLHASSAN, KHAIRUL FADZLI SAMAT, SIDDHARTH THOKCHOM, Sulaiman Wadi Harun

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

CO2 Sensing Performance of Carbon Black-Doped Europium Oxide Thick-Film Sensors

https://doi.org/10.14233/ajchem.2026.36103
Mohammad Haziq Bolhassan
Faculty of Electrical Technology and Engineering, Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka, Melaka, Malaysia
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1424-591X
Mohd Hafiz Jali
Faculty of Electrical Technology and Engineering, Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka, Melaka, Malaysia
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2894-7285
Khairul Fadzli Samat
Faculty of Industrial and Manufacturing Technology and Engineering, Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka, Melaka, Malaysia
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6646-8755
Siddharth Thokchom
School of Technology, Assam Don Bosco University, Azara, Guwahati-781017, India
https://orcid.org/0009-0001-7623-2970
Sulaiman Wadi Harun
Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4879-5853

Corresponding Author(s) : Mohd Hafiz Jali

mohd.hafiz@utem.edu.my

Asian Journal of Chemistry, Vol. 38 No. 10 (2026): Vol 38, Issue 10, 2026

Abstract

In this study, a carbon black-doped europium oxide (Eu2O3) thick-film gas sensor was developed and systematically evaluated for CO2 sensing applications. The sensing layers were fabricated using a screen-printing technique, with Eu2O3 paste prepared with an organic binder, followed by the incorporation of carbon black at different doping concentrations (0.1-5 wt.%). The structural and compositional characteristics of the films were investigated using field-emission scanning electron microscopy (FESEM) and energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDX), while their electrical properties were evaluated through current-voltage (I-V) measurements. Gas-sensing performance was investigated in a controlled chamber with CO2 concentrations ranging from 1000 to 5000 ppm. The results revealed that the carbon black incorporation significantly improved the microstructure of the sensing film by reducing particle agglomeration and generating a more porous, uniform morphology, thereby facilitating gas diffusion and charge transport. Among the tested samples, the sensor with 2 wt.% carbon black doping exhibited the best performance, achieving high linearity (97.66%) and enhanced sensitivity of 0.05327 mV/ppm compared with the undoped Eu2O3 sensor (0.01476 mV/ppm). The optimized sensor exhibited good repeatability, satisfactory stability, and reduced hysteresis during successive CO₂ exposure cycles. These improvements may be attributed to the formation of conductive pathways and the increased availability of active surface sites introduced by carbon black within the Eu2O3 matrix. The results establish carbon black-modified Eu2O3 thick films as promising candidates for room-temperature CO₂ gas sensing, with competitive sensing performance.

Keywords

Carbon dioxide sensor Europium oxide Carbon black doping Thick-film gas sensor Screen-printing technique
(1)
Bolhassan, M. H.; Jali, M. H.; Samat, K. F.; Thokchom, S.; Harun, S. W. CO2 Sensing Performance of Carbon Black-Doped Europium Oxide Thick-Film Sensors. ajc 2026, 38, 2519-2529.
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX
References
  1. M. Filonchyk, M. P. Peterson, L. Zhang, V. Hurynovich and Y. He, Sci. Total Environ., 935, 173359 (2024); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.173359
  2. C. Kim, C. J. Yoo, H. S. Oh, B. K. Min and U. Lee, J. CO2 Util., 65, 102239 (2022); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcou.2022.102239
  3. L. Fu, Z. Ren, W. Si, Q. Ma, W. Huang, K. Liao, Z. Huang, Y. Wang, J. Li and P. Xu, J. CO2 Util., 66, 102260 (2022); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcou.2022.102260
  4. J. Sun, X. Han, X. Sun, J. Lu, Y. Wang, B. Sun, R. Dong, H. Li, Y. Li, and M. Bao, J. Environ. Chem. Eng., 13, 118591 (2025); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jece.2025.118591
  5. J. Wang and R. Wang, Chemosensors, 13, 190 (2025); https://doi.org/10.3390/chemosensors13050190
  6. Y. Zhao, H. Zhang, S. Zhang, and Y. Zhao, Matter, 5, 1985 (2022); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matt.2022.05.028
  7. P. Raju and Q. Li, J. Electrochem. Soc., 169, 057518 (2022); https://doi.org/10.1149/1945-7111/ac6e0a
  8. X. Xu, K. Wang, and S. Xue, Alexandria Eng. J., 121, 452 (2025); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2025.02.100
  9. Y.-F. Sun, S.-B. Liu, F.-L. Meng, J.-Y. Liu, Z. Jin, L.-T. Kong, and J.-H. Liu, Sensors, 12, 2610 (2012); https://doi.org/10.3390/s120302610
  10. M.V. Nikolic, V. Milovanovic, Z.Z. Vasiljevic and Z. Stamenkovic, Sensors, 20, 6694 (2020); https://doi.org/10.3390/s20226694
  11. K. Sanmugavelan, M.H. Jali, S.A. Mohd Chachuli, S.W. Harun and S. Thokchom, J. Adv. Res. Micro Nano Eng., 36, 47 (2025); https://doi.org/10.37934/armne.36.1.4757
  12. X.M. Dong, R.W. Fu, M.Q. Zhang, B. Zhang and M.Z. Rong, Carbon, 42, 2551 (2004); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2004.05.034
  13. M.Q. Zhang, J.R. Li, M.Z. Rong and J.R. Xu, Carbon, 41, 2353 (2003); https://doi.org/10.1016/S0008-6223(03)00273-2
  14. K. Arshak, I. Gaidan, E.G. Moore and C. Cunniffe, Superlattices Microstruct., 42, 348 (2007); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spmi.2007.04.026
  15. Y. Cheng, Z. Li, T. Tang, K. Xu, H. Yu, X. Tao, C.M. Hung, N.D. Hoa, Y. Fang, B. Ren, H. Chen and J.Z. Ou, Appl. Mater. Today, 26, 101355 (2022); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmt.2021.101355
  16. M.A. Belal, S. Hajra, S. Panda, K.R. Kaja, M.M.M. Abdo, A. Abd El-Moneim, D. Janas, Y.K. Mishra and H.J. Kim, J. Mater. Chem. A, 13, 5447 (2025); https://doi.org/10.1039/D4TA06632D
  17. M. Masat and M. Ertuğrul, Int. J. Innov. Res. Rev, 5, 26 (2021).
  18. K. Sanmugavelan, S A.M. Chachuli, M.H. Jali, S.W. Harun and S. Thokchom, Int. J. Nanoelectron. Mater., 18, 556 (2025); https://doi.org/10.58915/ijneam.v18i4.2644
  19. J. Ma, Y. Jing, Y. Li, S. Cui, X. Zhao and J. Song, Mater. Sci. Semicond. Process., 192, 109422 (2025); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mssp.2025.109422
  20. W. Chen, Y. Wu, L. Guo, J. Gu, J. He and M. Song, Intermetallics, 155, 107828 (2023); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intermet.2023.107828
  21. C. Wang, L. Yin, L. Zhang, D. Xiang and R. Gao, Sensors, 10, 2088 (2010); https://doi.org/10.3390/s100302088
  22. G. Korotcenkov, Mater. Sci. Eng. B, 139, 1 (2007); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mseb.2007.01.044
  23. S.A. Goetz, D.T. Nguyen and A.P. Esser-Kahn, Carbon, 105, 126 (2016); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2016.03.053
  24. S.M. Batool, S.S. Batool, B. Aliashghar, D.S. Thomsan, M. Miranda, B.D. Braaten and P.G. Oduor, Mater. Today Sustain., 34, 101321 (2026); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mtsust.2026.101321
  25. W. Zhang, R.S. Blackburn and A.A. Dehghani-Sanij, J. Mater. Sci., 42, 7861 (2007); https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-007-1670-2
  26. C. Gao, S. Zhang, Y. Lin, F. Li, S. Guan and Z. Jiang, Compos., Part B Eng., 79, 124 (2015); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2015.03.047
  27. C. Abdelmounaïm, Z. Amara, A. Maha and D. Mustapha, Mater. Sci. Semicond. Process., 43, 214 (2016); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mssp.2015.12.019
  28. M.-S. Lee and J.-U. Meyer, Sens. Actuators B: Chem., 68, 293 (2000); https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-4005(00)00447-0
  29. T.P. Sumangala, V. Baco-Carles, L. Presmanes, C. Bonningue, Y. Thimont, I. Pasquet, P. Tailhades and A. Barnabé, J. Alloys Compd., 695, 937 (2017); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2016.10.197
  30. K.M. Mude, Vidyabharati Int. Interdiscipl. Res. J., 12, 78 (2021).
Read More
Author biographies is not available.
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 1 Download : 6
PlumX