4.6 Article

Reusable surface confined semi-conducting metal-TCNQ and metal-TCNQF(4) catalysts for electron transfer reactions

期刊

RSC ADVANCES
卷 3, 期 13, 页码 4440-4446

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c3ra22936j

关键词

-

资金

  1. Australian Research Council [FT110100760]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The synthesis of organic semiconducting materials based on silver and copper-TCNQ (TCNQ = 7,7,8,8-tetracyanoquinodimethane) and their fluorinated analogues has received a significant amount of attention due to their potential use in organic electronic applications. However, there is a scarcity in the identification of different applications for which these interesting materials may be suitable candidates. In this work, we address this by investigating the catalytic properties of such materials for the electron transfer reaction between ferricyanide and thiosulphate ions in aqueous solution, which to date has been almost solely limited to metallic nanomaterials. Significantly it was found that all the materials investigated, namely CuTCNQ, AgTCNQ, CuTCNQF(4) and AgTCNQF(4), were catalytically active and, interestingly, the fluorinated analogues were superior. AgTCNQF(4) demonstrated the highest activity and was tested for its stability and re-usability for up to 50 cycles without degradation in performance. The catalytic reaction was monitored via UV-vis spectroscopy and open circuit potential versus time measurements, as well as an investigation of the transport properties of the films via electrochemical impedance spectroscopy. It is suggested that morphology and bulk conductivity are not the limiting factors, but rather the balance between the accumulated surface charge from electron injection via thiosulphate ions on the catalyst surface and transfer to the ferricyanide ions which controls the reaction rate. The facile fabrication of re-usable surface confined organic materials that are catalytically active may have important uses for many more electron transfer reactions.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据