| Literature DB >> 27827376 |
Sha Chen1, Kang Li1, Fang Zhao1, Lei Zhang1, Mei Pan1, Yan-Zhong Fan1, Jing Guo1, Jianying Shi1, Cheng-Yong Su1,2.
Abstract
Photocatalytic water splitting is a natural but challenging chemical way of harnessing renewable solar power to generate clean hydrogen energy. Here we report a potential hydrogen-evolving photochemical molecular device based on a self-assembled ruthenium-palladium heterometallic coordination cage, incorporating multiple photo- and catalytic metal centres. The photophysical properties are investigated by absorption/emission spectroscopy, electrochemical measurements and preliminary DFT calculations and the stepwise electron transfer processes from ruthenium-photocentres to catalytic palladium-centres is probed by ultrafast transient absorption spectroscopy. The photocatalytic hydrogen production assessments reveal an initial reaction rate of 380 μmol h-1 and a turnover number of 635 after 48 h. The efficient hydrogen production may derive from the directional electron transfers through multiple channels owing to proper organization of the photo- and catalytic multi-units within the octahedral cage, which may open a new door to design photochemical molecular devices with well-organized metallosupramolecules for homogenous photocatalytic applications.Entities:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27827376 PMCID: PMC5105156 DOI: 10.1038/ncomms13169
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nat Commun ISSN: 2041-1723 Impact factor: 14.919
Figure 1PMD structural model.
Octahedral cage structure of [Pd6(RuL3)8]28+ and the multi-channel electron transfer pathways between chromophoric Ru and catalytic Pd metal centres. GS, ground state; ILCT, intraligand charge transfer; LMCT, ligand-to-metal charge transfer; MLCT, metal-ligand charge transfer.
Figure 2H2 evolution tests.
(a) H2 evolution with variable MOC-16 concentrations in DMSO solution containing 0.34 M H2O and 0.75 M TEOA. (b) Dependence of the photoabsorption completeness (orange, T denotes the mean transmittance) and the H2-production rate (blue) on the concentration of MOC-16.
Figure 3Long-term H2 evolution.
(a) H2 production of consecutive 16 3-h runs. (b) Accumulated TONs and TOFs based on Pd-centre in catalyst durability test over 48 h. TON=n(H2)/n(Pd), TOF=d(TON)/dt.
Figure 4UV–VIS absorption and emission spectra of RuL3 metalloligand and MOC-16 in DMSO.
(a) Electronic absorption spectra (CRuL3=8.0 × 10−6 and CMOC-16=1.0 × 10−6 M for equivalent RuL3). (b) Emission spectra (CRuL3=1.76 × 10−4 and CMOC−16=1.32 × 10−5 M for equal absorbance at excitation wavelength 466 nm).
Figure 5Transient absorption (TA) spectra excited at 400 nm and corresponding kinetic traces at selected wavelengths.
(a) RuL3 and (b) MOC-16 in DMSO.