Tao Ding1, Jan Mertens1, Anna Lombardi1, Oren A Scherman2, Jeremy J Baumberg1. 1. Nanophotonics Centre, Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB3 0HE, United Kingdom. 2. Melville Laboratory for Polymer Synthesis, Department of Chemistry, University of Cambridge, Lensfield Road, Cambridge CB2 1EW, United Kingdom.
Abstract
The precise morphology of nanoscale gaps between noble-metal nanostructures controls their resonant wavelengths. Here we show photocatalytic plasmon-induced polymerization can locally enlarge the gap size and tune the plasmon resonances. We demonstrate light-directed programmable tuning of plasmons can be self-limiting. Selective control of polymer growth around individual plasmonic nanoparticles is achieved, with simultaneous real-time monitoring of the polymerization process in situ using dark-field spectroscopy. Even without initiators present, we show light-triggered chain growth of various monomers, implying plasmon initiation of free radicals via hot-electron transfer to monomers at the Au surface. This concept not only provides a programmable way to fine-tune plasmons for many applications but also provides a window on polymer chemistry at the sub-nanoscale.
The precise morphology of nanoscale gaps between noble-metal nanostructures controls their resonant wavelengths. Here we show photocatalytic plasmon-induced polymerization can locally enlarge the gap size and tune the plasmon resonances. We demonstrate light-directed programmable tuning of plasmons can be self-limiting. Selective control of polymer growth around individual plasmonic nanoparticles is achieved, with simultaneous real-time monitoring of the polymerization process in situ using dark-field spectroscopy. Even without initiators present, we show light-triggered chain growth of various monomers, implying plasmon initiation of free radicals via hot-electron transfer to monomers at the Au surface. This concept not only provides a programmable way to fine-tune plasmons for many applications but also provides a window on polymer chemistry at the sub-nanoscale.
Entities:
Keywords:
films; gold; hot electrons; nanoparticles; photocatalysis; plasmons
Plasmons,
composed of oscillations
of free electrons on noble-metal surfaces, have triggered the discovery
of many new phenomena in nanophotonics over the last two decades,
leading to promising applications in surface-enhanced spectroscopies,[1] plasmon-assisted photocatalysis,[2,3] water splitting,[4,5] plasmon-mediated resist exposure,[6−10] plasmonic solar cells,[11] and photothermal
therapies.[12] Such effects arise from the
localized field enhancements or from plasmon-induced hot carriers.[13,14] It is highly desirable to match the excitation wavelength with plasmon
resonances so that optimal enhancement or efficiency can be achieved
in these diverse applications. In addition, ultralow-power switching
of the resonances fostered by their small optical mode volumes achieved
can enable new classes of optoelectronic devices. Two tuning strategies
are available: changing the refractive index of spacer layers inside
plasmonic gaps or changing the gap size itself. Unfortunately the
former strategy has not been effective so far. The combination of
plasmonic metals with reconfigurable soft-polymer spacers is thus
of great interest, to achieve on-demand tuning of plasmons. Previous
tuning methods using either chemical[15−17] or physical[18−20] mechanisms yield less-useful abrupt spectral shifts. More recently,
light-assisted tuning has enabled continuous tuning but demands active
feedback via in situ monitoring, yielding low throughput.[21−23]Here we introduce the concept of autonomous and programmed
tuning
based on plasmon-induced polymerization within the nanogaps, which
enables trimming of plasmon resonances to the desired spectral position.
Monomer polymerization in a nanogap expands its volume, thereby blue-shifting
the plasmon resonances strongly. As the plasmon shifts away from the
excitation wavelength, polymer growth terminates, thus stabilizing
the plasmon resonances. Such a self-limiting mechanism makes it possible
to program tuning by selecting irradiation wavelength and composition
of the monomers. We show this process is generic to a large class
of free-radical polymerizations, including also functional electronic
polymer materials.
Results and Discussion
Tuning Plasmons with Polymerization
To set the initial
gap, the Au substrate is coated with a thiophenol self-assembled monolayer
of thickness 0.6 nm, followed by drop-casting 80 nm of Au nanoparticles
(NPs) on top. This Au nanoparticle-on-mirror (NPoM) confines strong
optical fields (several hundred times the incident field) within the
nanogap.[24] The surface-coupled plasmon
mode of such plasmonic structures is exquisitely sensitive to the
gap size and contents,[25−28] thus giving a means to tune the nanogap spacing on demand as well
as to precisely track the polymer growth around each gold nanoparticle.
The initial color of the coupled plasmonic resonance from each NPoM
is within 10 nm of 800 nm, showing the high degree of robust construction
of this architecture.Irradiation with 635 nm continuous wave
(CW) laser light on these Au NPoMs (0.2 mW/μm2) completely
immersed in a bulk monomer of divinylbenzene (DVB) (Supporting Information (SI), Scheme S1) is found to increase
the gap size. This results in a 70 nm spectral blue-shift (from 800
to 730 nm) of the coupled plasmon resonance within 400 s (Figure a). As long as the
concentration of DVB is larger than 20% by volume, polymer growth
is observed. While, normally, increasing the dielectric constant in
the gap results in a plasmon red-shift, here changes in the refractive
index of <0.05 induce only small shifts. What instead dominates
the spectral shift is the thickness growth of the polymer layer inside
the gap. We thus see an overall blue-shift, as the coupled resonances
are much more sensitive to the gap separation for such small gaps.
The resulting blue-shift overwhelms any potential red-shift from the
dielectric increase. Dark-field images of the samples recorded with
a CCD camera before and after irradiation reveal a clear change of
each nanoparticle-on-mirror scattering color from orange to green
(Figure b). The scanning
electron microscopy (SEM) images of irradiated Au NPoMs further verify
the formation of a polymer coating around each AuNP (Figure c). As it is beyond current
capabilities to directly visualize changes of sub-nanometer gaps (even
using FIB/TEM),[20] we use optical spectroscopy
to identify the increase in gap size by applying a simple analysis
of the plasmon modes.[29] Exact simulations
based on finite-difference time-domain simulations have been used
to develop a simple model for such plasmonic gaps, which is based
on modeling the system as an electrical circuit with inductors and
capacitors set by the geometry of the nanoparticle and its facets.[29,30] Previous work with different spacers and nanoparticle diameters
has shown this to be in close agreement with the exact electromagnetic
simulations.
Figure 1
Using NPoM plasmon geometry to track light-induced polymerization
of DVB. (a) Scattering spectra of Au NP on Au substrate vs irradiation
time (635 nm 0.2 mW pump). T: transverse mode; L: dipolar mode. (b) Dark-field images of Au NPoMs before/after
irradiation of entire area. (c) Circuit model prediction of coupled
plasmon resonance (λ) vs gap size.
Inset depicts polymer growth in the gap between Au NP and Au substrate.
(d) SEM image of irradiated Au NPoM in DVB showing PDVB coating. (e,
f) SEM images of irradiated Ag NPoM in DVB before/after etching Ag
NPs with ammonia. Images are false-colored to highlight core–shell
structure.
Using NPoM plasmon geometry to track light-induced polymerization
of DVB. (a) Scattering spectra of Au NP on Au substrate vs irradiation
time (635 nm 0.2 mW pump). T: transverse mode; L: dipolar mode. (b) Dark-field images of Au NPoMs before/after
irradiation of entire area. (c) Circuit model prediction of coupled
plasmon resonance (λ) vs gap size.
Inset depicts polymer growth in the gap between Au NP and Au substrate.
(d) SEM image of irradiated Au NPoM in DVB showing PDVB coating. (e,
f) SEM images of irradiated Ag NPoM in DVB before/after etching Ag
NPs with ammonia. Images are false-colored to highlight core–shell
structure.The experimentally obtained resonance
positions (points in Figure c) reveal that the
formation of the polymer polydivinylbenzene (PDVB) in the gap increases
the distance of the Au NP to the underlying Au substrate from 0.6
± 0.2 nm to 0.9 ± 0.2 nm. However, since the shell thickness
of PDVB around the rest of the Au can be as large as 20 nm (Figure d), this shows that
polymer growth around the Au NPs is not homogeneous (inset in Figure c) but much smaller
at the base, where it is in contact with the substrate. This is likely
because the monomer is tightly constrained within the gap region,
while polymer chain growth is relatively easy from the Au NP surface
just outside the immediate vicinity of the gap. This is seen as well
when using nanoparticles made from silver, which can also be used
for the polymerization (Figure e) and which can be subsequently selectively removed using
ammonia. Etching the silver leaves behind a polymer feature that seems
to replicate the bottom facet of the Ag NPs (Figure f).The laser we use is linearly polarized,
but no polarization-dependent
growth is observed. This is expected since the cavity modes are actually z-polarized.[24,29,30] Our incident laser beam contains both s- and p-polarized components,
as it is focused using an NA = 0.8 objective. While the transverse
modes are then also excited, the in-plane field enhancements for generating
hot electrons are weaker by more than an order of magnitude,[31] which is why polymerization takes place only
in the gap between particle and surface.We find this method
of optically induced polymer coating also applies
to hydrophilic monomers such as N-isopropylacrylamide
(NIPAM) (Figure ).
Dark-field images reveal the gradual change of scattering color of
individual Au NPoMs as irradiation proceeds (Figure a).
Figure 2
Using NPoM plasmon geometry to track light-induced
polymerization
of NIPAM. Monomer is 2 M, containing 10 wt % N,N′-methylenebisacylamide. (a) Dark-field images and
(b) scattering spectra change with increasing irradiation time (635
nm, 0.2 mW pump). Modes T = transverse; L1= dipolar; L2= quadrupolar.
(c, d) SEM images (false color) of Au NPoM (c) before and (d) after
irradiation.
Using NPoM plasmon geometry to track light-induced
polymerization
of NIPAM. Monomer is 2 M, containing 10 wt % N,N′-methylenebisacylamide. (a) Dark-field images and
(b) scattering spectra change with increasing irradiation time (635
nm, 0.2 mW pump). Modes T = transverse; L1= dipolar; L2= quadrupolar.
(c, d) SEM images (false color) of Au NPoM (c) before and (d) after
irradiation.Depending on the exact
NP morphology, resonances can change drastically.
Here we can see two coupled plasmonic modes (dipolar and quadrupolar)
due to a larger lower facet of the Au NP (Figure b).[32] The scattering
spectra for NIPAM monomers also show the quadrupolar mode blue-shifting
from 690 nm to 600 nm when illuminated (Figure b). This suggests an increase of gap size
to 2 nm when carefully comparing to our electromagnetic simulations,
which have been calibrated against known gap spacings.[27,29,30] The SEM images before and after
the polymerization also clearly indicate a coating of PNIPAM around
the AuNP. As this monomer does not undergo thermal autoinitiation
(and no initiator is added), this gives further support to our claim
that hot-electron-assisted polymerization is the mechanism that is
responsible (see below).
Polymerization Process
Our data
confirm that a radical
polymerization process takes place around the Au NPoM during the irradiation
(also supported by the Raman spectra of the polymers observed after
irradiation, SI, Figure S1). We stress
that no initiators are used (needed to provide the first radical to
start the chain reaction), and at the mW laser powers here, temperature
rises of less than 30 °C are produced with this laser wavelength
(confirmed by Stokes/anti-Stokes Raman measurements, SI, Figure S2),[33] much less than
required for any thermal autoinitiation (>80 °C for most monomers).[7] Therefore, such polymerization seems to be caused
by the plasmons. Several mechanisms have been suggested previously
including plasmon resonance energy transfer[34,35] or plasmon-induced charge transfer, which shuttles hot electrons
or holes from the metal surface layers.[36,37] As photoexcited
carriers in the Au are given energies of <2 eV, this is insufficient
to directly initiate polymerization (which requires ultraviolet photons),
through any possible field-enhanced energy transfer. Different to
previous plasmon chemistries[36,38] instead here we suggest
the initiation is via hot electrons, not through a redox reaction
route, but through formation of [Au–C–C●] species near the metal surface, which induces further polymer chain
growth (Scheme and SI, Scheme S2). Formation of Au–C bonds
is identified in a number of previous reports[39,40] and plausible in our case, although physical attachment is also
possible.[41] We find the thickest shells
around these Au NPs (Figure d) are formed from irradiating DVB monomers, which indicates
a reduced chain termination rate arising when PDVB cross-links, which
comes from the sterics of this polymerization that reduces the chances
of two radical chain-ends meeting. The polymerization process is thus
initiated by electrons hopping onto monomers at the Au surface only,
followed by radical chain polymerization zipping up each long chain
up to a certain distance away where termination occurs.
Scheme 1
Hot-Electron
Initiation Mechanism
This hot-electron-mediated radical initiation mechanism
implies
that irradiation in the presence of any monomers that can be radically
polymerized should be able to expand the nanogaps in Au NPoMs and
blue-shift the plasmon resonances. Therefore, we test on a range of
monomers and directly watch in real time the progression of polymerization
from the spectral shifts of the coupled plasmon mode (Figure ). Molecules containing vinyl
bonds (which are polymerizable) lead to blue-shifts of the coupled
plasmons after irradiation, although the shift extent is different
for different monomers (Figure f). We suggest this is due to a difference in radical chain
termination rates, which results in different polymer chain lengths.
By contrast, no blue-shift is observed (i.e., no polymerization is
present in the gap) for small molecules that do not contain vinyl
bonds, such as ethylbenzene (EB) (Figure e). This verifies that the shells around
the Au NPs are indeed made of polymers rather than carbonization products
of small organic molecules. Alongside these blue-shifts the scattering
intensity also increases, which is due to the decreasing residual
intraband absorption of Au at longer wavelength (700–800 nm)
as the plasmon shifts to higher energy. We also find the preparation
of functional electronic materials such as P3HT is possible using
this route, although the mechanism still needs further clarification
(SI Figure S3).
Figure 3
Polymerization in different
monomers tracked by scattering spectra
of Au NPoM. (a–e) Irradiation in monomers of (a) DVB, (b) styrene
(St), (c) methyl methacrylate (MMA), (d) acrylic acid (AA), and (e)
control with ethylbenzene (EB), which is not polymerizable. Laser
on for 200 s, 635 nm, 0.2 mW. (f) Maximum spectral blue-shift of the
coupled plasmon for different monomers; error bars show a range of
trials.
Polymerization in different
monomers tracked by scattering spectra
of Au NPoM. (a–e) Irradiation in monomers of (a) DVB, (b) styrene
(St), (c) methyl methacrylate (MMA), (d) acrylic acid (AA), and (e)
control with ethylbenzene (EB), which is not polymerizable. Laser
on for 200 s, 635 nm, 0.2 mW. (f) Maximum spectral blue-shift of the
coupled plasmon for different monomers; error bars show a range of
trials.
Wavelength-Controlled Feedback
Since the polymerization
process is closely related to the efficiency of hot-electron injection,
it is optimal to excite the system close to its coupled plasmon resonance.
However, the shifts of the plasmon resonance due to polymerization
modify the spectral match between laser wavelength and coupled plasmonic
resonance during the irradiation. Actively tracking the plasmon shift
using a tunable optical parametric oscillator (OPO) laser source avoids
this problem so that the hot-electron generation remains maximized.
We observe a continuous blue-shift of the coupled plasmonic resonance
from 760 nm to 680 nm (∼80 nm shift) using an irradiation laser
wavelength that is tuned to follow the plasmon mode from 780 nm down
to 633 nm while keeping the power constant at 10 μW (average
power, 200 fs pulses) (Figure a). The extracted spectral blue-shifts with irradiation time
depict the polymerization process in time (Figure b). Initially, a 780 nm laser illuminates
a single nanoparticle possessing a coupled plasmon mode at 760 nm.
The plasmon peak gradually blue-shifts and eventually saturates at
718 nm. This saturation arises because the coupled plasmon moves outside
the excitation range of the 780 nm laser and is no longer optically
excited, thus turning off the generation of hot electrons for polymerization.
When the laser is retuned to 710 nm to again match the coupled plasmon,
a new cycle of growth and blue-shifting starts and saturates when
the coupled plasmon shifts to 680 nm. Further irradiation with 690
and 633 nm laser light repeats this effect, although smaller blue-shifts
are now observed. The smaller shifts at later stages likely arise
because of the weakened electric field concentration in the enlarged
gap spacing, which gives less efficient hot-electron generation. This
self-limiting resonance shift corresponds to less polymer growth under
the NP than around its sides, which again implicates hot-electron
initiation that occurs only close to the Au surface. We suggest that
in this restricted geometry within the gap there is a higher probability
of radical–radical termination reactions, keeping chains short.
Our observations demonstrate that this type of plasmon-resonant optically
controlled growth mechanism allows us to fine-tune the polymer deposition
by using different irradiation wavelengths. Changing the monomer alters
both the polymerization rate and the rate at which the plasmon resonance
shifts away from the laser via the increasing gap size, creating a
unique cycle of feedback that offers selective control of the growth.
Thus, we can program the tuning path and allow it to complete at every
plasmonic nanostructure.
Figure 4
Laser-guided polymer growth using tunable excitation
wavelengths.
(a) Evolving scattering spectra of Au NPoM in DVB as the OPO excitation
wavelength is shifted from 780 nm to 633 nm, 10 μW power. (b)
Evolution of coupled plasmon wavelength with irradiation time when
shifting pump laser wavelength as marked.
Laser-guided polymer growth using tunable excitation
wavelengths.
(a) Evolving scattering spectra of Au NPoM in DVB as the OPO excitation
wavelength is shifted from 780 nm to 633 nm, 10 μW power. (b)
Evolution of coupled plasmon wavelength with irradiation time when
shifting pump laser wavelength as marked.
Conclusions
In summary, we have realized light-directed
tuning of coupled plasmons
by expanding the nanogaps through in situ polymerization. We characterized
this using real-time dark-field microscopy on individual and many-nanoparticle
constructs. The polymerization process is identified in SEM images
and works for both styrenic and acrylic monomers. This method not
only can be used to remotely fine-tune the plasmons of NPoM nanostructures
in a facile way but also allows the polymer growth to be controlled
and monitored with light in real time. Although not suited for mass
production of polymers, this method is extremely versatile for synthesis
in nanodevices combining selective local synthesis, fine-tuning of
sizes (<10 nm), and monitoring by optical spectroscopy. Its generality
for different monomers further confirms such polymerization is due
to the injection of hot electrons generated by plasmons. This plasmon-mediated
process allows light-guided and self-limiting growth of polymers around
Au NPs, since the overlap of excitation wavelength with the coupled-plasmon
mode determines the efficiency of hot-electron generation, thereby
realizing programmable and autonomous tuning of plasmons. Moreover,
the mechanism of plasmon-induced polymerization suggested here opens
opportunities for developing plasmonic chemistry, examining the details
of different polymerizations, as well as for plasmon-tuning devices
for sensing applications.
Methods
Nanoassembly
Gold
or silver nanoparticles (Au NPs or
Ag NPs, 80 nm diameter, obtained from BBI) are drop-cast on thiophenol
self-assembled monolayer (SAM) functionalized gold films (100 nm thick,
thermally evaporated). Monomers (with inhibitors removed using 10
wt % NaOH solution) or ethylbenzene (10 μL) are then drop-cast
onto the samples, which are subsequently covered with a coverslip
to provide a flat upper surface for microscope observation (SI, Scheme S1). The widely spatially separated
nanoconstructs produced are formed from individual nanoparticles spaced
by the thin 0.6 nm thick SAM above the Au mirror. This nanoparticle-on-mirror
construct forms robust, highly confined localized plasmons.
Laser
Irradiation
A 635 nm linearly polarized laser
(Coherent Cube) is coupled to the microscope using a single-mode fiber
(P3-405BPM-FC-2, Thorlabs), which is then focused down onto the nanoparticles
through a 100× objective (Olympus, NA = 0.8). The irradiation
duration and power are varied to tailor the polymerization conditions.
For laser-wavelength-tuned irradiation, we use an optical parametric
oscillator pumped by a Ti:sapphire laser (Spectra Physics MaiTai delivering
200 fs pulses, 10 nm line width, at 80 MHz repetition rate), which
drives the OPO (Spectra Physics Inspire), with average output powers
of tens of mW. By means of a tunable optical filter, the average power
of the laser beam is kept below 30 μW on the sample focal spot.
Monitoring
Dark-field scattering spectra on individual
nanoconstructs are taken confocally through a 50 μm diameter
optical fiber coupled to a spectrometer (QE65000, Ocean Optics) during
the irradiation process when the laser is temporarily turned off for
5 s. The irradiated particles are tracked and subsequently characterized
with scanning electron microscopy (LEO 1530VP, Zeiss) after a few
nanometers of Pt coating. The etching of Ag is performed by immersing
the substrate in ammonia solution (25 wt %) for 10 min at ambient
conditions.
Simulations
Calculation of the gap
sizes is performed
as follows. Our simulation model consists of an 80 nm AuNP with a
bottom facet of width 30 nm separated from a flat gold surface by
a continuous spacer of refractive index ng = 1.6 and enclosed in a homogeneous medium of refractive index nm = 1.55. The facet of the AuNP faces the surface,
forming a thin nanocavity, which sustains cavity modes as discussed
in refs (25) and (30). In addition to cavity
modes, an antenna mode associated with the coupling of the particle
to its image in the gold surface is present in the system. The resonance
position of this antenna mode is calculated using a circuit model[42] and the system parameters above. Antenna and
cavity modes couple strongly, resulting in the formation of new hybrid
modes. Calculated gap sizes for the NPoM system are obtained by comparing
experimental resonances with calculated antenna–cavity hybrid
mode positions.
Authors: Arunabh Batra; Gregor Kladnik; Narjes Gorjizadeh; Jeffrey Meisner; Michael Steigerwald; Colin Nuckolls; Su Ying Quek; Dean Cvetko; Alberto Morgante; Latha Venkataraman Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2014-09-02 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: J Mertens; A Demetriadou; R W Bowman; F Benz; M-E Kleemann; C Tserkezis; Y Shi; H Y Yang; O Hess; J Aizpurua; J J Baumberg Journal: Nano Lett Date: 2016-08-24 Impact factor: 11.189
Authors: Fathima S Ameer; Shilpa Varahagiri; Donald W Benza; Daniel R Willett; Yimei Wen; Fenglin Wang; George Chumanov; Jeffrey N Anker Journal: J Phys Chem C Nanomater Interfaces Date: 2016-05-19 Impact factor: 4.126
Authors: Ryan T Hill; Jack J Mock; Angus Hucknall; Scott D Wolter; Nan M Jokerst; David R Smith; Ashutosh Chilkoti Journal: ACS Nano Date: 2012-09-21 Impact factor: 15.881
Authors: Shaunak Mukherjee; Florian Libisch; Nicolas Large; Oara Neumann; Lisa V Brown; Jin Cheng; J Britt Lassiter; Emily A Carter; Peter Nordlander; Naomi J Halas Journal: Nano Lett Date: 2012-12-05 Impact factor: 11.189