| Literature DB >> 28740562 |
Benjamin Dierre1,2, Karine Costuas3, Noée Dumait3, Serge Paofai3, Maria Amela-Cortes3, Yann Molard3, Fabien Grasset1,2,4, Yujin Cho4, Kohsei Takahashi4, Naoki Ohashi1,2,4, Tetsuo Uchikoshi1,4, Stéphane Cordier3.
Abstract
We report the photoluminescence (PL) and cathodoluminescence (CL) properties of face-capped [Mo6Xi8La6]2- (X = Cl, Br, I; L = organic or inorganic ligands) cluster units. We show that the emission of Mo6 metal atom clusters depends not only on the nature of X and L ligands bound to the cluster and counter-cations, but also on the excitation source. Seven members of the AxMo6Xi8La6 series (A = Cs+, (n-C4H9)4N+, NH4+) were selected to evaluate the influence of counter-cations and ligands on de-excitation mechanisms responsible for multicomponent emission of cluster units. This study evaluates the ageing of each member of the series, which is crucial for further energy conversion applications (photovoltaic, lighting, water splitting, etc.).Entities:
Keywords: 102 Porous / Nanoporous / Nanostructured materials; 204 Optics / Optical applications; 40 Optical, magnetic and electronic device materials; 502 Electron spectroscopy; Energy conversion; cathodoluminescence; counter-cations; ligands; metal clusters; molecular engineering; molybdenum; photoluminescence
Year: 2017 PMID: 28740562 PMCID: PMC5508363 DOI: 10.1080/14686996.2017.1338496
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Technol Adv Mater ISSN: 1468-6996 Impact factor: 8.090
Figure 1.CL spectra of 1–7 compound series.
Figure 2.PL spectra of 1–7 compound series (λexc = 325 nm).
Figure 3.QY of 1–2 and 4–7 vs. excitation wavelength (300–550 nm).
Parameters of the Gaussian functions used to fit CL and PL spectra of 1, 2, and 4–7: Emax1, Emax2, FWHM1, FWHM2 in eV; cont1 and cont2 percentages; coefficient of determination R 2. Values in italics were fixed (see text).
| E-beam excitation | Optical excitation | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Emax1 | Emax2 | FWHM1 | FWHM2 | cont1 | cont2 | Emax1 | Emax2 | FWHM1 | FWHM2 | cont1 | cont2 | ||||
| 1 | 1.396 | 1.740 | 0.097 | 0.349 | 1.5 | 98.5 | 0.9998 | 1.448 | 0.245 | 0.316 | 31.4 | 68.6 | 0.9983 | ||
| 2 | 1.401 | 1.721 | 0.128 | 0.333 | 3.3 | 96.7 | 0.9997 | 1.463 | 0.298 | 0.302 | 41.1 | 58.9 | 0.9958 | ||
| 4 | 1.796 | 1.909 | 0.240 | 0.174 | 44.4 | 55.6 | 0.9988 | 0.222 | 0.170 | 47.3 | 52.7 | 0.9971 | |||
| 5 | 1.400 | 1.716 | 0.126 | 0.339 | 3.4 | 96.6 | 0.9996 | 1.447 | 0.270 | 0.311 | 34.7 | 65.3 | 0.9962 | ||
| 6 | 1.394 | 1.704 | 0.099 | 0.333 | 2.3 | 97.7 | 0.9998 | 1.447 | 0.245 | 0.310 | 32.5 | 67.5 | 0.9908 | ||
| 7 | 1.398 | 1.736 | 0.112 | 0.342 | 2.1 | 97.9 | 0.9998 | 1.463 | 0.258 | 0.316 | 27.4 | 72.6 | 0.9954 | ||
Figure 4.PL intensity decay at maximum of emission of 1, 2, and 4–7 upon continuous 325 nm laser irradiation (average source power of 20 mW – around 10 mW on the sample). Inset: normalized curves.
Fitting parameters by a double exponential of PL (Figure 4) and CL (Figure 5) intensity decays. The loss percentage after 300s irradiation and the QY at 325 nm (QY325nm in percentage) extracted from Figure 3 are also reported.
| A1 | Optical excitation | A1 | E-beam excitation | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| τ1 (s) | A2 | τ2 (s) | Loss (%) | QY325 nm (%) | τ1 (s) | A2 | τ2 (s) | Loss (%) | ||||
| 1 | 0.42 | 15 | 0.58 | 226 | 29 | 26.3 | 3.03 | 13 | 1.67 | 87 | 90.2 | |
| 2 | 0.11 | 17 | 0.04 | 207 | 45 | 9.4 | 0.75 | 24 | 0.62 | 144 | 76.6 | |
| 4 | 3.05 | 8.1 | 0.53 | 76 | 94 | 19.3 | 34.5 | 4.2 | 1.21 | 28 | 99.5 | |
| 5 | 2.81 | 13 | 1.13 | 114 | 79 | 12.6 | 2.00 | 6.6 | 1.14 | 210 | 71.6 | |
| 6 | 0.07 | 13 | 0.04 | 1300 | 26 | 3.4 | 0.34 | 9.6 | 0.20 | 135 | 82.7 | |
| 7 | 0.06 | 10 | 0.01 | 93 | 88 | 14.2 | 0.64 | 9.1 | 0.43 | 76 | 88.3 | |
Figure 5.CL intensity decay at maximum of emission of 1, 2, and 4–7 upon electron irradiation. Inset: normalized curves.