| Literature DB >> 29234583 |
Alexa Schmitz1, Kai Schütte1, Vesko Ilievski1, Juri Barthel2, Laura Burk3, Rolf Mülhaupt3, Junpei Yue4, Bernd Smarsly4, Christoph Janiak1.
Abstract
Metal-fluoride nanoparticles, (MF x -NPs) with M = Fe, Co, Pr, Eu, supported on different types of thermally reduced graphite oxide (TRGO) were obtained by microwave-assisted thermal decomposition of transition-metal amidinates, (M{MeC[N(iPr)]2} n ) or [M(AMD) n ] with M = Fe(II), Co(II), Pr(III), and tris(2,2,6,6-tetramethyl-3,5-heptanedionato)europium, Eu(dpm)3, in the presence of TRGO in the ionic liquid (IL) 1-butyl-3-methylimidazolium tetrafluoroborate ([BMIm][BF4]). The crystalline phases of the metal fluorides synthesized in [BMIm][BF4] were identified by powder X-ray diffraction (PXRD) to be MF2 for M = Fe, Co and MF3 for M = Eu, Pr. The diameters and size distributions of MF x @TRGO were from (6 ± 2) to (102 ± 41) nm. Energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDX) and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) were used for further characterization of the MF x -NPs. Electrochemical investigations of the FeF2-NPs@TRGO as cathode material for lithium-ion batteries were evaluated by galvanostatic charge/discharge profiles. The results indicate that the FeF2-NPs@TRGO as cathode material can present a specific capacity of 500 mAh/g at a current density of 50 mA/g, including a significant interfacial charge storage contribution. The obtained nanomaterials show a good rate capacity as well (220 mAh/g and 130 mAh/g) at a current density of 200 and 500 mA/g, respectively.Entities:
Keywords: ionic liquids; material synthesis; metal-fluoride nanoparticles; microwave irradiation; thermally reduced graphite oxide
Year: 2017 PMID: 29234583 PMCID: PMC5704767 DOI: 10.3762/bjnano.8.247
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Beilstein J Nanotechnol ISSN: 2190-4286 Impact factor: 3.649
Scheme 1Synthesis scheme of MF@TRGO from [M(AMD)] and [Eu(dpm)3] by microwave (MW)-assisted thermal decomposition on thermally reduced graphite oxide (TRGO) in the ionic liquid [BMIm][BF4].
Figure 1Example PXRD of 0.5 wt % PrF3@TRGO-SH in [BMIm][BF4] synthesized from [Pr(AMD)3]. PrF3 reference reflections in red from COD 1010984. For the diffractogram with indexed reflections see Figure S18 in Supporting Information File 1. The PXRDs for the other samples are given in Figures S4–S19 in Supporting Information File 1.
Determined sizes of MF-NPs in MF@TRGO samples.a
| precursor | identified phase of MF | NP diameter from PXRD [nm]c | particle diameter from TEM [nm]d,e | particle diameter without TRGO from TEM [nm]d |
| TRGO-300 | ||||
| Fe(AMD)2 | FeF2 | 8–30 | 26 ± 7 | 65 ± 18g |
| Co(AMD)2 | —h | 16–31 | –h | 43 ± 11g |
| Pr(AMD)3 | PrF3 | 9–17 | 15 ± 4 | 11 ± 6g |
| Eu(dpm)3 | EuF3 | 15–21 | 14 ± 6 | 21 ± 7i |
| TRGO-400 | ||||
| Fe(AMD)2 | FeF2 | 9–20 | 30 ± 10 | 65 ± 18g |
| Co(AMD)2 | —h | 16–31 | —h | 43 ± 11g |
| Pr(AMD)3 | PrF3 | 10–14 | 10 ± 3 | 11 ± 6g |
| Eu(dpm)3 | EuF3 | 13–21 | 14 ± 4 | 21 ± 7i |
| TRGO-750 | ||||
| Fe(AMD)2 | FeF2 | 10–26 | 6 ± 2 | 65 ± 18g |
| Co(AMD)2 | —h | 21–38 | —h | 43 ± 11g |
| Pr(AMD)3 | PrF3 | 8–16 | 17 ± 4 | 11 ± 6g |
| Eu(dpm)3 | EuF3 | 14–22 | 18 ± 4 | 21 ± 7i |
| TRGO-SH | ||||
| Fe(AMD)2 | FeF2 | 16-28 | 6 ± 2 | 65 ± 18g |
| Co(AMD)2 | CoF2 | —j | 9 ± 2 | 43 ± 11g |
| Pr(AMD)3 | PrF3 | 14-21 | 6 ± 2 | 11 ± 6g |
| Eu(dpm)3 | EuF3 | 13-23 | 15 ± 5 | 21 ± 7i |
a0.5 wt % MF-NP/[BMIm][BF4] dispersions obtained by microwave-assisted heating for 10 min for Co, 15 min for Fe, Pr and Eu precursors; bthe phases of the nanoparticles were identified from PXRD; cdiameter calculated from Scherrer equation, Scherrer factor = 1; anisotropic defects were not considered; a range is given for diameter values derived from different reflections; daverage diameter and standard deviation σ; esee Experimental section for TEM measurement conditions; at least 50 particles were used for the analysis; fwidth and length of the rods; gdata from [63]; hno separated nanoparticles; idata from [76]; jno reflections in PXRD.
Figure 2TEM images of PrF3@TRGO-400 dispersions from [Pr(AMD)3] in [BMIm][BF4].
Figure 3XPS of PrF3@TRGO-400 dispersions from [Pr(AMD)3] in [BMIm][BF4].
Comparison of XPS binding energies.a
| PrF3@TRGO–400 binding energies [keV] | |||
| element | measured | Pr0 metal | Pr3+ oxidation state [ |
| Pr 3d 5/2 | 934.3 | 932 | 933–933.5 |
| measured | metal fluorides | organic fluorides [ | |
| F 1s | 686.3 | 684–685.5 | 688–689 |
acharge calibration: C 1s 284.8 eV; comparison of XPS binding energies in other MF@TRGO samples is given in Tables S9–S11 in Supporting Information File 1.
Figure 4The electrochemical performance of FeF2@TRGO-400 as cathode material for lithium-ion batteries. (a) The galvanostatic charge/discharge profiles at a current of 50 mA/g. The inset is the profile of the first cycle. (b) The rate performance after an activation over three cycles.