| Literature DB >> 29560235 |
S Tominaka1,2, H Hamoudi2, T Suga3, T D Bennett1, A B Cairns4, A K Cheetham1.
Abstract
The topochemical conversion of a dense, insulating metal-organic framework (MOF) into a semiconducting amorphous MOF is described. Treatment of single crystals of copper(i) chloride trithiocyanurate, CuICl(ttcH3) (ttcH3 = trithiocyanuric acid), 1, in aqueous ammonia solution yields monoliths of amorphous CuI1.8(ttc)0.6(ttcH3)0.4, 3. The treatment changes the transparent orange crystals of 1 into shiny black monoliths of 3 with retention of morphology, and moreover increases the electrical conductivity from insulating to semiconducting (conductivity of 3 ranges from 4.2 × 10-11 S cm-1 at 20 °C to 7.6 × 10-9 S cm-1 at 140 °C; activation energy = 0.59 eV; optical band gap = 0.6 eV). The structure and properties of the amorphous conductor are fully characterized by AC impedance spectroscopy, X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy, X-ray pair distribution function analysis, infrared spectroscopy, diffuse reflectance spectroscopy, electron spin resonance spectroscopy, elemental analysis, thermogravimetric analysis, and theoretical calculations.Entities:
Year: 2014 PMID: 29560235 PMCID: PMC5811114 DOI: 10.1039/c4sc03295k
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Chem Sci ISSN: 2041-6520 Impact factor: 9.825
Fig. 1Crystal structure of [CuCl(ttcH3)].[13] (a) 2 × 2 × 2 cells. (b) Connectivity of CuClS3 tetrahedral with the thioketone form of trithiocyanuric acid molecules (red: Cu, green: Cl, yellow: S, blue: N, brown: C, and white: H). Dotted lines show hydrogen bonding.
Fig. 2Photos of (a) 1 CuCl(ttcH3) crystals, (b) 2 – i.e. 1 treated in aqueous ammonia for 2 days, and (c) 3 – i.e. 2 dried at 130 °C under vacuum. The large monoliths are about 100 μm across.
Fig. 4FTIR spectra of 1, 2 and 3 compared with pure trithiocyanuric acid. (a) 600–1800 cm–1. (b) 2400–3800 cm–1.
Fig. 3AC impedance analyses. (a) Complex-plane impedance data for a pellet of 3 (red: 20 °C; blue: 40 °C; green: 60 °C; and black: 80 °C). The inset shows log|Z| vs. log frequency plots. (b) Arrhenius plot of the electronic conductivity. (c) Current–voltage characteristics measured by cyclic voltammetry scanned at 10 mV s–1 at 25 °C.
Comparison of known electrically conductive Cu-based coordination polymers
| Compound | Conductivity/S cm–1 | Cu valence | Dimensionality[ | Coordinating atoms | Cu–Cu neighbour distance/Å | Remarks | Ref. |
| [Cu(2,5-dimethyl- | 1.0 × 104
| +1.33 | I0O3 | N4 | 3.89 | Metallic |
|
| [Cu(4-hydroxythiophenolato)] | 1.2 × 102
| +1 | I2O0 | S3 | 3.24 | — |
|
| [Cu2Br4(bis(ethylenedithio) tetrathiafulvalenium)] | 2.1 × 100
| +1 | I2O0 | SBr3 | 2.77–2.78 (trimer) |
|
|
| [Cu6Br10(bis(ethylenedithio) tetrathiafulvalenium)2(H2O)2] | 5.1 × 10–2
| +1 | I1O0 | SBr3, Br4 | 2.78–2.96 |
|
|
| [Cu9(SH)8(2-pylidinethiol)8](BF4) | 1.6 × 10–3
| +1 | I1O0 | S3, S4 | 3.39–3.80 | Little visible absorption, |
|
| [Cu3I(pylimidine-2-thione)2] | 7.0 × 10–4
| +1 | I2O1 | NSI2, N2S2, NSI | 2.66–2.78 (trimer) | — |
|
| Cu[Cu(2,3-pyrazinedithiolato)2] | 6.0 × 10–4 | +2 | I0O3 | N4, S4 | 5.37 | Microporous, |
|
| [Cu(SCN) (pyridine-3,4-dicarbonitrile)2] | 4.3 × 10–5
| +1 | I1O0
| N3S | 6.09 | — |
|
| [Cu2Br(isonicotinate)2] | 1.2 × 10–5
| +1.5 | I0O2 | O2NBr | 2.39 (dimer) | — |
|
| [Cu3Br(pylimidine-2-thione)2] | 6.0 × 10–8
| +1 | I2O1 | NSBr2, NSBr, N2S2 | 2.59–2.75 (trimer) | — |
|
| Cu[Ni(2,3-pyrazinedithiolato)2] | 1.0 × 10–8
| +2 | I0O3 | N4, S4 | 5.30 (Cu–Ni) 6.83 (Cu–Cu) | Microporous, |
|
| [Cu6I6(pyridine-4-thione)4] | 2.0 × 10–9
| +1 | I3O0 | S2I2 | 3.14–3.89 |
|
|
| [Cu1.8(C3N3S3H1.2)] | 4.2 × 10–11
| +1 | I
| S3, NS3 | ∼3.2 | Amorphous, | This work |
| [Cu(SCN) (4-cyanopyridine)2] | 1.0 × 10–12
| +1 | I1O0
| N3S | 6.16 | Temperature independent |
|
| [CuCl(C3N3S3H3)] | — | +1 | I0O3 | S3Cl | 4.4 |
| This work |
Organic molecules are anion radicals.
Measured using pellets at room temperature.
Measured using single crystals at room temperature.
Measured using thin films at room temperature.
I2-doped samples.
SCN is regarded as inorganic.
Considered on the basis of the composition and the coordination spheres.
E o is the optical bandgap and E a is the activation energy.
Fig. 5XPS data of compound 1 and compound 3. (a) Cu 2p spectra. (b) Cu LMM X-ray-excited Auger spectra. (c) N 1s spectra (dots) fitted by two peaks (each: blue lines; total: red lines; and background: dotted lines). The intensity of 3 was magnified by 2.15 times. (d) S 2p spectra (dots) fitted by two sets (blue and green lines) of S 2p3/2–S 2p1/2 doublet peaks (separation = 1.20 eV; area ratio, 2p3/2–2p1/2 = 2 : 1). Dotted black lines = background. Red lines = total. The intensity of 3 was magnified by 1.5 times.
Fig. 6X-ray pair distribution function analysis. (a) Experimental PDF pattern of 3 and simulated pattern of 1. (b) PDF refinement of the structure of 3. The model consists of (i) the ttc3– anions coordinating to two Cu atoms as shown in panel d, which generate the sharp peaks, and (ii) the arrangement in space of these units, which generates the broad oscillating background (dotted line). The latter was simulated by moving the coordinates of the Cu sites in 1 to fit the broad oscillation as illustrated in the inset. (c) Local structure and bond lengths of 1, determined by single crystal X-ray diffraction. (d) Representative local structure and bond lengths in 3, determined by the PDF refinement.
Fig. 7Spectroscopic data of the frontier orbitals in 1 and 3. (a) XPS data of valence bands. The valence band maxima were obtained by extrapolation of the onset linear parts: 1.0 eV for 1 and 0.8 eV for 3. (b) Kubelka–Munk functions obtained by diffuse reflectance spectroscopy. (c) Schematic illustration of the positions of the frontier orbitals. (d) X-band ESR spectra for Cu(ii) ions in 3.