| Literature DB >> 31443464 |
Rosita Diana1, Barbara Panunzi1, Simona Concilio2, Francesco Marrafino3, Rafi Shikler4, Tonino Caruso5, Ugo Caruso6.
Abstract
From a dicyano-phenylenevinylene (PV) and an azobenzene (AB) skeleton, two new symmetrical salen dyes were obtained. Terminal bulky substituents able to reduce intermolecular interactions and flexible tails to guarantee solubility were added to the fluorogenic cores. Photochemical performances were investigated on the small molecules in solution, as neat crystals and as dopants in polymeric matrixes. High fluorescence quantum yield in the orange-red region was observed for the brightest emissive films (88% yield). The spectra of absorption and fluorescence were predicted by Density Functional Theory (DFT) calculations. The predicted energy levels of the frontier orbitals are in good agreement with voltammetry and molecular spectroscopy measures. Employing the two dyes as dopants of a nematic polymer led to remarkable orange or yellow luminescence, which dramatically decreases in on-off switch mode after liquid crystal (LC) order was lost. The fluorogenic cores were also embedded in organic polymers and self-assembly zinc coordination networks to transfer the emission properties to a macro-system. The final polymers emit from red to yellow both in solution and in the solid state and their photoluminescence (PL) performance are, in some cases, enhanced when compared to the fluorogenic cores.Entities:
Keywords: luminescent polymer; polymer network; salen dyes
Year: 2019 PMID: 31443464 PMCID: PMC6780212 DOI: 10.3390/polym11091379
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Polymers (Basel) ISSN: 2073-4360 Impact factor: 4.329
Scheme 1Synthetic route to the target compounds C1b and C2b.
Scheme 2Synthetic route to the organic polymers (the chelating sites evidenced in red color) and to the networks.
Optical data of C1b and C2b in solution and as neat and dispersed samples.
| Sample | λabs.sol | λem.sol | PLQY% c | Solvent | λabs.film | λem.film | PLQY% f | Matrix f |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C1b | 369 | 533 | 5.00 ± 0.02 | Chloroform | (403)474 j | 613 j | 25 ± 1 j | neat j |
| 373 | 529 | THF | 470 jj | 566 jj | 30 ± 1 jj | PS jj | ||
| 396 | 523 | NMP | 460 jjj | 566 ijjj | 88 ± 5 jjj | PVK jjj | ||
| - | - | - | 460 jv | 571 jv | 50 ± 5 jv | PDLC jv | ||
| C2b | 420 | 534 | 3.00 ± 0.02 | Chloroform | 446 j | 613 j | 22 ± 1 j | neat j |
| 422 | 512 | THF | 429 jj | 566 jj | 10 ± 2 jj | PS jj | ||
| 430 | 511 | NMP | 429 jjj | 566 ijjj | 21 ± 2 jjj | PVK jjj | ||
| - | - | - | 414 jv | 571 jv | 41 ± 5 jv | PDLC jv |
a Wavelength of UV-Visible absorbance maxima in solution; b Wavelength of emission maxima in solution; c Photoluminescence quantum yield (PLQY) in chloroform solution measured by relative methods using as standard quinine sulfate; d Wavelength of UV-Visible absorbance maxima on thin film; e wavelength of emission maxima on thin film; f PL quantum yield on thin film; j neat sample; jj sample dispersed in PS 10% by weight; jjj sample dispersed in PVK at 10% by weight; jv sample dispersed in QYPDLC-102 nematic polymer at 1% by weight. Less intense maxima in brackets.
Figure 1Crystalline samples of C1b (A on the left) and C2b (A on the right) in visible light and under 365 nm UV lamp light (B). The same samples dissolved in a dilute chloroform solution in natural (C) and under 365 nm UV lamp light (D).
Figure 2Fluorescence spectra recorded on 1% doped LC sample of C1b (A) and C2b (B) before (red curve) and after isotropization (blue curve). Inset: the same sample deposed between quartz slides under 365 nm UV light before (left) and after (right) isotropization.
Figure 3From left to right: P1b (a), P2b (b), co-P1b (c) and co-P2b (d) powder samples in natural light (A) and under 365 nm UV lamp (B). The correspondent cross-linked samples obtained by in situ deposition on quartz slides (C) under a 365 nm UV lamp.
Optical data of homo- and co-polymers and the derived networks.
| Compound | λabs.sol (nm) a | λem.sol (nm) b | PLQY% c | λabs.film (nm) d | λem.film (nm) e | PLQY% f |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| P1b | 321 (365,433) | 532 | 2.00 ± 0.02 | 466 | 606 | 34 ± 2 |
| P2b | 326–420 | 498 | 1.30 ± 0.02 | 448 | 560 | 20 ± 2 |
| co-P1b | 346 (453) | 518–616 | 4.50 ± 0.02 | 444 | 596 | 10 ± 1 |
| co-P2b | 348 (429) | 511 | 3.00 ± 0.02 | 435 | 551 | 14 ± 2 |
| Net-P1b | - | - | - | 460 | 555 | 8.0 ± 1 |
| Net-P2b | - | - | - | 435 | 490 | 7.0 ± 1 |
| Net-co-P1b | - | - | - | 395 | 597 | 9.0 ± 1 |
| Net-co-P2b | - | - | - | 397 | 552 | 10 ± 1 |
a Wavelength of UV-Visible absorbance maxima in NMP solution, less intense maxima in branch or range; b wavelength of emission maxima in NMP solution; c wavelength of UV-Visible absorbance maxima on thin film, less intense maxima in branch; d wavelength of emission maxima on thin film; e wavelength of emission maxima on thin film; f PL quantum yield on thin film.
Figure 4Representation of HOMO and LUMO orbitals for C1b and C2b.
Electro-optical properties calculated on C1b and C2b.
| Properties | C1b | C2b |
|---|---|---|
| Oxidation Potential (eV) | 1.27 | 1.26 |
| Reduction Potential (eV) | −0.92 | −1.00 |
| Hole Reorganization Energy (eV) | 0.28 | 0.40 |
| Electron Reorganization Energy (eV) | 0.22 | 0.29 |
| Triplet Energy (eV) | 1.49 | 1.00 |
| λmax (nm) | 516 | 509 |
| Emax (nm) | 565 | 550 |
| Scaled HOMO (eV) | −5.55 | −5.54 |
| Scaled LUMO (eV) | −3.36 | −3.28 |
| HOMO-LUMO (eV) | 2.18 | 2.26 |
| Triplet Stabilization Energy (eV) | 0.35 | 1.04 |
| Hole Extraction Potential (eV) | 5.92 | 5.82 |
| Triplet Reorganization Energy (eV) | 0.62 | 2.05 |
| Electron Extraction Potential (eV) | −2.08 | −2.05 |
Energy bandgaps calculated using voltammetric (ΔEEC) and optical (ΔEopt) data, compared to the relative difference with the theoretical C1b and C2b HOMO-LUMO values (ΔEopt − ΔEtheor), reported in Table 3.
| Polymers | ΔEEC (eV) | ΔEopt (eV) | ΔEopt − ΔEtheor (eV) |
|---|---|---|---|
| P1b | 1.9 | 2.9 | 0.7 |
| P2b | 1.8 | 3.0 | 0.7 |
| coP1b | 1.2 | 2.7 | 0.5 |
| coP2b | 1.4 | 2.9 | 0.6 |