Nils W Rosemann1,2, Pavel Chábera1, Om Prakash2, Simon Kaufhold2, Kenneth Wärnmark2, Arkady Yartsev1, Petter Persson3. 1. Division of Chemical Physics, Department of Chemistry, Lund University, Box 124, SE-22100 Lund, Sweden. 2. Center for Analysis and Synthesis (CAS), Department of Chemistry, Lund University, Box 124, SE-22100 Lund, Sweden. 3. Division of Theoretical Chemistry, Department of Chemistry, Lund University, Box 124, SE-22100 Lund, Sweden.
Abstract
Photoinduced bimolecular charge transfer processes involving the iron(III) N-heterocyclic carbene (FeNHC) photosensitizer [Fe(phtmeimb)2]+ (phtmeimb = phenyltris(3-methyl-imidazolin-2-ylidene)borate) and triethylamine as well as N,N-dimethylaniline donors have been studied using optical spectroscopy. The full photocycle of charge separation and recombination down to ultrashort time scales was studied by investigating the excited-state dynamics up to high quencher concentrations. The unconventional doublet ligand-to-metal charge transfer (2LMCT) photoactive excited state exhibits donor-dependent charge separation rates of up to 1.25 ps-1 that exceed the rates found for typical ruthenium-based systems and are instead more similar to results reported for organic sensitizers. The ultrafast charge transfer probed at high electron donor concentrations outpaces the solvent dynamics and goes beyond the classical Marcus electron transfer regime. Poor photoproduct yields are explained by donor-independent, fast charge recombination with rates of ∼0.2 ps-1, thus inhibiting cage escape and photoproduct formation. This study thus shows that the ultimate bottlenecks for bimolecular photoredox processes involving these FeNHC photosensitizers can only be determined from the ultrafast dynamics of the full photocycle, which is of particular importance when the bimolecular charge transfer processes are not limited by the intrinsic excited-state lifetime of the photosensitizer.
Photoinduced bimolecular charge transfer processes involving the iron(III) N-heterocyclic carbene (FeNHC) photosensitizer [Fe(phtmeimb)2]+ (phtmeimb = phenyltris(3-methyl-imidazolin-2-ylidene)borate) and triethylamine as well as N,N-dimethylaniline donors have been studied using optical spectroscopy. The full photocycle of charge separation and recombination down to ultrashort time scales was studied by investigating the excited-state dynamics up to high quencher concentrations. The unconventional doublet ligand-to-metal charge transfer (2LMCT) photoactive excited state exhibits donor-dependent charge separation rates of up to 1.25 ps-1 that exceed the rates found for typical ruthenium-based systems and are instead more similar to results reported for organic sensitizers. The ultrafast charge transfer probed at high electron donor concentrations outpaces the solvent dynamics and goes beyond the classical Marcus electron transfer regime. Poor photoproduct yields are explained by donor-independent, fast charge recombination with rates of ∼0.2 ps-1, thus inhibiting cage escape and photoproduct formation. This study thus shows that the ultimate bottlenecks for bimolecular photoredox processes involving these FeNHC photosensitizers can only be determined from the ultrafast dynamics of the full photocycle, which is of particular importance when the bimolecular charge transfer processes are not limited by the intrinsic excited-state lifetime of the photosensitizer.
There have been long-standing
efforts to replace rare and expensive transition metals like ruthenium[1−3] by Earth-abundant metals such as iron in photosensitizers for molecular-based
technologies such as dye-sensitized solar cells and photocatalysis.[4,5] Iron is of particular interest in this regard because it is the
most abundant transition metal on earth. Recent studies on Fe light-harvesting
complexes[6] have demonstrated significant
progress in terms of efficient interfacial electron transfer,[7,8] photoluminescence,[9,10] and record excited-state lifetimes
into the nanosecond regime.[10,11]The Fe(III) N-heterocyclic carbene (NHC) complex
[Fe(phtmeimb)2]PF6 (1) (phtmeimb
= phenyltris(3-methyl-imidazolin-2-ylidene)borate) (see Scheme A), with a lifetime of ∼2
ns, was furthermore found to be capable of driving bimolecular photoredox
reactions.[10] Despite efficient bimolecular
quenching of 1, the formation of long-lived photoproducts
was limited to yields of about 5%. A Stern–Volmer analysis
suggested typical diffusion-limited kinetics, raising significant
questions about what limits the product formation.[10] Furthermore, the Fe(III) hexacarbene complexes exhibit
a rare type of photophysics involving a low-spin (doublet) 3d5 ground state and a doublet ligand-to-metal charge transfer
(2LMCT) excited state. This contributes to a broader current
interest to develop earth-abundant photoactive complexes featuring
LMCT excited states.[1,3,12]
Scheme 1
(A) Structures of [Fe(phtmeimb)2]+, N,N-Dimethylaniline (DMA), and Triethylamine
(TEA) (Hydrogen Atoms Omitted for Clarity); (B) Schematic Bimolecular
Photocycle Involving the FeIII Sensitizer, Quencher (Q),
and Photoproduct (PP) Undergoing Charge Separation (CS) and Charge
Recombination (CR)
A typical bimolecular
photocycle is presented in Scheme B. Upon irradiation the Fe(III)
sensitizer is excited to the 2LMCT state. Subsequent charge
separation (CS) reduces the sensitizer while oxidizing the quencher.
From there the constituents can separate, resulting in photoproduct
(PP) formation, or the photocycle can be completed by charge recombination
(CR). Experimentally, the photocycle is typically traced by (i) quenching
of the photoluminescence (PL) intensity of the excited sensitizer
and (ii) emerging absorption or emission features from the PP. However,
a comprehensive elucidation of all of the elementary steps in the
full photocycle can be achieved only by studying the ultrafast photoinduced
dynamics at the pico- or femtosecond time scale.[13−16]As a first step for the
present type of Fe(III) photosensitizer,
we investigate the dynamics using two types of quencher molecules:
(I) aliphatic triethylamine (TEA) and (II) aromatic N,N-dimethylaniline (DMA). The oxidation potentials
of these electron donors differ slightly, i.e. 0.960 and 0.756 V vs
SCE in acetonitrile for TEA and DMA, respectively.[17] This yields free energies of −0.396 and −0.600
eV for the reduction of 1 and oxidation of TEA and DMA,
respectively, based on the excited-state redox potential of 1.[10]For comparative purposes,
we performed UV/vis, steady-state emission,
and time-resolved absorption spectroscopy on solutions of 1 in acetonitrile (MeCN) with added quenchers. Both the absorption
and emission spectra (see Figure ) exhibit virtually unchanged characteristics of 1, and additional absorbance of the quenchers is observed
only for wavelengths below 400 nm (see the Supporting Information). For both quenchers, the slopes of the intensity
and the pseudo-first-order lifetime curves as a function of quencher
concentration match well, indicating that for low to intermediate
quencher concentrations (<800 mM) pure dynamic quenching is observed
(see Figure ). These
measurements also indicate that quenching by DMA is more efficient
than quenching by TEA, as reflected in the dynamic quenching rates
for TEA and DMA, respectively (for details of the underlying Stern–Volmer
analysis, see the Supporting Information). This agrees with the free energy values given above. In particular,
the dynamic quenching rate of 1 in DMA is more than 2
orders of magnitude higher than in the prototype case of tris(bipyridine)ruthenium(II)[18,19] ([Ru(bpy)3]2+), indicating fundamental differences
from the processes found for 1.
Figure 1
Normalized luminescence
intensities (solid symbols) and excited-state
lifetimes (open symbols) of 1 in MeCN upon addition of
TEA (orange) or DMA (blue) on a double logarithmic scale vs normalized
quencher concentration. The inset shows the normalized absorbance
and emission spectra of 1 in MeCN (black dashed) with
added TEA (orange) or DMA (blue).
Normalized luminescence
intensities (solid symbols) and excited-state
lifetimes (open symbols) of 1 in MeCN upon addition of
TEA (orange) or DMA (blue) on a double logarithmic scale vs normalized
quencher concentration. The inset shows the normalized absorbance
and emission spectra of 1 in MeCN (black dashed) with
added TEA (orange) or DMA (blue).Next, we investigate the time-resolved dynamics with a particular
focus on high quencher concentrations. When the average distance between
quencher molecules becomes smaller than the size of the sensitizer,
it is reasonable to assume that the sensitizer and quencher are always
in close contact. In this static quenching regime, intrinsic charge
transfer rates become accessible, as previously applied in ultrafast
dynamics studies of organic sensitizers.[17,20−22] Transient absorption (TA) spectroscopy with ∼100
fs resolution was employed for these measurements (see the Supporting Information).First we summarize
the TA signature in pure MeCN (Figure inset).[10] In general, a
positive photoinduced absorption (PIA) reflects
absorption of a multitude of excited states (ESA) and may include
contributions of photoproducts, e.g., oxidized donor. A negative signal
corresponds to either ground-state bleach (GSB) or stimulated emission
(SE). In the case of 1 we observe several features: A
negative SE band at ∼680 nm and several ESA bands. The latter
are separated into (i) a band rising toward the long-wavelength part
of the visible spectrum, (ii) a band at ∼575 nm, and (iii)
a band rising toward the near-ultraviolet. The dip between the last
two ESA bands corresponds to the GSB, which is expected to peak at
∼505 nm but is overwhelmed by the stronger ESA. These features
all decay single-exponentially with a lifetime ∼2 ns.[10] This is also reflected in two isosbestic points
at zero differential absorption, between ESA and SE. An isosbestic
point corresponds to a state-to-state transition. Here, this is the
transition from the excited state to the ground state. This underlines
that the ESA and SE correspond to the same excited state.
Figure 2
(A) Normalized
differential absorption spectra at 1 ps time delay
in pure MeCN (blue) and with 4200 mM TEA (orange). (B) Normalized
differential absorption transients in the stimulated emission (SE)
region (700 nm) of 1 in MeCN for various concentrations
of TEA from 0 mM (blue) to 5040 mM (yellow). (C) Differential absorption
transients of 1 with TEA at a concentration of 4254 mM.
Each transient has been divided by the stimulated emission intensity
at the respective step. The GSB region was fit by a double-exponential
function (blue line).
(A) Normalized
differential absorption spectra at 1 ps time delay
in pure MeCN (blue) and with 4200 mM TEA (orange). (B) Normalized
differential absorption transients in the stimulated emission (SE)
region (700 nm) of 1 in MeCN for various concentrations
of TEA from 0 mM (blue) to 5040 mM (yellow). (C) Differential absorption
transients of 1 with TEA at a concentration of 4254 mM.
Each transient has been divided by the stimulated emission intensity
at the respective step. The GSB region was fit by a double-exponential
function (blue line).Next we focus on the
influence of TEA on the dynamics. The differential
absorption spectrum and transients in the SE region are given in Figure (for a set of full
differential absorption spectra, see the Supporting Information). Even for very high TEA concentrations the spectral
shape does not change. In agreement with the observed steady-state
emission quenching, the lifetime of ESA and SE shortens by 2 orders
of magnitude to ∼20 ps (see Figure ) at the maximum TEA concentration (5040
mM). We associate this shortening of excited-state lifetime with the
photoinduced CS, corresponding to a rate constant of 0.05 ps–1. This is consistent with the substantial negative free energy for
reduction of the excited complex 1 by TEA. As we do not
expect any significant TEA cation signal (see the Supporting Information), the CS process should also be observable
in either reduced species of 1 or a stoichiometric amount
of GSB that persists until the CR process occurs. The signature of
reduced 1 in the short-wavelength spectral region is,
however, not covered by our experiment. Additionally, we do not observe
any long-lived GSB. The absence of both TEA cation and a long-lived
GSB signal suggests that either the CR quickly follows the CS and
no long-lived product is formed or, contrary to our expectation, the
presence of TEA facilitates 1 to undergo internal conversion
to the ground state without CS occurring at all. To unambiguously
verify CS, we have divided the signals at all times by the corresponding
amplitude of the SE signal (see the Supporting Information). In the case of internal conversion, these normalized
transients should become time-independent constants in all wavelength
regions. At high TEA concentration, we obtain a nonconstant time dependence
in the GSB spectral region (see Figure ). This deviation directly reflects the relation of
the CS and CR rates. Fitting of the obtained dynamics reveals a rate
of 0.25 ps–1 for CR (see the Supporting Information).Next we study the dynamics
with DMA. At low DMA concentrations,
the TA spectra resemble those of MeCN/TEA mixtures. For higher DMA
concentrations, the GSB becomes clearly pronounced, the ESA decreases,
and at ∼450 nm another feature emerges (see Figure ). The latter agrees with the
expected absorption of DMA cation.[20] Analyzing
the transients in the selected spectral regions yields the decrease
of the SE as expected from the reported emission quenching. More informative
are the blue ESA and GSB regions. At low DMA concentration, i.e.,
in the diffusion-limited regime, the signal is dominated by the ESA
dynamics. At high DMA concentration, a subpicosecond buildup of additional
signal appears that is positive in the ESA region and negative in
the GSB region. We interpret this as a fast decay of the initially
dominating ESA of 1 without recovery of the ground-state
absorption, which thus reveals the negative GSB signal. With the same
dynamics, an additional but weak ESA component assigned to DMA cation
arises toward the blue spectral region. Importantly, both the rise
and decay dynamics of the negative GSB do not change above a DMA concentration
of ∼800 mM but clearly differ from the SE and ESA decay at
corresponding DMA concentrations. SE and ESA continuously speed up
with increasing DMA concentration, but the GSB only changes its amplitude.
We associate this behavior with the vanishing contribution of diffusion
as the average distance between 1 and the DMA molecules
decreases with increasing concentration. For the highest DMA concentration,
the rise and decay of the GSB have negligible diffusion contributions
and thus reflect the CS and CR processes between 1 and
DMA molecules in close contact. Consequently, by fitting the GSB observed
for the highest DMA concentration with a double-exponential function,
we extract a CS rate of 1.25 ps–1 and a CR rate
of 0.17 ps–1.
Figure 3
(A) Differential absorption spectra of 1 in MeCN at
time delay of 1 ps for DMA concentrations from 9 mM (blue) to 5000
mM (yellow). For comparison, the absorbances of DMA+ (green)
and 1 (light blue) are shown with the stimulated emission
of 1 (red) calculated from the steady-state emission
spectrum (sign reversed), all on an arbitrary scale. (B–D)
Differential absorption transients around 450 nm (ESA), 520 nm (GSB),
and 660 nm (SE), with quencher concentrations as for the spectra above.
(A) Differential absorption spectra of 1 in MeCN at
time delay of 1 ps for DMA concentrations from 9 mM (blue) to 5000
mM (yellow). For comparison, the absorbances of DMA+ (green)
and 1 (light blue) are shown with the stimulated emission
of 1 (red) calculated from the steady-state emission
spectrum (sign reversed), all on an arbitrary scale. (B–D)
Differential absorption transients around 450 nm (ESA), 520 nm (GSB),
and 660 nm (SE), with quencher concentrations as for the spectra above.In summary, we have investigated the full bimolecular
photocycle
between the excited state of the Fe(III)–NHC complex [Fe(phtmeimb)2]+ and common sacrificial donor molecules (TEA
and DMA). The ultrafast dynamics at high DMA concentration is assigned
to charge separation and recombination due to faster separation than
recombination. This is in clear contrast to the case of TEA, where
charge recombination is significantly faster than charge separation.
Although the CR rate is ∼0.2 ps–1 for both
quenchers, the CS rate differs drastically: 0.05 ps–1 in TEA and 1.25 ps–1 in DMA. This trend agrees
with, but is too large to be dominated by, differences in the driving
force. Similar to studies of coumarins, we assign this difference
to enhanced coupling of the sensitizer to aromatic DMA compared with
aliphatic TEA.[17] Furthermore, the charge
transfer in DMA appears to be independent of the slower solvation
dynamics.[21] Following studies on organic
light harvesters and DMA, we associate the ultrafast charge transfer
with nuclear reorganization as described by the Sumi–Marcus
model.[24,25] Additionally, the observed rates are significantly
higher than the reported values for standard Ru sensitizers.[18,26] Our observed CS rates put this iron-based complex in the same category
as organic molecules like oxazines[20] and
coumarins.[17] Despite very efficient charge
separation, formation of the photoproduct is not favored. This is
attributed to very fast spin-allowed charge recombination. The spin-allowed
CR rates in this study are comparable to reported rates in Ru and
Os sensitizers, where the formal spin-forbidden nature of the transitions
is largely lifted by strong spin–orbit coupling.[27] One strategy to explore further would be to
utilize the intrinsically smaller spin–orbit coupling in Fe(III)–NHC
complexes to achieve higher photoproduct yields in photocycles where
spin-forbidden CR is suppressed.Overall, these results provide
key insights to guide further efforts
to better utilize the full potential of the promising excited-state
properties of novel Fe(III)–NHC and other 2LMCT
photosensitizers.
Authors: Jason D Braun; Issiah B Lozada; Charles Kolodziej; Clemens Burda; Kelly M E Newman; Johan van Lierop; Rebecca L Davis; David E Herbert Journal: Nat Chem Date: 2019-11-18 Impact factor: 24.427
Authors: Pavel Chábera; Yizhu Liu; Om Prakash; Erling Thyrhaug; Amal El Nahhas; Alireza Honarfar; Sofia Essén; Lisa A Fredin; Tobias C B Harlang; Kasper S Kjær; Karsten Handrup; Fredric Ericson; Hideyuki Tatsuno; Kelsey Morgan; Joachim Schnadt; Lennart Häggström; Tore Ericsson; Adam Sobkowiak; Sven Lidin; Ping Huang; Stenbjörn Styring; Jens Uhlig; Jesper Bendix; Reiner Lomoth; Villy Sundström; Petter Persson; Kenneth Wärnmark Journal: Nature Date: 2017-03-29 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Yu Zhang; Tia S Lee; Joseph M Favale; Dylan C Leary; Jeffrey L Petersen; Gregory D Scholes; Felix N Castellano; Carsten Milsmann Journal: Nat Chem Date: 2020-03-16 Impact factor: 24.427
Authors: Aleksandra Ilic; Jesper Schwarz; Catherine Johnson; Lisa H M de Groot; Simon Kaufhold; Reiner Lomoth; Kenneth Wärnmark Journal: Chem Sci Date: 2022-07-20 Impact factor: 9.969
Authors: Narayan Sinha; Björn Pfund; Christina Wegeberg; Alessandro Prescimone; Oliver S Wenger Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2022-05-27 Impact factor: 16.383