π-Conjugated molecule bridged silicon quantum dots (Si QDs) cluster was prepared by Sonogashira C-C cross-coupling reaction between 4-bromostyryl and octyl co-capped Si QDs (4-Bs/Oct Si QDs) and 1,4-diethynylbenzene. The surface chemical structure, morphology, and chemical composition of the Si QD cluster were confirmed by Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy, field emission transmission electron microscopy, and energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy. Lithium-ion batteries were fabricated using 4-Bs/Oct Si QD and Si QD clusters as anode materials to investigate the effect of QD clustering on the electrochemical performance. Compared with the 4-Bs/Oct Si QD electrode, the Si QD cluster exhibits improved electrochemical performance, such as a high initial discharge capacity of ∼1957 mAh/g and good cycling stability with ∼63% capacity retention following 100 cycles at a current rate of 200 mA/g when tested at the voltage window of 0.01-2.5 V. The improved electrochemical performance of the Si QD cluster is attributed to the π-conjugated molecules between the Si QDs and on the surface of Si QD cluster, which serve as a buffer layer to alleviate the mechanical stresses arising from the alloying reaction of Si with lithium and maintain the electrical conduits in the anode system.
π-Conjugated molecule bridged silicon quantum dots (Si QDs) cluster was prepared by Sonogashira C-C cross-coupling reaction between 4-bromostyryl and octyl co-capped Si QDs (4-Bs/OctSi QDs) and 1,4-diethynylbenzene. The surface chemical structure, morphology, and chemical composition of the Si QD cluster were confirmed by Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy, field emission transmission electron microscopy, and energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy. Lithium-ion batteries were fabricated using 4-Bs/OctSi QD and Si QD clusters as anode materials to investigate the effect of QD clustering on the electrochemical performance. Compared with the 4-Bs/OctSi QD electrode, the Si QD cluster exhibits improved electrochemical performance, such as a high initial discharge capacity of ∼1957 mAh/g and good cycling stability with ∼63% capacity retention following 100 cycles at a current rate of 200 mA/g when tested at the voltage window of 0.01-2.5 V. The improved electrochemical performance of the Si QD cluster is attributed to the π-conjugated molecules between the Si QDs and on the surface of Si QD cluster, which serve as a buffer layer to alleviate the mechanical stresses arising from the alloying reaction of Si with lithium and maintain the electrical conduits in the anode system.
Lithium-ion batteries
(LIBs) with improved performance should be
developed to fulfill the increased demand for consumer electronics,
renewable energy storage, and electric vehicles.[1−3] Currently, commercialized
graphite anode cannot meet the criteria for application due to its
low theoretical capacity (372 mAh/g).[4] Silicon-based
electrodes are considered as one of the most promising candidates
for use in the next-generation LIBs because of their environmental
friendliness, natural abundance, nontoxicity, low cost, low discharge
potential plateau (∼0.37 V versus Li/Li+), and high
theoretical specific capacity (∼4200 mAh/g).[5,6] The
high theoretical capacity, corresponding to the maximum lithiation
state of Li22Si5, is an order of magnitude compared
with commercial graphite.[7] However, the
practical use of Si anodes is hampered primarily by the fact that
Si experiences huge volume changes up to 400% during the lithiation/delithiation
process.[8] The mechanical stress occurring
over extended cycles inevitably leads to degradation, electrode pulverization,
subsequent loss of electrical contact between active materials and
the current collector, and formation of unstable solid electrolyte
interface (SEI), resulting in rapid capacity fading.[9]Significant efforts have been devoted to overcoming
the aforementioned
challenges of Si-based electrodes. The strategies investigated include
modification of electrolyte additive,[10] construction of artificial coatings,[11] development of novel binder systems,[12] and nanoscale engineering of Si-based electrode materials with various
structures such as nanoparticles,[13−15] nanowires,[16] nanotubes,[17] and
nanoporous silicon.[18,19] Nanoscale materials can efficiently
accommodate the large mechanical stresses that result from the alloying
reaction of Si with lithium, leading to stable cycling performance.
Recently, reducing the size of Si electrode materials further to quantum
dot (QD) scale has been proven to improve the electrochemical performance
significantly. Recently, reducing the size of Si electrode materials
further to quantum dot (QD) scale has been proven to improve the electrochemical
performance significantly. Aghajamali et al. investigated the electrochemical
properties of nanocomposites with 3, 5, 8, and 15 nm Si nanocrystals
in conductive mesoporous graphene aerogels for LIBs and found that
when the size of the nanocrystals decreased from 15 to 3 nm, the cycling
stability of annealed Si nanocrystals nanocomposite was improved significantly,
owing to its high stress/strain tolerance.[20] However, a reduction in the size of Si material to the QD scale
leads to inferior electronic conduction due to numerous interfacial
contacts between QDs and extreme SEI formation due to the relatively
larger surface area.[21] In addition, these
QDs are likely to aggregate into larger particles, which severely
reduces the active sites during extended cycles, leading to rapid
capacity fading. To address these limitations, assembling the QDs
into clusters might be an efficient approach. Assembling the QDs into
a cluster not only provides free space that can accommodate volume
expansion and maintain its structure during cycles but also facilitate
the formation of SEI on the outer surface.[22] Herein, we report the successful preparation of Si QD cluster with
π-conjugated molecular bridges using Sonogashira C–C
cross-coupling reaction between 4-Bs/OctSi QDs and 1,4-diethynylbenzene.
Compared with the 4-Bs/OctSi QD electrode, the Si QD cluster exhibited
improved electrochemical performances due to the π-conjugated
molecules between QDs and on the surface of the Si QD cluster, which
facilitate and enhance the electrical contact with the current collector
and accommodates volumetric expansion occurring over extended cycles.
The cluster synthesis strategy can be an attractive approach to boost
the electrochemical performances of the QD cluster by modifying the
organic structures and introducing different functional groups.
Results
and Discussion
The π-conjugated molecule bridged Si
QD cluster was prepared
via a Sonogashira cross-coupling reaction between the 4-Bs/OctSi
QDs and 1,4-diethynylbenzene, as shown in Scheme b, where Si QDs are covalently connected
with vinylene-(phenylene-ethynylene)2-phenylene-vinylene
(−=–ϕ–≡–ϕ–≡–ϕ–=−).
The surface chemical structures of the 4-Bs/OctSi QD and Si QD clusters
were characterized by Fourier transform infrared (FT-IR) spectroscopy
compared with those of surface capping and bridging molecules including
1-bromo-4-ethynylbenzene and 1,4-diethynylbenzene, respectively (Figure a). The FT-IR spectrum
of 4-Bs/Oct-Si QDs shows absorptions at 2964, 2926, and 2860 cm–1 attributed to sp3-hybridized C–H
stretching, which indicates the presence of octyl groups on the surface
of Si QDs.[23] Attachment of 1-bromo-4-ethynylbenzene
on the surface of Si QDs is supported by the observation of weak absorptions
at 3062 and 1624 cm–1, which were assigned to the
sp2-hybridized C–H stretching and C=C stretching
in conjugation with Si atoms on the surface of Si QD (Si–C=C−).[24−26] The peaks at 3266 and 2108 cm–1 arising from sp-hybridized
C–H stretching and C≡C stretching, respectively, in
the spectrum of 1-bromo-4-ethynylbenzene were not observed in 4-Bs/OctSi QDs, which was consistent with effective purification. Further
evidence of hydrosilylation on the surface of Si QDs was demonstrated
by 1H NMR. Figure b compares the 1H NMR spectra of the 1-bromo-4-ethynylbenzene
(bottom) and the 4-Bs/Oct-Si QDs (top). In the 1H NMR spectrum
of the 1-bromo-4-ethynylbenzene (bottom), the peaks are clearly assigned,
as shown schematically in the inset: 7.5–7 ppm (aromatic, c,
d), and 3.0 ppm (ethynyl CH, e). Compared with 1-bromo-4-ethynylbenzene,
the spectrum of 4-Bs/OctSi QD revealed additional peaks at 3.6 and
5.3 ppm, which could be assigned to protons in the vinyl group-bonded
Si atom. Therefore, based on the FT-IR and 1H NMR results,
we conclude that the surface of Si QDs is well functionalized by 1-octene
and 1-bromo-4-ethynylbenzene via the Si–C chemical covalent
bond. Meanwhile, as seen in Figure a, the Si QD cluster exhibits features that are mostly
identical to 4-Bs/OctSi QDs in the FT-IR spectra. In addition, the
peak at 2240 cm–1 corresponding to C≡C stretching
of Si QD cluster shifted to a higher frequency compared with that
of 1,4-diethynylbenzene (2110 cm–1). It is known
that the polycondensation of poly(arylene ethynylene) shifts the C≡C
stretching peak of the original HC≡C–Ar–C≡CH
to a higher frequency.[27] Therefore, these
FT-IR results indicate that 4-Bs/OctSi QDs and 1,4-diethynylbenzene
were C–C cross-coupled together in the Si QD cluster.
Scheme 1
(a) Hydrosilylation Reaction between Hydride-Terminated Si
QD and
1-Bromo-4-ethynylbenzene/1-Octene. (b) Sonogashira C–C Cross-Coupling
Reaction between 4-Bs/Oct Si QDs and 1,4-Diethynylbenzene
Figure 1
FT-IR spectra
of 1-bromo-4-ethynylbenzene, 1,4-diethynylbenzene,
4-Bs/Oct Si QD cluster, and Si QD cluster (a). 1H NMR spectra
of 1-bromo-4-ethynylbenzene and 4-Bs/Oct Si QDs (b).
FT-IR spectra
of 1-bromo-4-ethynylbenzene, 1,4-diethynylbenzene,
4-Bs/OctSi QD cluster, and Si QD cluster (a). 1H NMR spectra
of 1-bromo-4-ethynylbenzene and 4-Bs/OctSi QDs (b).The morphologies of the Si QD cluster were confirmed
using field-emission
transmission electron microscopy (FE-TEM). As seen in the low-magnitude
TEM images (Figure a), the Si QD cluster are approximately 1 μm agglomerates,
with a secondary structure consisting of relatively small clusters
measuring 80–100 nm in diameter. The high-magnitude TEM image
(Figure d–f)
reveals that the Si QDs with an average diameter of 2.7 ± 0.4
nm were clearly distinguishable from the π-conjugated organic
molecule matrix in the Si QD cluster with high crystallinity, and
its interplanar distance of 0.19 nm corresponded to the (220) crystal
plane of the diamond cubic Si. Importantly, the Si QDs were uniformly
distributed over the QD cluster without aggregation, which could be
attributed to the presence of π-conjugated bridging molecules
between Si QDs and dense functional groups on the surface of Si QDs.
To further identify the distribution of QDs in the Si QD cluster,
elemental mapping of different elements was conducted using a scanning
electron microscope equipped with an energy-dispersive X-ray (EDX)
spectroscopy system. Based on the elemental mapping images shown in Figure , it was confirmed
that the species of C, O, and Si were uniformly distributed in the
Si QD cluster. Unexpectedly, a significant amount of O was detected,
probably due to the oxidation of Si QDs at high temperature (110 °C)
during cluster synthesis. To obtain an accurate analysis of the chemical
compositions of the 4-Bs/Oct-Si QDs and the Si QD clusters, we conducted
elemental analyses for C, H, N, S, and O, and the results are summarized
in Table . Based on
the results of the elemental analyses, the silicon content in the
4-Bs/OctSi QD and Si QD clusters was estimated and used to evaluate
the electrochemical performance.
Figure 2
TEM images (a, b, d–f) of the Si
QD cluster. Size distribution
(c) of Si QDs in the Si QD cluster.
Figure 3
TEM image
(a), corresponding secondary electron TEM image (b),
EDX mapping (c–e), and EDX spectrum (f) of the Si QD cluster.
Table 1
Elemental Analyses of the 4-Bs/Oct
Si QD and Si QD Clusters
% C
% N
% H
% S
% O
% Si (remaining)
4-Bs/Oct Si QD cluster
49.80
0.09
7.01
0.47
1.48
41.15
Si QD cluster
72.87
0.27
4.86
0.08
6.78
15.14
TEM images (a, b, d–f) of the Si
QD cluster. Size distribution
(c) of Si QDs in the Si QD cluster.TEM image
(a), corresponding secondary electron TEM image (b),
EDX mapping (c–e), and EDX spectrum (f) of the Si QD cluster.The porous structure of the 4-Bs/OctSi QD and Si
QD clusters was
investigated using the nitrogen adsorption–desorption isotherm
and the Barrett–Joyner–Halenda (BJH) pore diameter distributions
(Figure ). The isotherm
of the Si QD cluster showed a typical type IV isotherm, indicating
their mesoporous structure, while the isotherm for 4-Bs/OctSi QDs
had no characteristics of a porous structure. From the nitrogen adsorption–desorption
isotherm, the specific surface area, pore volume, and average pore
size were evaluated to be ∼31.53 m2/g, 0.18 cm3/g, and 22.02 nm, respectively. This mesoporous architecture
of the Si QD cluster may facilitate the transportation of lithium
ions into the structure and accommodate the extreme volume expansion/contraction
during the repeated lithiation/delithiation process. Therefore, the
Si QD cluster is expected to exhibit promising electrochemical performance
as anode materials for lithium-ion batteries.
Figure 4
Nitrogen adsorption–desorption
isotherms (a) and the corresponding
Barrett–Joyner–Halenda (BJH) pore diameter distribution
(b) of the 4-Bs/Oct Si QD and Si QD clusters.
Nitrogen adsorption–desorption
isotherms (a) and the corresponding
Barrett–Joyner–Halenda (BJH) pore diameter distribution
(b) of the 4-Bs/OctSi QD and Si QD clusters.The electrochemical performance of the 4-Bs/Oct-Si QDs and Si QD
clusters as anode active materials was evaluated using a CR 2032 coin-type
cells with lithium metal as the counter electrode. All of the specific
capacities were calculated based on the silicon content obtained from
the elemental analyses (Table ). Figure a–d shows the galvanostatic charge–discharge curves
and the corresponding differential capacity plots (dQ/dV) for the 4-Bs/Oct-Si QDs and the Si QDs clusters
at a current density of 200 mA/g in the potential window of 0.01–2.5
V versus Li/Li+. In the first cycle for the 4-Bs/OctSi
QDs, the specific charge and discharge capacities were 17 and 10 mAh/g,
respectively, with 59% initial Coulombic efficiency (CE). Considering
that carbon black has lithium ion uptake ability, these specific capacities
can be regarded as essentially zero.[28] No
characteristic delithiation plateaus and peaks of amorphous Si at
∼0.30 and ∼0.47 V versus Li/Li+ were observed
in the potential profile (Figure c) and dQ/dV plot
(Figure d), respectively,
indicating that the 4-Bs/OctSi QDs did not participate in delithiation
process.[29] This result is in good agreement
with the report by Aghajamali et al., who observed an extremely low
specific capacity of undecanoic acid-functionalized silicon nanocrystals
with an average diameter of 3.2 nm.[20] The
failure of the 4-Bs/Oct-Si QDs electrode could be ascribed to the
loss of electrical contact with the current collector due to a much
smaller average Si QD size (2.7 ± 0.4 nm) compared with that
of carbon black (46.5 ± 13.5 nm, Figure S1). Further, the dissolution problems generally encountered in organic
molecule-based electrodes may induce extremely low capacities in the
4-Bs/OctSi QDs.[30] From the fact that the
surface-functionalized Si QDs can be soluble in a common solvent,
it is possible that the 4-Bs/Oct-Si QDs were dissolved in the electrolyte
away from the current collector before or immediately after the lithiation
reaction. In contrast, the Si QD cluster exhibits an improved electrochemical
performance with the initial specific charge and discharge capacities
of 8151 and 1957 mAh/g, respectively. This result could be attributed
to the increase in the overall size of Si anode by clustering and
the presence of π-conjugated molecules between Si QDs and on
the surface of the Si QD cluster, which facilitates the electrical
contact between the anode active material and the conductive carbon
black. As shown in Figure b, the differential capacity plots of the Si QD cluster in
delithiation reaction showed peaks at ∼0.37 and ∼0.53
V versus Li/Li+, which indicates the participation of Si
QDs in the electrochemical reaction. In addition, another broad peak
was observed at around 1.0 V versus Li/Li+. This can be
attributed to the deinsertion reaction of lithium ions in the unsaturated
π-conjugated molecules of the Si QD cluster during the first
lithiation cycle. Even though it is difficult to form Li/C complexes
from unsubstituted aromatics, such as pyrene and naphthalene, it seems
that the abundant number of ethynyl groups in the Si QD cluster is
capable of providing excellent electron-donating properties, leading
to the insertion of lithium ions.[30] The
lithium-ion insertion into the π-conjugated bridged molecules
may explain why the specific charge capacity (8151 mAh/g) of the Si
QD cluster is much larger than the theoretical capacity of Si (4200
mAh/g) for the most saturated lithium silicide phase L22Si5. The intensity of the broad peak at around 1.0 V versus
Li/Li+ was drastically decreased in the second cycle compared
with the peaks at ∼0.37 and ∼0.53 V, which suggests
an irreversible reaction of the π-conjugated molecules composed
of phenyl and ethynyl groups. Therefore, it can be considered that
the specific capacities of the Si QD cluster upon the following cycles
were mainly provided by Si QDs. In the galvanostatic charge–discharge
curves and the corresponding differential capacity plots of lithiation
reaction, the long, flat plateau and high-intensity peak were observed
below 0.3 V versus Li/Li+. The characteristics of crystalline
Si at around 0.11 V were not clearly distinguished because of the
π-conjugated molecules.[31] Additionally,
at around 1.5 V versus Li/Li+, the peaks associated with
the side reaction of the Si electrode, including the SEI formation
and reduction of SiO on the surface of
the Si QDs were observed. As a result of the SEI formation, reduction
of SiO on the surface of the Si QDs,
and the irreversible reaction of π-conjugated molecules in the
Si QD cluster, the initial CE of the Si QD cluster was only 24%.
Figure 5
Galvanostatic
charge–discharge curves and the corresponding
differential capacity plot (dQ/dV) for the Si QD cluster (a, b) and 4-Bs/Oct Si QD cluster (c, d).
Cycling performance (e) and rate capability (f) of the 4-Bs/Oct Si
QD and Si QD clusters.
Galvanostatic
charge–discharge curves and the corresponding
differential capacity plot (dQ/dV) for the Si QD cluster (a, b) and 4-Bs/OctSi QD cluster (c, d).
Cycling performance (e) and rate capability (f) of the 4-Bs/OctSi
QD and Si QD clusters.Figure e shows
the cycling performance of the 4-Bs/Oct-Si QDs and Si QD clusters
at a current density of 200 mA/g. As mentioned above, the 4-Bs/OctSi QDs showed low specific capacities close to zero. The reversible
capacity of the Si QD cluster was estimated around 1957 mAh/g in the
first cycle, which decayed during the fifth cycling process while
still retaining ∼63% (1232 mAh/g) of its initial capacity after
charge/discharge over 100 cycles. The good cycling stability of the
Si QD cluster is attributed to the π-conjugated molecules between
Si QDs and on the surface of the Si QD cluster, which was proved by
examining the morphologies of the cycled electrode using scanning
electron microscopy (SEM) (Figure S3).
The π-conjugated molecules between Si QDs and on the surface
of the Si QD cluster acts as a buffer layer to mitigate the mechanical
stresses arising from the alloying reaction of Si with lithium during
the extended cycles. Furthermore, the ability to enable electron/Li+ ion transport of the π–π network in π-conjugated
molecules would also have contributed to the cycling stability.[32] The CE of Si QD cluster at the current rate
of 200 mAh/g reached 80% after the second cycle, with an average of
97% during the 10th–100th cycles. Furthermore, the rate capability
of the 4-Bs/OctSi QD and Si QD clusters was evaluated under various
current rates ranging from 200 to 8000 mAh/g, as shown in Figure f. The average reversible
capacities at 200, 400, 800, 2000, 4000, and 8000 mA/g were measured
to be 1782, 1054, 465, 53, 17, and 7 mAh/g. At a high current density
of 2000 mA/g, the Si QD cluster retained only ∼3% of its average
specific capacity at 200 mA/g. As can be seen from the pore distribution
of the Si QD cluster (Figure ), due to the macropores in the Si QD cluster, the SEI formation
could not be completely confined to the surface. As a result, a thick
SEI layer was formed on both the inside and the outside of the Si
QD cluster, which inhibited the diffusion of lithium ions, leading
to low capacities at a high current rate. Nevertheless, the reversible
capacity was recovered up to 87% (1545 mAh/g) of its average specific
capacity when measured again at 200 mA/g, which indicates the structural
stability of the π-conjugated molecule bridged Si QD cluster
during repeated charge/discharge cycles.To further elucidate
the failure of the 4-Bs/OctSi QD cluster
and the improvement of the Si QD cluster in the electrochemical performance,
electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) measurements were conducted
under the full delithiation state after 100 charge/discharge cycles. Figure a presents the Nyquist
plots of the 4-Bs/OctSi QD and Si QD clusters, which consist of one
or two semicircles in the high- and intermediate-frequency ranges,
and a sloping line in the low-frequency range. These Nyquist plots
were fitted with the equivalent circuit shown in Figure b.[33] In the equivalent circuit, Re is related
to the contact resistance associated with the cell components, such
as the electrolyte, the working electrode, and the counter electrode. Rsei and CPEsei are the interface
resistance and the constant phase element relevant to the formation
of the SEI layer; Rct and CPEsei are the charge-transfer resistance and the constant phase element
of the electrolyte/active material and active material/current collector
interface; and W is the Warburg contribution related
to the diffusion of lithium ions within the active material.[34−36] The fitted impedance plots indicated by solid lines are in good
agreement with the experimental EIS plot and the fitted parameters
are summarized in Table . Apparently, the SEI film resistance (Rsei) of the Si QD cluster (271.30 Ω) is lower than that of the
4-Bs/OctSi QDs (667.20 Ω), indicating that the QD clustering
can inhibit the growth of the SEI layer. Notably, the charge-transfer
resistance at the electrolyte/active material and active material/current
collector interface (Rct) of 4-Bs/OctSi QDs (147 620 Ω) is substantially greater than that
of the Si QD cluster (845 Ω), which may be attributed to the
poor contact with the current collector (Figure a). This finding confirms that the increase
in the overall size of Si anode by clustering and the presence of
π-conjugated molecule between Si QDs and on the surface of the
Si QD cluster facilitates electrical contact with the current collector,
resulting in improved electrochemical performance (Figure b).
Figure 6
Experimental and fitted
EIS plots of the 4-Bs/Oct Si QD and Si
QD cluster electrode (a). Equivalent circuit used to model the EIS
spectra (b).
Table 2
Impedance-Fitted Parameters for the
4-Bs/Oct Si QD and Si QD Cluster Electrodesa,b
electrode
Re
Rsei
CPEsei-T
CPEsei-P
Rct
CPEct-T
CPEct-P
W–R
W–T
W–P
4-Bs/Oct Si QD
4.00
667.20
7.33 × 10–6
0.69
147 620
3.64 ×10–4
0.78
815 890
23.13
1.26
Si QD cluster
2.48
271.30
2.39 × 10–5
0.67
845
1.18 ×10–3
0.63
1224
83.36
0.73
Resistance (R)
and CPE–T parameters have units of Ω
and F·s(CPE–, respectively.
Warburg diffusion resistance
(W–R) and Warburg diffusion
capacitance
(W–T) have units of Ω and s, respectively.
Figure 7
Difference in the charge-transfer reaction from
the current collector
to the 4-Bs/Oct Si QD (a) and Si QD clusters (b).
Experimental and fitted
EIS plots of the 4-Bs/OctSi QD and Si
QD cluster electrode (a). Equivalent circuit used to model the EIS
spectra (b).Difference in the charge-transfer reaction from
the current collector
to the 4-Bs/OctSi QD (a) and Si QD clusters (b).Resistance (R)
and CPE–T parameters have units of Ω
and F·s(CPE–, respectively.Warburg diffusion resistance
(W–R) and Warburg diffusion
capacitance
(W–T) have units of Ω and s, respectively.
Conclusions
A
π-conjugated molecule bridged Si QD cluster was successfully
prepared via Sonogashira C–C cross-coupling reaction between
4-Bs/OctSi QDs and 1,4-diethynylbenzene. Compared with the 4-Bs/OctSi QD electrode, the Si QD cluster electrode exhibits improved electrochemical
performance, such as a high initial reversible capacity of ∼1957
mAh/g and good cycling stability with ∼63% capacity retention
following 100 cycles at a current rate of 200 mA/g. The improved electrochemical
performance of the Si QD cluster is attributed to the π-conjugated
molecules between QDs and on the surface of the Si QD cluster, which
acts as a buffer layer to alleviate mechanical stresses arising from
the alloying reaction of Si with lithium, and maintains the electrical
conduits in the anode system. This cluster synthesis strategy can
be an attractive approach because the electrochemical performance
of the QD cluster can be further enhanced by modifying the organic
structures and introducing different functional groups.
Experimental
Section
Chemicals and Materials
All chemical reagents were
used as received without further purification. Toluene (anhydrous,
99.8%), borane–tetrahydrofuran complex solution (BH3OC4H8, 1.0 M in THF), 1,4-diethynylbenzene
(C10H6, 96%), 1-octene (C10H16, 98%), bis(triphenylphosphine)palladium(II) dichloride (Pd-(PPh3)2Cl2, 98%), copper(I) iodide (CuI,
>98.0%), triethylamine (TEA) (N(C2H5)3, 99.0%), vinylene carbonate (VC) (99%), sodium chloride (NaCl)
(≥98.0%),
and poly(acrylic acid) (PAA) (average Mv ∼ 450 000) were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich. Hydrofluoric
acid (HF, 48–51%) and ammonium hydroxide solution (NH4OH, 25%) were purchased from J.T. Baker and Acros Organic, respectively.
Super P carbon black, n-methyl-2-pyrrolidone (NMP),
Cu-foil, and Li-metal were obtained from Wellcos Corporation (South
Korea). Ethanol (EtOH) (C2H5OH, 99.5%) and methanol
(MeOH) (CH3OH, 99.5%) were purchased from Dae-Jung (South
Korea). 1-Bromo-4-ethynylbenzene (C8H5Br, >98.0%)
was purchased from TCI. One molar lithium hexafluorophosphate (LiPF6) in ethylene carbonate (EC)/ethyl methyl carbonate (EMC)
(1:1 v/v) was obtained from Soul-Brain (South Korea).
Synthesis of
4-Bromostyryl and Octyl Co-Capped Si QDs
The synthetic procedures
of silica nanoparticles (SiO2 NPs) and oxide-coated silicon
nanocrystals (Si NCs@SiO) are described
in the Supporting Information.[37,38] Freestanding 4-bromostyryl and
octyl co-capped Si QDs (4-Bs/OctSi QDs) were prepared using borane-catalyzed
hydrosilylation reaction between 1-bromo-4-ethynylbenzene/1-octene
and hydride-terminated Si QDs (H-Si QDs).[39,40] The H-Si QDs were synthesized only from Si NCs@SiO (0.5 g) via an etching reaction using a mixture of HF (20
mL), EtOH (20 mL), and distilled water (20 mL) for 2 h. After the
completion of the etching process, H-Si QDs were extracted from the
etching solution with toluene (3 × 30 mL). The H-Si QDs were
isolated from the toluene by centrifugation at 12 000 rpm for
10 min and redispersed in anhydrous toluene. After the H-Si QDs were
transferred to a 100 mL two-neck flask equipped with a condenser connected
to an argon-filled Schlenk line, the borane–tetrahydrofuran
complex solution (0.6 mL), 1-octene (6 mL), and 1-bromo-4-ethynylbenzene
(0.2 g) were added, and the reaction mixture was stirred for 48 h
at room temperature. After the reaction was complete, the aggregated
or unreacted materials were removed by centrifugation and filtration.
The product was purified by solvent precipitation using methanol as
an antisolvent and toluene as a solvent. Finally, the 4-Bs/OctSi
QDs were obtained as bright yellow solids after drying with a rotary
evaporator.
Synthesis of π-Conjugated Molecule
Bridged Si QD Cluster
The π-conjugated molecule bridged
Si QD cluster was prepared
via Sonogashira cross-coupling reaction following our previous report,
with some modifications.[41] The C–C
cross-coupling reaction between 4-Bs/OctSi QDs and 1,4-diethynylbenzene
was carried out in an argon atmosphere using the standard Schlenk
line technique. The 4-Bs/OctSi QDs (50 mg), 1,4-diethynylbenzene
(63 mg), Pd(PPh3)2Cl2 (20 mg), and
CuI (8 mg) were dissolved/dispersed into anhydrous toluene (30 mL)
and the reaction mixture was transferred to a 100 mL two-neck flask
equipped with a condenser that was connected to an argon-filled Schlenk
line. After the addition of TEA (3 mL) to the flask, the reaction
mixture was stirred at 110 °C for 2 h to obtain a dark-brown
solution. After cooling the reaction mixture, methanol (MeOH) was
added to precipitate the Si QD cluster. The Si QD cluster was centrifuged
at 12 000 rpm for 10 min and washed three times with MeOH (100
mL) to remove the catalyst. Finally, the Si QD cluster was obtained
as a dark-brown powder after drying with a rotary evaporator.
Material
Characterization
Field-emission transmission
electron microscopy (FE-TEM) was performed using a JEM-2100F electron
microscope (JEOL, Japan) with an accelerating voltage of 400 kV. For
TEM sampling, 0.1 wt % solution of the Si QD cluster in toluene was
drop-cast onto a lacey carbon-coated copper grid, and the solvent
was evaporated in vacuum. Proton nuclear magnetic resonance (H NMR)
data were collected with the superconducting FT-NMR at 300 MHz (Varian
Inc., Palo Alto, California). Chemical shifts were reported in parts
per million (ppm) in a solvent of chloroform-d (99.8 atom % D). Fourier-transform
infrared (FT-IR) spectroscopy was performed using a Nicolet 380 spectrometry
system (Waltham, MA) operated in the mid-IR range of (4000–400)
cm–1, with the spectra obtained at a spectral resolution
of 2 cm–1 in the transmittance mode. Carbon, hydrogen,
nitrogen, sulfur, and oxygen contents were measured using a Thermo
Scientific Flash 2000 organic elemental analyzer and vario MICRO cube
elemental analyzer. Nitrogen adsorption–desorption isotherms
were recorded using Belsorp mini II surface area and porosimetry analyzer.
Prior to the measurements, the Si QD cluster was degassed under vacuum
at 70 °C for 6 h.
Electrochemical Characterization
The electrochemical
performance of the 4-Bs/OctSi QD and Si QD clusters was evaluated
using a CR 2032 coin-type cell with Li metal as the counter/reference
electrode. The working electrodes were prepared by casting a mixture
of the test materials, super Pcarbon, and poly(acrylic acid) in a
weight ratio of 70:15:15 onto a copper foil, which serves as a current
collector. The copper foils were dried at 60 °C for 5 h in a
vacuum oven to remove the solvent used for slurry preparation. The
mass loading of all the electrodes was ∼1.0 mg/cm2. The coin cells were assembled in an argon-filled glovebox using
lithium metal and glass fiber (GF/F, Whatman) as a separator. One
molar LiPF6 in ethylene carbonate (EC)/ethyl methyl carbonate
(EMC) (1:1 v/v) containing 5 wt % vinylene carbonate (VC) was used
as an electrolyte. Galvanostatic charge–discharge and cycling
performance measurements were conducted in the potential range of
0.01–2.5 V versus Li/Li+ at room temperature using
a battery cycling system (WonATech-WBCS 3000L). The AC impedance was
also measured by CompactStat (IVIUM TECHNOLOGIES), with a frequency
range of 100 kHz to 0.01 Hz and a voltage amplitude set to 10 mV.
Cyclic voltammetry scans were performed with a potential range of
0.01–2.5 V (versus Li+/Li) at the scan rate of 0.01
mV/s.
Authors: Tapas K Purkait; Muhammad Iqbal; Maike H Wahl; Kerstin Gottschling; Christina M Gonzalez; Muhammad Amirul Islam; Jonathan G C Veinot Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2014-12-18 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Nian Liu; Zhenda Lu; Jie Zhao; Matthew T McDowell; Hyun-Wook Lee; Wenting Zhao; Yi Cui Journal: Nat Nanotechnol Date: 2014-02-16 Impact factor: 39.213