4.6 Article

Halide-Induced Cooperative Acid-Base Behavior at a Negatively Charged Interface

期刊

JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY C
卷 117, 期 17, 页码 8840-8850

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/jp401164r

关键词

-

资金

  1. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
  2. Canada Foundation for Innovation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Using Second harmonic generation and sum frequency generation spectroscopy, we monitor the influence of Sodium and potassium halides on acid-base processes at the negatively charged, silica/aqueous electrolyte interface We find that the two types of acidic silanols at the surface are very. sensitive to the presence of,halides in the aqueous phase. As the halide size increases, the pH at which half the more acidic sites are deprotonated (pH(0.5)) shifts to lower pH. Conversely, the pH(0.5) of the less acidic sites shifts to higher pH with increasing halide size. We also observe titration curves of increasing sharpness as the halide size increases, indicative of positive cooperativity. Using a simple cooperative model, we find that the cooperative,unit for the dissociation of more acidic surface sites is similar to 1, 2, and 3 for the chloride, bromide, and iodide electrolytes, respectively, which reveals that the larger anions promote deprotonation among the more acidic silanol groups. We also find that the fraction of more acidic sites, proportional to the relative surface charge density at neutral pH, increases from 20% to 86% as the sodium halide is varied from chloride to iodide: As the percentage of more acidic sites and the surface charge at neutral pH increases, the effective acidity of the less acidic sites decreases, indicating that greater surface charge density renders the remaining silanol groups more difficult to deprotonate. As the relative amount of less acidic sites increases, their deprotonation events exhibit negative, rather than positive, cooperativity revealing charge repulsion between neighboring silanol groups.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据