4.8 Article

Selective Reduction Mechanism of Graphene Oxide Driven by the Photon Mode versus the Thermal Mode

期刊

ACS NANO
卷 13, 期 9, 页码 10103-10112

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acsnano.9b03060

关键词

graphene oxide; structural dynamics; time-resolved electron diffraction; time-resolved spectroscopy; time-dependent density functional theory

资金

  1. JST [JPMJPR13KD, JPMJPR13KC]
  2. CREST program from JST [JPMJCR18R3]
  3. SICORP Program from JST
  4. KAKENHI from JSPS [JP16H00915, JP16H04001, JP17H06375, JP18H05170, JP18H04519, JP18H04371, JP18H04288, JP18H05208]
  5. JSPS Leading Initiative for Excellent Young Researchers

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A two-dimensional nanocarbon, graphene, has attracted substantial interest due to its excellent properties. The reduction of graphene oxide (GO) has been investigated for the mass production of graphene used in practical applications. Different reduction processes produce different properties in graphene, affecting the performance of the final materials or devices. Therefore, an understanding of the mechanisms of GO reduction is important for controlling the properties of functional two-dimensional systems. Here, we determined the average structure of reduced GO prepared via heating and photoexcitation and clearly distinguished their reduction mechanisms using Graphene oxide ultrafast time-resolved electron diffraction, time-resolved infrared vibrational spectroscopy, and time-dependent density functional theory calculations. The oxygen atoms of epoxy groups are selectively removed from the basal plane of GO by photoexcitation (photon mode), in stark contrast to the behavior observed for the thermal reduction of hydroxyl and epoxy groups (thermal mode). The difference originates from the selective excitation of epoxy bonds via an electronic transition due to their antibonding character. This work will enable the preparation of the optimum GO for the intended applications and expands the application scope of two-dimensional systems.

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

4.8
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