4.8 Article

Identifying the Molecular Edge Termination of Exfoliated Hexagonal Boron Nitride Nanosheets with Solid-State NMR Spectroscopy and Plane-Wave DFT Calculations

期刊

CHEMISTRY OF MATERIALS
卷 32, 期 7, 页码 3109-3121

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.chemmater.0c00104

关键词

-

资金

  1. U.S. DOE [DE-AC02-07CH11358]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Hexagonal boron nitride nanosheets (h-BNNS), the isoelectronic analog to graphene, have received interest over the past decade due to their high thermal oxidative resistance, high bandgap, catalytic activity, and low cost. The functional groups that terminate boron and nitrogen zigzag and/or armchair edges directly affect their chemical, physical, and electronic properties. However, an understanding of the molecular edge termination present in h-BNNS is lacking. Here, high-resolution magic-angle spinning (MAS) solid-state NMR (SSNMR) spectroscopy, and plane-wave density-functional theory (DFT) calculations are used to determine the molecular edge termination in exfoliated h-BNNS. H-1 -> B-11 cross-polarization MAS (CPMAS) SSNMR spectra of h-BNNS revealed multiple hydroxyl/oxygen coordinated boron edge sites that were not detectable in direct excitation experiments. A dynamic nuclear polarization (DNP)-enhanced H-1 -> N-15 CPMAS spectrum of h-BNNS displayed four distinct N-15 resonances while a 2D H-1{N-14} dipolar-HMQC spectrum acquired with fast MAS revealed three distinct N-15 environments. Plane-wave DFT calculations were used to construct model edge structures and predict the corresponding B-11, N-14 and N-15 SSNMR spectra. Comparison of the experimental and predicted SSNMR spectra confirms that zigzag and armchair edges with both amine and boron hydroxide/oxide termination are present. The detailed characterization of h-BNNS molecular edge termination will prove useful for many material science applications. The techniques outlined here should also be applicable to understand the molecular edge terminations in other 2D materials.

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