4.7 Article

Confinement Promotes Hydrogen Bond Network Formation and Grotthuss Proton Hopping in Ion-Conducting Block Copolymers

期刊

MACROMOLECULES
卷 55, 期 2, 页码 615-622

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.macromol.1c01808

关键词

-

资金

  1. MRSEC Program of the National Science Foundation [DMR 1720256]
  2. Department of Energy Office of Basic Energy Sciences [DE-SC0016390]
  3. DOE Office of Science [DE-SC0012704]
  4. U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) [DE-SC0016390] Funding Source: U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

It is found that block copolymer proton-conducting polymeric ionic liquid (PIL) has higher conductivity than analogous homopolymer. The increased structural rigidity of the ionic functional groups in the block copolymer PIL leads to enhanced ion dynamics. This nanoscale restructuring significantly enhances Grotthuss proton hopping dynamics in the block copolymer PIL.
Proton-conducting polymer membranes frequently contain nanoscale structural and ion-conducting phases. In addition to enhancing the mechanical properties, this mesoscale structure often leads to a significant increase in ion dynamics; however, the molecular underpinnings behind this phenomenon are not well understood. Here, a model proton-conducting polymeric ionic liquid (PIL) block copolymer is shown to have conductivity up to an order of magnitude higher than an analogous homopolymer. Variable temperature H-1 solid-state magic angle spinning (MAS) NMR spectroscopy reveals that confinement in the block copolymer PIL decreases the segmental motion of the PIL and increases the structural rigidity of the ionic functional groups. This increased structural rigidity is found to dramatically increase the connectivity of the hydrogen bonding network in the block copolymer PIL according to double quantum-single quantum H-1 MAS NMR. This nanoscale restructuring leads to a significant increase in Grotthuss proton hopping dynamics in the block copolymer PIL compared to the homopolymer.

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

4.7
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