Ru(II)-bpy complexes bound to nanocrystalline TiO2 films through phenyleneethynylene (OPE) linkers: Effect of the linkers length on electron injection rates

Journal of Physical Chemistry C

Volumn 111, Issue 7, 2007, Pages 2827-2829

  Myahkostupov, Mykhaylo ^a   Piotrowiak, Piotr ^a   Wang, Dong ^a   Galoppini, Elena ^a  

^a RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

INJECTION DYNAMICS; ISOPHTHALIC ACID; OLIGO(PHENYLENEETHYNYLENE); SENSITIZERS;

COMPLEXATION; ELECTRON INJECTION; ORGANIC ACIDS; REACTION RATES; RUTHENIUM COMPOUNDS; TITANIUM DIOXIDE;

NANOCRYSTALLINE MATERIALS;

EID: 33847724721     PISSN: 19327447     EISSN: 19327455     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/jp0679257     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Kalyanasundaram, K.; Grätzel, M. Coord. Chem. Rev. 1998, 177, 347.
2. (a) Benkö, G.; Kallioinen, J.; Korppi-Tommola, J. E. I.; Yartsev, A.; Sundström, V. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2002, 124, 489.
3. (b) van't Spijker, H.; Goossens, A. Thin Sol. Films 2002, 403-404, 410.
4. (c) Kuciauskas, D.; Monat, J. E.; Villahermosa, R.; Gray, H. B.; Lewis, N. S.; McCusker, J. K. J. Phys. Chem. B 2002, 106, 9347.
5. (d) Hannappel, T.; Burfeindt, B.; Storck, W.; Willig, F. J. Phys. Chem. B 1997, 101, 6799.
6. Lewis, N. S. Inorg. Chem. 2005, 44, 6900.
7. (a) Ernstorfer, R.; Gundlach, L.; Felber, S.; Storck, W.; Eichberger, R.; Willig, F. J. Phys. Chem. B. 2006, 110, 25383.
8. (b) Persson, P.; Lundqvist, M. J.; Ernstorfer, R.; Goddard, W. A., III; Willig, F. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2006, 2, 441.
9. (c) Kilså, K.; Mayo, E. I.; Kuciauskas, D.; Villahermosa, R.; Lewis, N. S.; Winkler, J. R.; Gray, H. B. J. Phys. Chem. A 2003, 107, 3379.
10. (d) Anderson, N. A.; Ai, X.; Chen, D.; Mohler, D. L.; Lian, T. J. Phys. Chem. B 2003, 107, 14231.
11. (a) Piotrowiak, P.; Galoppini, E.; Wei, Q.; Meyer, G. J.; Wiewior, P. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003, 125, 5278.
12. (b) Galoppini, E.; Guo, W.; Zhang, W.; Hoertz, P. G.; Qu, P.; Meyer, G. J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2002, 124, 7801 -7811.
13. Galoppini, E. Coord. Chem. Rev. 2004, 248, 1283.
14. (a) Wang, D.; Mendelsohn, R.; Galoppini, E.; Hoertz, P. G.; Carlisle, R. A.; Meyer, G. J. J. Phys. Chem. B 2004, 108, 16642.
15. (b) Wang, D.; Schlegel, J. M.; Galoppini, E. Tetrahedron 2002, 58, 6027.
16. Lundqvist, M. J.; Galoppini, E.; Meyer, G. J.; Persson, P. J. Phys. Chem A 2006, in press.
17. (a) Smalley, J. F.; Sachs, S. B.; Chidsey, C. E. D.; Dudek, S. P.; Sikes, H. D.; Creager, S. E.; Yu, C. J.; Feldberg, S. W.; Newton, M. D. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2004, 126, 14620.
18. (b) Kushmerick, J. G.; Holt, D. B.; Pollack, S. K.; Ratner, M. A.; Yang, J. C.; Schull, T. L.; Naciri, J.; Moore, M. H.; Shashidhar, R. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2002, 124, 10654.
19. (c) Tour, J. M. Ace. Chem. Res. 2000, 33, 791.
20. Schwab, P. F. H.; Levin, M.; Michl, J. Chem. Rev. 1999, 99, 1863.
21. (a) Funston, A. M.; Silverman, E. E.; Miller, J. R.; Schanze, K. S. J. Phys. Chem. B 2004, 108, 1544.
22. (b) Chaignon, F.; Torroba, J.; Blart, E.; Borgström, M.; Hammarström, L.; Odobel, M. New J. Chem. 2005, 29, 1272.
23. (c) Atienza, C.; Insuastri, B.; Seoane, C.; Martín, N.; Ramey, J.; Aminur Rahman, G. M.; Guldi, D. M. J. Mater. Chem. 2005, 15, 124.
24. (d) El-ghayoury, A.; Harriman, A.; Khathyr, A.; Ziessel, R. J. Phys. Chem. A 2000, 104, 1512.
25. (e) Eng, M. P.; Ljungdahl, T.; Mårtensson, J.; Albinsson, B. J. Phys. Chem. B 2006, 110, 6483.
26. (f) Pettersson, K.; Kyrychenko, A.; Rönnow, E.; Ljungdahl, T.; Mårtensson, J.; Albinsson, B. J. Phys. Chem. A 2006, 110, 310.
27. (g) Pettersson, K.; Wiberg, J.; Ljungdahl, T.; Mårtensson, J.; Albinsson, B. J. Phys. Chem. A 2006, 110, 319.
28. (h) Thompson, A. L.; Ahn, T.-S.; Justin Thomas, K. R.; Thayumanavan, S.; Martínez, T. J.; Bardeen, C. J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005, 127, 16348.
29. Sudeep, P. K.; James, P. V.; Thomas, K. G.; Kamat, P. V. J. Phys. Chem. A 2006, 110, 5642.
30. The surface coverage was lowest for compound 3. This is reflected in the lower amplitudes at t = 0 for 3 (Figure 3). We have often observed that structural differences result in difference in binding properties, and that the largest or more lipophilic compounds are most difficult to bind.
31. 0 exp(-βr) where r is the N to C distance.
32. - counterion on the calculated optoelectronic properties of 1 and 2, see ref 8.
33. Willig and Gundlach, private communication.