1981
DOI: 10.1016/0167-2738(81)90292-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Mechanisms of hydrogen diffusion and conduction in DUO 2 AsO 4 ·4D 2 O as inferred from neutron diffraction evidence

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

3
11
0

Year Published

1982
1982
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 45 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
3
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The activation energy ( E a ) of BIL25–BIL100, calculated by the Arrhenius equation, are 0.60, 0.76, and 0.76 eV, respectively. These values are higher than those of the typical hydrated proton conductors with H + transfer through a Grotthuss mechanism, such as Nafion ( E a =0.22 eV) and HUO 2 AsO 4 ⋅4 H 2 O ( E a =0.32 eV), but are comparable to that of the anhydrous proton conductors, such as 0.66 eV for [Zn(H 2 PO 4 ) 2 (HPO 4 )]⋅(H 2 dmbim) 2 , and 0.90 eV for Im@{Al( μ 2 ‐OH)(1,4‐bdc)} n (dmbim=5,6‐dimethylbenzimidazole; 1,4‐bdc=1,4‐benzenedicarboxylate) . The rate‐limiting step of the Grotthuss mechanism is the structural reorientation of the proton carrier after H + transfer, and thus the E a would automatically be higher for a larger molecule.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 76%
“…The activation energy ( E a ) of BIL25–BIL100, calculated by the Arrhenius equation, are 0.60, 0.76, and 0.76 eV, respectively. These values are higher than those of the typical hydrated proton conductors with H + transfer through a Grotthuss mechanism, such as Nafion ( E a =0.22 eV) and HUO 2 AsO 4 ⋅4 H 2 O ( E a =0.32 eV), but are comparable to that of the anhydrous proton conductors, such as 0.66 eV for [Zn(H 2 PO 4 ) 2 (HPO 4 )]⋅(H 2 dmbim) 2 , and 0.90 eV for Im@{Al( μ 2 ‐OH)(1,4‐bdc)} n (dmbim=5,6‐dimethylbenzimidazole; 1,4‐bdc=1,4‐benzenedicarboxylate) . The rate‐limiting step of the Grotthuss mechanism is the structural reorientation of the proton carrier after H + transfer, and thus the E a would automatically be higher for a larger molecule.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 76%
“…Thet emperature dependence of the proton conductivity was measured at 93 %R Hu sing as ample (pelletized at 50 MPa) of CPM-103a to further probe the mechanism of proton conduction (Supporting Information, Figure S14). Figure 2c shows the Arrhenius plot of the proton conductivity.The activation energy (E a )was found to be 0.66 eV,which indicates that the mechanism of proton conduction is expected to be similar to that of the Grotthus mechanism, that is,p roton transport from Himdc 2À by re-forming hydrogen bonds between Himdc 2À and H 2 Og uest molecules.T he E a value is higher than some well-known hydrated proton conductors,s uch as PCMOF-5 (0.32 eV) [16] ,H UO 2 PO 4 ·H 2 O (0.32 eV) [17] and Nafion (0.22 eV); [18] but comparable to inorganic-organic hybrid highly proton-conductive materials,s uch as (NH 4 ) 2 (adipic acid)[Zn 2 (oxalate) 3 ]·3 H 2 O . .…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 85%
“…The activation energy ( E a ) was found to be 0.66 eV, which indicates that the mechanism of proton conduction is expected to be similar to that of the Grotthus mechanism, that is, proton transport from Himdc 2− by re‐forming hydrogen bonds between Himdc 2− and H 2 O guest molecules. The E a value is higher than some well‐known hydrated proton conductors, such as PCMOF‐5 (0.32 eV)16, HUO 2 PO 4 ⋅H 2 O (0.32 eV)17 and Nafion (0.22 eV);18 but comparable to inorganic–organic hybrid highly proton‐conductive materials, such as (NH 4 ) 2 (adipic acid)[Zn 2 (oxalate) 3 ]⋅3 H 2 O (0.63 eV),6 In‐IA‐2D‐1(0.61 eV),19 and {[Ca( D ‐Hpmpc)(H 2 O) 2 ]⋅2 HO 0.5 } n /PVP composite (0.65 eV) 20…”
mentioning
confidence: 82%