Tag Archives: Hao Li

Love, hate, and the whole damn thing affect batteries, semiconductors, and electronic memory

Leave a reply

A Jan. 24, 2013 news item on ScienceDaily features love triumphing over hate where tetracationic rings are concerned,

Northwestern University graduate student Jonathan Barnes had a hunch for creating an exotic new chemical compound, and his idea that the force of love is stronger than hate proved correct. He and his colleagues are the first to permanently interlock two identical tetracationic rings that normally are repelled by each other. Many experts had said it couldn’t be done.

On the surface, the rings hate each other because each carries four positive charges (making them tetracationic). But Barnes discovered by introducing radicals (unpaired electrons) onto the scene, the researchers could create a love-hate relationship in which love triumphs.

The Jan. 24, 2013 Northwestern University news release by Megan Fellman, which originated the news item, probes into the nature of the problem and its solution (Note: A link has been removed),

Unpaired electrons want to pair up and be stable, and it turns out the attraction of one ring’s single electrons to the other ring’s single electrons is stronger than the repelling forces.

The process links the rings not by a chemical bond but by a mechanical bond, which, once in place, cannot easily be torn asunder.

The study detailing this new class of stable organic radicals will be published Jan. 25 [2013] by the journal Science.

“It’s not that people have tried and failed to put these two rings together — they just didn’t think it was possible,” said Sir Fraser Stoddart, a senior author of the paper. “Now this molecule has been made. I cannot overemphasize Jonathan’s achievement — it is really outside the box. Now we are excited to see where this new chemistry leads us.”

…

The rings repel each other like the positive poles of two magnets. Barnes saw an opportunity where he thought he could tweak the chemistry by using radicals to overcome the hate between the two rings.

“We made these rings communicate and love each other under certain conditions, and once they were mechanically interlocked, the bond could not be broken,” Barnes said.

Barnes’ first strategy — adding electrons to temporarily reduce the charge and bring the two rings together — worked the first time he tried it. He, Stoddart and their colleagues started with a full ring and a half ring that they then closed up around the first ring (using some simple chemistry), creating the mechanical bond.

When the compound is oxidized and electrons lost, the strong positive forces come roaring back — “It’s hate on all the time,” Barnes said — but then it is too late for the rings to be parted. “That’s the beauty of this system,” he added.

Most organic radicals possess short lifetimes, but this unusual radical compound is stable in air and water. The compound tucks the electrons away inside the structure so they can’t react with anything in the environment. The tight mechanical bond endures despite the unfavorable electrostatic interactions.

The two interlocked rings house an immense amount of charge in a mere cubic nanometer of space. The compound, a homo[2]catenane, can adopt one of six oxidation states and can accept up to eight electrons in total.

“Anything that accepts this many electrons has possibilities for batteries,” Barnes said.

“Applications beckon,” Stoddart agreed. “Now we need to spend more time with materials scientists and people who make devices to see how this amazing compound can be used.”

For anyone interested in the details of the work, here’s a citation and link to the paper published in Science,

A Radically Configurable Six-State Compound by Jonathan C. Barnes, Albert C. Fahrenbach, Dennis Cao, Scott M. Dyar, Marco Frasconi, Marc A. Giesener, Diego Benítez, Ekaterina Tkatchouk, Oleksandr Chernyashevskyy, Weon Ho Shin, Hao Li, Srinivasan Sampath, Charlotte L. Stern, Amy A. Sarjeant, Karel J. Hartlieb, Zhichang Liu, Raanan Carmieli, Youssry Y. Botros, Jang Wook Choi, Alexandra M. Z. Slawin, John B. Ketterson, Michael R. Wasielewski, William A. Goddard III, J. Fraser Stoddart. Science 25 January 2013: Vol. 339 no. 6118 pp. 429-433 DOI: 10.1126/science.1228429

This is paper is behind a paywall.

University of Missouri and the US Geological survey study carbon nanotubes in aquatic environments

Leave a reply

The University of Missouri’s Aug. 22, 2012 news release (by Timothy Wall) announces the result of a carbon nanotube study in aquatic environments,

A joint study by the University of Missouri and United States Geological Survey found that they [carbon nanotubes or CNTs] can be toxic to aquatic animals. The researchers urge that care be taken to prevent the release of CNTs into the environment as the materials enter mass production.

“The great promise of carbon nanotubes must be balanced with caution and preparation,” said Baolin Deng, professor and chair of chemical engineering at the University of Missouri. “We don’t know enough about their effects on the environment and human health. The EPA and other regulatory groups need more studies like ours to provide information on the safety of CNTs.”

CNTs are microscopically thin cylinders of carbon atoms that can be hundreds of millions of times longer than they are wide, but they are not pure carbon. Nickel, chromium and other metals used in the manufacturing process can remain as impurities. Deng and his colleagues found that these metals and the CNTs themselves can reduce the growth rates or even kill some species of aquatic organisms. The four species used in the experiment were mussels (Villosa iris), small flies’ larvae (Chironomus dilutus), worms (Lumbriculus variegatus) and crustaceans (Hyalella azteca).

“One of the greatest possibilities of contamination of the environment by CNTs comes during the manufacture of composite materials,” said Hao Li, associate professor of mechanical and aerospace engineering at MU. “Good waste management and handling procedures can minimize this risk. Also, to control long-term risks, we need to understand what happens when these composite materials break down.”

I found the abstract for the team’s paper gave a good overview of how the research was conducted,

Carbon nanotubes (CNTs) are hydrophobic in nature and thus tend to accumulate in sediments if released into aquatic environments. As part of our overall effort to examine the toxicity of carbon-based nanomaterials to sediment-dwelling invertebrates, we have evaluated the toxicity of different types of CNTs in 14-d water-only exposures to an amphipod (Hyalella azteca), a midge (Chironomus dilutus), an oligochaete (Lumbriculus variegatus), and a mussel (Villosa iris) in advance of conducting whole-sediment toxicity tests with CNTs. The results of these toxicity tests conducted with CNTs added to water showed that 1.00 g/L (dry wt) of commercial sources of CNTs significantly reduced the survival or growth of the invertebrates. Toxicity was influenced by the type and source of the CNTs, by whether the materials were precleaned by acid, by whether sonication was used to disperse the materials, and by species of the test organisms. Light and electron microscope imaging of the surviving test organisms showed the presence of CNTs in the gut as well as on the outer surface of the test organisms, although no evidence was observed to show penetration of CNTs through cell membranes. The present study demonstrated that both the metals solubilized from CNTs such as nickel and the “metal-free” CNTs contributed to the toxicity.

Here’s the full citation and a link to the paper,

Toxicity of carbon nanotubes to freshwater aquatic invertebrates by Joseph N. Mwangi, Ning Wang, Christopher G. Ingersoll, Doug K. Hardesty, Eric L. Brunson, Hao Li, and Baolin Deng in Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, Volume 31, Issue 8, pages 1823–1830, August 2012

For anyone who’s curious about what carbon nanotubes look like, here’s an image provided by the University of MIssouri,

Carbon Nanotubes Credit: Shaddack, Wikimedia Commons
Multi-walled carbon nanotubes. 3-15 walls, mean inner diameter 4nm, mean outer diameter 13-16 nm, length 1-10+ micrometers. Black clumpy powder, grains shown, partially smeared on paper. Scale in centimeters.

I could have included a larger version of the image but, given that we’re talking about the nanoscale, the smaller image seems more appropriate.