日本語View as Markdown

Hydrogenation, purification, and unzipping of carbon nanotubes by reaction with molecular hydrogen: road to graphane nanoribbons.

分子状水素との反応による単層カーボンナノチューブの水素化・精製・アンジッピングとグラフェンナノリボン生成

other not specified not assessed

Abstract

This study examined the reaction of single-walled carbon nanotubes (SWNTs) with molecular hydrogen gas at 50 bar across a temperature range of 400–550°C. At 400–450°C, covalent C-H bond formation was observed in approximately one-third of carbon atoms, indicating successful hydrogenation. At 550°C, the dominant process shifted to etching rather than hydrogenation. Across the full temperature range tested, a subset of SWNTs underwent structural unzipping to yield graphene nanoribbons. Extended annealing under hydrogen at elevated conditions for 72 hours additionally produced nanotube opening, removal of amorphous carbon impurities, and stripping of carbon coatings from iron catalyst particles, enabling their complete elimination via subsequent acid treatment. These findings outline a hydrogen-based route toward graphane nanoribbon synthesis and nanotube purification.

Mechanism

Under 50 bar hydrogen gas, thermal treatment at 400–450°C induces covalent C-H bond formation on SWNT carbon atoms (hydrogenation), while higher temperatures (550°C) favor etching. Prolonged annealing facilitates nanotube unzipping into graphene nanoribbons and removal of amorphous carbon and catalyst coatings.

Bibliographic

Authors
Talyzin AV, Luzan S, Anoshkin IV, Nasibulin AG, Jiang H, Kauppinen EI, et al.
Journal
ACS Nano
Year
2011 (2011-06-28)
PMID
21504190
DOI
10.1021/nn201224k

Tags

Delivery context

The delivery route is not clearly identifiable from this paper. For hydrogen intake, inhalation is the most efficient route; inhalation, however, carries explosion risk (empirical LFL of 10%; high-concentration devices are not recommended).

Safety notes

The delivery route is not clearly identifiable from this paper. For hydrogen intake, inhalation is the most efficient route; inhalation, however, carries explosion risk (empirical LFL of 10%; high-concentration devices are not recommended).

See also:

Cite as: H2 Papers — PMID 21504190. https://h2-papers.org/en/papers/21504190
Source: PubMed PMID 21504190