Ask for a reprint
email :
* Give your email
2013
ACL
|
D.H.Brouwer, S.Cadars, J.Eckert, Z.Liu, O.Terasaki, B.F.Chmelka, 'A General Protocol for Determining the Structures of Molecularly Ordered but Non-Crystalline Silicate Frameworks', J. Am. Chem. Soc. 135 5641-5655 (2013) doi:10.1021/ja311649m
A general protocol is demonstrated for determining the structures of molecularly ordered but non-crystalline solids, which combines constraints provided by X-ray diffraction (XRD), one- and two-dimensional solid-state nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy, and first-principles quantum chemical calculations. The approach is used to determine the structure(s) of a surfactant-directed layered silicate with short-range order in two dimensions, but without long-range periodicity in three-dimensions (3D). The absence of long-range 3D molecular order and corresponding indexable X-ray diffraction reflections precludes determination of a space group for this layered silicate. Nevertheless, by combining structural constraints obtained from solid-state 29Si NMR analyses, including the types and relative populations of distinct 29Si sites, their respective 29Si-O-29Si connectivities and separation distances, with unit cell parameters (though not space group symmetry) provided by XRD, a comprehensive search of candidate framework structures leads to the identification of a small number of candidate structures that are each compatible with all of the experimental data. Subsequent refinement of the candidate structures using density-functional theory (DFT) calculations allow their evaluation and identification of “best” framework representations, based on their respective lattice energies and quantitative comparisons between experimental and calculated 29Si isotropic chemical shifts and 2J(29Si-O-29Si)-scalar couplings. The comprehensive analysis identifies three closely related and topologically-equivalent framework configurations that are in close agreement with all experimental and theoretical structural constraints. The subtle differences among such similar structural models embody the complexity of the actual framework(s), which likely contain co-existing or subtle distributions of structural order that are intrinsic to the material.
|
|
|