RSC Advances
Communication
than the other imidazolium salts, which will encounter an
association of multiple TFSI anions with a lithium cation.19 The
ratio of DO/DR is 0.97 and 0.98 for 2 and 3, respectively; these
values are really close to 1 thus showing that the oxidation process
is fully reversible and the diffusion expectedly follows Arrhenius-
type behaviour. The heterogeneous rate transfer constant (ks) was
determined using peak-to-peak separation (Dp) according to
Nicholson’s method.20 The scan rate experiment was carried out
using iR compensation with positive feedback. At low scan rates,
the electron transfer is Nernstian and not controlled by the
electrode reaction kinetics. At scan rates of 2 V s21 and higher, the
peak separations from these scan rates were used to calculate an
average ks. All data are summarised in Table 1. As discussed above,
compound 3, with less interaction to the electrolyte than 2,
Table 1 Electrochemical data of compounds 1–4
ox
E1/2 (V)
DR (cm2 s21
3.72 6 1027
)
DO (cm2 s21
)
ks (cm s21
)
1
2
3
4
+1.00a
—
—
+0.51 (+0.56/+0.45) 3.64 6 1027
+0.51 (+0.56/+0.46) 5.21 6 1027
+0.44 (+0.50/+0.37) 3.24 6 1027
3.52 6 1027
5.08 6 1027
3.21 6 1027
0.0049
0.0090
0.0049
a
Quasi-reversible wave.
are 0.34 V lower than 1. For comparison, we also measured the
oxidation potential of 2,5-di-tert-butyl-1,4-dimethoxybenzene (4) in
the same conditions. This compound also shows a reversible
oxidation wave with E1/2ox = +0.44 V which is 0.07 V lower than the
ox
predictably has a higher ks value (0.0090 and 0.0049 cm s21
respectively).
In conclusion, three new imidazolium salts, 1–3 which are
,
E1/2 of 2 and 3 (+0.51 V for both). The difference in potential
could be attributed to the imidazolium cation on the chain pulling
electron density away from the core thus requiring more energy to
remove an electron or from possible p-stacking interactions
between the aromatic core and the imidazolium ring, allowed by
the flexibility of the propyl linker chain. The evaluation of the
electrochemistry of an analogue of compound 1 with a shorter
linker could provide an explanation on the shift in potential. To
examine the effect the addition of the tert-butyl groups and the
incorporation of the redox shuttle into an ionic liquid has on the
transport properties, the diffusion coefficients (reduced, DR and
oxidised, DO forms) of compounds 1–4 and the heterogeneous rate
transfer (ks) of compounds 2–4 were measured. Compound 1 does
not show a reversible oxidation and therefore DO and ks could not
be calculated. The diffusion coefficient, an important parameter
for redox shuttles as it is a factor in the determination of the
maximum current that the redox shuttle can carry,18 was
calculated from a series of oxidations at different scan rates
based on 1,4-dimethoxybenzene and 2,5-di-tert-butyl-1,4-dimethox-
ybenzene redox-active groups linked to imidazolium cations to
form salts with TFSI and PF6 anions were reported. Compound 1
has the highest oxidation potential but is irreversible; compounds
2 and 3 are fully reversible, the large tert-butyl groups prevent
dimerisation but also lower oxidation potential through a large
inductive effect. The PF6 salt, 2 shows the highest diffusion
coefficient and heterogeneous rate constant among the three
compounds. In comparison to 4, the incorporation of 2,5-di-tert-
butyl-1,4-dimethoxybenzene onto a redox-active imidazolium salt
improves the thermal stability, has no negative impact on the
transport properties and even actually increases the oxidation
potential. In a future paper, we will report on the use of these
redox-active imidazolium salts as redox shuttles for cathode
overcharge protection in Li-ion batteries.
(ESI, Fig. S8–S12). The diffusion coefficients of the reduced forms
3
´ ´
We acknowledge the financial support from Fonds Quebecois
pour la Recherche en Nature et Technologie (FQRNT).
are all in the same order of magnitude (61027 cm2 s21), for the
four compounds with the only difference being the PF6 salt (3)
which has a higher diffusion coefficient in both the reduced and
oxidised forms. The reason for the small increase can be explained
by the PF6 salt experiencing less interaction with the electrolyte
Notes and references
1 A. B. McEwen, H. L. Ngo, K. LeCompte and J. L. Goldman, J.
Electrochem. Soc., 1999, 146, 1687–1695.
2 A. Lewandowski and A. Swiderska-Mocek, J. Power Sources,
2009, 194, 601–609.
3 M. Armand, F. Endres, D. R. MacFarlane, H. Ohno and
B. Scrosati, Nat. Mater., 2009, 8, 621–629.
4 M. Galinski, A. Lewandowski and I. Stepniak, Electrochim. Acta,
2006, 51, 5567–5580.
5 W. Wang, R. Balasubramanian and R. W. Murray, J. Phys.
Chem. C, 2008, 112, 18207–18216.
6 O. Fontaine, C. Lagrost, J. Ghilane, P. Martin, G. Trippe,
C. Fave, J. C. Lacroix, P. Hapiot and H. N. Randriamahazaka, J.
Electroanal. Chem., 2009, 632, 88–96.
7 J. C. Forgie, S. El Khakani, D. D. MacNeil and D. Rochefort,
Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys, 2013, 15, 7713–7721.
8 Y. Gao, B. Twamley and J. M. Shreeve, Inorg. Chem., 2004, 43,
3406–3412.
9 J. Chen, C. Buhrmester and J. R. Dahn, Electrochem. Solid-State
Lett., 2005, 8, A59–A62.
Fig. 2 Cyclic voltammogram of compound 1 showing the formation of a new
compound upon cycling. Inset shows the stable behaviour of compound 2.
Conditions: 10 mM in EC:DEC + 1.5 M LiTFSI, 100 mV s21
.
This journal is ß The Royal Society of Chemistry 2013
RSC Adv., 2013, 3, 12035–12038 | 12037