Victoria Bemmer
d,
Michael Bowkera,
James H. Cartera,
Philip R. Davies*a,
Lee E. Edwardsa,
Kenneth D. M. Harrisb,
Colan E. Hughesb,
Fiona Robinsonc,
David J. Morgana and
Matthew G. Thomasa
aCardiff Catalysis Institute, School of Chemistry, Cardiff University, Cardiff, CF10 3AT, UK. E-mail: daviespr@cardiff.ac.uk
bSchool of Chemistry, Cardiff University, Cardiff, CF10 3AT, UK
cCogent Power Ltd, Newport NP19 0RB, UK
dDept. of Materials, Imperial College, South Kensington Campus, London SW7 2AZ, UK
First published on 26th February 2020
The aim of this paper is to clarify the assignments of X-ray photoelectron spectra of aluminium phosphate materials prepared from the reaction of phosphoric acid with three different aluminium precursors [Al(OH)3, Al(NO3)3 and AlCl3] at different annealing temperatures. The materials prepared have been studied by X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS), powder X-ray diffraction (XRD), infrared spectroscopy and high-resolution solid-state 31P NMR spectroscopy. A progressive polymerization from orthophosphate to metaphosphates is observed by XRD, ATR-FTIR and solid state 31P NMR, and on this basis the oxygen states observed in the XP spectra at 532.3 eV and 533.7 eV are assigned to P–O–Al and P–O–P environments, respectively. The presence of cyclic polyphosphates at the surface of the samples is also evident.
The majority of studies on aluminium phosphates have focused on bulk analysis techniques,7 such as powder X-ray diffraction (XRD), solid-state 31P NMR, FTIR and thermogravimetric methods, but the surface properties of these materials are also of interest and one of the most commonly used techniques to investigate this aspect is X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS). A seminal study by Gresch et al.8 in 1979 on XPS of sodium phosphates provided well substantiated peak assignments for the oxygen region. This paper has since been extensively cited and used as a benchmark for XPS studies of phosphates. Gresch et al. proposed that the different states of oxygen created by crosslinking between phosphate units could be distinguished by their XP spectra, with the “bridging” oxygens appearing at higher binding energy (533.1–533.6 eV) than “non-bridging” oxygens (530.5–531.7 eV). This assignment was based on electronegativity arguments and spectra of model compounds. Concomitant with the shift in O(1s) binding energy, Gresch et al. reported that the P(2p) binding energy shifts from 132.5 eV to 134.5 eV as the degree of P–O–P bridging bonds increases.
More recently, Crobu et al.9 have also used the shift in O(1s) binding energy to assess the ratio of bridging to non-bridging oxygen in zinc polyphosphate glasses, correlating their results with secondary ion mass spectrometry measurements. They reported a shift from 532.2 eV to 534.0 eV as the reference material changed from an orthophosphate to a metaphosphate, with the P(2p) peak shifting from 134.0 eV to 134.8 eV.
Rotole and Sherwood, on the other hand, studied electrochemically deposited phosphate films on aluminium substrates.10 The XP spectra were referenced against data on aluminium orthophosphate11 and metaphosphate12 samples. They reported a constant P(2p) binding energy of 134.5 eV and a shift in the O(1s) peak from 531.4 eV for the orthophosphate to a broader peak at 531.8 eV for the metaphosphate. The latter peak clearly showed evidence for a second component at about 533.5 eV. However, the O(1s) data from the electrochemically treated surface were not so conclusive; the O(1s) spectrum of the “metaphosphate” was significantly broader than that of the orthophosphate and seemed to consist of two components. It is not clear whether the component due to bridging oxygens is at higher or lower binding energy than the component due to terminal oxygens.
In the present study, we have used solid-state 31P NMR, powder XRD and FTIR data to explore the structural changes that occur in aluminium phosphate materials synthesized from 3:1 mixtures of phosphoric acid and an aluminium precursor (either aluminium hydroxide, aluminium nitrate or aluminium chloride), which throw light on the information available from the surface specific XPS technique. Our results show that the expected polymerization occurs in materials prepared from all three precursors, and largely confirm the assignments of XP spectra based on existing literature. However, we also find evidence for the presence, at the surface, of polyphosphate species that do not contain aluminium, which distorts the Al:O:P ratios established from the XPS spectra.
Powder X-ray diffraction (XRD) data were recorded at room temperature using a PANalytical X'Pert Pro diffractometer with a monochromatic Cu Kα source (λ = 0.154 nm) operating at 40 kV and 40 mA. The data were recorded over the 2θ range 10–80° with a step size of 0.016°.
High-resolution solid-state 31P NMR spectra were acquired at room temperature on a Chemagnetics Infinity Plus spectrometer (31P Larmor frequency, 121.50 MHz). The samples were contained in a 4 mm rotor with magic-angle spinning at 12 kHz. Methyldiphenylphosphine oxide (MDPPO) was used as a reference, with 31P chemical shift at 30.8 ppm.
FTIR spectra were recorded using a germanium crystal ATR on a Varian 3100 Excalibur system with Varian Resolutions Pro software.
The crystalline phases present within each sample were investigated by powder XRD. Fig. 1, shows the XRD patterns for the AlPOH samples. For AlPOH(300) [i.e., the sample prepared from the Al(OH)3 precursor and annealed at 300 °C], only low intensity peaks are observed in the XRD data, and we have been unable to definitively match these peaks to a known structure. For the AlPOH(500) sample, the XRD data show sufficient crystallinity to allow Le Bail fitting, although Rietveld refinement was not possible. The Le Bail fitting confirms that two distinct phases are present: a cubic aluminium metaphosphate [Al(PO3)3] (ICSD: 26759) and an aluminium hexacyclophosphate (ICSD: 260723). For the AlPOH(800) sample, only the cubic aluminium metaphosphate is present. The results from Le Bail fitting are shown in Fig. S1 and S2 (in ESI†).
Fig. 1 Powder XRD patterns recorded for the AlPOH materials, with annealing at different temperatures. The AlPOH(300) sample is mostly non-crystalline, but both cubic metaphosphate and hexacyclophosphate are present in the AlPOH(500) sample. The AlPOH(800) sample is a pure phase of the cubic metaphosphate. Data for the AlPCl and AlPNO3 materials are given in ESI.† |
d'Yvoire14,15 also reported a pure cubic phase for a material prepared from Al(OH)3 and annealed at 800 °C, with a second phase present in the material annealed at 500 °C. However, d'Yvoire assigned the second phase to a monoclinic structure rather than the aluminium hexacyclophosphate observed here.
XRD indicates that the AlPNO3(500) and AlPNO3(800) samples (Fig. S3 and S4†) are a mixture of the cubic aluminium metaphosphate and aluminium hexacyclophosphate phases [similar to AlPOH(500) but different from AlPOH(800)]. Among the samples prepared from the AlCl3 precursor, the only crystalline product was AlPCl(800), identified from XRD as pure cubic Al(PO3)3 (Fig. S5†).
Further structural insights are obtained from high-resolution solid-state 31P NMR spectra (Fig. 2). For several of the samples, a peak at 0 ppm is present and assigned as the phosphoric acid starting material. As the annealing temperature increases, there is a trend towards increasingly negative 31P chemical shifts, attributed to polymerization.16 For AlPOH(300), a broad set of overlapping peaks is observed between 5 ppm and −40 ppm, possibly suggesting an amorphous structure. The peaks at −21 ppm and −32 ppm (which represent ca. 20% of the total signal) are assigned16 to aluminium tripolyphosphate (AlH2P3O10·H2O). These peaks are also observed for AlPNO3(300). For AlPOH(800), only one peak is observed (at 50.5 ppm) and is attributed unambiguously to cubic Al(PO3)3, consistent with the presence of a single phosphorus environment in this structure (Fig. 3). This peak is also present for the AlPOH(500) sample, together with peaks at −36.5 ppm and −43.0 ppm; the area ratio for these two peaks is 2:1, consistent with the presence of three crystallographically distinct phosphorus environments in the aluminium hexacyclophosphate phase (Fig. 3). Monoclinic Al(PO3)3, on the other hand, has 9 distinct phosphorus environments (Fig. 3).
Fig. 3 Structures of (a) aluminium orthophosphate (AlPO4), (b) monoclinic aluminium metaphosphate, (c) aluminium hexacyclophosphate, and (d) cubic aluminium metaphosphate. |
For the AlPNO3(300) sample, three peaks are observed between 5 ppm and −35 ppm [in contrast to the overlapping set of peaks observed in this region for AlPOH(300)], including peaks at −21 ppm and −32 ppm assigned to aluminium tripolyphosphate (AlH2P3O10·H2O), which represents ∼50% of the signal. The peak at −3.4 ppm is attributed to some remaining aluminium orthophosphate. For the AlPNO3(500) sample, the 31P NMR spectrum contains peaks characteristic of the hexacyclophosphate (43.3%) and cubic metaphosphate (52%). Annealing at a higher temperature does not complete the transformation to the cubic metaphosphate as the 31P NMR spectrum for the AlPNO3(800) sample clearly contains peaks due to the hexacyclophosphate phase (ca. 36% of the signal intensity).
The 31P NMR spectra for AlPCl(400) and AlPCl(500) are significantly different from those observed for the AlPOH and AlPNO3 materials. The major peaks are due to cubic metaphosphate (50.5 ppm), orthophosphate (1 ppm and 0 ppm), pyrophosphate (−12 ppm and −13.5 ppm) and polyphosphate (peaks in the range −20 ppm to −28 ppm), with only very weak peaks observed for hexacyclophosphate. In contrast, the AlPCl(800) sample is a pure phase of cubic Al(PO3)3. These observations suggest that the metaphosphate formed from the AlCl3 precursor may be produced via a slightly different pathway than from the Al(OH)3 and Al(NO3)3 precursors. We deduce that the stability of the Al–Cl bond hinders formation of aluminium phosphate from the Al(Cl)3 precursor at lower temperatures, leaving the phosphoric acid to react mostly with itself to form varying degrees of polyphosphates. However, at the higher annealing temperature of 800 °C, the phosphate transforms completely to cubic Al(PO3)3.
Reactant | Annealing temperature/°C | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
300/400 | 500 | 800 | |||||
a Binding energies are referenced to the C (1s) peak at 284.7 eV; curves are fitted with Gaussian–Lorentzian (GL (30)) line shapes. | |||||||
Al(OH)3 | O(1s) binding energya | 533.7 | 532.3 | 533.5 | 532.0 | 533.8 | 532.1 |
% of peak area | 55.5 | 44.5 | 44.6 | 55.4 | 39.0 | 61.0 | |
∼532:533 ratio | 0.8 | 1.2 | 1.6 | ||||
O:P ratio | 3.2 | 2.9 | 3.0 | ||||
P:Al ratio | 5.3 | 5 | 3.8 | ||||
Al(NO3)3 | O(1s) binding energya | 533.6 | 532.2 | 533.8 | 532.3 | 533.7 | 532.1 |
% of peak area | 69.1 | 30.9 | 64.4 | 35.6 | 38.5 | 61.5 | |
∼532:533 ratio | 0.43 | 0.55 | 1.6 | ||||
O:P ratio | 2.8 | 3 | 2.9 | ||||
P:Al ratio | n/a | 10.2 | 3.6 | ||||
AlCl3 | O(1s) binding energya | 534.0 | 532.5 | 533.9 | 532.4 | 533.7 | 532.1 |
∼532:533 ratio | 62.4 | 37.6 | 59.8 | 40.2 | 39.6 | 60.4 | |
Peak area ratio | 0.6 | 0.7 | 1.5 | ||||
O:P ratio | 3.3 | 3.1 | 2.8 | ||||
P:Al ratio | n/a | n/a | 4.6 |
The Al(2p) XP spectra for all samples are shown in Fig. 5. For the AlPOH samples, a strong peak is present for all annealing temperatures at ∼75.3 eV for AlPOH(300) and shifting slightly to 75.1 eV for AlPOH(800). However, for the AlPNO3(300) sample, no peaks are observed in the Al(2p) XP spectrum, while a peak at ca. 75 eV is present for both AlPNO3(500) and AlPNO3(800). For the AlPCl samples, again no peaks are observed in the Al(2p) XP spectra for the AlPCl(300) and AlPCl(500) samples, while a peak is observed at ca. 75 eV for AlPCl(800). This difference in behaviour parallels the physical appearance of the AlPCl samples, for which both AlPCl(300) and AlPCl(500) are tacky but AlPCl(800) is not.
The XP spectra in the P(2p) region (Fig. 6) have a single peak at ∼134.8 eV for all samples with a small shift (∼0.2 eV) to lower binding energy as the annealing temperature is increased to 800 °C. The observed peak is consistent with the average peak position for metaphosphates in the NIST database17 (134.8 eV; σ = 0.5 eV) and with results of Rotole and Sherwood10,11 on aluminium phosphates. However, it is in marked contrast to sodium phosphates,8 for which the P(2p) binding energy shifts by 2 eV from the orthophosphate (132.5 eV) to the oxygen-bridged metaphosphate (134.5 eV).
The atomic ratios calculated from the XPS spectra (Table 1) are informative. The P:O ratio is very close to 1:3 for all samples but the P:Al ratio is always higher than 3:1. The fact that the XPS survey scans for materials prepared at lower annealing temperatures (Fig. S6†) do not contain any signal for aluminium or for any other cation suggests that the surface is dominated by hydrogen phosphates, with the consistent O:P ratio of 3:1 indicating extensive polymerization at the surface. We also note that no XPS signal due to chlorine is observed for any of the samples (Fig. S7†). Following annealing at 800 °C, the samples from all precursors are highly crystalline, and the presence of the Al(2p) peak in the XP spectra suggests that the surface is now dominated by aluminium metaphosphate. However, the P:Al ratio remains higher than the expected 3:1 ratio, particularly for AlCl3(800), suggesting that some hydrogen polyphosphates are present at the surface.
In the metaphosphate, these two bonding environments are expected to be present in a 2:1 ratio of P–O–Al to P–O–P. However, as shown in Table 1, quantification of the XPS data for the samples annealed at 800 °C gives a peak area ratio (532.3 eV:533.7 eV) of ca. 1.6:1, whereas the expected ratio is 2:1. Thus, the P:Al ratio at the surface of these materials is higher than the expected 3:1 ratio. To understand these differences, we now consider the XP spectra recorded for samples annealed to lower temperatures.
A key observation is that the AlPNO3(300) and AlPCl(300) samples show no evidence, in the XP spectra, for the presence of aluminium. The AlPNO3(500) sample does show evidence for aluminium, but the AlPCl(500) sample does not. The absence of aluminium indicates a purely hydrogen terminated phosphate material at the surface. Unreacted phosphoric acid can be ruled out based on the O:P ratio of 3:1, but there is evidence from the solid-state 31P NMR results for hydrogen terminated or cyclic polyphosphates (giving peaks at −28 ppm and −32 ppm) which would have a 3:1 ratio. A cyclic polyphosphate such as P4O10 has a P–O–P to PO bond ratio of 1.5:1, which could account for the XPS ratios if the oxygen in PO has a binding energy of ∼532 eV, overlapping with the XPS peak for the oxygen in P–O–Al. This assignment would be in agreement with Gresch et al.8 Finally, the “wet” physical appearance of samples annealed at lower temperatures is also consistent with the presence of hydrogen polyphosphates which would be poorly crystalline.
From the data presently available, we cannot determine whether annealing ultimately leads to sublimation or decomposition of the polymeric phosphates, or whether further reaction with unreacted aluminium precursor occurs. However, for samples annealed at 800 °C, the XP spectra are consistent with the presence of aluminium metaphosphates although the slightly higher P:Al ratio in the case of the material prepared from AlCl3 suggests the surface contains some hydrogen terminated polyphosphates.
Footnotes |
† Electronic supplementary information (ESI) available. See DOI: 10.1039/c9ra08738a |
‡ Current address: Dept. of Materials, Imperial College, South Kensington Campus, London SW7 2AZ, UK. |
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2020 |