Skip to main content
. 2017 Jul 5;8:1375–1387. doi: 10.3762/bjnano.8.139

Table 2.

Water contact angles, AFM roughness, and optical thickness obtained for Au(111) surfaces modified with various dinickel(II) complexes.

Compound Contact angle [°]a,b Roughness (rms) [Å]b,c Optical film thickness [Å] Ref.

bare gold 75.8 (1.5) 6 (1) [39]
2 [Ni2L(L2)](ClO4) 71.4 (2.1)
75.9 (2.1)d
76.0 (2.0)e
17 (5)
16 (2)
n.d.f
16 (7)
n.d.f
n.d.f
[39], this work
3 [Ni2L(L3)](ClO4) 71.5 (1.6)
76.7 (1.9)d
76.5 (2.1)e
17 (5)
n.d.f
n.d.f
15 (8)
n.d.f
n.d.f
[40]
6 [Ni2L(L4)](ClO4) n.d. n.d. n.d.
7 [Ni2L(L5)](ClO4) 70.8 (1.0) 13 (4) 20 (7) this work
8 [Ni2L(L6)](ClO4) 69.6 (3.3) 19 (4) 24 (7) this work
9 [Ni2L(O2CPh)](ClO4) 75.9 (2.0) 6 (1) n.d.f [40]
10 [Ni2L(O2CMe)](ClO4) 75.8 (1.5) 6 (1) n.d.f [40]

aThe values represent the average of five 4 μL drops of distilled, deionized water. The ″bare″ gold surfaces were identically treated to the modified surfaces except with omission of any adsorbate in the solvent. bStandard deviations are given in parentheses. cRoot mean squared (rms) surface roughness determined by AFM. dTetraphenylborate salt. eAfter metathesis with NaBPH4. fn.d. = not determined.