Lara Cancela1, Miguel A Esteruelas1, Javier Galbán2, Montserrat Oliván1, Enrique Oñate1, Andrea Vélez1, Juan C Vidal3. 1. Departamento de Química Inorgánica - Instituto de Síntesis Química y Catálisis Homogénea (ISQCH) - Centro de Innovación en Química Avanzada (ORFEO-CINQA), Universidad de Zaragoza - CSIC, 50009 Zaragoza, Spain. 2. Departamento de Química Analítica, Facultad de Ciencias - Instituto de Nanociencia de Aragón (INA-ICMA), Universidad de Zaragoza, 50009 Zaragoza, Spain. 3. Grupo de Espectroscopia Analítica y Sensores (GEAS) - Instituto de Investigación en Ciencias Ambientales de Aragón (IUCA), Universidad de Zaragoza, 50009 Zaragoza, Spain.
Abstract
Reactions of polyhydrides OsH6(PiPr3)2 (1) and IrH5(PiPr3)2 (2) with rollover cyclometalated hydride complexes have been investigated in order to explore the influence of a metal center on the MHn unit of the other in mixed valence binuclear polyhydrides. Hexahydride 1 activates an ortho-CH bond of the heterocyclic moiety of the trihydride metal-ligand compounds OsH3{κ2-C,N-[C5RH2N-py]}(PiPr3)2 (R = H (3), Me (4), Ph (5)). Reactions of 3 and 4 lead to the hexahydrides (PiPr3)2H3Os{μ-[κ2-C,N-[C5RH2N-C5H3N]-N,C-κ2]}OsH3(PiPr3)2 (R = H (6), Me (7)), whereas 5 gives the pentahydride (PiPr3)2H3Os{μ-[κ2-C,N-[C5H3N-C5(C6H4)H2N]-C,N,C-κ3]}OsH2(PiPr3)2 (8). Pentahydride 2 promotes C-H bond activation of 3 and the iridium-dihydride IrH2{κ2-C,N-[C5H3N-py]}(PiPr3)2 (9) to afford the heterobinuclear pentahydride (PiPr3)2H3Os{μ-[κ2-C,N-[C5H3N-C5H3N]-N,C-κ2]}IrH2(PiPr3)2 (10) and the homobinuclear tetrahydride (PiPr3)2H2Ir{μ-[κ2-C,N-[C5H3N-C5H3N]-N,C-κ2]}IrH2(PiPr3)2 (11), respectively. Complexes 6-8 and 11 display HOMO delocalization throughout the metal-heterocycle-metal skeleton. Their sequential oxidation generates mono- and diradicals, which exhibit intervalence charge transfer transitions. This notable ability allows the tuning of the strength of the hydrogen-hydrogen and metal-hydrogen interactions within the MHn units.
Reactions of polyhydrides OsH6(PiPr3)2 (1) and IrH5(PiPr3)2 (2) with rollover cyclometalated hydride complexes have been investigated in order to explore the influence of a metal center on the MHn unit of the other in mixed valence binuclear polyhydrides. Hexahydride 1 activates an ortho-CH bond of the heterocyclic moiety of the trihydride metal-ligand compounds OsH3{κ2-C,N-[C5RH2N-py]}(PiPr3)2 (R = H (3), Me (4), Ph (5)). Reactions of 3 and 4 lead to the hexahydrides (PiPr3)2H3Os{μ-[κ2-C,N-[C5RH2N-C5H3N]-N,C-κ2]}OsH3(PiPr3)2 (R = H (6), Me (7)), whereas 5 gives the pentahydride (PiPr3)2H3Os{μ-[κ2-C,N-[C5H3N-C5(C6H4)H2N]-C,N,C-κ3]}OsH2(PiPr3)2 (8). Pentahydride 2 promotes C-H bond activation of 3 and the iridium-dihydride IrH2{κ2-C,N-[C5H3N-py]}(PiPr3)2 (9) to afford the heterobinuclear pentahydride (PiPr3)2H3Os{μ-[κ2-C,N-[C5H3N-C5H3N]-N,C-κ2]}IrH2(PiPr3)2 (10) and the homobinuclear tetrahydride (PiPr3)2H2Ir{μ-[κ2-C,N-[C5H3N-C5H3N]-N,C-κ2]}IrH2(PiPr3)2 (11), respectively. Complexes 6-8 and 11 display HOMO delocalization throughout the metal-heterocycle-metal skeleton. Their sequential oxidation generates mono- and diradicals, which exhibit intervalence charge transfer transitions. This notable ability allows the tuning of the strength of the hydrogen-hydrogen and metal-hydrogen interactions within the MHn units.
The hydrogen atoms
of the MH units
of LMH transition
metal polyhydride complexes interact with one another and with the
metal center, forming Kubas type dihydrogens (dH–H = 0.8–1.0 Å), elongated dihydrogens (dH–H = 1.0–1.3 Å), compressed hydrides (dH–H = 1.3–1.6 Å), or classical hydrides (dH–H ≥ 1.6 Å). These interactions are governed by the electron
density of the metal center, which is regulated by the coligands L.[1] Thus, the ability
of such compounds to reversibly release the H2 molecule
requires L ligands, which are able to
modify the electron density of the metal center, in order to allow
reversible changes in the inner interactions of the MH units. The design of such ligands is certainly a
challenge of the first magnitude.An attractive approach to
the solution of this challenge is the
use transition metal complexes, which should display frontier orbitals
involving substantial mixing with a π-ligand backbone, whereas
such a ligand should also bear atoms with free electrons. The coordination
of this metal–ligand to an MH unit
would generate species with frontier orbitals delocalized between
the two metal centers connected by the π-linker. Thus, the metals
can be viewed as being electronically coupled and therefore the changes
in electron density at one site should perturb the electron density
at the other.[2] The search for efficient
π-linkers (bridging ligands), which promote the cooperative
effect between the redox active centers through electronic coupling
pathways, is central for success. Unsaturated carbon chains,[3] aromatic polycycles,[3c,4] aromatic N-heterocycles,[5] bisdioxolenes,[6] bisdithiolenes,[7] dithiolate,[8] cyanide,[9] and cyanamides[10] have been mainly employed so far, as bridging
ligands, to provide electronical coupling between metals.The
interactions between the metal centers have been grouped into
three categories, according to the Robin–Day classification:
weak, moderate, and strong.[11] Compounds
displaying weak interaction form class I, and their redox centers
mostly behave as separated sites. On the other hand, strong interaction
affords a complete electron density delocalization, and complexes
with this ability are grouped as class III. Species exhibiting moderate
interaction between their redox centers constitute class II.[3d,12] The degree of interaction is efficiently assessed by means of the
analysis of the intervalence charge transfer (IVCT) band in the UV–vis–NIR
spectra on the basis of the Marcus–Hush theory.[13] At the electrochemistry level, the redox potential
separation between successive redox processes is also a frequently
used measure, although it often presents misinterpretation issues.[14]We have recently shown that the platinum
group polyhydrides OsH6(PiPr3)2 (1)
and IrH5(PiPr3)2 (2) promote the activation of C—H bonds of the rings
of 2,2′-bipyridines and related heterocycles to afford rollover
cyclometalated trihydride- and dihydride-derivatives (Scheme ),[15] in agreement with the ability of polyhydrides of the platinum group
metals to activate σ-bonds[1f] and
in particular the d2-hexahydride OsH6(PiPr3)2.[16] In the context of the rollover cyclometalation, we noted
that in a few cases the resulting ligands underwent an additional
cylometalation promoted by a second metal complex, to form binuclear
species bearing a bridging rollover bis-cyclometalated heterocycle.[17] Although evidence of the ability of these bridges
to provide electronic coupling pathways has not been reported, these
findings inspired us to prepare osmium- and iridium-polyhydrides with
this class of bridging ligands and to use them as models to check
our proposed approach toward the control of reversible changes in
the existing interactions within the MH units.
Scheme 1
C—H Bond Activation of 2,2′-Bipyridines
This paper proves that rollover cyclometalated
2,2′-bipyridine
heterocycles provide electronic coupling pathways between the metals
of (PiPr3)2HnOs(μ-L)OsHn(PiPr3)2 (n = 2 or 3) and (PiPr3)2H2Ir(μ-L)IrH2(PiPr3)2 complexes and that changes in the electron density of a metal center
influence the inner interactions of the MH unit of the other.
Results and Discussion
Metal–Ligand C–H
Bond Activation
Osmium-hexahydride
complex 1 is able to activate C—H bonds of the
rollover cyclometalated trihydride derivatives OsH3{κ2-C,N-[C5RH2N-py]}(PiPr3)2 (R = H (3), Me (4), Ph (5)) in toluene under
reflux (Scheme ) and
in agreement with its ability to promote σ-bond activation reactions.
Complexes 3 and 4 afford the binuclear-hexahydride
compounds (PiPr3)2H3Os{μ-[κ2-C,N-[C5RH2N–C5H3N]-N,C-κ2]}OsH3(PiPr3)2 (R = H (6) Me (7)),
as a result of the coordination of the free nitrogen atom of the rollover
cyclometalated heterocycle and the ortho-CH bond
activation of the other ring, whereas the reaction with the phenyl-derivative 5 leads to the pentahydride (PiPr3)2H3Os{μ-[κ2-C,N-[C5H3N-C5(C6H4)H2N]-C,N,C-κ3]}OsH2(PiPr3)2 (8). In contrast to 6 and 7, complex 8 bears two different
osmium(IV) OsH(PiPr3)2 moieties, OsH3(PiPr3)2 and OsH2(PiPr3)2. In this case, the bridging ligand acts in a dual manner:
monoanionic C,N-chelate with OsH3(PiPr3)2 and dianionic C,N,C-pincer with OsH2(PiPr3)2. The difference
is a consequence of the hexahydride being also able to activate the
phenyl substituent of the rollover cyclometalated heterocycle of 5. The three binuclear products can be also prepared by treatment
of 1 with 0.5 equiv of the 2,2′-bipyridine. Both
methods, via intermediates 3–5 and
the one-pot synthesis procedures, afford the quantitative formation
of the binuclear species, which were isolated as orange solids in
about 80% yield. Complexes 6 and 8 were
characterized by X-ray diffraction analysis.
Scheme 2
Formation of Binuclear
Species 6, 7, and 8
Figure shows the
structure of 6, which can be described as two equivalent
OsH3(PiPr3)2 units linked
by a rollover bis-cyclometalated 2,2′-bipyridine. The coordination
polyhedron around each osmium atom is the typical pentagonal bipyramid
for osmium(IV) OsH3(Y-X)(PiPr3)2 species[18] with axial phosphines
(P(1)–Os-P(2) = P(2A)—Os(A)—P(1A) = 160.82(2)°),
whereas the hydride ligands lie at the joint base of the bipyramid
coplanar to the heterocycle. The Os—N and Os—C bond
lengths of 2.1665(18) and 2.144(2) Å are similar to those of
the precursor 3.[15] In agreement
with the high symmetry of the molecule, the 31P{1H} NMR spectrum of this compound in toluene-d8 displays a singlet at 23.1 ppm for the four equivalent phosphines.
In the 1H NMR spectrum, the most noticeable feature is
the hydride resonances, which appear between −5 and −13
ppm displaying the typical behavior observed for the inequivalent
hydrides of OsH3(Y-X)(PiPr3)2 complexes, involved in a thermally activated site exchange
process.[18] The 31P{1H}, 1H, and 13C{1H} NMR spectra
of 7 in toluene-d8 reflect
the asymmetry imposed by the methyl substituent of the heterocycle.
Thus, in contrast to 6 the 31P{1H} NMR spectrum shows two singlets at 22.7 and 21.4 ppm, whereas
resonances corresponding to inequivalent OsH3(PiPr3)2 units are observed between −5
and −14 ppm in the 1H NMR spectrum. The 13C{1H} NMR spectrum displays two triplets (2JC–P ≈ 6 Hz) at 173.9 and
168.9 ppm for the inequivalent metalated carbon atoms.
Figure 1
Molecular diagram of
complex 6 (ellipsoids shown at
50% probability). All hydrogen atoms (except the hydrides) are omitted
for clarity. Selected bond distances (Å) and angles (deg): Os—P(1)
= Os(A)—P(1A) = 2.3422(6), Os—P(2) = Os(A)—P(2A)
= 2.3414(6), Os—C(2A) = Os(A)—C(2) = 2.144(2), Os—N(1)
= Os(A)—N(1A) = 2.1665(18); P(1)—Os—P(2) = P(2A)—Os(A)—P(1A)
= 160.82(2), N(1)—Os-C(2A) = N(1A)—Os(A)–C(2)
= 76.14(7).
Molecular diagram of
complex 6 (ellipsoids shown at
50% probability). All hydrogen atoms (except the hydrides) are omitted
for clarity. Selected bond distances (Å) and angles (deg): Os—P(1)
= Os(A)—P(1A) = 2.3422(6), Os—P(2) = Os(A)—P(2A)
= 2.3414(6), Os—C(2A) = Os(A)—C(2) = 2.144(2), Os—N(1)
= Os(A)—N(1A) = 2.1665(18); P(1)—Os—P(2) = P(2A)—Os(A)—P(1A)
= 160.82(2), N(1)—Os-C(2A) = N(1A)—Os(A)–C(2)
= 76.14(7).The structure of 8 (Figure ) proves
the dual coordination of the heterocycle
in this complex, C,N-chelate to
a metal center (Os(1)) and C,C,N-pincer to the other (Os(2)). The coordination polyhedron
around both metal centers can be also idealized as a pentagonal bipyramid.
However, there are significant differences between the bipyramids,
which are associated with the acting fashion of the bridging ligand.
The polyhedron around Os(1) resembles that of 6 with
a P(1)—Os(1)—P(2) angle of 158.86(3)°. Phosphine
ligands attached to Os(2) also occupy the axial positions of the bipyramid,
forming a P(3)—Os(2)—P(4) angle of 164.05(3)°,
whereas the pincer lies at the perpendicular joint base, coplanar
to the hydride ligands, acting with a C(1)—Os(2)—C(12)
angle of 150.41(12)°, which slightly deviates from the ideal
value of 144°. The Os(1)—C(7) and Os—N(1) distances
of 2.143(3) and 2.185(2) Å are similar to those found in 6, whereas the Os(2)—C(1), Os(2)—C(12), and
Os(2)—N(2) bond lengths compare well with the observed ones
for osmium compounds bearing C,N,C-pincer ligands.[16c,15,19]31P{1H}, 1H, and 13C{1H} NMR spectra of 8 in dichloromethane-d2 are consistent with the structure shown in Figure . Thus, the 31P{1H} NMR spectrum contains two singlets at 24.1
and 1.8 ppm, assigned to the OsH3(PiPr3)2 and OsH2(PiPr3)2 units, respectively. In the 1H NMR spectrum, the
resonances of the OsH3(PiPr3)2 unit display the typical pattern for the cyclometalated OsH3(Y-X)(PiPr3)2 species, between
−6 and −14 ppm, along with two temperature invariant
doublets (2JH–H = 11.3
Hz) of triplets (2JH–P = 15.1 and 17.2 Hz) at −8.48 and −9.19 ppm corresponding
to the hydride ligands of the OsH2(PiPr3)2 unit. The 13C{1H} NMR
spectrum shows three triplets (2JC–P = 6.1–8.5 Hz) at 169.9, 168.0, and 165.5
ppm due to the metalated carbon atoms.
Figure 2
Molecular diagram of
complex 8 (ellipsoids shown at
50% probability). All hydrogen atoms (except the hydrides) are omitted
for clarity. Selected bond distances (Å) and angles (deg): Os(1)—P(1)
= 2.3415(8), Os(1)—P(2) = 2.3418(8), Os(2)—P(3) = 2.3752(8),
Os(2)—P(4) = 2.3778(8), Os(1)—N(1) = 2.185(2), Os(2)—N(2)
= 2.121(2), Os(1)—C(7) = 2.143(3), Os(2)—C(1) = 2.159(3),
Os(2)—C(12) = 2.137(3); P(1)—Os(1)—P(2) = 158.86(3),
P(3)—Os(2)—P(4) = 164.05(3), N(1)—Os(1)—C(7)
= 76.41(10), C(1)—Os(2)—N(2) = 75.77(10), C(12)—Os(2)—N(2)
= 74.89(11), C(1)—Os(2)—C(12) = 150.41(12).
Molecular diagram of
complex 8 (ellipsoids shown at
50% probability). All hydrogen atoms (except the hydrides) are omitted
for clarity. Selected bond distances (Å) and angles (deg): Os(1)—P(1)
= 2.3415(8), Os(1)—P(2) = 2.3418(8), Os(2)—P(3) = 2.3752(8),
Os(2)—P(4) = 2.3778(8), Os(1)—N(1) = 2.185(2), Os(2)—N(2)
= 2.121(2), Os(1)—C(7) = 2.143(3), Os(2)—C(1) = 2.159(3),
Os(2)—C(12) = 2.137(3); P(1)—Os(1)—P(2) = 158.86(3),
P(3)—Os(2)—P(4) = 164.05(3), N(1)—Os(1)—C(7)
= 76.41(10), C(1)—Os(2)—N(2) = 75.77(10), C(12)—Os(2)—N(2)
= 74.89(11), C(1)—Os(2)—C(12) = 150.41(12).The success of the reactions shown in Scheme encouraged us to extend this synthetic methodology,
involving polyhydride-mediated sequential rollover cyclometalation
of 2,2′-bipyridines to other polyhydrides and to study its
utility to generate heterobinuclear derivatives. Thus, we decided
to also investigate the C—H bond activation of 3 and the iridium-dihydride IrH2{κ2-C,N-[C5H3N-py]}(PiPr3)2 (9), promoted by
the iridium-pentahydride complex 2 (Scheme ). Treatment of toluene solutions
of 3 with 1.0 equiv of 2 under reflux for
16 h leads to the heterobinuclear pentahydride (PiPr3)2H3Os{μ-[κ2-C,N-[C5H3N-C5H3N]-N,C-κ2]}IrH2(PiPr3)2 (10), which was isolated as an orange solid in 68%
yield. Under the same conditions, the reaction of 9 and 2 affords the homobinuclear tetrahydride (PiPr3)2H2Ir{μ-[κ2-C,N-[C5H3N-C5H3N]-N,C-κ2]}IrH2(PiPr3)2 (11), which can be also prepared by treatment of 2 with 0.5 equiv of 2,2′-bipyridine. Complex 11 was isolated as a yellow solid in almost quantitative yield.
Scheme 3
Formation of Complexes 10 and 11
The 31P{1H}, 1H, and 13C{1H} NMR spectra of 10 in toluene-d8 strongly support the structure proposed for
this compound, in Scheme . The 31P{1H} NMR spectrum contains
two singlets at 30.3 and 22.4 ppm, one for each group of equivalent
phosphines, whereas the 1H NMR spectrum is consistent with
the presence in the complex of two different classes of hydride ligands.
In agreement with 8, hydrides attached to osmium give
rise to resonances displaying the typical temperature-dependent pattern
for a cyclometalated OsH3(XY)(PiPr3)2 species, between −5 and −13 ppm while
hydrides of the IrH2(PiPr3)2 unit generate two temperature invariant doublets (2JH–H = 3.6 Hz) of triplets (2JH–P = 18.9 Hz) at −12.93
and −21.93 ppm. In the 13C{1H} NMR spectrum,
the resonances due to the metalated carbon atoms appear at 173.4 and
163.2 ppm, as triplets with C–P coupling constants of about
6 Hz. Complex 11 was characterized by X-ray diffraction
analysis. Figure shows
a view of the structure. The molecule is formed by two chemically
equivalent IrH2(PiPr3)2 moieties connected to each other through a rollover bis-cyclometalated
2,2′-bipyridine linker. It is a d6–d6 counterpart of the d4–d4 complex 6 and the d4–d6 derivative 10. The coordination polyhedron
around each iridium center is the expected octahedron with trans phosphines
(P—Ir—P = 156.94(3)°). In agreement with its structure,
the 31P{1H} NMR spectrum of this highly symmetrical
molecule shows a singlet at 29.9 ppm for the four equivalent phosphines,
the 1H NMR spectrum contains two doublets (2JH–H = 4.1 Hz) of triplets (2JH–P = 21.2 and 19.3 Hz)
at −12.93 and −22.00 ppm for the inequivalent hydrides
of the equivalent IrH2(PiPr3)2 units, whereas the 13C{1H} NMR spectrum
displays a triplet (2JC–P = 6.5 Hz) at 163.6 for the equivalent metalated carbon atoms.
Figure 3
Molecular diagram
of complex 11 (ellipsoids shown
at 50% probability). All hydrogen atoms (except the hydrides) are
omitted for clarity. Selected bond distances (Å) and angles (deg):
Ir—P(1) = Ir—P(1A) = Ir(A)—P(1B) = Ir(A)—P(1C)
= 2.2988(5), Ir—N(1) = Ir(A)—N(1A) = 2.1329(17), Ir—C(1)
= Ir(A)—C(1B) = 2.1330(17); P(1)—Ir—P(1A) = P(1B)—Ir(A)—P(1C)
= 156.94(3), N(1)—Ir—C(1) = N(1A)—Ir(A)—C(1B)
= 78.47(9).
Molecular diagram
of complex 11 (ellipsoids shown
at 50% probability). All hydrogen atoms (except the hydrides) are
omitted for clarity. Selected bond distances (Å) and angles (deg):
Ir—P(1) = Ir—P(1A) = Ir(A)—P(1B) = Ir(A)—P(1C)
= 2.2988(5), Ir—N(1) = Ir(A)—N(1A) = 2.1329(17), Ir—C(1)
= Ir(A)—C(1B) = 2.1330(17); P(1)—Ir—P(1A) = P(1B)—Ir(A)—P(1C)
= 156.94(3), N(1)—Ir—C(1) = N(1A)—Ir(A)—C(1B)
= 78.47(9).
Frontier Orbitals and Photophysical
Properties
The
UV–vis spectra for 1 × 10–4 M solutions
of the mononuclear precursors 3–5 and 9 and binuclear derivatives 6–8, 10, and 11 in 2-methyltetrahydrofuran
(MeTHF) were recorded. Figure shows the spectra of 10 and their mononuclear
building blocks 3 and 9, whereas the rest
are shown in Figures S19–S27. In
addition, time-dependent DFT calculations (B3LYP-GD3//SDD(f)/6-31G**)
were performed to their rationalization, considering tetrahydrofuran
as solvent. Selected absorptions are collected in Table , whereas frontier orbitals
are shown in Figures and S28–S36.
Figure 4
UV–vis spectra
of complexes 3, 9, and 10 recorded
in 2-methyltetrahydrofuran (1 ×
10–4 M) at 298 K.
Table 1
Selected Experimental UV-vis Absorptions
for 3–11 (in MeTHF) and Computed
TD-DFT (in THF) Vertical Excitation Energies and Their Major Contributions
λ exp (nm)
ε (M–1 cm–1)
excitation energy (nm)
oscilator strength f
transition
Complex 3
241
13310
232
0.1039
HOMO–6 → LUMO (47%)
427
3360
400
0.0582
HOMO–1
→ LUMO (91%)
477
1730
444 (S1)
0.0272
HOMO → LUMO (91%)
512
290
498 (T1)
0
HOMO → LUMO (95%)
Complex 4
243
18290
235
0.1747
HOMO–6 →
LUMO (56%)
426
4590
399
0.0599
HOMO–1 →
LUMO (91%)
484
2350
446 (S1)
0.0327
HOMO → LUMO (91%)
506
1230
507 (T1)
0
HOMO → LUMO (95%)
Complex 5
243
18360
255
0.1933
HOMO–7
→ LUMO (21%)
HOMO–5 → LUMO (54%)
453
2430
405
0.0457
HOMO–1 → LUMO (88%)
494
1360
444 (S1)
0.0344
HOMO → LUMO
(88%)
513
740
504 (T1)
0
HOMO → LUMO (95%)
Complex 6
282
28300
282
0.2481
HOMO–2 → LUMO+3 (51%)
408
5420
394
0.0653
HOMO–2 → LUMO (96%)
470
7470
440 (S1)
0.0966
HOMO →
LUMO (96%)
506
3380
511 (T1)
0
HOMO → LUMO (96%)
Complex 7
274
33490
270
0.1805
HOMO–2 → LUMO+4 (65%)
416
2620
396
0.0531
HOMO–2 → LUMO (96%)
478
3810
447 (S1)
0.0949
HOMO → LUMO
(97%)
524
320
525 (T1)
0
HOMO → LUMO (96%)
Complex 8
282
35260
278
0.0482
HOMO → LUMO+6 (59%)
402
9500
383
0.1737
HOMO–2
→ LUMO (50%)
HOMO → LUMO+1 (45%)
496
2380
481 (S1)
0.0347
HOMO →
LUMO (95%)
532
2310
551 (T1)
0
HOMO → LUMO (96%)
Complex 9
276
20330
274
0.2307
HOMO–4 → LUMO (78%)
403
3560
381 (S1)
0.0657
HOMO → LUMO
(94%)
463
500
445 (T1)
0
HOMO → LUMO (82%)
Complex 10
224
23460
247
0.0776
HOMO–4 → LUMO+3 (89%)
404
5330
390
0.0496
HOMO–1 → LUMO (95%)
450
6250
426 (S1)
0.0798
HOMO →
LUMO (95%)
504
770
492 (T1)
0
HOMO → LUMO (94%)
Complex 11
273
24510
266
0.3100
HOMO–8 → LUMO (40%)
HOMO → LUMO+3 (38%)
370
1900
338
0.0484
HOMO–4 → LUMO (97%)
431
3410
390 (S1)
0.1364
HOMO → LUMO (98%)
461
900
461 (T1)
0
HOMO →
LUMO (88%)
Figure 5
HOMO of the
homobinuclear derivatives 6–8 and 11.
UV–vis spectra
of complexes 3, 9, and 10 recorded
in 2-methyltetrahydrofuran (1 ×
10–4 M) at 298 K.HOMO of the
homobinuclear derivatives 6–8 and 11.The spectra of the osmium mononuclear
precursors 3-5 show bands in three different
regions of the spectrum:
<300, 300–500, and >500 nm. The absorptions at the highest
energy region correspond mainly to 1π–π*
intraheterocycle transitions, whereas the bands between 300 and 500
nm are due to transitions from the metal to the heterocycle mixed
with from the heterocycle to the heterocycle. These bands mainly result
from HOMO–1-to-LUMO, and HOMO-to-LUMO transitions. Both HOMO–1
and HOMO are essentially located at the metal center and the metalated
heterocycle. For HOMO, the percentage of the former is between 52%
and 59% and that of the second one lies in the range 28–38%.
The LUMO is almost exclusively centered on the metalated heterocycle
(95%). The very weak absorption tails after 500 nm are assigned to
formally spin forbidden 3MLCT transitions caused by the
large spin–orbit coupling introduced by osmium. The spectrum
of the mononuclear iridium complex 9 is similar to those
of 3-5. The absorptions of <300 nm should
be assigned to 1π–π* ligand-to-ligand
transitions, whereas those between 300 and 450 nm are due to spin-allowed
iridium-to-heterocycle charge transfer (1MLCT) mixed with
heterocycle-to-heterocycle transitions. The absorption tails after
450 nm correspond to formally spin forbidden 3MLCT transitions,
which are produced by the large spin–orbit coupling introduced,
in this case, by the iridium center.Complexes 3–5 and 9 display a HOMO involving
substantial mixing with a π-ligand
backbone (Figures S28–S30 and S34). Thus, they fulfill the main requirement in order to serve as metal–ligand
species, which allow building binuclear compounds bearing metals electronically
coupled, where the new HOMO is delocalized between the metal centers
connected by the π-linker. As a proof-of-concept validation,
the HOMO of the homobinuclear derivatives 6–8 and 11 is clearly delocalized throughout the
metal–heterocycle-metal system (Figure ) with similar participation percentage of
the three moieties. As in the mononuclear precursors, the LUMO is
almost exclusively centered on the heterocycle. The UV–vis
spectra of the binuclear osmium compounds 6–8 show bands between 274 and 496 nm corresponding to osmium-to-heterocycle
charge transfer (1MLCT) mixed with heterocycle-to-heterocycle
transitions and weak absorption tails after 500 nm due to formally
spin forbidden 3MLCT transitions, whereas the spectrum
of the binuclear iridium derivative 11 contains bands
between 249 and 431 nm assigned to iridium-to-heterocycle charge transfer
(1MLCT) mixed with heterocycle-to-heterocycle transitions
and weak absorption tails after 440 nm due to formally spin forbidden 3MLCT transitions.The HOMO delocalization throughout
metal–heterocycle-metal
of the binuclear complexes requires not only the HOMO delocalization
along metal-heterocycle of the metal–ligand mononuclear precursor
but also electronic compatibility between the metal fragments linked
by the heterocycle. This is given in complexes 6–8, where the heterocycle links two d4-metal fragments, and in complex 11 formed by
two d6-metal moieties. In contrast to
complexes 6–8 and 11, the heterocycle of the heterobinuclear derivative 10 associates fragments of two different ions, d4 and d6, which appear to be inconsistent
to produce electronic coupling. Thus, the HOMO of this compound (Figure S35) is essentially centered on the osmium
atom (45%) and the heterocycle (33%), whereas the iridium center has
only a residual contribution (5%). Despite this difference, the UV–vis
spectrum of 10 can be rationalized in a similar manner
to those of 7 and 8.The mononuclear
complexes 3–5 and
binuclear derivatives 6–8 are osmium(IV)
phosphorescent emitters in the orange-red spectral region (546–728
nm) upon photoexcitation. Emission spectra in doped poly(methyl methacrylate)
(PMMA) film at 5 wt % at room temperature and MeTHF at room temperature
and at 77 K are shown in Figures S37–S54, whereas Table shows
the experimental and calculated wavelengths, observed lifetimes, quantum
yields, and radiative and nonradiative rate constants. The spectra
of the six compounds are very similar, which is consistent with the
scarce differences found for the DFT-calculated HOMO–LUMO gaps
(3.26–3.54 eV, see Table ). Because the emissions can be attributed to T1 excited states, there is good agreement between
the experimental wavelengths and those calculated through the estimation
of the difference in energy between the optimized triplet states T1 and the singlet states S0 in tetrahydrofuran. The observed lifetimes are in the range
of 1.5–5.2 μs. Quantum yields are modest and higher for
the binuclear compounds. This poor efficiency could be related to
the low value of the radiative rate constants. Phosphorescent emitters
based on osmium[20] are comparatively much
less frequent than those of iridium[21] and
platinum[22] in particular the osmium(IV)
ones.[19,23] Complexes 6–8 are the first reported binuclear osmium(IV) emitters. In contrast
to 3–8, the iridium derivatives 9–11 are not emissive.
Table 2
Emission Properties of Complexes 3–8a
complex
HOMO (eV)
LUMO (eV)
HLG (eV)
calc λema (nm)
media (T, K)
λem (nm)
τobs (μs)
Φ
krb (s–1)
knrb (s–1)
kr/knr
3
PMMA (298)
599
1.5
0.01
6.6 × 103
6.6 × 105
0.01
–4.81
–1.27
3.54
591
MeTHF (298)
614
2.3
0.01
4.3 × 103
4.3 × 105
0.01
MeTHF (77)
578
4.1
4
PMMA (298)
593
3.1
0.02
6.4 × 103
3.1 × 105
0.02
–4.75
–1.24
3.51
602
MeTHF (298)
610
3.1
0.02
6.4 × 103
3.1 × 105
0.02
MeTHF
(77)
550
5.2
5
PMMA (298)
593
3.3
0.01
3.0 × 103
3.0 × 105
0.01
–4.78
–1.29
3.49
564
MeTHF (298)
611
2.7
0.01
3.7 × 103
3.6 × 105
0.01
MeTHF (77)
574
3.4
6
PMMA
(298)
562, 599
4.4
0.03
6.8 × 103
2.2 × 105
0.03
–4.58
–1.11
3.47
577
MeTHF (298)
562
3.9
0.02
5.1 × 103
2.5 × 105
0.02
MeTHF (77)
546, 592
3.9
7
PMMA (298)
570,
611
3.7
0.06
1.6 × 104
2.5 × 105
0.06
–4.50
–1.08
3.42
596
MeTHF (298)
627
4.5
0.03
6.6 × 103
2.1 × 105
0.03
MeTHF (77)
559, 620
3.5
8
PMMA (298)
598, 658,
728
2.7
0.03
1.1 × 104
3.6 × 105
0.03
–4.35
–1.09
3.26
620
MeTHF (298)
602,
651
1.5
0.08
5.3 × 104
6.1 × 105
0.08
MeTHF (77)
584, 641, 708
3.3
Predicted from TD-DFT calculations
in THF at 298 K by estimating the energy difference between the optimized T1 and singlet S0 state.
Calculated according
to the equations kr = Φ/τobs and knr = (1 – Φ)/τobs, where kr is the radiative
rate constant, knr is the nonradiative
rate constant, Φ
is the quantum yield, and τobs is the excited-state
lifetime.
Predicted from TD-DFT calculations
in THF at 298 K by estimating the energy difference between the optimized T1 and singlet S0 state.Calculated according
to the equations kr = Φ/τobs and knr = (1 – Φ)/τobs, where kr is the radiative
rate constant, knr is the nonradiative
rate constant, Φ
is the quantum yield, and τobs is the excited-state
lifetime.
Electrochemical Properties
The redox properties of
the osmium precursors 3–5, the mononuclear
iridium complex 9, and the binuclear derivatives 6–8, 10, and 11 were evaluated by cyclic voltammetry performed under argon atmosphere
in a 0.1 M [NBu4]PF6 dichloromethane solution,
and the potentials were referenced versus Fc/Fc+. Table summarizes the main
findings.
Table 3
Electrochemical Data of Complexes 3–11
complex
Eox1 (V)
E1/2ox1 (V)
Eox2 (V)
E1/2ox2 (V)
Eox3 (V)
E1/2ox3 (V)
Kc(1–2)
Kc(2–3)
3
0.31
0.77
0.72
4
0.25
0.72
0.67
5
0.29
0.25
0.76
0.69
6
0.09
0.06
0.42
0.39
0.73
0.69
8.30 × 105
8.03 × 104
7
0.03
0.00
0.39
0.35
0.82
1.55 × 106
1.37 × 107
8
–0.41
–0.46
0.00
–0.05
0.42
0.38
2.03 × 107
6.84 × 106
9
0.02
–0.03
0.43
0.37
0.84
0.80
10
–0.32
–0.35
0.07
0.31
2.86 × 105
3.24 × 103
11
–0.18
–0.20
0.15
0.08
0.38
2.90 × 106
9.86 × 103
Mononuclear complexes 3–5 exhibit
Os(IV)/Os(V) and Os(V)/Os(VI) oxidations peaks between 0.20 and 0.80
V. The second oxidation is quasi-reversible for the three compounds,
whereas the first one is irreversible for 3 and 4 and quasi-reversible for 5 (Figures S55–S57). The mononuclear iridium compound 9 displays three quasi-reversible Ir(III)/Ir(IV), Ir(IV)/Ir(V),
and Ir(V)/Ir(VI) oxidation peaks at 0.02, 0.43, and 0.84 V, respectively
(Figure S61).The cyclic voltammograms
of the homobinuclear osmium derivatives 6–8 (Figure ) contain three quasi-reversible [Os2]/[Os2]+, [Os2]+/[Os2]2+, and [Os2]2+/[Os2]3+ oxidation peaks between −0.45
and 0.90 V. The first of them is observed in the range −0.45–0.10
V, the second one between 0.00 and 0.42 V, and the last one in the
range 0.42–0.90 V. Both separations between the consecutive
waves (ΔE) are long, yielding large values
of Kc (Kc =
e–n),[24] between 8.03 ×
104 and 2.03 × 107. They in a first glance
suggest class III radicals with the odd electron fully delocalized
(eq ; n = 4, 5).[3d] The homobinuclear iridium
complex 11 (Figure ) also exhibits three oxidation peaks at −0.18,
0.15, and 0.38 V. However, the separations between them are in this
case significantly different. The separation between the first oxidation
and the second one is long, giving rise to a Kc value of 2.90 × 106, which lies within the
range found for 6–8. On the other
hand, the separation between the second oxidation peak and the third
one is shorter. It only allows calculating a Kc value of 9.86 × 103. The heterobinuclear
complex 10 (Figure S62) has
three quasi-reversible oxidation peaks at −0.32, 0.07, and
0.31 V, corresponding to independent events on each metal. According
to the contribution of the metal centers to the HOMO of the species
generated in the process and their respective spin density maps (Figure S121), the first oxidation appears to take
place on the osmium center, whereas the second and third ones should
occur on the iridium center.
Figure 6
Cyclic
voltammograms of 10–3 M dichloromethane
solutions of complexes 6 (a), 7 (b), 8 (c), and 11 (d). Supporting electrolyte: [Bu4N]PF6 (0.1 M). Scan rate: 100 mV s–1. The potentials were referenced to the ferrocene/ferrocenium (Fc/Fc+) couple.
Cyclic
voltammograms of 10–3 M dichloromethane
solutions of complexes 6 (a), 7 (b), 8 (c), and 11 (d). Supporting electrolyte: [Bu4N]PF6 (0.1 M). Scan rate: 100 mV s–1. The potentials were referenced to the ferrocene/ferrocenium (Fc/Fc+) couple.
UV–vis–NIR
Spectra of the Oxidized Binuclear Species
UV–vis–NIR
spectroelectrochemical investigations
on 1 × 10–3 M solutions of the homobinuclear
complexes 7, 8, and 11 and
the heterobinuclear derivative 10 in dichloromethane
and in the presence of 0.1 M of [NBu4]PF6 were
carried out in order to corroborate the formation of mixed valence
species, suggested by the electrochemical study, as a result of the
performed oxidations. In contrast to 7, 8, 10, and 11, the solubility of the symmetrical
complex 6 in the usual organic solvents is not enough
to carry out the same spectroelectrochemical study with this compound.The comparison of the spectra of the monocations [M2]+ with those of the neutral complexes reveals interesting
findings. The spectrum of the monocation [7]+ (Figure S85) shows growing of the absorption
bands in the visible region between 450 and 550 nm, with regard to
that of 7 (Figure S84), together
with the appearance of a broader absorption centered at 1746 nm in
the NIR region. This behavior is ascribed to a HOMO(B)-to-LUMO(B)
intervalence charge transfer transition (IVCT) signature by a mixed-valence
species. An IVCT band is also observed in the spectrum of [8]+ (Figure , green line). It appears at 1705 nm, slightly red-shifted with regard
to [7]+ by about 40 nm, being much more intense.
In contrast, the spectrum of the diiridium cation [11]+ (Figure S93) has a much less
intense IVCT band at 912 nm, blue-shifted. The spectrum of the heterobimetallic
Os–Ir cation [10]+ (Figure S98) does not contain any perceptible IVCT band, in
spite of that DFT calculations predict a weak transition at 1066 nm.
Figure 7
UV–vis–NIR
absorption spectra of complexes 8-[8] in dichloromethane
solutions.
UV–vis–NIR
absorption spectra of complexes 8-[8] in dichloromethane
solutions.The oxidation of the monocations
to the [M2]2+ species gives rise to the disappearance
of the IVCT band in some
cases. Spectra of the dications [7]2+ and
[11]2+ do not contain any IVCT band (Figures S86 and S94). However, an intense IVCT
transition at 2000 nm is observed in the spectrum of [8]2+ (Figure , red line); which is about 300 nm red-shifted with regard to that
of [8]+. DFT calculations on [8]2+ reveal that the triplet state is 3.9 kcal/mol more
stable than the singlet state, so that [8]2+ should be described as a diradical. The oxidation from the dications
[M2]2+ to the trications [M2]3+ regenerates mixed-valence species for [7]3+ and [8]3+. Thus, the spectra of
[7]3+ (Figure S87) and [8]3+ (Figure , blue line) contain an IVCT transition centered
at about 1824 and 1614 nm, red-shifted by 77 and 15 nm with regard
to those of the respective monocations.Mixed-valence transition
metal complexes can be classified using
the delocalization parameter Γ,[12b] which is calculated by means of eq (3d)where Δν1/2 and Δνmax are the bandwidth at the half height
and the maximum absorption, respectively, for a Gaussian-shaped ICTV
band (cm–1).Table collects
the values of the delocalization parameter, calculated according to eq , for the ITCV bands previously
mentioned. Values of Γ < 0.5 indicate mixed-valence complexes
of class II, while values of Γ > 0.5 are characteristic of
compounds
of class III. Complexes in the borderline class II/class III display
values of Γ ≈ 0.5. According to this criteria, cation
[7]3+ belongs to class II, whereas ITCV bands
of the cations resulting from the three sequential oxidations of the
asymmetrical homobinuclear osmium complex 8 and the diiridium
cation [11]+ give Γ values, which fit
to class III. Cation [7]+ appears to be a
species of the borderline class II/class III with a Γ-value
of 0.51.
Table 4
Mixed-Valence and IVCT Parameters
complex
νmax/cm–1a
Δν1/2/cm–1a
Δν1/20/cm–1a
Γb
[7]+
9676
2287
4728
0.51
[7]3+
11088
3467
5061
0.31
[8]+
6307
1427
3817
0.63
[8]2+
5338
742
3511
0.78
[8]3+
6481
1045
3869
0.72
[11]+
11131
2001
5071
0.61
From Gaussian fit of ε/ν
versus ν.
Parameters
calculated using eq .
From Gaussian fit of ε/ν
versus ν.Parameters
calculated using eq .
Nature of the MH Units upon Oxidation
The dissociation energy
of a hydrogen molecule from a polyhydride
complex depends upon the electron density of the metal. This energy
increases as the hydrogen–hydrogen interaction decreases and
therefore it is higher for hydride forms than for dihydrogen ones.
This is a direct consequence of the metal-dihydrogen bonding situation.
Similar for all σ-complexes, the interaction between the coordinated
hydrogen molecule and the transition metal in the dihydrogen compounds
involves σ-donation from the σ-orbital of the coordinated
bond to empty orbitals of the metal and back bonding from the metal
to the σ*-orbital of the bond. The balance between donation
and back-donation determines the oxidative addition degree, which
has been fit to the separation between the coordinated hydrogen atoms.[1] To gain insight into the influence of the sequential
oxidation of the binuclear complexes 6–8, 10, and 11 on the respective MH units, we comparatively analyzed the hydrogen–hydrogen
separations in the optimized structures of the generated cations (Figures S64–S83). Chart gives a view of these structures, whereas Table gathers the separation
between the hydrogen atoms of the MH units.
Chart 1
Nature of the MH Units of the Neutral
and Cationic Forms
Table 5
Calculated
(B3LYP-D3//SDD(f)/6-31G**)
Separation between the Hydrogen Atoms Bonded to the Metal
complex
H1—H2 (Å)
H2—H3 (Å)
H4—H5 (Å)
H5—H6 (Å)
H3—H4 (Å)
6
1.6
1.8
1.6
1.8
[6]+
1.5
1.8
1.6
1.8
[6]2+
0.9
2.3
1.6
1.8
[6]3+
0.9
2.3
1.4
1.9
7
1.6
1.8
1.6
1.7
[7]+
1.5
1.8
1.6
1.7
[7]2+
0.9
2.3
1.6
1.7
[7]3+
0.9
2.2
1.5
1.8
8
1.6
1.8
1.6
[8]+
1.6
1.8
1.6
[8]2+
1.5
1.9
1.5
[8]3+
0.9
2.2
1.4
10
1.6
1.8
2.3
[10]+
1.5
1.8
2.3
[10]2+
0.9
2.3
2.3
[10]3+
0.9
2.2
2.4
11
2.3
2.3
[11]+
2.3
2.4
[11]2+
2.3
2.5
[11]3+
2.3
2.5
The neutral complexes are in the four cases
classical hydrides
with separations between their hydride ligands longer than 1.6 Å.
The monocations [M2]+ are also pure hydrides,
although it should be mentioned that subtle but significant differences
are observed between them. Two of the hydride ligands of a half of
[6]+ approach about 0.1 Å to form a compressed
dihydride (H(1) and H(2)). The same behavior is observed in the OsH3(PiPr3)2 moiety of [7]+ linked to the nitrogen atom of the unsubstituted
pyridyl ring and in the OsH3(PiPr3)2 moiety of [10]+. In contrast,
the hydrides of [8]+ and [11]+ are not affected. This difference in behavior appears to
be connected with the distribution of the frontier orbitals of the
cations (Figure ).
The SOMO of [6]+ (a), [7]+ (b), and [10]+ (d) is mainly centered
on the heterocycle linker and the metal center keeping invariant the
MH unit, while the LUMO is distributed
between the heterocycle linker and the metal center of the modified
MH unit. In contrast, both SOMO and LUMO
of [8]+ (c) are delocalized on the heterocycle
linker and the metals. The SOMO of [11]+ (e)
is similarly distributed. However, the LUMO is mainly centered on
the heterocycle linker and one of the metals.
Figure 8
SOMO and LUMO of complexes
[6] (a), [7] (b), [8] (c), [10]+ (d),
and [11] (e).
SOMO and LUMO of complexes
[6] (a), [7] (b), [8] (c), [10]+ (d),
and [11] (e).The oxidation from the monocations to the [M2]2+ species enhances the approaching of the compressed dihydrides,
which
become a Kubas-type dihydrogen in [6]2+, [7]2+, and [10]2+. On the
other hand, two hydrides of each OsH unit
of the cation [8]2+ approach 0.1 Å to
generate a compressed dihydride attached to each metal. In contrast
to [6]2+, [8]2+ and
[10]2+, the hydrides of [11]2+ remain unaltered. The oxidation of the dications has also
different implications depending upon the generated trication. Cations
[6]3+ and [7]3+ undergo
the transformation of two hydride ligands of the previously unaffected
OsH3(PiPr3)2 moiety from
classical to compressed, while the hydrogen atoms of the other are
not affected. The OsH3(PiPr3)2 moiety of [8]2+ is more sensitive
to the oxidation than the OsH2(PiPr3)2 one. Thus, while the compressed dihydrides of the OsH3(PiPr3)2 moiety of [8]2+ are transformed into a Kubas-type dihydrogen
in [8]3+, those of the OsH2(PiPr3)2 moiety only experience a slight
approach. The MH units of cations [M2]2+ and [M2]3+ of 10 and 11 display similar parameters.The previous
observations suggest that the MH units
of d4-osmium fragments are
more sensitive to the oxidation than those of d6-iridium fragments and that the metal center of the MH unit that undergoes the transformation is
that with the highest contribution to the LUMO of the binuclear species.
Concluding Remarks
The rollover cyclometalated hydride derivatives
OsH3{κ2-C,N-[C5RH2N-py]}(PiPr3)2 (R = H, Me, Ph) and IrH2{κ2-C,N-[C5RH2N-py]}(PiPr3)2 display frontier orbitals involving
substantial mixing of the metal center and the π-heterocycle
backbone. The activation of an ortho-CH bond of the
heterocyclic moiety of these metal–ligand units, promoted by
the platinum group metals polyhydride complexes OsH6(PiPr3)2 and IrH5(PiPr3)2, gives rise to four different classes
of binuclear derivatives: the hexahydride (PiPr3)2H3Os{μ-[κ2-C,N-[C5RH2N-C5H3N]-N,C-κ2]}OsH3(PiPr3)2 compounds with two OsH3(PiPr3)2 halves, the homopentahydride (PiPr3)2H3Os{μ-[κ2-C,N-[C5H3N-C5(C6H4)H2N]-C,N,C-κ3]}OsH2(PiPr3)2 derivative bearing
OsH3(PiPr3)2 and OsH2(PiPr3)2 fragments, the heteropentahydride
(PiPr3)2H3Os{μ-[κ2-C,N-[C5H3N-C5H3N]-N,C-κ2]}IrH2(PiPr3)2 with OsH3(PiPr3)2 and IrH2(PiPr3)2 units, and the tetrahydride (PiPr3)2H2Ir{μ-[κ2-C,N-[C5H3N-C5H3N]-N,C-κ2]}IrH2(PiPr3)2 complex
formed by two IrH2(PiPr3)2 moieties. With the exception of the heterobinuclear pentahydride
(PiPr3)2H3Os{μ-[κ2-C,N-[C5H3N-C5H3N]-N,C-κ2]}IrH2(PiPr3)2, these compounds display HOMO delocalization
throughout the metal–heterocycle-metal skeleton. This electronic
situation lends them interesting electrochemical properties. Their
sequential oxidation allows generating mixed valence species, including
mono- and diradicals, which exhibit intervalence charge transfer transitions.
This noticeable ability allows us to govern the strength of the hydrogen–hydrogen
and metal–hydrogen interactions within the MH units of these compounds. This finding should be of paramount
importance for the attractive goal of reversibly controlling the coordination
of the hydrogen molecule in transition metal polyhydride complexes.
Experimental Section
General Information
All reactions were carried out
with exclusion of air using Schlenk-tube techniques or in a drybox.
Instrumental methods and X-ray details are given in the Supporting Information. In the NMR spectra (Figures S1–S18) the chemical shifts (in
ppm) are referenced to residual solvent peaks (1H, 13C{1H}) or external 85% H3PO4 (31P{1H}). Coupling constants J and N (N = JP–H + JP’-H for 1H and N = JP–C + JP’-C for 13C{1H}) are given in hertz.
Preparation
of (PiPr3)2H3Os{μ-[κ2-C,N-[C5H3N-C5H3N]-N,C-κ2]}OsH3(PiPr3)2 (6)
This compound can
be prepared by two methods. Method a: A mixture
of OsH6(PiPr3)2 (1, 77 mg, 0.149 mmol) and OsH3{κ2-C,N-[C5H3N-py]}(PiPr3)2 (3,
100 mg, 0.149 mmol) in toluene (6 mL) was refluxed for 16 h. The resulting
suspension was cooled to room temperature, and the solvent was removed
in vacuo. The addition of methanol (4 mL) caused the precipitation
of a pale orange solid that was washed with further portions of methanol
(3 × 3 mL) and finally it was dried in vacuo. Yield: 131 mg (74%).
Method b: A mixture of 1 (150 mg, 0.29 mmol) and 2,2′-bipyridine
(23 mg, 0.145 mmol) in toluene (6 mL) was refluxed for 16 h. The workup
of the reaction is analogous as that described in Method a. Yield:
133 mg (78%). Anal. Calcd for C46H96N2Os2P4: C, 46.76; H, 8.19; N, 2.37. Found: C,
46.76; H 8.29; N, 2.31. IR (cm–1): ν(Os–H)
1985, 2102 (w). 1H NMR (300.13 MHz, toluene-d8, 298 K): δ 8.80 (d, 3JH–H = 5.4, 2H, py), 8.30 (d, 3JH–H = 7.3, 2H, py), 6.29 (m, 2H, py),
1.89 (m, 12H, PCH(CH3)2), 1.02 (dvt, 3JH–H = 6.6, N = 13.0, 36H, PCH(CH3)2), 0.99 (dvt, 3JH–H = 6.7, N = 13.4, 36H, PCH(CH3)2), −9.12 (br,
4H, Os–H), −12.30 (br, 2H, Os–H). 1H NMR (300.13 MHz, toluene-d8, high field
region, 223 K): δ −5.92 (br, 2H, Os–H), −12.13
(br, 4H, Os–H). The low solubility of the solid precluded obtaining
its 13C{1H} NMR spectrum. 31P{1H} NMR (121.50 MHz, toluene-d8, 298 K): δ 23.1 (s). T1(min) (ms,
OsH. 300 MHz, toluene-d8, 223 K): 54 ±
5 (−5.92 ppm); 97 ± 10 (−12.13).
Preparation
of (PiPr3)2H3Os{μ-[κ2-C,N-[C5H2MeN-C5H3N]-N,C-κ2]}OsH3(PiPr3)2 (7)
This compound can
be prepared by two methods. Method a: A mixture
of 1 (76 mg, 0.146 mmol) and OsH3{κ2-C,N-[C5(Me)H2N-py]}(PiPr3)2 (4, 100 mg, 0.146 mmol) in toluene (4 mL) was refluxed for 16 h, giving
a dark orange suspension. After cooling the mixture to room temperature,
the solvent was removed in vacuo, affording an orange residue. Addition
of cold methanol (3 mL) caused the precipitation of an orange solid
that was washed with cold methanol (3 × 3 mL) and dried in vacuo.
Yield: 136 mg (78%). Method b: A mixture of 1 (100 mg,
0.194 mmol) and 6-methyl-2,2′-bipyridine (14.7 μL, 0.095
mmol) in toluene (4 mL) was refluxed for 16 h, giving a dark orange
solution. The workup of the reaction is analogous at that described
in Method a. Yield: 96 mg (83%). Anal. Calcd for C47H98N2Os2P: C, 47.21; H, 8.26; N, 2.34.
Found: C, 47.31; H, 7.96; N, 2.34. HRMS (electrospray, m/z): calculated for C47H98N2Os2P4 [M]+, 1198.5905,
found, 1198.5911. IR (cm–1): ν(Os–H)
1978 (w). 1H NMR (300.13 MHz, toluene-d, 298 K): δ 8.85 (d, 1H, 3JH–H = 5.0, py), 8.32 (d, 3JH–H = 7.4, 1H, Me-py),
8.21 (d, 3JH–H = 7.1,
1H, py), 6.62 (d, 3JH–H = 7.4, 1H, Me-py), 6.25 (m, 1H, py), 2.91 (s, 3H, CH3), 1.93 (m, 12H, PCH(CH3)2), 1.04 (dvt, 3JH–H = 6.5, N = 13.3, 36H, PCH(CH3)2), 1.09–0.92 (m, 72H, PCH(CH3)2), −9.21 (br, 4H, Os–H), −12.26
(br, 1H, Os–H), −13.17 (br, 1H, Os–H). 13C{1H}-apt NMR (75.48 MHz, toluene-d8, 298 K): δ 173.9 (t, 2JC–P = 6.8, Os–C py), 173.7 (s, C Me-py),
173.6 (s, C py), 168.9 (t, 2JC–P= 6.2, Os–C Me-py), 153.8 (s, CH Me-py),
150.9 (s, CH py), 150.0 (s, CH py), 149.9 (s, C Me-py), 122.0 (s,
CH py), 121.4 (s, CH Me-py), 33.3 (s, CH3), 28.3 (vt, N = 23.0, PCH(CH3)2), 28.2 (vt, N = 23.2, PCH(CH3)2), 20.6, 20.5, and 20.4 (all s, PCH(CH3)2). 31P{1H} NMR (121.50
MHz, toluene-d, 298
K): δ 22.7 (s), 21.4 (s). T1(min) (ms, OsH, 300 MHz, toluene-d, 213 K): 57 ± 6 (−6.01 ppm); 57 ± 6 (−12.16
ppm); 48 ± 5 (−13.10 ppm).
Preparation of (PiPr3)2H3Os{μ-[κ2-C,N-[C5H3N-C5(C6H4)H2N]-C,N,C-κ3]}OsH2(PiPr3)2 (8)
This compound can be prepared
by two methods. Method a: A mixture of 1 (66 mg, 0.128
mmol) and OsH3{κ2-C,N-[C5(Ph)H2N-py]}(PiPr3)2 (5, 96 mg, 0.128 mmol) in toluene
(3 mL) was refluxed for 16 h, giving a dark orange suspension. After
the mixture was cooled to room temperature, the solvent was removed
in vacuo, affording an orange residue. Addition of cold methanol (3
mL) caused the precipitation of an orange solid that was washed with
methanol (3 × 3 mL) and dried in vacuo. Yield: 122 mg (76%) Method
b: A mixture of 1 (150 mg, 0.290 mmol) and 6-phenyl-2,2′-bipyridine
(33.7 mg, 0.145 mmol) in toluene (5 mL) was refluxed for 16 h, giving
a dark orange suspension. The workup of the reaction is analogous
at that described in Method a. Yield: 147.5 mg (81%). Anal. Calcd
for C52H98N2Os2P4: C, 49.74; H, 7.87; N, 2.23. Found: C, 49.48; H, 7.72; N, 2.14.
HRMS (electrospray, m/z): calculated
for C52H97N2Os2P4 [M – H]+, 1255.5826; found, 1255.5451. IR (cm–1): ν(Os–H) 2141, 2106 (w). 1H NMR (300.13 MHz, CD2Cl2, 298 K): δ
8.63 (d, 1H, 3JH–H =
5.5, py), 8.14 (d, 3JH–H = 7.8, 1H, central py), 7.83 (d, 3JH–H = 7.4, 1H, py), 7.78 (d, 3JH–H = 7.4, 1H, Ph), 7.51 (d, 3JH–H = 7.6, 1H, Ph), 7.10 (d, 3JH–H = 7.8, 1H, central py), 6.80
(t, 3JH–H= 7.4, 1H, Ph), 6.63 (t, 3JH–H = 7.2, 1H, Ph), 6.21 (t, 3JH–H = 5.6, 1H, py), 1.97 (m, 12H, PCH(CH3)2), 0.97 (dvt, 3JH–H = 6.4, N = 13, 36H, PCH(CH3)2), 0.81 (dvt, 3JH–H = 6.4, N = 12.2, 36H, PCH(CH3)2), −8,48 (dt, 2JH–H = 11.3, 2JH–P = 15.1, 1H, Os–H), −9.19
(dt, 2JH–H = 11.3, 2JH–P = 17.2, 1H, Os–H),
−9.49 (br, 2H, Os–H), −12.47 (br, 1H, Os–H). 1H NMR (300.13 MHz, CD2Cl2, 203 K, high
field region): δ – 6.23 (br, 1H, Os–H), −8.48
(dt, 2JH–H = 16.8, 2JH–P = 14.2, 1H, Os–H), −9.22 (dt, 2JH–H = 16.9, 2JH–P = 10.8, 1H, Os–H), −12.57
(br, 1H, Os–H), −12.89 (br, 1H, Os–H). 13C{1H}-apt NMR (75.48 MHz, CD2Cl2, 298 K): δ 175.2 (s, C py), 170.9 (s, C central py), 169.9
(t, 2JC–P = 8.3, Os–C
Ph), 168.0 (t, 2JC–P= 6.1, Os–C central py), 165.5 (t, 2JC–P = 8.5, Os–C
py), 156.7 (s, C central py), 151.9 (s, CH central py), 150.3 (s,
C Ph), 149.9 (s, CH Ph), 149.5 (s, CH py), 146.9 (s, CH Ph), 126.9
(s, CH Ph), 122.4 (s, CH py), 122.2 (s, CH Ph), 119.8 (s, CH Ph),
113.8 (s, CH central py), 28.4 (vt, N = 23.4, PCH(CH3)2), 27.0 (vt, N = 23.6, PCH(CH3)2), 20.6,
20.3, 19.9, and 19.4 (all s, PCH(CH3)2). 31P{1H} NMR (121.50 MHz, CD2Cl2, 298 K): δ 24.1 (s), 1.8 (s).
Preparation
of (PiPr3)2H3Os{μ-[κ2-C,N-[C5H3N-C5H3N]-N,C-κ2]}IrH2(PiPr3)2 (10)
A mixture of 2 (100 mg, 0.193 mmol) and OsH3{κ2-C,N-(C5H3N-py)}(PiPr3)2 (3, 129 mg, 0.193 mmol)
in toluene (4 mL) was refluxed for 16 h. After
this time, the resulting dark orange solution was cooled to room temperature,
filtered through Celite and the solvent was removed in vacuo. The
addition of pentane (5 mL) caused the precipitation of an orange solid;
this was washed with further portions of pentane (3 × 2 mL) and
finally dried in vacuo. Yield: 155 mg (68%). Anal. Calcd for C46H95IrN2OsP4: C, 46.72; H,
8.10; N, 2.37. Found: C, 46.72; H, 8.12; N, 2.36. HRMS (electrospray, m/z) calcd for C46H94IrN2OsP4 [M – H]+, 1183.5585;
found, 1183.5529. IR (cm–1): ν(Ir–H)
2141 (m), ν(Os–H) 2102 (m), 1988 (m). 1H NMR
(300.13 MHz, C6D6, 298 K): δ 8.93 (d, 3JH–H = 5.5, 1H, CH py),
8.47 (m, 2H, CH py), 8.11 (d, 3JH–H = 7.3, 1H, CH py), 6.38 (m, 2H, CH py), 2.04 (m, 6H, PCH(CH3)2), 1.93 (m, 6H, PCH(CH3)2), 1.05 (m, 72H, PCH(CH3)2), −8.98 (br, 2H, Os–H), −12.24
(br, 1H, Os–H), −13.05 (dt, 2JH–H = 4.1, 2JH–P = 21.4, 1H, Ir–H), −22.16 (dt, 2JH–H = 4.1, 2JH–P = 19.3, 1H, Ir -H). 1H NMR (300.13
MHz, toluene-d8, 223 K, high field region):
δ – 5.80 (br, 1H, Os–H), −12.10 (br, 2H,
Os–H), −12.93 (br t,2JH–P = 18.9, 1H, Ir–H), −21.93
(dt,2JH–H = 3.6, 2JH–P = 18.9,
1H, Ir–H). 13C{1H}-apt NMR (75.48 MHz,
C6D6, 298 K): δ 176.1, 174.0 (both s,
C py), 173.4 (t, 2JC–P = 6.4, Os–C), 163.2 (t, 2JC–P = 6.2, Ir–C), 152.1, 150.1, 150.0, 147.7,
122.2, 122.1 (all s, CH py), 28.0 (vt, N = 23.3,
PCH(CH3)2), 27.4 (vt, N = 26.8, PCH(CH3)2), 20.4, 20.3, 20.3, 20.1 (all s, PCH(CH3)2). 31P{1H} NMR (161.99 MHz, C6D6, 298 K): δ 30.3 (s, Ir–P), 22.4
(s, Os–P). T1(min) (ms, OsH, 300
MHz, toluene-d8, 243 K): 66 ± 7 (−12.15
ppm), value of the resonance at −5.98 ppm could not be calculated
due to the broadness of it.
Preparation of (PiPr3)2H2Ir{μ-[κ2-C,N-[C5H3N-C5H3N]-N,C-κ2]}IrH2(PiPr3)2 (11)
This compound can be prepared by two
methods. Method a:
A mixture of 2 (115 mg, 0.224 mmol) and IrH2{κ2-C,N-[C5H3N-py]}(PiPr3)2 (9, 150 mg, 0.224 mmol) in toluene (8 mL) was refluxed
for 16 h. After this time, the resulting yellow dark solution was
cooled to room temperature, filtered through Celite, and the solvent
was removed in vacuo. The addition of pentane (5 mL) caused the precipitation
of a yellow solid, which was washed with further portions of pentane
(3 × 5 mL), and finally, it was dried in vacuo. Yield: 225 mg
(85%). Method b: A mixture of 2 (200 mg, 0.386 mmol)
and 2,2′-bipyridine (30 mg, 0.193 mmol) in toluene (8 mL) was
refluxed for 16 h. The workup of the reaction is analogous at that
described in Method a. Yield: 204 mg (89%). Anal. Calcd for C46H94Ir2N2P4: C,
46.68; H, 8.01; N, 2.37. Found: C, 46.83; H, 8.18; N, 2.36. HRMS (electrospray, m/z) calcd for C46H93Ir2N2P4 [M – H]+, 1183.5542; found, 1183.5351. IR (cm–1): ν(Ir–H)
2151 (m), 1931 (m). 1H NMR (300 MHz, C6D6, 298 K): δ 8.57 (d, 3JH–H = 5.1, 2H, CH py), 8.22 (d, 3JH–H = 7.1, 2H, CH py), 6.46 (dd, 3JH–H = 7.1, 3JH–H = 5.1, 2H, CH py), 2.04 (m,
12H, PCH(CH3)2), 1.08 (dvt, 3JH–H = 6.6, N = 13.5, 36H, PCH(CH3)2),
1.04 (dvt, 3JH–H = 6.7, N = 13.1, 36H, PCH(CH3)2), −12.93 (dt, 2JH–H = 4.1, 2JH–P = 21.2,
1H, Ir–H), −22.00 (dt, 2JH–H = 4.1, 2JH–P = 19.3, 1H, Ir–H). 13C{1H}-apt NMR
(75.45 MHz, C6D6, 298 K): δ 177.3 (s,
C py), 163.6 (t, 2JC–P = 6.5, Ir–C py), 150.8, 148.5, 121.9 (all s, CH py), 27.4
(vt, N = 26.8, PCH(CH3)2), 20.4, 20.1 (both s, PCH(CH3)2). 31P{1H} NMR (121.5 MHz, C6D6, 298 K): δ 29.9 (s).
UV–vis–NIR
Spectroelectrochemical Investigations
Spectroelectrochemical
experiments combine UV–vis–NIR
spectroscopic measurements and redox processes at the same time. Thus,
they allow obtaining the spectra of specific controlled oxidation
states. The electrochemical measurements were performed with a micro-Autolab
FRA2 Type III (Methrom, Utrecht, Netherlands) potentiostat controlled
by NOVA (v.2.1.4) software. For the optical measurements, a JASCO
V670 spectrophotometer using quartz (1 mm optical path length) was
used. The spectroelectrochemical cell (1 mL volume) was a DRP-PTGRID-TRANSCELL
(DropSens). It contains an optically transparent Pt grid working electrode
(0.6 × 0.4 cm) which allows the bulk electrolysis of the solution
contained in the cell, a Ag/AgCl reference electrode, and a platinum
counter electrode. The experiments were performed under argon and
protected from the light in dichloromethane solution (10–3 M) with [Bu4N]PF6 as a supporting electrolyte
(0.1 M). To obtain the UV–vis–NIR spectra, anodic potentials
according to the previously measured cyclic voltammograms were applied
for the corresponding oxidations to [M2]+, [M2]2+, and [M2]3+ during the
wavelength scan.
Authors: Luis Casarrubios; Miguel A Esteruelas; Carmen Larramona; Agustí Lledós; Jaime G Muntaner; Enrique Oñate; Manuel A Ortuño; Miguel A Sierra Journal: Chemistry Date: 2015-10-06 Impact factor: 5.236