2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.jssc.2017.05.017
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparitive study on structural, magnetic and spectroscopic properties of four new copper(II) coordination polymers with 4′-substituted terpyridine ligands

Abstract: International audienceThe synthesis and characterization of four copper(II) complexes with different terpyridyl ligands have been carried out, their crystal and molecular structures determined and their magnetic and luminescent properties analyzed. The ligands used in the coordination reactions were 4′-(3-methyl-2-thienyl)-4,2′:6′,4''-terpyridine (4-stpy), -4′-(4-quinolinyl)-4,2′:6′,4''-terpyridine (4-qtpy), 4′-(4-quinolinyl)-3,2′:6′,3''-terpyridine (3-qtpy, unreported so far) and 4′-(4-cyanophenyl)-4,2′:6′,4'… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
13
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 57 publications
1
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…It is tempting to suggest that this is due to the steric hindrance of the {Cu(hfacac) 2 } domains. We note that there are also no π-stacking interactions between 4,2 :6 ,4"-tpy domains in the 1D-polymers [Cu(hfacac) 2 (L 2 )] n •CHCl 3 and [Cu(hfacac) 2 (L 4 )] n (see Scheme 2 for L 2 and L 4 ) [36], although Moreno and coworkers did observe π-stacking of 4,2 :6 ,4"-tpy units in the molecular complex [Cu 3 (ttfacac) 6 (L 1 ) 2 ] (L 1 , see Scheme 2) [37]. Another similarity between [Cu 2 (hfacac) 4 (1) Having investigated the effects of moving the substitution position of the CF3 group while retaining a 4,2′:6′,4″-tpy metal-binding unit on going from 1 to 2, we turned our attention to ligands 3 and 4 with 3,2′:6′,3″-tpy domains.…”
Section: Single Crystal Structures Of 1 Andmentioning
confidence: 93%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…It is tempting to suggest that this is due to the steric hindrance of the {Cu(hfacac) 2 } domains. We note that there are also no π-stacking interactions between 4,2 :6 ,4"-tpy domains in the 1D-polymers [Cu(hfacac) 2 (L 2 )] n •CHCl 3 and [Cu(hfacac) 2 (L 4 )] n (see Scheme 2 for L 2 and L 4 ) [36], although Moreno and coworkers did observe π-stacking of 4,2 :6 ,4"-tpy units in the molecular complex [Cu 3 (ttfacac) 6 (L 1 ) 2 ] (L 1 , see Scheme 2) [37]. Another similarity between [Cu 2 (hfacac) 4 (1) Having investigated the effects of moving the substitution position of the CF3 group while retaining a 4,2′:6′,4″-tpy metal-binding unit on going from 1 to 2, we turned our attention to ligands 3 and 4 with 3,2′:6′,3″-tpy domains.…”
Section: Single Crystal Structures Of 1 Andmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…and [Cu(hfacac) 2 (L 4 )] n (L 1 -L 4 are defined in Scheme 2) [36]. All four compounds are 1D-coordination polymers with 4,2 :6 ,4"-or 3,2 :6 ,3"-tpy domains linking octahedral Cu(II) centers.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…have been prepared as previously reported. 15,24 Microanalyses were recorded on a Thermo-FINNIGAN Flash EA 1112 CHNS/O analyzer at the Microanalytical Service of the CRMPO at the University of Rennes 1, France. NMR spectroscopy: 1 H and 13 C NMR spectra in CDCl 3 solution were recorded on a Bruker-400 NMR spectrometer (chemical shifts referenced to residual solvent peaks, δTMS= 0).…”
Section: -Stpy and 3-qtpymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although many examples of 1D-, 2D- and 3D-assemblies have been prepared from ligands containing one or more 4,2′:6′,4′′-tpy units, the coordination behaviour of 3,2′:6′,3′′-tpy ligands remains less exploited. 1,5–25 We have reported three copper( ii ) 1D-coordination polymers [Cu 2 (hfacac) 4 (L1) 2 ] n · n (1,2-Cl 2 C 6 H 4 ) (Hhfacac = 1,1,1,5,5,5-hexafluoropentane-2,4-dione), [Cu 2 (hfacac) 4 (L1) 2 ] n · n C 6 H 5 Cl, and [Cu(hfacac) 2 (L2)] n · n C 6 H 5 Cl, containing ditopic 3,2′:6′,3′′-tpy ligands with coordinatively innocent 4′-substituents. In [Cu 2 (hfacac) 4 (L1) 2 ] n · n (1,2-Cl 2 C 6 H 4 ) and [Cu 2 (hfacac) 4 (L2) 2 ] n · n C 6 H 5 Cl the 3,2′:6′,3′′-tpy domains exhibit conformation C , while with [Cu(hfacac) 2 (L2)] n · n C 6 H 5 Cl conformation B is adopted (Scheme 1).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%