Polypyridyl-hydrazone based Ruthenium(II) complexes: Spectral and computational analysis

Comparative study of the anchorage and the catalytic properties of nanoporous TiO2 films modified with ruthenium (II) and rhenium (I) carbonyl complexes

“…On the other hand, several reports on the general, flexible and modular ruthenium(II) complexes synthesis of type cis-Ru(N,N) 2 X 2 (where N,N is a dinitrogenated ligand and X is an halide such as chloride) conclude that the electronic effects produced by the ligands nature and coordination position are fundamental to control their electrochemical properties [16][17][18][19]. In addition, numerous studies on electron transfer and transport processes in solar cells based on TiO 2 with ruthenium (II) complexes have demonstrated successful results in energy conversion [16,20].…”

Amine functionalized homoleptic ruthenium(II) sensitizer for dye‐sensitized solar cells: A combined effect of ancillary ligands and co‐sensitization

“…Along with the calculations, ground state = −5.2631 eV, excited state = −4.1134 eV, band gap = 1.1497 eV. This tiny force distance confirms the complex RDAB3 has huge reactivity in addition to great polarizability . The HOMO, LUMO, and bandgap calculated from the DFT calculations are well‐correlated with electrochemical calculations (Table ).…”

“…Electron wealthy area denoted in region of dark red, whereas the electron deficient sites are indicates in the region of blue. MEP of RDAB3 visibly that on amine group of nitrogens, the further heterocyclic bipyridyl nitrogen atoms have more electronegative . The electron wealthy (red) section is occupied about amine nitrogen atoms, by a lower assessment of −6.765e−3.…”

“…MEP of RDAB3 visibly that on amine group of nitrogens, the further heterocyclic bipyridyl nitrogen atoms have more electronegative. 22,23 The electron wealthy (red) section is occupied about amine nitrogen atoms, by a lower assessment of −6.765e −3. On the other hand, higher electron deficient (blue) zone is surrounded on bipyridyl nitrogen perhaps caused by the protons, with a higher value of 6.765e−3.…”