1985
DOI: 10.1107/s0108270185008848
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Structure of 2-(1-adamantyl)-2-trimethylsiloxy-1,1-bis(trimethylsily)-1-silaethylene

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

1
7
0

Year Published

1990
1990
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
1
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Figure 3 shows the molecular structure of 3b as determined by single-crystal X-ray crystallography. The geometry of the central Si–C moiety closely resembles the one observed for Brook’s acyclic silene (Me 3 Si) 2 Si=C(OSiMe 3 )Ad ( 6 ) 3 , 12 with nearly identical Si=C bond lengths (1.767 vs 1.762 Å) and an essentially planar C(1) atom (∑αC(1) = 359.8°). As compared to 6 , Si(1) in 3b is slightly more pyramidalized by 2°, while the twist angle around the Si=C bond in 3b is significantly smaller, as shown by the torsion angles Si(6)–Si(1)–C(1)–C(10) and Si(2)–Si(1)–C(1)–O(1), likely as a result of the incorporation of Si(1) into the cyclohexasilane cycle.…”
supporting
confidence: 57%
“…Figure 3 shows the molecular structure of 3b as determined by single-crystal X-ray crystallography. The geometry of the central Si–C moiety closely resembles the one observed for Brook’s acyclic silene (Me 3 Si) 2 Si=C(OSiMe 3 )Ad ( 6 ) 3 , 12 with nearly identical Si=C bond lengths (1.767 vs 1.762 Å) and an essentially planar C(1) atom (∑αC(1) = 359.8°). As compared to 6 , Si(1) in 3b is slightly more pyramidalized by 2°, while the twist angle around the Si=C bond in 3b is significantly smaller, as shown by the torsion angles Si(6)–Si(1)–C(1)–C(10) and Si(2)–Si(1)–C(1)–O(1), likely as a result of the incorporation of Si(1) into the cyclohexasilane cycle.…”
supporting
confidence: 57%
“…The adducts obtained have been used as “instant silenes” in cases where the noncomplexed silene was not stable. In one of his contributions on the topic, Wiberg offered the following speculation: A prerequisite for adduct formation seems to be a polar SiX double bond, as neither Brook’s sila enol ether, , which has a largely nonpolar silicon−carbon double bond, nor West’s or Masamune’s (symmetrical) disilenes have been reported to form stable adducts.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is recognized that bond lengths from crystal structures may vary significantly from true values, or from those derived from ab initio calculations: no attempt was made here to correct for the different kinds of data being considered. The crystal structure data for the Wiberg silene MezSi=C(SiMeS)Si-Me(Bu-t)J3] were fairly accurately reproduced, as were the data for the Brook silene (Me3Si)zSi= C(OSiMeJAd [2], although in the latter case one significant problem was encountered. Thus, the angle =C-O-SiMe, reported in the crystal structure was remarkably large, 134", and the angle 0-Cs,,z--C (of the adamantyl group) was remarkably small (1 12.2").…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 65%
“…The parameter lists given below meet the object of duplicating simultaneously the structures of simple silenes, such as silene [l], dimethylsilene [ 11, and bis(sily1)silene [ 13, as well as the reported crystal structures of (Me3Si)2Si=CAd(OSiMe3) [2] (Ad = 1 -adamantyl) and Me2Si=C(SiMe3)SiMe ( B U -~)~ [3], and in addition disilenes such as disilene 141, tetraniethyldisilene [4], and the crystalline disilenes tetramesityldisilene [5], trans-l,2-dimesityl-1,2-di(t-butyl)disilene [S], and tetra(2,6-diethyl-pheny1)disilene [6].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%