2016
DOI: 10.1002/chem.201603360
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Synthesis of Triptycene‐Substituted Azapentacene and Azahexacene Derivatives

Abstract: We describe the synthesis and characterization of novel iptycene-substituted azaacenes by using either a classic condensation route (diamine plus ortho-quinone) and/or a Pd-catalyzed coupling of an aromatic diamine with an aromatic dihalide. The attachment of an iptycene unit leads to a significant blueshift (15 nm) in the UV/Vis spectra of these azaacenes. The iptycene unit stabilizes a hexaazahexacene with a λ of 833 nm. By employing 5,6-diamino(benzothiadiazole) as a synthon for tetraaminobenzene, we could … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

2
10
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

2
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
(25 reference statements)
2
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…By fitting the absorption onset in the PDS measurements, we find the band gap of TIPS‐TAP to be 1.55 eV, slightly lower than that of TIPS‐TAP‐1T at 1.6 eV and TIPS‐TAP‐2T at 1.7 eV. The increase in bandgap with the incorporation of triptycenyl units is in agreement with previous DFT calculations . Using these bandgaps we estimate the electron affinity of TIPS‐TAP to be 4.5 eV, which suggests it exhibits a significantly lower LUMO than that of TIPS‐TAP‐1T (at 4.2 eV) and TIPS‐TAP‐2T (at 4.1 eV).…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 87%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…By fitting the absorption onset in the PDS measurements, we find the band gap of TIPS‐TAP to be 1.55 eV, slightly lower than that of TIPS‐TAP‐1T at 1.6 eV and TIPS‐TAP‐2T at 1.7 eV. The increase in bandgap with the incorporation of triptycenyl units is in agreement with previous DFT calculations . Using these bandgaps we estimate the electron affinity of TIPS‐TAP to be 4.5 eV, which suggests it exhibits a significantly lower LUMO than that of TIPS‐TAP‐1T (at 4.2 eV) and TIPS‐TAP‐2T (at 4.1 eV).…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 87%
“…The ionization potential (IP) was determined by fitting the low binding energy edge and was found to be 6.05 eV for TIPS‐TAP and 5.8 eV for TIPS‐TAP‐1T and TIPS‐TAP‐2T. The small decrease in the ionization potential upon the addition of the triptycenyl moiety/moieties is in agreement with the previous cyclic voltammetry measurements and density functional theory (DFT) calculations …”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 85%
See 3 more Smart Citations