Star-Shaped D-A Compounds
A R T I C L E S
TAM2. A procedure similar to that for TAM1 was applied. A
mixture of Pd(OAc)2 (23 mg, 0.1 mmol), biphenyl-4-ylphenylamine
(1.0 g, 4 mmol), NatBuO (460 mg, 6 mmol), T-Br (980 mg, 1 mmol),
toluene (20 mL), and PtBu3 (8 mL, 0.4 mmol, 0.05 M in toluene)
gave TAM2 (1.2 g, 82%) as yellow crystals with recrystallization from
The Netherlands) coupled with a photomultiplier tube (PMT, Ham-
mamatsu R4220p, Japan) held at -750 V with a high-voltage power
supply (Kepco, Flushing, NY). The photocurrent produced at the PMT
was transformed into a voltage signal by an electrometer/high resistance
system (Keithley, Cleveland, OH) and fed into the external input
channel of an analog-to-digital converter (ADC) of the Autolab. The
ECL spectra were taken using a liquid nitrogen-cooled charge-coupled
device (CCD) camera (Princeton Instrument, SPEC-32), which was
cooled to -100 °C and calibrated with a mercury lamp. Absorption
spectra were recorded with a Milton Roy Spectronic 3000 array
spectrophotometer. Fluorescence spectra were acquired on a Quanta
Master spectrofluorimeter (Photon Technology International, Birming-
ham, NJ). Differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) was recorded with
JADE DSC (PerkinElmer).
DigiSim 3.03 (Bioanalytical Systems, Inc., West Lafayette, IN)
was used to simulate the cyclic voltammograms. The double-layer
capacitance (∼40 nF) and uncompensated resistance (1200 Ω) were
determined from the current response to a potential step made in a
nonfaradic region. The diffusion coefficients, D, were determined
from the Randles-Sevic equation and a Cottrell plot of an oxidizing
potential step. The electrode surface area was determined from a
Cottrell plot of a potential step experiment in 1 mM ferrocene in
MeCN (D ) 1.2 × 10-5 cm2/s).13
1
methanol. IR (KBr) ν 2979, 1607, 1514, 1282, 824, 765 cm-1; H
NMR (CDCl3, 400 MHz) δ 8.86 (dd, J ) 9.2, 1.2 Hz, 3H), 8.74 (d,
J ) 0.8 Hz, 3H), 7.86 (d, J ) 8.0 Hz, 3H), 7.72 (d, J ) 8.4 Hz 3H),
7.63-7.61 (m, 6H), 7.53 (d, J ) 8.2 Hz, 6H), 7.45 (t, J ) 7.6 Hz,
6H), 7.35-7.28 (m, 9H), 7.25-7.19 (m, 15H), 7.15 (dd, J ) 10.4
Hz, 2.4 Hz, 3H), 7.08 (t, J ) 7.4 Hz, 3H), 2.24-2.19 (m, 6H),
2.06-2.01 (m, 6H), 0.49 (t, J ) 7 Hz, 18H); 13C NMR (CDCl3, 100
MHz) δ 171.4, 152.5, 150.0, 147.8, 147.5, 147.0, 145.6, 140.4, 135.7,
135.1, 134.3, 129.2, 128.6, 128.4, 127.7, 126.7, 124.3, 123.8, 123.4,
122.9, 121.2, 119.0, 56.3, 32.8, 8.9; MS (m/z, FAB+) 1472 (100), 1471
(68), 492 (18), 447 (32), 307 (55); HRMS (M+, FAB+) Calcd
C108H90N6 1470.7227, found 1470.7202.
TAM3. A procedure similar to that for TAM1 was applied. A
mixture of Pd(OAc)2 (23 mg, 0.1 mmol), naphthalen-2-ylphenyl-
amine (900 mg, 4 mmol), NatBuO (460 mg, 6 mmol), T-Br (980 mg,
1 mmol), toluene (20 mL), and PtBu3 (8 mL, 0.4 mmol, 0.05 M in
toluene) gave TAM3 (700 mg, 53%) as yellow crystals using column
chromatography with hexane/toluene (3/1) and then recrystallization
from methanol. IR (KBr) ν 2966, 1600, 1520, 1375, 818, 791 cm-1
.
Results and Discussion
1H NMR (CDCl3, 400 MHz) δ 8.81 (dd, J ) 9.2, 1.2 Hz, 3H), 8.68
(s, 3H), 7.96 (d, J ) 8.4 Hz, 3H), 7.91 (d, J ) 8.4 Hz, 3H), 7.81-7.78
(m, 6H), 7.61 (d, J ) 8.4 Hz, 6H), 7.48 (m, 6H), 7.38-7.32 (m, 6H),
7.25-7.23 (m, 3H), 7.13-7.11 (m, 9H), 7.01-6.97 (m, 6H), 2.16-2.12
(m, 6H), 1.95-1.89 (m, 6H), 0.41 (t, J ) 7.2 Hz, 18H); 13C NMR
(CDCl3, 100 MHz) δ 171.4, 152.3, 149.8, 148.8, 148.4, 145.8, 143.5,
135.1, 134.5, 134.0, 130.8, 129.0, 128.3, 126.7, 126.2, 126.1, 125.9,
124.2, 122.9, 122.1, 121.8, 121.1, 119.5, 118.8, 116.4, 56.2, 32.7, 8.8;
MS (m/z, FAB+) 1394 (15), 1393 (12), 460 (16), 307 (100), 289 (45);
HRMS ((M + H)+, FAB+) Calcd C102H85N6 1393.6836, found
1393.6853.
Electrochemistry. Cyclic voltammograms for TAM1-TAM4
are shown in Figure 2, and Table 1 summarizes the electro-
chemical results. All TAM compounds show one reversible
reduction peak at (1 to 4) -1.79, -1.78, -1.78, and -1.74 V
vs SCE, respectively. The reduction peaks were reversible even
at a slow scan rate (50 mV/s), indicating a long-lived radical
anion. The radical anion is reasonably assigned the 1,3,5-triazine
(A) core and is relatively insensitive to the substituent groups.
The reduction peak potential separation between the forward
scan and reverse scan was ∼65 mV at 100 mV/s, slightly greater
than ∼58 mV expected for a one-electron process.14 The
additional 6 mV is attributed to iR drop in the highly resistive
solvent, so the reduction is believed to be a single electron
transfer. Moreover, the same peak splitting was observed for
the reference material, ferrocene, which is known to undergo
one-electron oxidation. Digital simulation of reduction CV at
different scan rates was performed to confirm the reduction
mechanism (Supporting Information, Figure S3). The best fit
between the experimental and simulated CVs was observed from
50 mV/s to 1 V/s, assuming the reduction mechanism is a simple
electron transfer with no coupled homogeneous chemical
reactions. The best fit was obtained, after correction for Ru, a
heterogeneous electron transfer rate constant, ko ∼ 0.02 cm/s.
This relatively slow electron transfer for a simple outer sphere
reaction might be caused by a large conformational change in
the molecule upon reduction.
TAM4. A mixture of Pd(OAc)2 (23 mg, 0.1 mmol), carbazole (900
mg, 4 mmol), K2CO3 (830 mg, 6 mmol), and T-Br (980 mg, 1 mmol)
were added to o-xylene (20 mL) and PtBu3 (8 mL, 0.4 mmol, 0.05 M
in toluene). The reaction mixture was heated at 160 °C for 5 days.
The reaction mixture was allowed to cool to room temperature,
quenched with water (40 mL), and extracted twice with CH2Cl2.The
combined organic solution was washed with brine and dried over
MgSO4, and the product was isolated as yellow crystals from column
chromatography with hexane/toluene (3/1) and then recrystallized from
methanol to afford TAM4 (630 mg, 51%). IR (KBr) ν 2986, 1620,
1527, 1235, 831, 751 cm-1; 1H NMR (CDCl3, 400 MHz) δ8.98 (dd,
J ) 9.6, 1.6 Hz, 3H), 8.87 (d, J ) 1.2 Hz, 3H), 8.20 (d, J ) 7.6 Hz,
6H), 8.07 (t, J ) 8.4 Hz, 6H), 7.65-7.63 (m, 6H), 7.49-7.47 (m,
12H), 7.36-7.32 (m, 6H), 2.37-2.33 (m, 6H), 2.24-2.20 (m, 6H),
0.58 (t, J ) 7.2 Hz, 18H); 13C NMR (CDCl3, 100 MHz) δ 171.5,
152.9, 150.5, 145.1, 140.8, 139.8, 137.3, 135.3, 128.6, 125.9, 123.3,
121.8, 121.6, 120.3, 119.9, 109.7; MS (m/z, FAB+) 1238 (20), 1237
(12), 460 (15), 391 (28), 307 (100); HRMS ((M + H)+, FAB+) Calcd
C90H73N6 1237.5897, found 1237.5897.
Characterization. Electrochemical measurements were per-
formed in a conventional electrochemical cell consisting of a
working electrode with a ∼1 mm inlaid platinum disk, a Ag wire
as a quasireference electrode (referenced verse internal standard,
ferrocene/ferrocenium then converting to SCE), and a Pt wire coil
as counter electrode. For ECL, the working electrode was a 2 mm
platinum disk J-type (bent to face the detector). The working
electrode was polished with 1 µm alumina (Buehler, Ltd., IL), and
then 0.3 µm and 0.05 µm, followed by sonication in deionized water
and acetone for 5 min each. This series of D-A molecules was
tested in 1:1 benzene:MeCN, with 0.1 M Bu4NPF6 as a supporting
electrolyte. Cyclic voltammograms (CVs) were recorded on a model
660 electrochemical workstation (CH Instruments, Austin, TX).
(8) For review on ECL: (a) Bard, A. J. Electrogenerated Chemilumines-
cence; Marcel Dekker: New York, 2004. (b) Miao, W. Chem. ReV.
2008, 108, 2506. (c) Knight, A. W.; Greenway, G. M. Analyst 1994,
119, 879. (d) Richter, M. M. Chem. ReV. 2004, 104, 3003.
(9) (a) Lai, R. Y.; Fabrizio, E. F.; Jenekhe, S. A.; Bard, A. J. J. Am. Chem.
Soc. 2001, 123, 9112. (b) Rashidnadimi, S.; Hung, T.-H.; Wong, K.-
T.; Bard, A. J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2008, 130, 634.
(10) Chandross, E.; Sonntag, F. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1966, 88, 1089.
(11) Reichardt, C. SolVents and SolVent Effect in Organic Chemistry; Wiley-
VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA: Weinheim, Germany, 2003.
(12) Saroja, G.; Pingzhu, Z.; Ernsting, N. P.; Liebscher, J. J. Org. Chem. 2004,
69, 987.
(13) Kadish, K.; Ding, J.; Malinski, T. Anal. Chem. 1984, 56, 1741.
(14) The exact difference in the peak potentials for a nernstian reaction
with no resistive effects depends slightly on the potential for scan
reversal past the wave of interest. Bard, A. J.; Faulkner, L. R.
Electrochemical Methods; Wiley: New York, 2001, p 242.
Electrochemical current and ECL transients were simultaneously
recorded using an Autolab electrochemical workstation (Eco Chemie,
9
J. AM. CHEM. SOC. VOL. 132, NO. 31, 2010 10947