866
Y. Park et al. / Organic Electronics 11 (2010) 864–871
2.1.2. Synthesis of 6,6,12,12-tetraethyl-3,9-bis-[1,10;30,100]
terphenyl-40-yl-6,12-dihydro-diindeno[1,2-b;10,20-e]pyrazine
(p-TP-EPY)
bardment (FAB) mass spectrometry. 1H and 13C NMR
spectra were recorded on Bruker Avance 300 and Avance
500 spectrometers. The FT-IR spectra were recorded on a
Thermo Electron Nicolet IR-200 spectrometer. FAB-mass
The final yield was 0.89 g, 57%. 1H NMR (500 MHz, THF-
d8): d (ppm) 8.09–7.76 (s, 2H), 7.76–7.75 (m, 8H), 7.71–
7.69 (d, 2H), 7.46–7.43 (t, 4H), 7.35–7.34 (t, 2H), 7.27–
7.22 (m, 6H), 7.19–7.15 (m, 6H), 7.04–7.03(d, 4H), 2.47–
2.28 (m, 4H), 2.06–1.99 (m, 4H), 0.38–0.36 (t, 12H). 13C
NMR (300 MHz, CDCl3): 162.9, 152.4, 148.0, 141.7, 141.3,
140.9, 140.7, 140.6, 139.8, 139.5, 131.7, 131.3, 130.2,
129.4, 129.0, 128.0, 127.6, 127.3, 126.8, 126.3, 122.4,
122.2, 53.8, 31.3, 8.8. FT-IR (KBr cmꢀ1): 3055, 3025, 2962,
2919, 2874, 2853, 1599, 1486, 1462, 1442, 1317, 1288,
1233, 1178, 1124, 895, 826, 763, 748, 697, 486, HRMS
Calcd for C62H53N2 (M+H)+, 825.4209, found: 825.4214.
spectra were recorded on
a
JEOL, JMS-AX505WA,
HP5890 series II. The melting temperatures (Tm), glass-
transition temperatures (Tg), crystallization temperatures
(Tc), and degradation temperatures (Td) of the com-
pounds were measured by carrying out differential scan-
ning calorimetry (DSC) under
a nitrogen atmosphere
with a DSC2910 (TA Instruments) and thermogravimetric
analysis (TGA) with a SDP-TGA2960 (TA Instruments).
The optical absorption spectra were obtained with a HP
8453 UV–Vis–NIR spectrometer. A Perkin Elmer lumines-
cence spectrometer LS50 (xenon flash tube) was used for
photo- and electroluminescence spectroscopy. The redox
potentials of the compounds were determined with cyc-
lic voltammetry (CV) by using a WBCS 3000 system with
a scanning rate of 100 mV/s. We used a synthetic mate-
rial coated ITO as the working electrode, a saturated Ag/
AgNO3 reference electrode, and acetonitrile (AN) with
0.1 M tetrabutylammonium perchlorate (TBAP) as the
electrolyte. Ferrocene was used for potential calibration
and for reversibility criteria.
2.1.3. Synthesis of 1,7-dibromo-6,6,12,12-tetraethyl-6,12-
dihydro-diindeno[1,2-b;10,20-e]-pyrazine (1c)
2.1.3.1. 4-Bromo-2,3-dihydro-2-(hydroxyimino)indene-1-one
(1a). The yield was 79%. 1H NMR (300 MHz, acetone-d6): d
(ppm) 11.90 (s, 1H), 7.95–7.92 (d, 1H), 7.79–7.76 (d, 1H),
7.50–7.45 (t, 1H), 3.76 (s, 2H).
2.1.3.2. 1,7-Dibromo-6,12-dihydro-diindeno[1,2-b;10,20-
e]pyrazine (1b). The yield was 56%. 1H NMR (300 MHz,
CDCl3): d (ppm) 8.17–8.15 (d, 2H), 7.65–7.63 (d, 2H),
7.45–7.42 (d, 2H), 4.02 (s, 4H).
2.3. Fabrication of the OLEDs
2.1.3.3. 1,7-Dibromo-6,6,12,12-tetraethyl-6,12-dihydro-
diindeno[1,2-b;10,20-e]pyrazine (1c). The yield was 38%. 1H
NMR (500 MHz, CDCl3): d (ppm) 8.08–8.05 (d, 2H), 7.58–
7.56 (d, 2H), 7.32–7.29 (t, 2H), 2.72–2.55 (m, 4H), 2.37–
2.29 (m, 4H), 0.27–0.24 (t, 12H). 13C NMR (500 MHz,
CDCl3): 163.0, 152.2, 145.9, 142.5, 142.3, 134.1, 133.9,
129.4, 129.3, 128.5, 120.4, 120.2, 119.8, 57.5, 57.4, 28.3,
8.8. Fab+-MS m/e: 526.
All organic layers were deposited under 10ꢀ6 Torr,
with a rate of deposition of 1 Å/s to give an emitting area
of 4 mm2. In these devices, 4,40,400-tris(N-(2-naphthyl)-N-
phenyl-amino)-triphenylamine [2-TNATA] was used as
the hole injection layer, N,N0-bis(naphthalen-1-yl)-N,N0-
bis(phenyl)benzidine [NPB] and 4,40,400-tri(N-carbazol-
yl)triphenylamine [TCTA] were used as the hole trans-
porting and exciton blocking layers, respectively, and 8-
hydroxyquinoline aluminum [Alq3] was used as the elec-
tron transporting layer [31]. The LiF and aluminum lay-
ers were continuously deposited under the same
vacuum conditions. The device structures were ITO/2-
TNATA (30 nm)/NPB (10 nm)/TCTA (10 nm)/o- or m- or
p-TP-EPY (30 nm)/Alq3 (30 nm)/LiF (1 nm)/Al (200 nm).
The current–voltage (I–V) characteristics of the fabri-
cated EL devices were obtained with a Keithley 2400
electrometer. Light intensity was obtained with a Minol-
ta CS-1000A.
2.1.4. Synthesis of 3,9-dibromo-6,6,12,12-tetraethyl-6,12-
dihydro-diindeno[1,2-b;10,20-e]pyrazine (3c)
2.1.4.1. 6-Bromo-2,3-dihydro-2-(hydroxyimino)indene-1-one
(3a). The yield was 77%. 1H NMR (300 MHz, acetone-d6): d
(ppm) 11.83 (s, 1H), 7.89–7.85 (m, 2H), 7.64–7.61 (d, 1H),
3.82 (s, 2H).
2.1.4.2. 3,9-Dibromo-6,12-dihydrodiindeno[1,2-b:1,2-
e]pyrazine (3b). The yield was 53%. 1H NMR (300 MHz,
CDCl3): d (ppm) 8.37–8.36 (s, 2H), 7.64–7.60 (d, 2H),
7.54–7.38 (d, 2H), 4.04 (s, 4H).
2.4. Computational details
2.1.4.3. 3,9-Dibromo-6,6,12,12-tetraethyl-6,12-dihydro-
diindeno[1,2-b;10,20-e]-pyrazine (3c). The yield was 63%. 1H
NMR (500 MHz, CDCl3): d (ppm) 8.23–8.21 (s, 2H), 7.58–
7.56 (d, 2H), 7.33–7.26 (d, 2H), 2.33–2.28 (m, 4H), 2.06–
2.02 (m, 4H), 0.38–0.33 (t, 12H), 13C NMR(300 MHz,
CDCl3): 163.1, 151.8, 148.5, 141.1, 132.3, 124.9, 124.6,
121.7, 54.1, 31.2, 8.7. Fab+-MS m/e: 526.
The HOMO and LUMO energy levels of the indeno-
pyrazine derivatives were optimized by using the DMol3
program of Materials Studio 4.3Ò, which carries out
quantum mechanical calculations with density func-
tional theory (DFT). The Perdew, Burke and Ernzerhof
(PBE) functional and double numeric polarization basis
set was used in the calculations. The structures were
optimized by using delocalized internal coordinates; to
confirm that each optimized conformation was the min-
imum structure we performed numerical frequency
analysis.
2.2. Measurements
The structures of the synthesized compounds were
characterized by using NMR, FT-IR, and fast-atomic bom-