H. Yang et al. / Inorganic Chemistry Communications 8 (2005) 853–857
855
melting below 320 ꢁC. 1H NMR(DMSO): d 7.88–
7.79(m, 7H), 8.07(d, 1H), 8.38(d, 1H), 5.21(m, 2H),
4.30(m, 2H), 4.08(s, 5H). Anal. Calcd. for C22H118N2
(SO3)2Fe: C, 50.19%; H, 3.42%; N, 5.32%; Fe, 10.65%.
Found: C, 51.20%; H, 3.80%; N, 5.31%; Fe, 10.66%.
IR (cmꢀ1): mOH 3426(s), mC–H 3094 (w), mC@C 1635(m),
1594(m,) 1395 (w), mS@O 1194 (s), 1123 (s).
Table 1
UV–Vis spectroscopic parameters for compounds I, II in aqueous
solution at 20 ꢁC
Compound
kmax (nm)
Absorbency A
I
247.0
285.0
341.0
449.0
1.443
1.357
0.195
0.066
The UV–Vis spectra of compounds I and II were dis-
played in Fig. 1, while the corresponding absorption
bands were recorded in Table 1, respectively. The
absorption band of compound I at 285 nm is attributed
to p–p* transition of substituted benzene ring which is
red-shifted more than 30 nm compared to that of unsub-
stituted benzene ring at 254 nm [7]. The shifting of the
absorption band to long wavelength is due to that the
electrophobic ferrocene group and the electrophilic sul-
fonic group connected to benzene can respectively in-
crease HOMO level and decrease of LOMO level,
which make the energy-level width of substituted ben-
zene narrower. The bands at 247, 341 and 449 nm of
compound I and 526 nm of compound II belong to
the d–d transition of monosubstituted ferrocene, which
are also red-shifted relative to that of unsubstituted fer-
rocene at 240 nm, 320 and 435 nm [7] because of the
existence of electrophilic sulfonic group. Owing to the
longer conjugated chain and better electro-transfer abil-
ity of compound II, the 91-nm displacement at 526 nm
of compound II is much greater than that 14-nm dis-
placement at 449 nm of compound I compared to the
band at 435 nm of unsubstituted ferrocene. The strong
band at 348 nm in Fig. 1(b) is belonging to azo group
[7] that shows an overlap with the absorption band of
substituted ferrocene in compound II.
II
348.0
526.0
1.983
0.253
ical method and permit the collection of excellent data at
low concentration of electro-active substance [8]. The
CV curves in Fig. 2 show that the redox characteristics
are similar for both compounds. The oxidation peaks
of BSAFc and AYFc are all 296 mV and the reduction
peaks are 202 and 196 mV, respectively. That is to
say, the separation of oxidation and reduction poten-
tials, DEP, are 94 and 100 mV at 100 mV/s, respectively,
for BSAFc and AYFc. These values are larger than that
expected for reversible one-electron transfer reaction,
which is given by 57/z mV, where z is the number of
electron transferred in the process [9], indicating that
the irreversibility of the electron-transfer process was
maintained under this condition. The half-wave poten-
tials of BSAFc and AYFc are 249 and 245 mV which
could be figured out easily. Generally, the half-wave po-
tential of monosubstituted ferrocene that linked with
electrophilic group would shift towards positive
potential compared to unsubtituted ferrocene. Antoni-
etta Baldo et al. [10] had found that the half-wave poten-
tial of ferrocene is 190 mV (vs. Ag/AgCl) in pure
aqueous solution. There were about 60 mV towards
more positive potential of BSAFc and AYFc, which is
consistent with the result of UV–Vis spectra.
The electrochemical behaviors of compounds I and II
were investigated in the potential range of 0.0–0.5 V by
cyclic voltammetry (CV) which is sensitive electrochem-
250
202
a
2.5
200
194
b
150
b
2.0
100
50
1.5
0
-50
-100
a
1.0
-150
296
0.5
0.0
-200
296
-250
0
100
200
300
400
500
E/mV vs Ag/AgCl
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
Fig. 2. Cyclic voltammogram of: (a) BSAFc (1 · 10ꢀ3 M); (b) AYFc
(1 · 10ꢀ3 M). Working electrode and auxiliary electrode: Pt disk.
Reference electrode: Ag/AgCl (1 M KCl). Scan rate: 100 mV/s.
Supporting electrode: NaCl aqueous solution (0.05 M).
wave length(nm)
Fig. 1. UV–Vis spectra: (a) BSAFc (I) (1 · 10ꢀ4M); (b) AYFc (II)
(1 · 10ꢀ4M).