1
166
A. El-Dissouky et al. / Spectrochimica Acta Part A 57 (2001) 1163–1170
2.4. Elemental analyses
The absence of any peak attributable to the
−
1
C–OH (3440 and 3180 cm ) moiety implies that
in solution the ligands remains predominantly in
form IA. However, in solution and in the presence
of uranyl ion these compounds exist in a tau-
tomeric equilibrium IBUIC. The main change is
observed in the carbonyl stretching vibration, thus
suggesting that the form (IC) prevails. The tau-
tomeric form (IC) reacts with uranyl ion by loss
of enolic proton as mononegative chelating agents
producing of (CO)/(OH) mode of the free ligands.
New bonds assigned to w(OH) in the free ligands
is absent, suggesting the cleavage of intramolecu-
lar hydrogen bonded wOH [6] with subsequent
deprotonation of enolic OH group and coordina-
tion of oxygen to the metal ion. The positive shift
The uranium content of each complex was de-
termined by igniting a definite mass of the com-
plex at :1000°C and weighing the residue as
U O . Carbon, hydrogen and nitrogen contents
3
8
were determined at the Microanalytical Unit at
Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt. The analytical
data are given in Table 1. Sulphur was determined
as barium sulphate after oxidative decomposition
with mixed acids.
3
. Reseults and discussion
3
.1. Stoichiometeries of the new uranyl complexes
−
1
of w(C–O) by 5–15 cm
in all the complexes
The
fact
that
HLn
complexes
with
further confirms through the oxygen [12]. A new
broad absorption in the region 3150–3500 cm
−
1
UO (CH COO) ·2H O involving 2:1 ligand to
2
2
2
3
2
2
+
UO
ratio (Table 1), have been isolated, clearly
is observed in complexes which is attributed to the
presence of coordinated water [7]. Its presence is
further confirmed by the appearance of a non-lig-
illustrates that the ligands under study does not
introduce sufficiently severe steric hindrance as to
preclude the formation of [UO (L ) ·2H O] com-
plexes, but its steric feature and arrangement in
space can also favorably influence the stabiliza-
tion of 2:1 complexes. All complexes are diamag-
netic and sparingly soluble in most common
organic solvents, and it is thus difficult to deter-
−
1
and bond at 820–840 cm
All the complexes exhibit w(C=C) in the region
.
2
n 2
2
−
1
1595–1610 cm . The phenyl ring vibration ap-
−
1
pears at 1480–1510 cm . The presence of an
p-substituted benzene ring in the ligands as well as
in the complexes is indicated by strong and sharp
1
−1
mine the molecular weights and to record the H
bands around 630–650 cm . Bands at 2940–
−
1
−1
NMR spectra. At 100–110°C these complexes
lose two molecules of water and become con-
verted into [UO (L ) ].
3040 cm
for the ligands and at :2960 cm
for the complexes are assigned to w(C–H) vibra-
tion of the aromatic system.
2
n 2
3.2. Infrared spectra and nature of coordination
3.3. Electronic spectra
−
1
The mode of bonding of the azodyes to the
HLn exhibits bands at 26 415–26 250 cm
−
1
uranyl ions was elucidated by investigating the IR
spectra of the chelates 1M:2L as compared to
those of the free ligands.
(CS) (np*), 30 674–30 540 cm (CO) (np*),
−1
33 550–33 444 cm
tion), 40 480–39 470 cm
p*) [11] and 29 410–29 250 cm
(H-bonding and associa-
−
1
(phenyl) (ph–ph*, p–
−
1
In the IR spectra of all the ligands at :1550
transition of
−
1
cm
due to the w(–N=N–) mode. In the metal
phenyl rings overlaped by composite broad p–p*
of azo structure. In the dioxouranium(VI) com-
plexes, the (CS)(n–p*) transition shifts slightly to
lower energy and remain almost constant. The
(CO) (np*) transition disappears with the
chelates, this frequency is lowered to :1540
−
1
cm
indicating the bonding of the azo nitrogen
to the uranyl atom. The w(C–N) vibration ap-
−
1
pearing at :1480 cm
in the ligands suffers a
−
1
downward shift of :10 cm thereby supporting
the coordination of one of the azo nitrogen atoms
to the uranyl ion.
simultaneous appearance of
a
new bands
−
1
($29 500 cm ), being attributed to pp* (C=
C) as a sequences of enolization. The band due to