J . Org. Chem. 2000, 65, 3563-3565
3563
Sch em e 1. Com p u ted Str u ctu r es of th e Th r ee
Con for m a tion a l Stu d ies by Dyn a m ic NMR.
76.1 Ster eod yn a m ics of Rin g In ver sion of
Bicyclo[3.3.1]n on a n -9-on e
P ossible Con for m er s of 2. Th e Rela tive En er gy
Va lu es Ar e in k ca l m ol-1
Stefano Grilli,2 Lodovico Lunazzi,* and
Andrea Mazzanti*
Department of Organic Chemistry “A.Mangini”,
University of Bologna, Risorgimento, 4 Bologna 40136, Italy
Received J anuary 12, 2000
The chemistry of bicyclo[3.3.1]nonane, 1 has been ex-
tensively investigated both for what concerns the syn-
thetic3 and conformational properties.4-6
This confirms the negative result previously reported10
and made impossible the measurement of the ring
inversion barrier in 1, even though a theoretical calcula-
11
tion had suggested a value (7.6 kcal mol-1
)
which, in
principle, should be accessible to NMR determination.
The situation appears more promising with regard to
the possibility of measuring the ring inversion barrier of
the corresponding ketone, i.e., bicyclo[3.3.1]nonan-9-one,
2, which, at the best of our knowledge, has never been
determined. Also compound 2 can adopt three conforma-
tions, having the same symmetry of 1, as displayed in
Scheme 1.
In this case, too, the twisted twin boat form 2c has a
computed energy12 much too high to be appreciably
populated, but the difference between the energies of the
BC (2b) and of the most stable CC (2a ) form is signifi-
cantly smaller (0.95 kcal mol-1) than in 1. Our value is
at variance with that reported by Osawa et al. that
predicted11 a quite larger difference (2.61 kcal mol-1) but
essentially agrees with that (1.1 kcal mol-1) computed
by Raber et al.13
In addition to calculations, these authors carried out
also a lanthanide-induced shift (LIS) investigation and
found that their data could be better interpreted by
assuming a 22% proportion of the BC conformer (2b) at
ambient temperature.13 This entails8 a ∆G° value of 1.16
kcal mol-1 (very close to the one they had computed) at
+25 °C which, assuming the invariance of ∆G° with
temperature, corresponds to an amount of 0.9% at a
temperature (e.g., -165 °C) where the ring inversion
process of 2 is likely to be slow in the NMR time scale:
if our computed energy difference (Scheme 1) is used, the
BC proportion at that temperature is expected to be even
higher (2.4%).14 Although quite small, this amount should
not escape detection by 13C NMR, as reported for a
number of analogous biased equilibria.9a,15 It has to be
mentioned, however, that a previous attempt to observe
This hydrocarbon has three possible conformational
minima, corresponding to a twin chair (CC, point group
C2v), boat chair (BC, point group Cs), and twisted twin
boat (BB, point group C2).4-6 All the calculations indicate
that the latter form has too high an energy to be
sufficiently populated and that the CC form corresponds
to the most stable conformer. The energy difference
between the two forms CC and BC is also relatively high;
nonetheless the presence of the latter could be experi-
mentally identified (about 25%) in an electron diffraction
investigation carried out at +400 °C.7 This proportion
entails an energy difference (∆G°) of 2.3 kcal mol-1 which
is, unfortunately, too large a value for detecting this
minor conformer at a temperature low enough to render
the ring inversion process sufficiently slow for NMR
detection. In the equations of ref 7, statistical factors were
introduced to account for the double probability that
conformer BC has to occur with respect to conformer CC,8
and, on this basis, the proportion of the BC conformer is
expected to lie between 2 × 10-3 and 5 × 10-5 in the
temperature range -100° to -170 °C. Such an amount
is clearly too small to be observed or even to affect
significantly the line width of the NMR signals of the
major conformer.9 Accordingly, we did not find any
evidence of a line broadening due to a slow dynamic
equilibrium between these two forms in the 13C spectra
of 1 taken at 100.6 MHz in the range -100° to -170 °C.
(1) Part 75. Gasparrini, F.; Lunazzi, L.; Mazzanti, A.; Pierini, M.;
Pietrusiewicz, K. M.; Villani, C. J . Am. Chem. Soc. 2000, 122, in press
(Ms. J A 9941779).
(2) In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Ph.D. in
Chemical Sciences, University of Bologna.
(3) Peters, J . A. Synthesis 1979, 321 and references quoted therein.
(4) Allinger, N. L.; Tribble, M. T.; Miller, M. A.; Wertz, D. H. J . Am.
Chem. Soc. 1971, 93, 1637.
(5) Engler, E. M.; Andose, J . D.; Schleyer, P.v. R. J . Am. Chem. Soc.
1973, 95, 8005.
(10) Schneider, H.-J .; Lonsdorfer, M.; Weigand, E. F. Org. Magn.
Reson. 1976, 8, 363.
(11) J aime, C.; Osawa, E.; Takeuchi, Y.; Camps, P. J . Org.Chem.
1983, 48, 4514.
(12) The energies refer to Molecular Mechanics calculations (MMX
force field) as implemented in the program PCModel, Serena Software,
Bloomington, IN.
(6) Osawa, E.; Aigami, K.; Imamoto, Y. J . Chem. Soc., Perkin Trans.
2 1979, 172.
(7) Mastryukov, V. S.; Popik, M. V.; Dorofeeva, O. V.; Golubinskii,
A. V.; Vilkov, L. V.; Belikova, N. A.; Allinger, N. L. J . Am. Chem. Soc.
1981, 103, 1333.
(8) The equation takes the form [BC]/[CC] ) 2 exp (-∆G°/RT)
(9) (a) Anet, F. A. L.; Basus, V. J . J . Am. Chem. Soc. 1973, 95, 4424.
(b) Anet, F. A. L.; Basus, V. J . J . Magn. Reson. 1978, 32, 339. (c)
Okazawa, N.; Sorensen, T. S. Can. J . Chem. 1978, 56, 2737.
(13) Raber, D. J .; J anks, C. M.; J ohnston, M. D., J r.; Raber, N. K.
Tetrahedron Lett. 1980, 21, 677.
(14) A X-ray diffraction study carried out at -173 °C indicates that
2a (CC conformer) is the only species observable in the solid state
(Mora. A. J .; Fitch, A. N. Z. Kristallogr. 1999, 214, 480). Solely the
most stable of the various possible conformers is usually present in
the crystalline state, so that this result agrees with the theoretical
prediction that the CC conformer of Scheme 1 is the one having the
lowest energy.
10.1021/jo000049n CCC: $19.00 © 2000 American Chemical Society
Published on Web 05/10/2000