348
VASIL’CHENKO et al.
–
1
IR (
620 (
414 (
ν
, cm ): 3393 (
2
ν
(O–H)), 3032 (
ν
(C–H)), performed by calcining weighed samples of the comꢀ
1
1
1
3
δ
(H O)), 1607, 1580 (
ν
(C=N)), 1480, 1456, plexes in a quartz tubular vessel in a flow of hydrogen.
ν
(C=C) + (CH )), 1249, 1185, 1114, 1072, The vessel was heated to 600°C with a split furnace.
δ
3
040, 804, 701, 663 (
41 ( (Rh–Cl)), 236 (
H NMR ( , ppm): 8.188 (d, H(5),
.175 (s, H(1)), 7.922 (d, H(3), J = 8 Hz), 7.338 (dd, 209 F1 Iris Thermo Microbalance instrument
δ
CH)), 505, 429, 387 (
(Rh–N)).
δ(ring)), Because salt III decomposes explosively at ~250°С, an
ν
ν
analysis for its rhodium content was not made. Therꢀ
1
δ
J = 6.2 Hz), mal analysis of the complexes was carried out on a TG
8
H(4), J1 = 8 Hz, J2 = 6.2 Hz), 2.227 (s, Me).
(NETZSCH) under helium in an Al O3 crucible
2
1
For
, ppm): 8.809 (d, H(5),
.927 (d, H(3), = 7.8 Hz), 7.688 (dd, H(4), J1
.8 Hz, J2 = 5 Hz).
Synthesis of complex II. An excess of a saturated
solution of sodium perrhenate was added to a hot
0.05 M solution of complex . The resulting light yelꢀ
β
ꢀpicoline as a reference compound, H NMR (heating rate 10 K/min).
(
δ
J = 5 Hz), 8.707 (s, H(1)),
Single crystals of complexes II and III were grown
from their saturated solutions in DMF. Air evaporaꢀ
tion for seven days gave large yellow crystals suitable
7
7
J
=
for Xꢀray diffraction analysis. Complex I crystallized
from both water and DMF as thin plates unsuitable for
Xꢀray diffraction analysis.
~
I
low precipitate was filtered off, washed with a miniꢀ
mum amount of water, and dried in air. The yield was
Xꢀray diffraction of complexes II · DMF and III. An
array of reflection intensities was collected on a
BrukerꢀNonius X8Apex automated fourꢀcircle difꢀ
9
5–98%.
For C H Cl N O ReRh
fractometer (a CCD area detector, MoK radiation,
24
32
2
4
4
α
graphite monochromator) at room temperature. Crysꢀ
tallographic parameters and the data collection statisꢀ
tics for complexes II · DMF and III are given in
Table 1. The structures were solved by direct methods
and refined in the anisotropic and isotropic (for H)
approximations. Part of the H atoms was located from
anal. calcd. (%): C, 36.19; H, 3.54; N, 7.03; Rh + Re, 36.31.
Found (%): C, 36.00; H, 3.20; N, 6.40; Rh + Re, 36.30.
–
1
IR (
581 (
ν
, cm ): 3104, 3044, 2923 (
ν
(C–H)), 1607,
(C=C) +
1
ν
(C=N)), 1481, 1456, 1419 (
ν
δ
(CH )), 1245, 1191, 1115, 1070, 1039, 799, 698, 662
3
(
(
δ
(CH)), 905 (
(Rh–Cl)), 323 (
Synthesis of complex III. An excess of concenꢀ
ν
(Rh–O)), 503, 430, 390 (
(ring)), 341 difference electronꢀdensity maps and part of them was
δ
–
ν
δ
(ReO )), 236 (
ν
(Rh–N)).
located geometrically. All calculations were performed
with the SHELXꢀ97 program package [14]. Theoretiꢀ
4
trated HClO was added to a hot ~0.05 M solution of cal diffraction patterns for these complexes were calꢀ
4
complex
filtered off, washed with a minimum amount of water, Selected bond lengths in complexes III and II · DMF
I
. The resulting light yellow precipitate was culated from singleꢀcrystal Xꢀray diffraction data.
and dried in air. The yield was 95–98%.
are listed in Table 2. Additional crystallographic
parameters have been deposited with the Cambridge
Crystallographic Data Collection (nos. 680021 (III
and 680022 (II · DMF); http://www.ccdc.cam.
ac.uk/).
)
For C H Cl N O Rh
24
32
3
4 2
anal. calcd. (%): C, 32.48;
Found (%): C, 32.50;
H, 3.33;
H, 3.20;
N, 6.31.
N, 6.30.
Xꢀray powder diffraction analysis of polycrystalline
–1
IR (
583 (
ν
, cm ): 3108, 3031, 2923 (
(C=N)), 1481, 1453, 1420 (
(CH)), 1093 monochromator, scintillation detector with amplitude
(ring)), discrimination). To prepare samples, the complexes
ν
(C–H)), 1610, samples was carried out on a DRONꢀRM4 diffractoꢀ
1
ν
ν
(C=C) + meter (Cu
K
radiation, reflectedꢀbeam graphite
α
δ
(CH )), 1246, 1193, 797, 697, 662 (
δ
3
–
4
(
ν
(Cl–O)), 621 (
δ
(ClO )), 502, 430, 386 (
δ
3
40 ( (Rh–Cl)), 233 (
ν
ν
(Rh–N)). The band
δ(CH) is
were suspended in hexane and applied to the polished
side of a fused quartz cell. A similarly prepared sample
partly masked by the broad absorption band
Salt
III are poorly soluble even in boiling water (0.27 and
.19 g/l, respectively). All the salts are well soluble in
ν
(Cl–O).
I
is well soluble in water (27.9 g/l). Salts II and of polycrystalline silicon (
external standard. Diffraction patterns were recorded
in the step mode: = 5 –60 for the complex salts
and = 5 –135 for their thermolysis products. The
a = 5.4309 Å) was used as an
0
2θ
°
°
DMF, pyridine, ethanol, and acetone; they are insolꢀ
uble in hexane.
2θ
°
°
complexes contain the only phase, which is evident
from singleꢀcrystal Xꢀray diffraction data.
IR spectra were recorded on a Scimitar FTS 2000
instrument in the 4000–400 cm range (KBr pellets)
and a Vertex 80 spectrometer in the 400–100 cm
range (polyethylene pellets). H NMR spectra were
–1
–
1
Xꢀray powder diffraction analysis of thermolysis
products was carried out with consideration to the data
recorded on a Bruker DPXꢀ250 spectrometer in D O contained in the PDF card file for pure compounds
at room temperature with DMSO as a standard. Analꢀ [15]. The parameters of the metallic phases were
yses for C, H, and N were carried out on a Euro EA refined for the whole array of data with the PowderCell
1
2
3000 instrument. An analysis for the metal content was 2.3 application [16].
RUSSIAN JOURNAL OF COORDINATION CHEMISTRY Vol. 36
No. 5
2010