98976-61-5Relevant articles and documents
Stepwise oxidative cleavage of bis(diphenylphosphino)methane in the substituted ruthenium clusters Ru3(CO)8(μ-η2-Ph2PCH 2PPh2)2 and Ru4(μ-H)4(CO)10(μ-η 2-Ph2PCH2PPh2)
Bergounhou, Christian,Bonnet, Jean-Jacques,Fompeyrine, Patricia,Lavigne, Guy,Lugan, No?l,Mansilla, Frederica
, p. 60 - 66 (2008/10/08)
Thermolysis of Ru3(CO)8(μ-η2-dppm)2 (1) (dppm = bis(diphenylphosphino)methane) yields the intermediate species Ru3(μ-H)(CO)7(μ3-η 4-(C6H5)PCHP(C6H5)(C 6H4))(μ-η2-dppm) (3) which is subsequently converted into Ru3(CO)7(μ3-P(C6H 5))(μ3-η2-CHP(C6H 5)2)(μ-η2-dppm) (4). In the presence of molecular hydrogen, 3 yields Ru3(μ-H)2(CO)6(μ-η 2-(C6H5)PCH2P(C6H 5)2) (5). The X-ray structure of 3 is reported: the compound crystallizes in monoclinic system, space group P21/c, Z = 4, and cell dimensions a = 12.865 (1) A?, b = 17.524 (2) A?, c = 23.661 (2) A7ring;, β = 105.53 (1)°. The structure, refined to R = 0.041, consists of the packing of four molecular cluster units. The cluster possesses an open trinuclear framework involving two metal-metal bonds (Ru(1)-Ru(2) = 2.888 (1) A?; Ru(2)-Ru(3) = 3.205 (1) A?). The latter, H-bridged, is supported by a bridging dppm ligand. The other ligand is seen on the face of the cluster during the intermediate activation step. Coordination of this fragment involves (i) terminal and bridging phosphorus atoms (P(2)-Ru(2) = 2.361 (2) A?; P(1)-Ru(1) = 2.375 (2) A?; P(1)-Ru(3) = 2.230 (2) A?), (ii) the ortho-metalated phenyl ring (Ru(1)-C(22) = 2.164 (8) A?), and (iii) unusual metalation of the carbon atom C(8) which leads to a triangular cyclometalated ring, P(1)-C(8)-Ru(3), with Ru(3)-C(8) = 2.229 (7) A?. Thermolysis of Ru4(μ-H)4(CO)10(μ-dppm) (6) yields Ru4(μ-H)3(CO)10(μ3-η 2-(C6H5)PCH2P(C6H 5)2) (7), the structure of which is discussed on the basis of mass spectrometry and 1H and 31P NMR data. 7 is shown to react with CO to afford Ru3(μ-H)(CO)9(μ3-η 2-(C6H5)PCH2P(C6H 5)2) (8). Complexes 6-8 were checked by catalytic hydrogenation of cyclohexene, and their efficiency was compared with that of Ru4(μ-H)4(CO)12. Under the reported experimental conditions, conversion of 6 into 7 is observed, while 8 is inactive. Catalytic hydrogenation is observed in the presence of 7 with rates matching those observed for Ru4(μ-H)4(CO)12.