Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The synthesis, characterization, and crystal chemistry of N, N ‘-diphenylisophthalamide ( 1 ) and pyridine-2,6-dicarboxylic acid bisphenylamide ( 2 ) are described. Through a combination of single-crystal X-ray diffraction and molecular orbital and crystal packing calculations, the important intermolecular interactions have been determined. The structures have been compared with the closely related structures, N, N ‘-bis(3-hydroxyphenyl)isophthalamide ( 3 ) and N, N ‘-dimethyl- N, N ‘-diphenylisophthalamide ( 4 ). Crystalline 1 and 2 are isostructural, but there are subtle differences in the conformations and packing as a consequence of intramolecular hydrogen bonding in 2 . This reduces the deviation from planarity in the molecular conformation of 2 and consequently lengthens the intermolecular hydrogen bonding distances. This is reflected in the lattice energies of 1 and 2 (−40.9 and −38.7 kcal/mol, respectively) and in the stacking energies of these compounds. For the compounds that do not contain an N atom in the central ring the progression 3, 1, 4 represents a reduction in the hydrogen-bonding options, reflected in the respective lattice energies: −51.3, −40.9, and −33.3 kcal/mol. The difference between 3 and 1 is in excellent agreement with predictions based on group contributions in structure 3 . In 4 there are no hydrogen bonding options and so C−H···O interactions play a much more important role.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Malone et al. (1997) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: