Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The series of iridium(III) complexes Ir(C ∧ N) 2 LX (C ∧ N = bzq, LX = acac, 1; C ∧ N = thp, LX = acac, 2; C ∧ N = tpy, LX = acac, 3; C ∧ N = bzq, LX = dbm, 4; acac = acetoylacetonate, bzq = benzoquinoline, tpy = 2-(4-tolyl)pyridine, thp = 2-(2‘-thienyl)pyridine and dbm = dibenzoylmethanate) have been investigated theoretically to explore their electronic structures and spectroscopic properties. Their structures in the ground and excited states have been optimized at the B3LYP/LANL2DZ and CIS/LANL2DZ levels, respectively. The calculated bond lengths of Ir−N, Ir−C, and Ir−O in the ground state agree well with the corresponding experimental results. Upon excitation, the bond lengths of Ir−N and Ir−C lengthen by 0.03 Å and that of Ir−O shortens by 0.01 Å compared with those in the X 1 A ground states. This is consistent with the variation trend of corresponding vibration mode in the ground and excited states. At the TD-DFT and PCM levels, 1 − 4 give rise to absorptions at 484, 462, 452, and 536 nm and phosphorescent emissions at 541, 589, 499, and 540 nm, respectively. The transitions of 1 − 3 are attributed to [d(Ir) + π(C ∧ N)] → [π*(C ∧ N)] charge transfer, whereas those of 4 are related to [d(Ir) + π(C ∧ N)] → [π*(LX) + π*(C ∧ N)]. It is shown that the emissions are significantly dominated by the metal participating in the frontier molecular orbitals and affected by the C ∧ N ligands but are hardly perturbed by the LX ligands.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Liu et al. (2006) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: