Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Density functional theory calculations were performed on a series of six ruthenium complexes possessing tridentate ligands: [Ru(tpy)(2)](2+) (1; tpy = [2,2';6',2'']-terpyridine), [Ru(tpy)(pydppx)](2+) (2; pydppx = 3-(pyrid-2'-yl)-11,12-dimethyldipyrido[3,2-a: 2',3'-c]phenazine), [Ru(pydppx)(2)](2+) (3), [Ru(tpy)(pydppn)](2+) (4; pydppn = 3-(pyrid-2'-yl)-4,5,9,16-tetraazadibenzo[a,c]naphthacene), [Ru(pydppn)(2)](2+) (5), and [Ru(tpy)(pydbn)](+) (6; pyHdbn = 3-pyrid-2'-yl-4,9,16-triazadibenzo[a,c]naphthacene). The calculations were compared to experimental data, including electrochemistry and electronic absorption spectra. The theoretical results reveal that the lowest-lying singlet and triplet states in 4 and 5 are pydppn-based ππ* in character, which are remarkably different from the lowest-lying metal-to-ligand charge transfer (MLCT) states in 1-3. The calculated lowest triplet states in 4 and 5 are consistent with the (3)ππ* states observed experimentally. However, although the extended π-system of pydbn(-) is similar to that of pydppn, the HOMO of 6 lies above those of 4 and 5, resulting in strikingly different spectroscopic properties. Calculations show that the lowest triplet excited state of 6 is a combination of (3)MLCT and (3)ππ*. This work demonstrates that the electronic structure of the tridentate ligand has a pronounced effect on the photophysical properties of ruthenium(II) complexes and that DFT and TD-DFT methods are a useful tool that can be used to predict photophysical and redox properties of transition metal complexes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sun et al. (2010) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: