4.6 Article

The solvation and electrochemical behavior of copper acetylacetonate complexes in ionic liquids

期刊

JOURNAL OF MOLECULAR STRUCTURE
卷 1060, 期 -, 页码 142-149

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.molstruc.2013.12.025

关键词

Copper complexes; Ionic liquids; EPR; Salvation; Voltammetry

资金

  1. Fundacao para a Ciencia e Tecnologia [CIENCIA 2007, PTDC/QUI-QUI/098516/2008, PTDC/QUI-QUI/102150/2008, Pest-OE/QUI/UI0100/2013]
  2. Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia [PTDC/QUI-QUI/098516/2008] Funding Source: FCT

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The behavior of copper(II) complexes of pentane-2,4-dione and 1,1,1,5,5,5-hexafluoro-2,4-pentanedione, [Cu(acac)(2) (1) and [Cu(HFacac)(2)(H2O)] (2), in ionic liquids and molecular organic solvents, was studied by spectroscopic and electrochemical techniques. The electron paramagnetic resonance characterization (EPR) showed well-resolved spectra in most solvents. In general the EPR spectra of [Cu(acac)(2)] show higher g(z) values and lower hyperfine coupling constants, A(z), in ionic liquids than in organic solvents, in agreement with longer Cu-O bond lengths and higher electron charge in the copper ion in the ionic liquids, suggesting coordination of the ionic liquid anions. For [Cu(HFacac)(2)(H2O)] the opposite was observed suggesting that in ionic liquids there is no coordination of the anions and that the complex is tetrahedrically distorted. The redox properties of the Cu(II) complexes were investigated by cyclic voltammetry (CV) at a Pt electrode (d = 1 mm), in bmimBF(4) and bmimNTf(2) ionic liquids and, for comparative purposes, in neat organic solvents. The neutral copper(II) complexes undergo irreversible reductions to Cu(I) and Cu(0) species in both ILs and common organic solvents (CH2Cl2 or acetonitrile), but, in ILs, they are usually more easier to reduce (less cathodic reduction potential) than in the organic solvents. Moreover, 1 and 2 are easier to reduce in bmimNTf(2) than in bmimBF(4) ionic liquid. (C) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据