Electronic, Raman and resonance Raman spectroscopy of [NBu₄][RuBr₄(MeCN)₂]

Abstract

Raman spectra taken at resonance with the e_u(Br pπ) → b_2g(Ru dπ) charge-transfer (CT) transition of the trans-[RuBr₄(MeCN)₂]^– ion, as its [NBu₄]⁺ salt at ca. 80 K, consist of long overtone progressions in ν₁(a_1g), the symmetric RuBr stretch (at 188.5 cm^–1), together with combination band progressions in which ν₁ is the progression-forming mode and the enabling modes include ν₂(b_1g), ν_as(RuBr), and ν₄(b_2g), δ_s(BrRuBr). The excitation profile of the ν₁ band approximately follows the contour of the e_u → b_2g CT transition referred to above, consistent with the operation of the A-term scattering mechanism. The spectroscopic data allow the determination of the harmonic wavenumber (ω₁) and anharmonicity (x₁₁) of the ν₁(a_1g) mode to be 188.8 cm^–1 and –0.15 cm^–1, respectively. Some comparative data on the analogous chloride ion, trans-[RuCl₄(MeCN)₂]^–, are also given.

References

1. M. Hartmann, T. J. Einhauser and B. K. Keppler, Chem. Commun., 1996, 1741.
2. W. Preetz and F. H. Johannsen, J. Organomet. Chem., 1975, 86, 397.
3. G. J. Leigh and D. M. P. Mingos, J. Chem. Soc. A, 1970, 587.
4. M. D. Rowe, A. J. McCaffery, R. Gale and D. N. Copsey, Inorg. Chem., 1972, 11, 3090.
5. C. M. Duff and G. A. Heath, J. Chem. Soc., Dalton Trans., 1991, 2401.
6. A. J. McCaffery and M. D. Rowe, J. Chem. Soc., Faraday Trans. 2, 1973, 69, 1767.
7. J. P. Al-Dulaimi, R. J. H. Clark and D. G. Humphrey, unpublished work.
8. J. P. Al-Dulaimi, R. J. H. Clark and D. G. Humphrey, J. Chem. Soc., Dalton Trans., 1997, 2535.
9. V. T. Coombe, G. A. Heath, T. A. Stephenson and D. K. Vattis, J. Chem. Soc., Dalton Trans., 1983, 2307.
10. P. Braunstein and J. Rose, Inorg. Synth., 1989, 26, 356.
11. D. H. Whiffen, Spectroscopy, Longmans, London, 1966, p. 141. The one-electron spin–orbit coupling constants (ξ) of Cl and Br are 586 and 2460 cm^–1, respectively.
12. C. K. Jørgenson, Mol. Phys., 1959, 2, 309.
13. G. A. Heath and D. G. Humphrey, J. Chem. Soc., Chem. Commun., 1991, 1668.
14. F. H. Johannsen and W. Preetz, Z. Anorg. Allg. Chem., 1977, 436, 143.
15. Y. M. Bosworth and R. J. H. Clark, Chem. Phys. Lett., 1974, 28, 611.
16. The Raman spectra of [NEt₄][RuCl₄(MeCN)₂] was recorded as an undiluted salt at room temperature on a Renishaw Raman System 1000 using the 514.5 nm excitation line (0.1 mW) of an argon ion laser. There was no evidence for sample damage at this power, and the spectrum contained, in addition to a band attributable to the v₁(a_1g), v_s(RuCl) mode at 310 cm ^–1 , medium bands at 965 cm -¹[assigned to v(CC)] and 1381 cm ^–1[assigned to δ(CH₃)], and a strong band at 2305 cm^–1[assigned to v(CN)]; these bands all have obvi-ous analogues in the Raman spectrum of [NBu₄][RuBr₄(MeCN)₂](Table 2).
17. Y. M. Bosworth and R. J. H. Clark, Inorg. Chem., 1975, 14, 170.
18. K. Venkateswarlu, J. Chem. Phys., 1951, 19, 293.
19. J. J. F. Alves and D. W. Franco, Polyhedron, 1996, 15, 3299.
20. R. J. H. Clark, in Advances in Infrared and Raman Spectroscopy, ed. R. J. H. Clark and R. E. Hester, Heyden, London, 1975, vol. 1, pp. 143–172.
21. R. J. H. Clark and T. J. Dines, Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. Engl., 1986, 25, 131.
22. J. R. Campbell and R. J. H. Clark, Mol. Phys., 1978, 36, 1133.
23. R. J. H. Clark and P. C. Turtle, J. Chem. Soc., Faraday Trans. 2, 1978, 74, 2063.
24. The excitation profile and the electronic spectrum are expected, on theoretical grounds,²¹ to match each other very closely, but not exactly; moreover, in the present case, the excitation profile relates to a KBr disc at 80 K whereas the electronic spectrum relates to a CH₂Cl₂ solution, a fact which might contribute to the slight difference.
25. R. J. H. Clark and T. J. Dines, Mol. Phys., 1984, 52, 859.