Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
What's in an Atom? A Comparison of Carbon and Silicon-Centred Amidinium⋅⋅⋅Carboxylate Frameworks*.
Boer, Stephanie A; Yu, Li-Juan; Genet, Tobias L; Low, Kaycee; Cullen, Duncan A; Gardiner, Michael G; Coote, Michelle L; White, Nicholas G.
Afiliação
  • Boer SA; Research School of Chemistry, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia.
  • Yu LJ; Research School of Chemistry, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia.
  • Genet TL; Research School of Chemistry, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia.
  • Low K; Research School of Chemistry, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia.
  • Cullen DA; Research School of Chemistry, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia.
  • Gardiner MG; Research School of Chemistry, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia.
  • Coote ML; Research School of Chemistry, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia.
  • White NG; Research School of Chemistry, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia.
Chemistry ; 27(5): 1768-1776, 2021 Jan 21.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32924234
ABSTRACT
Despite their apparent similarity, framework materials based on tetraphenylmethane and tetraphenylsilane building blocks often have quite different structures and topologies. Herein, we describe a new silicon tetraamidinium compound and use it to prepare crystalline hydrogen bonded frameworks with carboxylate anions in water. The silicon-containing frameworks are compared with those prepared from the analogous carbon tetraamidinium when biphenyldicarboxylate or tetrakis(4-carboxyphenyl)methane anions were used similar channel-containing networks are observed for both the silicon and carbon tetraamidinium. When terephthalate or bicarbonate anions were used, different products form. Insights into possible reasons for the different products are provided by a survey of the Cambridge Structural Database and quantum chemical calculations, both of which indicate that, contrary to expectations, tetraphenylsilane derivatives have less geometrical flexibility than tetraphenylmethane derivatives, that is, they are less able to distort away from ideal tetrahedral bond angles.
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Bases de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Chemistry Assunto da revista: QUIMICA Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Austrália

Texto completo: 1 Bases de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Chemistry Assunto da revista: QUIMICA Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Austrália