4.5 Article

Experimental and Theoretical Studies of the Potential Interconversion of the Amine-Borane iPr2NH•BH(C6F5)2 and the Aminoborane iPr2N=B(C6F5)2 Involving Hydrogen Loss and Uptake

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF INORGANIC CHEMISTRY
Volume -, Issue 34, Pages 5279-5287

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1002/ejic.201100779

Keywords

Main group elements; Amines; Boranes; Dehydrogenation; Hydrogenation

Funding

  1. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC)
  2. Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC)
  3. EPSRC [EP/H018468/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  4. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EP/H018468/1] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The amineborane adduct iPr2NH center dot BH(C6F5)2 (1) and the aminoborane iPr2N=B(C6F5)2 (2) have been prepared and crystallographically characterised. Interconversion between the two compounds has been attempted using thermal and transition-metal-catalysed dehydrogenation and hydrogenation protocols and the overall reaction thermodynamics were probed by computational methods. Thermal dehydrogenation of 1 was found to yield 2, together with uncharacterised by-products. Treatment of 1 with the carbene 1,3-di-tert-butyl-4,5-dihydroimidazol-2-ylidene (3) under ambient conditions did not lead to the elimination of hydrogen, but instead to the loss of C6F5H to afford iPr2N=B(H)C6F5 (4). Attempts to hydrogenate aminoborane 2 were unsuccessful with no reaction observed either thermally or in the presence of transition-metal catalysts. A computational study of the interconversion between compounds 1 and 2 indicated a thermodynamically unfavourable hydrogenation reaction, which was inverse to that demonstrated for the analogous phosphaneborane/phosphanylborane pair, iPr2PH center dot BH(C(6)F(5))(2) (5) and iPr2PB(C6F5)2 (6). The contrasting reactivity was attributed to the different N-B and pi-B p-bond strengths in 2 and 6, respectively.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available