4.7 Review

Molecular tectonics.: Porous hydrogen-bonded networks built from derivatives of 9,9′-spirobifluorene

期刊

JOURNAL OF ORGANIC CHEMISTRY
卷 69, 期 6, 页码 1762-1775

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/jo0348118

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Molecules with multiple sites that induce strong directional association tend to form open networks with significant volumes available for the inclusion of guests. Such molecules can be conveniently synthesized by grafting diverse sticky sites onto geometrically suitable cores. The characteristic inability of 9,9'-spirobifluorene to form close-packed crystals suggests that it should serve as a particularly effective core for the elaboration of molecules designed to form highly porous networks. To test this hypothesis, various new tetrasubstituted 9,9'-spirobifluorenes with hydrogen-bonding sites at the 3,3',6,6'-positions or 2,2',7,7'-positions were synthesized by multistep routes. Four of these compounds were crystallized, and their structures were determined by X-ray crystallography. In all cases, the compounds form extensively hydrogen-bonded networks with high porosity. In particular, 43% of the volume of crystals of 3,3',6,6'-tetrahydroxy-9,9'-spirobifluorene (28) is available for the inclusion of guests, whereas the porosity is only 28% in crystals of tetrakis(4-hydroxyphenyl)methane, a close model that lacks the spirobifluorene core. Similarly, the porosities found in crystals of 2,2',7,7'-tetra(acetamido)-9,9'-spirobifluorene (33) and 2,2',7,7'-tetrasubstituted tetrakis(diaminotriazine) 39 are 33% and 60%, respectively. Moreover, the porosity of crystals of 2,2',7,7'-tetrasubstituted tetrakis(triaminotriazine) 40 is 75%, the highest value yet observed in crystals built from small molecules. These observations demonstrate that a particularly effective strategy for engineering molecules able to form highly porous networks is to graft multiple sticky sites onto spirobifluorenes or other cores intrinsically resistant to close packing.

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

4.7
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