Skip to Content
MilliporeSigma
  • Hypervalent neutral O-donor ligand complexes of silicon tetrafluoride, comparisons with other group 14 tetrafluorides and a search for soft donor ligand complexes.

Hypervalent neutral O-donor ligand complexes of silicon tetrafluoride, comparisons with other group 14 tetrafluorides and a search for soft donor ligand complexes.

Dalton transactions (Cambridge, England : 2003) (2011-01-18)
Kathryn George, Andrew L Hector, William Levason, Gillian Reid, George Sanderson, Michael Webster, Wenjian Zhang
ABSTRACT

The hypervalent adducts of SiF(4), trans-[SiF(4)(R(3)PO)(2)] (R = Me, Et or Ph), cis-[SiF(4){R(2)P(O)CH(2)P(O)R(2)}] (R = Me or Ph), cis-[SiF(4)(pyNO)(2)] and trans-[SiF(4)(DMSO)(2)] have been prepared from SiF(4) and the ligands in anhydrous CH(2)Cl(2), and characterised by microanalysis, IR and VT multinuclear ((1)H, (19)F, (31)P) NMR spectroscopy. The NMR studies show extensive dissociation at ambient temperatures in non-coordinating solvents, but mixtures of cis and trans isomers of the monodentate ligand complexes were identified at low temperatures. Crystal structures are reported for trans-[SiF(4)(R(3)PO)(2)] (R = Me or Ph), and cis-[SiF(4)(pyNO)(2)]. The GeF(4) analogues cis-[GeF(4){R(2)P(O)(CH(2))(n)P(O)R(2)}] (R = Me or Ph, n = 1; R = Ph, n = 2) were similarly characterised and the structures of cis-[GeF(4){R(2)P(O)CH(2)P(O)R(2)}] (R = Me or Ph) determined. The reaction of R(3)AsO (R = Me or Ph) with SiF(4) does not give simple adducts, but forms [R(3)AsOH](+) cations as fluorosilicate salts. SiF(4) adducts of some ether ligands (including THF, 12-crown-4) were also characterised by (19)F NMR spectroscopy in solution at low temperatures (∼190 K), but are fully dissociated at room temperature. Attempts to isolate, or even to identify, SiF(4) adducts with phosphine or thioether ligands in solution at 190 K were unsuccessful, contrasting with the recent isolation and detailed characterisation of GeF(4) analogues. The chemistry of SiF(4) with these oxygen donor ligands, and with soft donors (P, As, S or Se), is compared and contrasted with those of GeF(4), SnF(4) and SiCl(4). The key energy factors determining stability of these complexes are discussed.