Ja. Simon et al., INTRAMOLECULAR ELECTRONIC-ENERGY TRANSFER IN RUTHENIUM(II) DIIMINE DONOR PYRENE ACCEPTOR COMPLEXES LINKED BY A SINGLE C-C BOND, Journal of the American Chemical Society, 119(45), 1997, pp. 11012-11022
The photophysical behavior of [(bpy)(2)Ru(L)](2+) complexes (L = 4-(1
''-pyrenyl)-2,2'-bipyridine, bpy-pyr; 2-(1'-pyrenyl)-1,10-phenanthroli
ne, phen-pyr; and 2-(2'-naphthyl)-1,10-phenanthroline, phen-nap) was i
nvestigated in solutions and frozen matrices. The conformation of the
linked pyrene differs in the two complexes: The pyrene moiety is confo
rmationally constrained to be nearly perpendicular to the phenanthroli
ne in the phen-pyr complex while the pyrene in the bpy-pyr complex has
much greater flexibility about the C-C bond linking the ligand and th
e pyrene. The (MLCT)-M-3 excited state of the Ru(II) diimine complex a
nd the (3)(pi-->pi) state of the pyrenyl substituent are nearly isoen
ergetic; the (MLCT)-M-3 state is the lowest energy state in the bpy-py
r complex, and the pyrene (3)(pi-->pi) state is lower in energy for t
he phen-pyr complex. The bpy-pyr complex is unique in that the (MLCT)-
M-3 state has a very long lived luminescence (approximately 50 mu s in
degassed CH3CN). Luminescence decays for both pyrene containing compl
exes can be fit as double exponentials, indicating that the (MLCT)-M-3
and (3)(pi-->pi) states are not in equilibrium. Analysis of decays o
btained at several temperatures reveal that energy transfer is slower
than relaxation of the (MLCT)-M-3 state but more rapid than decay of t
he pyrene localized (3)(pi-->pi) state. The results also suggest that
electronic coupling between the two states is weak despite the fact t
hat the two chromophores are separated by a single covalent bond.