Table 3.
Structural parameters for a series of monometallic and bimetallic azido complexes. Compounds from the literature are listed by their six-letter CSD entry code.
| 1 | EBAHAS | ENAZPU10a | FUNGUQb | MANNIAc | MANNOGc | MANNUMc | NIPLEFd | PAQTIKe | YOMNIZf | PAYKACg | PAYKEGg | AQELIRh | PAYKEG01i | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | 2.3445(8) | 2.3472(5) | 2.3166(7) | 2.3429(6) | |
| Ru−N3 (Å) | 2.097(4) | 2.123(2), 2.094(2) | 2.121(8) | 2.11(1) | 2.115(3) | 2.069(9), 2.078(8) | 2.084(5) | 2.158(3), 2.122(3) | 2.117(5) | 2.066(3) | 2.076(7) | 2.042(4) | 2.246(4) | 2.050(4) |
| RuN−N2 (Å) | 1.176(6) | 1.187(2), 1.196(2) | 1.18(1) | 1.08(1) | 1.194(4) | 1.16(1), 1.17(1) | 1.171(7) | 1.138(5), 1.181(4) | 1.173(7) | 1.195(4) | 1.09(1) | 1.101(5) | 1.036(5) | 1.183(6) |
| RuN2−N (Å) | 1.241(7) | 1.166(2), 1.159(2) | 1.15(1) | 1.06(2) | 1.157(4) | 1.14(1), 1.14(1) | 1.173(7) | 1.172(6), 1.171(5) | 1.193(7) | 1.156(5) | 1.16(2) | 1.230(8) | 1.158(7) | 1.160(7) |
| Ru−N−N2 (°) | 132.2(4) | 128.5(1), 124.2(1) | 116.7(7) | 154(1) | 137.6(3) | 149.7(9), 143.5(9) | 139.1(4) | 120.7(3), 127.5(3) | 120.9(4) | 125.3(3) | 171.0(8) | 165.5(5) | 153.6(5) | 150.9(4) |
[RuII(N3)2{N(O)CH(py)CH2N(C2H5)C2H4py}], from ref. 70.
trans-[Ru(en)2(N2)(N3)]+, from ref. 71.
trans-[Ru(TMC)(NCCH3)(N3)]+, from ref. 72.
MANNIA = trans-[Ru(TMC)(NC–O–OCH3–C6H4)(N3)]+, MANNOG = trans-[Ru(TMC)(Ph3PN)(N3)]+, MANNUM = trans-[Ru(TMC)(NCC6H5)(N3)]+, from ref. 73.
[Ru(N4Py)(N3)]+, from ref. 74.
[Ru(o-BQDI)(Me3tacn)(N3)]+, from ref. 75.
[Ru(N3)6]3–, from ref. 76.
PAYKAC = Ru2(DPhF)4N3, PAYKEG = Ru2(D(3,5–Cl2Ph)F)4N3, from ref. 77. To account for disorder, the Ru−Na−Nc angles instead of the Ru−Na−Nb angles were used in the Ru−Na−Nb−Nc fragment.
Ru2(DMBA)4(N3)2, from ref. 78.
Ru2(D(3,5–Cl2Ph)F)4N3, from ref. 67.