Abstract
Although the emission spectra and excited-state lifetime of Ru(bpy) 3 2+ (bpy=2,2′-bipyridine), Ru(dmbpy) 3 2+ (dmbpy=4,4′- dimethyl-2,2′-bipyridine) and Ru(phen) 3 2+ (phen=1,10-phenanthroline) are little affected by the addition of the cationic surfactant cetyltrimethylammonium chloride (CTAC), an appreciable shift in λ max em , emission intensity and emission lifetime are observed for Ru(dtbpy) 3 2+ (dtbpy=4,4′-di-tert-butyl-2,2′-bipyri dine) and Ru(dpphen) 3 2+ (dpphen=4,7-diphenyl-1,10-phenanthroline). These results point out the importance of hydrophobic interactions over the coulombic repulsion thereby bringing the ruthenium(II) complexes close to the cationic micelles. The rate of luminescence quenching of five *Ru(NN) 3 2+ complexes, with alkyl-substituted phenolate ions in the presence of CTAC, follows different trends depending on the nature of the ligand in Ru(NN) 3 2+ as well as the quencher. The micellar inhibition is explained by considering ArO - being strongly associated with CTAC leaving Ru(NN) 3 2+ in the aqueous phase. The micellar catalysis at high [CTAC] with Ru(dtbpy) 3 2+ and Ru(dpphen) 3 2+ may be due to the operation of predominant hydrophobic interaction over the electrostatic repulsion.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Journal of the Chemical Society, Faraday Transactions
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
