Insertion and elimination Peter H.M. Budzelaar Insertion reactions If at a metal centre you have a) a s-bound group (hydride, alkyl, aryl) b) a ligand containing a p-system (olefin, alkyne, CO) the s-bound group can migrate to the p-system. R M R M CO O 2 R M M R Insertion and elimination Insertion in MeMn(CO)5 insertion HOMO TS agostic LUMO CO CO adduct 3 h2-acyl Insertion and elimination Insertion reactions The s-bound group migrates to the p-system. But if you only see the result, it looks like the p-system has inserted into the M-X bond, hence the name insertion. To emphasize that it is actually (mostly) the X group that moves, we use the term migratory insertion. The reverse of insertion is called elimination. Insertion reduces the electron count, elimination increases it. Neither insertion nor elimination causes a change in oxidation state. 4 Insertion and elimination 1,1 insertions In a 1,1-insertion, metal and X group "move" to the same atom of the inserting substrate. The metal-bound substrate atom increases its valence. CO, isonitriles (RNC) and SO2 often undergo 1,1-insertion. Me M M CO 5 O Me Me M SO2 M S Me O O Insertion and elimination Insertion of CO and isonitriles • CO insertion is hardly exothermic. • An additional ligand may be needed to trap the acyl and so drive the reaction to completion. • In the absence of added ligands often fast equilibrium. • CO insertion in M-H, M-CF3, M-COR endothermic. – no CO polymerization. – but isonitriles do polymerize! 6 Insertion and elimination Double CO insertion ? Deriving a mechanism from a reaction stoichiometry is not always straightforward. The following catalytic reaction was reported a few years ago: 2 R2NH + 2 CO + ArI "Pd" R2NCOCOAr + R2NH2+ I- This looks like it might involve double CO insertion. But the actual mechanism is more complicated. 7 Insertion and elimination No double CO insertion ! R2NCOCOAr L2Pd(CO)n ArX - n CO ox add CO red elim X COAr L2Pd L2Pd Ar CONR2 HNR2 nucl attack - H+ ins CO + COAr L2Pd CO 8 COAr subst CO - X- L2Pd X Insertion and elimination Promoting CO insertion • "Bulky" ligands O CO M requires more space than M R R • Lewis acids Coordinate to O, stabilize product AlCl3 AlCl3 O O C vs M M R R Drawback: usually stoichiometric 9 Insertion and elimination Sometimes it only looks like insertion Nucleophilic attack at coordinated CO can lead to the same products as standard insertion: Ir OMe Ir CO Ir OMe CO OMe Ir COOMe Main difference: nucleophilic attack does not require an empty site. 10 Insertion and elimination 1,2-insertion of olefins Insertion of an olefin in a metal-alkyl bond produces a new alkyl. Thus, the reaction leads to oligomers or polymers of the olefin. Me M 11 M M Insertion and elimination 1,2-insertion of olefins Insertion of an olefin in a metal-alkyl bond produces a new alkyl. Thus, the reaction leads to oligomers or polymers of the olefin. Best known polyolefins: • polyethene (polythene) • polypropene In addition, there are many specialty polyolefins. Polyolefins are among the largest-scale chemical products made. They are chemically inert. Their properties can be tuned by the choice of catalyst and comonomer. 12 Insertion and elimination Why do olefins polymerize ? Driving force: conversion of a p-bond into a s-bond – One C=C bond: 150 kcal/mol – Two C-C bonds: 285 = 170 kcal/mol – Energy release: about 20 kcal per mole of monomer (independent of mechanism!) Many polymerization mechanisms – – – – Radical (ethene, dienes, styrene, acrylates) Cationic (styrene, isobutene) Anionic (styrene, dienes, acrylates) Transition-metal catalyzed (a-olefins, dienes, styrene) Transition-metal catalysis provides the best opportunities for tuning of reactivity and selectivity 13 Insertion and elimination Mechanism of olefin insertion Standard Cossee mechanism M M R R M R M R Green-Rooney variation (a-agostic assistance): M M CH2P M CH2P H CH2P M H P Interaction with an a C-H bond could facilitate tilting of the migrating alkyl group The "fixed" orientation suggested by this picture is probably incorrect 14 Insertion and elimination Insertion in M-H bonds Insertion in M-H bonds is nearly always fast and reversible. Hydrides catalyze olefin isomerization Regiochemistry corresponds to Markovnikov rule (with Md+-Hd-) To shift the equilibrium to the insertion product: • Electron-withdrawing groups at metal alkyl more electron-donating than H • Early transition metals M-C stronger (relative to M-H) • Alkynes instead of olefins more energy gain per monomer, both for M-H and M-C insertion 15 Insertion and elimination Catalyzed olefin isomerization Metals have a preference for primary alkyls. But substituted olefins are more stable! Cp2Zr Cl dominant alkyl Cp2ZrHCl dominant olefin Cp2Zr Cl In isomerization catalysis, the dominant products and the dominant catalytic species often do not correspond to each other. For each separately, concentrations at equilibrium reflect thermodynamic stabilities via the Boltzmann distribution. 16 Insertion and elimination Catalyzed olefin isomerization xs Most stable alkyl Cp2ZrCl Cp2ZrHCl or or + + Most stable olefin + little 17 Insertion and elimination M-H vs M-C insertion Insertion in M-C bonds is slower than in M-H. Barrier usually 5-10 kcal/mol higher Factor 105-1010 in rate ! Reason: shape of orbitals (s vs. sp3) M 18 M Insertion and elimination Repeated insertion Multiple insertion leads to dimerization, oligomerization or polymerization. M H M Et kprop M Bu kCT M H + Key factor: kCT / kprop = 1: mainly dimerization 0.1-1.0: oligomerization (always mixtures) « 0.1: polymerization 0: "living" polymerization kprop M Hx kCT M H + kprop M Oc kprop etc 19 kCT M H + For non-living polymerization: N n2 ( n 0) n 1 1 Wn 2 (n 2) 2 n 1 (2 1) 1 Insertion and elimination Schulz-Flory statistics 0.45 Mole fraction 0.40 Weight fraction 0.35 0.30 = 0.7 0.25 0.20 0.15 0.10 0.05 0.00 2 5 8 11 14 17 20 23 26 29 32 35 38 41 44 47 Mole fraction 0.10 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.00 Weight fraction = 0.1 2 5 8 11 14 17 20 23 26 29 32 35 38 41 44 47 Mole fraction 0.03 Weight fraction 0.02 0.02 = 0.02 0.01 0.01 For non-living polymerization: N n2 ( n 0) n 1 1 Wn 2 0.00 2 20 Key factor: kCT / kprop = 1: mainly dimerization 0.1-1.0: oligomerization (always mixtures) « 0.1: polymerization 0: "living" polymerization 5 8 11 14 17 20 23 26 29 32 35 38 41 44 47 (n 2) 2 n 1 (2 1) 1 Insertion and elimination Applications of oligomers and polymers • Ethene and propene come directly from crude oil "crackers" – Primary petrochemical products, basic chemical feedstocks • Dimerization rarely desired – Making butene costs $$$ ! • Oligomers: surfactants, comonomers – High added value, but limited market • Polymers: plastics, construction materials, foils and films – Very large market, bulk products 21 Insertion and elimination Selective synthesis of trimers etc ? • 1-Hexene and 1-octene are valuable co-monomers. • Selective synthesis of 1-hexene from ethene is not possible using the standard insertion/elimination mechanism. • There are a few catalysts that selectively trimerize ethene via a different mechanism ("metallacycle" mechanism). – Redox-active metals (Ti, V, Cr, Ta) required – Cr systems are used commercially • There are also one or two catalysts that preferentially produce 1-octene. The mechanism has not been firmly established. 22 Insertion and elimination Trimerization via metallacycles + Key issues: M= • Geometrical constraints prevent b-elimination in metallacyclopentane. Ti (and others) M II subst M II coord • Formation of 9-membered rings unfavourable. M II • Ligand helps balance (n) and (n+2) oxidation states. red elim M? H M IV M IV H coord b-elim M IV 23 ins M IV Insertion and elimination CO/olefin copolymerization M O • CO cheaper than ethene • Copolymer more polar than polyethene – much higher melting point CO P P O M • Chemically less inert M O CO P O P • No double CO insertion O M uphill • No double olefin insertion O CO CO binds more strongly, inserts more quickly • Slow b-elimination from alkyl CO M O 5-membered ring hinders elimination O P M = L2Pd, L2Ni 24 Insertion and elimination Hydroformylation • Used to make long-chain alcohols and acids from 1-alkenes – Often in situ reduction of aldehydes to alcohols – Unwanted side reaction: hydrogenation of olefin to alkane • Main issue: linear vs branched aldehyde formation • It is possible to make linear aldehydes from internal olefins ! H H M M O O M O H M H M O H2 M CO CO M H2 H 25 Insertion and elimination Insertion of longer conjugated systems Attack on an h-polyene is always at a terminal carbon. LUMO coefficients largest Usually a,w-insertion 26 M M R R Insertion and elimination Insertion of longer conjugated systems A diene can be h2 bound. 1,2-insertion M M R R Metallocenes often do not have enough space for h4 coordination: 27 Insertion and elimination Diene rubbers • Butadiene could form three different "ideal" polymers: cis 1,4 trans 1,4 1,2 • In practice one obtains an imperfect polymer containing all possible insertion modes. • Product composition can be tuned by catalyst variation. • Polymer either used as such or (often) after cross-linking and hydrogenation. 28 Insertion and elimination Addition to enones • RLi, Grignards: usually 1,2 – "charge-controlled" R OH • OrganoCu compounds often 1,4 – or even 1,6 etc – "orbital-controlled" – stereoregular addition possible using chiral phosphine ligands – frequently used in organic synthesis 29 O R O Insertion and elimination Less common elimination reactions a-elimination: Cp2Zr Cp2Zr H Probably via s-bond metathesis: Zr H H tBu Other ligand metallation reactions: - Zr tBu H Zr L2Pt L2Pt Via s-bond metathesis or oxidative addition/reductive elimination 30 Insertion and elimination Less common elimination reactions b-elimination from alkoxides of late transition metals is easy: M O CH 3 M + CH2O H The hydride often decomposes to H+ and reduced metal: alcohols easily reduce late transition metals. Also, the aldehyde could be decarbonylated to yield metal carbonyls. For early transition metals, the insertion is highly exothermic and irreversible. 31 Insertion and elimination