Sciencemadness Discussion Board

CoCl(PPh3)3

Toshiro - 4-8-2007 at 01:38

Hello everyone ,

I want to know if the synthesis of CoCl(PPh3)3 is cobalt trichloride with triphenylphosphine with ethanol as reducing agent , like the synthesis of wilkinson catalyst , is this correct or there is a difference ? thanks ..

guy - 4-8-2007 at 12:24

Well good luck getting CoCl3. That is almost impossible to get since Co(III) is an extremely strong oxidizing agent, only CoF3 has been really made.

Toshiro - 4-8-2007 at 13:01

Ok Guy , how can i do this synthesis , do you have another idea ?

guy - 4-8-2007 at 13:16

Why not just use anhydrous CoCl2 and PPh3?

The_Davster - 4-8-2007 at 13:35

The reference for the synthesis of this is:
Watatsuki, Y.; Yamazaki, H. Inorg. Syn. 1989, 26, 189–200.

Toshiro - 4-8-2007 at 13:36

Please give more details , that's very interressant :D , with CoCl2 ?

The_Davster - 4-8-2007 at 13:41

I cannot access that article, a preparation on orgsyn.org which uses the chlorotris(tripheylphosphine)cobalt(I) compound only cites the above article for the synthesis.

Toshiro - 4-8-2007 at 13:47

Thanks anyway The_Davster , do you have any idea yourself ?

[Edited on 4-8-2007 by Toshiro]

Sandmeyer - 5-8-2007 at 03:10

It seems you're only here for one reason, and you're very annoying as you fail to understand that ppl are providing as much info as they can in order to help you. :mad:

Toshiro - 5-8-2007 at 03:46

Sandmeyer , why i'm annoying because i want to learn more ? ... whats the problem ? :D

Nicodem - 6-8-2007 at 08:33

You asked a question about the synthesis of CoCl(PPh3)3 and you were given a working procedure by The_Davster. Next, you ask about unpublished ideas on how to prepare that complex. Meanwhile you provide no background about why you need that and especially in what context. This smells of R&D parasitism (that is: lazy researchers without imagination asking others to do the intellectual work for which they are paid for). This forum had a lot of incursions like that in the recent year so you happened (perhaps unjustly) to raise suspicions about being one of those members who did not read the forum subtitle: The art and science of amateur experimentalism. Several members here work in profit institutions as well, but they generally do not abuse this forum (well, I would say there is a silent consensus that only the Reference section can be abused but always on the premise that the reference is needed utmost for academic research…). So it happened that some members (like Sandmeyer) became extremely touchy about the amateur vs. professional issue.