Related Experiment Video
Updated: Nov 15, 2025

Fabricating van der Waals Heterostructures with Precise Rotational Alignment
Published on: July 5, 2019
Three Distinct Spin-Crossover Pathways in Halogen-Appended 2D Hofmann Frameworks
Ashley T Brennan1,2,3, Katrina A Zenere1,2,3, Cameron J Kepert1,2,3
1The School of Chemistry, University of New South Wales-Sydney, Sydney 2052, New South Wales, Australia.
Abstract:
We probe, here, a family of 2D Hofmann-type frameworks, [FeII(Pd(CN)4)(bztrzX)2]·nH2O [X·nH2O; X = F, Cl, Br; n = 1 (X = Cl, Br) and 3 (X = F); bztrzX = (E)-1-(2-Xphen-1-yl)-N-(4H-1,2,4-triazol-4-yl)methanimine], with halogen-appended ligands. In all cases, there are two crystallographically distinct FeII sites, ({Fe1-Fe2}), driven by the presence of a range of host-host and host-guest interactions. We find that lattice modification through X variation influences the elastic coupling between the FeII sites, the emergence of ferroelastic or antiferroelastic interactions between these sites, and the relative spin-state stabilization/destabilization at each site. In Cl·H2O, the FeII sites show strong elastic coupling, as evidenced by both FeII sites undergoing a spin transition in a single cooperative step, as driven by the volume strain over the high-spin (HS)-to-low-spin (LS) transition. The FeII sites in F·3H2O are also elastically coupled; however, the change of the X atom characteristics and increased guest molecules in the pores result in an antiferroelastic interaction characteristic between Fe1 and Fe2 and a resultant two-step spin-state transition. The change of the X atom to Br in Br·H2O results in the FeII sites being decoupled due to halogen atom steric bulk, resulting in the independent spin-state transition of Fe1 and Fe2 sites and a two-step spin-state transition pathway. Uniquely, all three possible spin-state transition pathways of a two-site switching system are observed in this family [(1) {HS-HS} ↔ {HS-LS} ↔ {LS-LS} for Br·H2O, (2) {HS-HS} ↔ {LS-HS} ↔ {LS-LS} for F·3H2O, and (3) {HS-HS} ↔ {LS-LS} for Cl·H2O for {Fe1-Fe2}]. Overall, these findings broadly support recent theoretical models but highlight that additional structural and topological complexities are needed to form a holistic picture of the drivers of elastic frustration.
More Related Videos
06:44From Molecules to Materials: Engineering New Ionic Liquid Crystals Through Halogen Bonding
Published on: March 24, 2018
08:42Microfluidic-based Synthesis of Covalent Organic Frameworks COFs: A Tool for Continuous Production of COF Fibers and Direct Printing on a Surface
Published on: July 10, 2017
Related Concept Videos
Spin–Spin Coupling: Three-Bond Coupling (Vicinal Coupling)
The extent of coupling depends on the C‑C bond length, the two H‑C‑C angles, any electron-withdrawing substituents, and the dihedral angle between the involved orbitals. The...
Spin–Spin Coupling: One-Bond Coupling
Hybridization of Atomic Orbitals I
Spin–Spin Coupling: Two-Bond Coupling (Geminal Coupling)
The central atom need not be NMR-active because its electrons are affected by the electron polarization of the spin-active atoms. However, spin information is transmitted less effectively than in one-bond coupling, and 2J values are usually weaker than 1J values. The energy of...
Hybridization of Atomic Orbitals II
Valence Bond Theory