Subtitles section Play video Print subtitles >> I want to continue our discussion of first order analysis and analysis of couple in first order and your first order systems. And, as I said, the good news is that even though very few of the systems that we deal with are truly first order, many of the systems we deal with can be analyzed as if they were first order, realizing that sometimes you will see some deviation. So, today we're going to look at multi-plates and look at trying to really understand them, and to extract coupling constants from them. And so, we've already talked about multi-plates where you have all of the same type of coupling like a quartet or a septet and now I want to go and talk about multi-plates where we have coupling where you have different coupling constants, you know, to different types of protons. As I said, if you have different types of protons but the coupling constants are the same, so you have a proton that's coupled to a methane on one side, and a methylene on the other side, and all three of those coupling constants are the same, no big deal. It's going to be a quartet. You'll see it as a quartet, you can analyze it as a quartet, you can call it a quartet, and that's great. But, now we'll look at some first order coupling analysis where we have different coupling constants. And, I'll start with a simple example. Remember last time we were talking about typical coupling concepts and I said, well you know most of your vicinal couplings, most of your three bond couplings, are about seven hertz but, there's some that fall out of that range, and I said one of the categories that you have are alkenes. So, let's take a moment to think about alkenes and we'll think about tert-butyl, I guess technically you'd call this 3, 3, dimethyl, 1 butane, so we'll talk about tert-butyl ethylene here. So, in alkenes your cist couplings are on the order of about 10 hertz. I think I gave you a range of numbers and I said if you want to keep one number in your head, 10 is a good number to keep in your head. So, let's say we would expect about 10 hertz. Trans couplings are typically very different than cist couplings. I gave you a range of numbers from about 14 to 18 and I said if you want to keep one number in your head, let's keep 17 hertz as a typical coupling for trans. And, vicinal couplings are all over the map. I said for SP3 a sort of normal value might be 14 hertz. SP2 tends to be a lot smaller, just a couple of hertz, so if you wanted to keep one number as an expectation, I said zero to 2 hertz. Let's say about 1 hertz. And, let's take a look at how these residences, we would expect in [inaudible]. So, HA is going to be split by HB and HC, and HC is going to split with about a 17 hertz coupling constant, and HB is going to split it with about a 10 hertz coupling constant. To put it another way, in the different molecules, HA is going to see some molecules where HB and HC are both spin-up. Some molecules in which one is spin up and one is spin down. Some in which the other is spin up and the other is spin down, and some in which both are spin down. Now, in the case of a simple triplet where you have the same coupling constant, if one is spin up and one is spin down, or the other is spin up and their swapped, it doesn't make a difference. But, if your coupling concepts are different, then you're going to see different magnetic environments for those 2 molecules, and the result is that you're going to for HA, and indeed we will see for all the others that a doublet of doublets were DD. We always name our species by way of the first coupling constant gives the first name. The big coupling constant gives the first name, and the small coupling constant gives the last name. In this case of course it's moot because its name is doublet of doublets. But as we see of course when we get to triplet of doublets, and doublet of triplets it's going to matter. So, one way to conceptualize these split interactions is as a splitting diagram. And so we can say that HA is going to be split with a big coupling of 17 hertz, and so I'll just remind us that this is 17 hertz. And each of those lines is going to be further split with a coupling of 10 hertz, and I'm trying my best here to be proportional. And so we would expect, we would expect a pattern somewhat like this, four lines with a Lorentzian line shape. Like so. And if I call these lines, 1, 2, 3 and 4 and we see such a pattern, we see a doublet of doublets, our big J is always going to be 1 minus 3, and that's going to be the same as 2 minus 4 within the limits of experimental error, because there is experimental error in peak positions because of things like digital resolution which says although your NMR spectrum is depicted as a series of smooth curves, each curve is actually composed of a series of data points and the separation of those data points depends on your sweep with, and your acquisition time, typically you have about 30,000 to 40,000 about 32,000 to say 50,000 real data points divided over the entire width of the spectrum. So, if your spectrum width is 14 parts per million, and your 500 megahertz, so your spectra width is 500 hertz per PPM, your sweep width is 7,000 hertz, and if you have a 30,000 point spectrum that means, each of your points is going to be separated by a few tenths of a hertz, right? By 7,000 divided by the number of points, by let's say 32,000 real points. That would be called the 64K data set because in the Fourier Transform you collect 64,000 real -- you collect 64,000 points in the time domain, and when you do a Fourier Transform that converts you to 32,000 real points in the frequency domain and 32,000 imaginary points in the frequency domain. So, that spectrum is going to have 7,000 divided by 30,000 is what about a quarter, about .25 or so hertz, right? Yeah, about .25, .4 hertz digital resolution which means your points are separated by a few tenths of a hertz. Now for that very reason, when we report our spectral observations you don't want to report your coupling constants to better than a tenth of a hertz because by the time you're at a hundredth of a hertz, your numbers are insignificant. I mean think about it, your Lorentzian Line width is on the order of a hertz due to the uncertainty principle and errors and shimming. It's usually about 1.2 hertz. You have a digital resolution of about 1.2 hertz. So, that means you can determine the peak position to a couple of tenths of a hertz. So, what I typically do to get the best accuracy is I take the position 1 and position 3, and I subtract them, and I take position 2 and sub 4 and I subtract those, and then I average them. And in this case here, let's say I get 17.0 hertz, and I report this as a DD 17.0 10.0 hertz. Small J, similarly is going to be 1 minus 2 and 3 minus four, and I would take those and average them and get about 10 hertz. You will find on many of the homework problems as you go along and we get to the more advanced part of the course, I include a peak print out. If you want on the PDF, you can simply highlight that peak printout, paste it into excel, split your data from using the text to columns command, and then simply in your excel spreadsheet just take 1 minus 3 and 2 minus 4 and 1 minus 2 and 3 minus 4 and average them appropriately, and get your coupling constant out without having to resort to pencil and paper calculations. All right, so this is AJ. Let's take a look at what we'd expect for HB. So, HB is going to be split by HA with a coupling constant of 10 hertz and it's going to be split by HC with a coupling constant of 1 hertz. So, it too will be a doublet of doublets and I will try to draw everything proportionally on my black boards here. And so here we have our 10 hertz, and here we have our 1 hertz, and we get a pattern that looks like so. HC we'd also expect to be a doublet of doublets, and here we'd expect it to be -- have coupling constants of about 17 hertz and 1 hertz, so again I will draw my little splitting diagram. And that would be the doublet of doublets that we'd observe. So, how does that sound? Does that make sense? >> So, I have a question [inaudible]. >> Ah. Okay, the distance from 1 to 4. So, look we've moved apart 17 hertz, and then I've moved 5 hertz out here, and 5 hertz out here. [ Inaudible Question ] What? [ Inaudible ] Would be, I'm sorry 1.5 to 3.5? >> Yeah, 15 hertz over the [inaudible]. >> From 1 to 4? So, 1 to 4 is going to be 17 plus 10 hertz, which is 27 hertz, and actually you've hit upon something that's a super, super point. The difference between the first line in a multi-plate and the last line is the sum of all of the Js. Now, by all of the Js I mean with all of their multiplicities built in. And, this is what came up when we were talking about that problem in discussion section and we were trying to figure out how many hertz the spectrometer was, and I said well, let's assume you have a typical triplet. Let's assume a typical coupling is 3 hertz. Remember the problem, the question was what was the field strength of the spectrometer and we got 200 and something or 350, and we have one peak that looked like this, and another peak that was a sextet that looked like this. And so one way to do this problem was to measure this distance and say oh, that's about 7 hertz, but you're measuring it with your ruler and it's not so accurate. So, another way to do this is to say all right, so we'll measure this distance, that's going to be 14 hertz. Why? Because a triplet is a proton that's split by two 7 hertz couplings. So, 2 times 7 is 14, and then I say well the way I did it which got a little more accuracy was to look at the sextet. And since I said all of the Js are about 7 hertz, this distance here from outer line to outer line, corresponds to the sum of the 5 Js, all of which are the same that are coupling it. So, this corresponds to 35 hertz. And what's important about this then, is that the distance between the outer lines becomes a check sum. What do I mean? I mean that if you have analyzed your multi-plate correctly, and you understand it correctly, and you've all of the Js correctly, then you can go ahead and add up all of those J's, and of course if one of those Js is corresponding to a triplet, you add it in twice, and that's going to correspond to the distance between the first and the last. And, if you haven't gotten it right, it won't come out right. And what's also important is let's say a multi-plate is a little bit broad, and this came up with somebody in the [inaudible] research group, who's looking at confirmations of oxocarbenium ions, and couldn't exactly see the size of the multi-plate but he darn well could see whether the multi-plate was roughly 7 hertz wide, or whether the multi-plate was roughly 15 hertz wide. And that was able to tell him whether his proton was axial, or equatorial, on a cyclohexane type ring, on a pyran ring, and hence the stereochemistry and the confirmation. So, this is why this is extremely important. So, thoughts or questions? All right, I handed out before, but I realize not everyone brings the paper. I handed out before a two-sided thing, so if you had the handout from last time that had the phenylalanine on it, you don't need to grab a new one. But, I decided to make extras because I realize not everybody is prepared. Actually, if we can sweep the extras over to this side of the room now. That'll take care of a lot of stuff. All right, everyone have one or the other sort of copy? So, let's go ahead and let's take a look, so this is a real spectrum of 3, 3 dimethyl, 1 butane that I pulled out of the SIAL website, and then just using Illustrator, just expanded the multi-plates and put them on top of a hertz scale. So, based on this right now, we should very easily be able to see which proton corresponds to which. So, this multi-plate here has just expanded over here, and further expanded on top of a hertz scale here. These 2 multi-plates here and here are expanded onto here, and then expanded onto 2 scales. So, which one is this? >> HA. >> So, that's HA. Which one is this? >> HC. >> HC, okay. And this is then HB. All right, let's take a moment to actually read off the scale, yes read a ruler, think analog, and see how our actual coupling constants compared to the typical ones. So, let's analyze the HA and figure out what the 2 Js are really. We'll do the same for HB and HC. And I see, is it Ruben? Yeah, I see Ruben is prepared, as am I with my handy ruler from the bookstore. It really is good to have a scientific ruler here for this. All right, so who wants to tell me what you got for the 2 Js and HA? >> I got 18 and 11. >> Sounds about right. Okay, so HA is a DD with 18 and 11 hertz. Here would be a good example of where we probably couldn't report to more accurately than nearest hertz because we simply don't have the resolution. If I were measuring this on an actual spectrometer and I was able to read with accuracy or peak printout, I would report for example this as 5.83 parenthesis DD, J equals whatever I read with accuracy. Here I can only say it would be like 18 and 11.0 hertz. And, assuming the integral worked out, I would write it as 1H. And you would report -- so this is how you tabulate -- how you tabulate NMR data. All right, what about HC? Seventeen and 2, what did you get? >> I got 18 and 2. >> Eighteen and 2, 18 and 2, about 18 and 2. It doesn't surprise me that the 2 coupling constants are the same because coupling constants should be the same. Now mind you, if I get different values for example, and again, there's digital error, there's experimental error, if I got 17.4 for 1, and 17.6 for the other, I would report what I observe, the data that I would observe, I would report for the one 17.4. For the other, 17.6, and that's perfectly reasonable. What about for this one? >> Two and 11. >> Two and 11, and we always report it as the big coupling constant first, and then the small coupling constant. Thoughts or questions on this? >> When you report the chemical shift, do you put delta in front of it, or do you just say [inaudible]. >> These days, well if you're reporting a whole series, so great question. The question is do you report delta 5.83? So, delta means chemical shift in PPM, so yeah if I'm reporting an individual number, I would probably report it. If I'm tabulating data, these days what people typically do in JOC is say chemical shifts are reported in hertz relative with respected TMS or with respected solvent peaks. So, people typically don't. It's kind of falling out of fashion. But, delta was used specifically; remember I mentioned this obscure Tao scale from the 60's. Delta was used specifically to indicate it's on the delta scale. Now the Tao scale is so much forgotten that people tend not to put as much emphasis on using delta. All right, try some more multi-plates. And, what I'm going to do, and I'll show you another thing that's useful in just a second. But, what I'm going to do is give you a handout that has some simulated multi-plates, and I'll show you where I got them in just a second. But we can analyze them. So, the best way to really get an understanding of something is to work through it. And, we've already kind of beaten to death a doublet of doublets, I'm going to skip that and go on. But, now we have another pattern, and how would we describe this pattern? >> Triplet. >> Triplet of doublets, and I want to come to this. All right. So, for the purposes of this class, we're always going to name it as big coupling constant dictates the first name, small coupling constant dictates the last name. [ Inaudible Question ] We're going to work through both of them and see the differences. Now, the reason it is important to have agreement on this nomenclature is that if we don't have agreement then you will have different interpretations of the pattern and in turn, how many couplings of different types you have. And, when it comes to actually understanding stereo chemical relationships, you will get it wrong. Now, the only problem is there's a heck of a lot of confusion in the literature. I will make a case for this system of nomenclature. This is what we're going to use in the class. I can show you at least one example where a different system of nomenclature is used. I can also show you an article that analyzes everything in terms of doublet of doublet of doublets. And for example, we call this D, D, D with the same J. I take issue with that because people invariably erroneously extract coupling constants by that method and get meaningless numbers. For example, they will measure one distance and call it one J and another distance and call it the other J. So, they'll measure 7.4 and 7.0 and say those are different Js and they're not. It's simply the limits of digital resolution and experimental error. So, for the purposes of this class, and for the purposes of what makes sense, we will always follow this nomenclature. All right, so let's take a look at why we know that our big coupling constant is -- I'm sorry, doublet of triplets; DT. All right, now we're on the same page. So, a doublet of triplets can be thought of as a pair of triplets. All right, so, we split with a big J, into a doublet. And then we split with a small J into a triplet. Now, I'll tell you a secret, for absolutely every multi-plate out there, for every, every, every multi-plate out there the smallest J is the difference between the first and second line and the last and next to last line, every, every, multi-plate and you can work yourself -- work your way through and convince yourself. So, if we call these peaks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and we look at them in a peak print out, and I just number them 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, now I have a caveat for you. I've simulated this and my simulation happens to run from low to high PPM. Typically when you see a real spectrum it's going to run from high to low. So, typically 1 would be at the top, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. Okay, so small J is always going to be the first and the second or the last and the next to last. This is simulated data, so the numbers accord exactly. But, if I were dealing with real data, what I would do is take and average this. So, for example we have that 459, so this is a column for hertz, this is a column for PPM, that's the height, that's what you'll see in the typical printout; 459.57 minus 455.30 that number happens to be 10 -- 4.27. And because this data is synthetic, because it is simulated, I take the last two and I find that it is exactly the same number for 444.70 minus 440.43 and not surprisingly because it is simulated, it is the exact same number. So, within reporting to tenths of a hertz, this is 4.3. With real data, I would take the two and average them. All right, for a doublet of triplets, the distance between the two tall lines, between lines 2 and 5 is always going to be your big J. Depending on the ratio of the small J to the big J, these two lines may swap, so your big J may be 1 to 4 or it may be 1 to 3 if they swap, so if you know exactly what it is, you can take that. But, you can always be safe taking 2 to 5. You can always be safe taking the two biggies. So, here I get that it's 455.30 minus 444.70 and that's 10.6. So, if I was reporting this, I would report the data in the order big J, small J, 10.6, 4.3 hertz. Yeah? >> If those [inaudible] just by randomly overlapping [inaudible] would it still be considered a doublet? >> It would still be considered a doublet of triplets, and I can show you, we can do that pattern in a second. All right, so what I want us to do is work through and do a splitting diagram for this, and I have this graph paper here and we'll do it, just for the sake of ease we'll do it as one box is a hertz, and what I'll do is a DT of 10 and 4 hertz, just to make it easy. So, if I do my splitting diagram, I go ahead and I'm going to split out into 10 for the doublets, so I'm going to go 5 each way. So, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, this happens to be 8 boxes to the inch graph paper. And then if I continue my splitting diagram, I'm going to split into a triplet with 4 hertz, and so I'm going to go out each way 4, and have a line in the center. So, I can go out, 1, 2, 3, 4, out 1, 2, 3, 4 and then on this one I can go out 1, 2, 3. >> Is it supposed to be 2? >> No. Do I go 2 and 2? Nope, because remember a triplet is a split with two for a hertz coupling constant. So, a triplet is identical to a doublet of doublets with 4 hertz. So, we're doing a little short-cut here. Okay, so what I'm saying is a triplet with 4 hertz, is this and that's the same as a -- that's the same as a DD with 2 identical coupling constants. And so, we can take a look at that and see what we get. So, if I go out like this, I'll try to make it fit as exactly on scale. I'm not drawing on graph paper. And, if this is 4, and now we split 4 and 4 we go line with the intensity of 1, line with intensity of 2, line with intensity of 1. And so, a triplet, you're going to with a 4 hertz coupling constant is going to move out 4 hertz in each direction. And that makes sense because remember I said that if the total J is 8 hertz, because you have two 4 hertz couplings, then those outer 2 lines are 8 hertz apart. That make sense? And so I can graph this, and I'll graph it with the relative intensities of 1 to 2, to 1, and 1, to 2, to 1. >> What did you say not to do earlier [inaudible]? >> Not to go out 2 hertz on each side. >> Two hertz oh, 2 okay, >> So, I said we're going out 4 hertz because the triplet is 4 and 4. It's two 4 hertz coupling constants. A triplet with 4 hertz coupling is conceptually the same as a DD with -- it is indistinguishable from a DD with 4 hertz and 4 hertz. So, so what? I'm sorry. >> Can we just draw that [inaudible]? >> If you want you can draw this. But, still name this as a triplet. >> Oh, okay. I think I just misunderstood what they were saying. >> All right, so let us compare this now to the triplet of doublets coupling pattern. So, of course a triplet of doublets is something where you have 1 big -- you have 2 big couplings and one small coupling. And you can think of it -- so this is a small triplet of doublets and you can think of this as a -- you can think of it as 3 doublets, or a trio of doublets. And so, your big J is going to be 1 minus -- and again, we can think of this 4, 5, 6, 4, 5, 6 and our big J is going to be 1 minus 3 which is the same as 2 minus 4 which is the same as 3 minus 5 which is the same as 4 minus 6. So, this spacing, this spacing, this spacing, and this spacing all correspond to the triplet. And, if I want the best thing would be to take and average them for maximum amount of accuracy. In this case with simulated data I could just say all right, that's equal to 464.43 minus 453.5 -- point 26. And that number happens to be 11.17. Small J and as I said for any multi-plate, you can always take first minus second, or next to the last minus next to the last -- minus last. The small j is 1 minus 2, 3 minus 4, 5 minus 6, if I want to since this is simulated data, I'll just take 464.43 minus 457.92 and I get that that's 6.5. So, I would report this as 11.2, 6.5 hertz. >> So, we would only need one decimal point because that's the maximum resolution. >> That's the maximum resolution of the instrument. And in carbon NMR, where your sweep width is now about 20 times as large, typically your digital resolution is on the order of 1 hertz because you might have 32,000 data points but, your sweep width now might be for example, two 20,000 hertz, so your digital resolution is about 1 hertz. So, typically people report Js and the carbon to just the nearest hertz. All right, so let's go ahead and we'll simulate this as a TD 11-6. And so, I will make my triplet, and I will go down, and I will go out 11, and I'll go 1, 2, 3 and out 11, and then I'll split each of those into 6 hertz doublets. So, I go out 1, 2, 3, 1, 2, 3 and out 1, 2, 3, 1, 2, 3 and I get line, line, line, line, line, line. [ Inaudible Question ] What's that? >> They'd look -- the higher resolution [inaudible] make a straight line. >> Well, you know the digital resolution, great question. So, the digital resolution of an 800 megahertz spectrometer isn't any higher than the digital resolution of a 300 megahertz spectrometer, which means your line width isn't any sharper. So, since no matter whether you measure on a big spectrometer or a little spectrometer, this distance is still exactly the same. The separation of the lines in hertz is the same, it'll look pretty similar. It's just if you have tinting, due to non first order effects, AB type of effect. You'll see less of a difference. Now, I want to show you 2 other things, this one here, can anybody name it real quickly? Do you see the pattern; it's a doublet of triplets. It's a pair of triplets, and if you go ahead and you take this line to this line, 2 to 5 is your big J, 1 to 2 and 3 to 4 is your small J, and that'll give you your name of it. This one happens to be 7.8 and 5.9 hertz. All right, I want to show you a couple of tools and then I want to show you 1 last pattern. All right, so this is -- this is what generated all these peaks, this is downloadable on the website, and so for example if I wanted to make a doublet of triplets with 10.6 and 4.3 what I'd do is simply enter 10.6, and of course since we have 2 couplings of 4.3 making up a triplet, I simply enter 4.3 twice, and there's the pattern we just saw. This just simulates the line width, if the lines are a little fatter, or a little thinner, that gives you your Lorentzian Line shape, the one that I call line width. The one that we just saw which was 7.8 and 5.9is that one? And the one that we saw before that, which was your triplets of doublets with 11.2 and 6.5, is that one? The same type of tool exists in Chem-Doodle, so I can go ahead and simulate a system for example with 11.2 -- oh, 2 spins and 6.5, and there are even little convenient -- convenient slider tools that can take us into our doublet of triplets we just saw. All right, last thing I want to show you as this will prepare you to tackle just about anything is this pattern over here. Here we have 3 distinct coupling constants. So, this pattern is a -- let me grab the right sheet here, actually which was the next one on your page? Was it this one? Or was it this one. All right so, I will grab this -- no. it was the other one, all right, so I will grab this one and, -- oh -- that is. Wait, you have 2 of the other? All right, so all right, we will do this one here which is the last one. We are split with 3 distinct coupling constants, so it is a doublet of doublet of doublets. And if we think about our lines here, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, remember normally you'd number from the top. All right, we name it big J, medium J, small J. Small J is always the first minus the second, which is 1 minus 2, or the last and the next to the last which is 7 to 8. That's 8.19, I won't do the math. The medium J is always for a doublet of doublet of doublets, 1 minus 3 or 6 -- and 6 minus 8 always, always, always for a doublet of doublets. That's 10.76, the large J is either 1 minus 4 or 1 minus 5 and in turn either r5 minus 8 or 4 minus 8. Rather than deal with those vagaries remember what I said before, that 1 minus 8 is always the sum of the Js and any if you have like a triplet in there you'd use 2 of those Js. So, that is always J small, plus J medium, plus J large. And in this case, that is 31.91 which means J large is equal to 31.91 minus 10.76 minus 8.19 is equal to 12.96. And so if I report this, it's 13.0, 10.8, and 8.2 and I will leave it to you to work through the splitting tree. You will get plenty of this in a handout that I've assigned for next week, although given where we're out you can do for this homework set. I'd encourage you to at least work through it, it's a work book hand out that goes with today's lecture so, anyway. Okay, that's what I think I want to say right now, you have all the tools to tackle complex first order and your first order multi-plates. ------------------------------3d155e5aaa20--
B2 hertz coupling multi line constant report Chem 203. Organic Spectroscopy. Lecture 13. Coupling Analysis in Systems (continued) 35 3 Cheng-Hong Liu posted on 2015/01/31 More Share Save Report Video vocabulary