Show simple item record

Kinetics of the Thermal Decomposition of Dimethylmercury. I. Cyclopentane Inhibition

dc.contributor.authorRussell, Morley E.en_US
dc.contributor.authorBernstein, Richard B.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2010-05-06T21:38:29Z
dc.date.available2010-05-06T21:38:29Z
dc.date.issued1959-03en_US
dc.identifier.citationRussell, Morley E.; Bernstein, Richard B. (1959). "Kinetics of the Thermal Decomposition of Dimethylmercury. I. Cyclopentane Inhibition." The Journal of Chemical Physics 30(3): 607-612. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/70105>en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/70105
dc.description.abstractThe kinetics of the pyrolysis of gaseous dimethylmercury have been studied in the presence and absence of cyclopentane inhibitor from 290–375°C for the inhibited and 265–350°C for the uninhibited reactions. The decomposition in excess cyclopentane is first order, with methane the major product (accounting for >95% of the carbon). Rate constants are dependent upon the ratio of dimethylmercury (DMM) to cyclopentane and upon total pressure. The constant for DMM loss is: kD=1.1×1015 exp(—55 900/RT) sec—1. The rate constant (from combined data on DMM loss and CH4 formation) extrapolated to the fully inhibited, high‐pressure limit is: k1=5.0×1015 exp(—57 900/RT) sec—1.The data for the uninhibited decomposition agree with the literature; a partial mechanism is suggested which predicts the transition from chain to nonchain behavior with increasing temperature.For the inhibited reaction the following mechanism is proposed: (1) Hg(CH3)2→HgCH3+CH3, (2) HgCH3→Hg+CH3, (3) CH3+Hg(CH3)2→CH4+CH3HgCH2, (4) CH3+C5H10→CH4+C5H9, (5) CH3+Hg(CH3)2→C2H6+HgCH3, (6) 2 CH3→C2H6, (7) CH3HgCH2→HgCH3+CH2.Using the present value of E1=57.9±1.4 kcal/mole in conjunction with known thermochemical data, E2=0±3 kcal/mole. From the inhibition data, k3/k4=0.7±0.2 at 300°C, with a very small temperature coefficient. The inert gas pressure effect is evidence for the unimolecular nature of step (1).en_US
dc.format.extent3102 bytes
dc.format.extent422340 bytes
dc.format.mimetypetext/plain
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.publisherThe American Institute of Physicsen_US
dc.rights© The American Institute of Physicsen_US
dc.titleKinetics of the Thermal Decomposition of Dimethylmercury. I. Cyclopentane Inhibitionen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelPhysicsen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelScienceen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumChemistry Department, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michiganen_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/70105/2/JCPSA6-30-3-607-1.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1063/1.1730017en_US
dc.identifier.sourceThe Journal of Chemical Physicsen_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceL. H. Long, Trans. Faraday Soc. 51, 673 (1955).en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceR. Srinivasan, J. Chem. Phys. 28, 895 (1958).en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFor further details, see Ph.D. dissertation, M. E. Russell, University of Michigan (1958), available from University Microfilms, Ann Arbor, Michigan.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceH. Gilman and R. E. Brown, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 52, 3314 (1930).en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceH. S. Gutowsky, J. Chem. Phys. 17, 128 (1949).en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceThe very small fraction of this residue volatile at −127 °C was analyzed mass spectrometrically and found to contain compounds similar to those in a comparable fraction from a decomposition in the absence of cyclopentane.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceK. E. Wilzbach and W. Y. Sykes, Science 120, 494 (1954).en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceC. M. Laurie and L. H. Long, Trans. Faraday Soc. 51, 665 (1955).en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTracer experiments, described elsewhere,3 showed that approximately one‐half of this ethane was derived from the cyclopentane carbon atoms and was therefore spurious, so that the proper ratio lies in the range 0.01–0.02. It was also shown by the tracer technique that <2% of the carbon in the methane product originated from the cyclopentane, with >98% derived from the DMM decomposed.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceComparing values for kDkD and kM/2kM∕2 with k1k1 shows only small differences, due to the fact that the corrections for finite Q and 1/P0t1∕P0t are of opposite sign and similar magnitudes. Using no corrections, one obtains nearly the same equation: k1  =  4.5×1015exp(−57 700/RT).k1=4.5×1015exp(−57700∕RT).en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceIf one includes the next approximation in the series expansion of the term involving the square root in Eq. (1), one obtains the result, kM  =  2k1(1+Qk3/k4) [1−4k1k6Q/k42(C5H10)],kM=2k1(1+Qk3∕k4)[1−4k1k6Q∕k42(C5H10)], which explains the negative curvature of the kMkM vs Q (Fig. 3).en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJ. R. McNesby and A. S. Gordon, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 79, 825 (1957).en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceOswin, Rebbert, and Steacie, Can. J. Chem. 33, 472 (1955).en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCarson, Carson, and Wilmshurst, Nature 170, 320 (1952).en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHartley, Pritchard, and Skinner, Trans. Faraday Soc. 46, 1019 (1950).en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceH. O. Pritchard, J. Chem. Phys. 25, 267 (1956).en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGowenlock, Polanyi, and Warhurst, Proc. Roy. Soc. (London) A218, 269 (1953).en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceObtained3 by combining data of reference 13 with that of R. Gomer and G. B. Kistiakowsky, J. Chem. Phys. 19, 85 (1951).en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFrom a two‐point fit of the data of Gomer and Kistiakowsky (see reference 18), i.e., logk3/k5logk3∕k5 vs 1∕T.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGomer and Kistiakowsky (reference 18); also G. B. Kistiakowsky and E. K. Roberts, J. Chem. Phys. 21, 1637 (1953).en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceYeddanapalli, Srinivasan, and Paul, J. Sci. Ind. Research (India) 13B, 232 (1954).en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceS. J. Price and A. F. Trotman‐Dickenson, Trans. Faraday Soc. 53, 939 (1957). These authors noted the strong pressure dependence of the rate constant for the decomposition of DMM in the high‐temperature region.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceN. B. Slater, Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. London Ser. A 246, 57 (1953); see also A. F. Trotman‐Dickenson, Gas Kinetics (Butterworths Publications, Ltd., London, 1955), p. 63.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAlthough only limited data on the pressure dependence of k are available, one may estimate n, the effective number of normal vibrations in the Slater theory; then it is possible to make a rough prediction of the difference between the activation energy for the high‐pressure unimolecular constant and the apparent activation energy deduced from low‐pressure rate constants: E0−Ep  =  nRT/2,E0−Ep=nRT∕2, where E0E0 is the activation energy for the unimolecular rate constant and EpEp is that for the rate constant in the fully bimolecular region. From the present data the ratio P5/P50P5∕P50 (Slater’s notation) is estimated to be (very approximately) 650 mm Hg∕9 mm Hg  =  72,Hg=72, which corresponds to n ≅ 11n≅11 [Table 4 of reference 23 (Slater)]. Alternatively, in terms of the shift of a curve of logk/k∞logk∕k∞ vs logP at two temperatures, n  =  2Δn=2Δ logP/ΔlogP∕Δ logT. From a plot of 1∕k vs 1∕P for the data at 816 °K (reference 22, Fig. 1) k∞ ≅ 1.5sec−1;k∞≅1.5sec−1; from this a plot of logk/k∞logk∕k∞ vs logP may be constructed and compared with a similar one for the present data (632 °K). After extrapolation to allow overlap, a shift corresponding to n ≅ 10n≅10 is noted. [A third estimate of n based on the magnitude of k/k   =  In(θ)k∕k=In(θ) using Slater’s23 relation for θ∕P his Table 3, requires more information than available. The factors except fnfn are known; unfortunately the high pre‐exponential factor gives rise to a very atypical value of θ∕P and the results are unsatisfactory.] Choosing n  =  10n=10 as a minimum estimate, E0−Ep ≥ 8E0−Ep⩾8 kcal∕mole near 800 °K. Since Price and Trotman‐Dickenson22 used as their standard pressure a value (16 mm Hg) where the slope of the log‐log plot corresponded to an order of ca 1.5, the difference in activation energy would of course be smaller than this value (and probably somewhat smaller than the 7 kcal∕mole discrepancy sought).en_US
dc.owningcollnamePhysics, Department of


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.