4.6 Article

Kinetic correlations for H-2 addition and elimination reaction mechanisms during silicon hydride pyrolysis

期刊

PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY CHEMICAL PHYSICS
卷 12, 期 39, 页码 12676-12696

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c0cp00666a

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Science Foundation [CBET-0500320]
  2. ARCS Foundation Inc.
  3. Laboratory for Chemical Technology at Ghent University in Belgium
  4. Fund for Scientific Research-Flanders (F.W.O.-Vlaanderen)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The mechanism of H-2 addition and elimination reactions in selected silicon hydrides (SixHy, x = 1-10, y = 4-20) was modeled using quantum chemical calculations, statistical thermodynamics, transition state theory and transition state group additivity. Rate coefficients for 25 H-2 addition reactions were calculated using G3//B3LYP. For nearly every reaction, the overall conversion exhibits two steps. In the addition direction, the reactants first meet to form an adduct which then converts into a saturated silicon hydride via homolytic H-H bond cleavage. Values for the single-event Arrhenius pre-exponential factor, (A) over tilde, and the activation energy, E-a, were calculated from the G3//B3LYP rate coefficients, and a group additivity scheme was developed to predict (A) over tilde and E-a. The values predicted by group additivity are more accurate than kinetic correlations currently used in the literature, which rely on representative (A) over tilde values and the Evans-Polanyi correlation. The factors that have the most pronounced effect on (A) over tilde and E-a were investigated, and stabilization of the divalent silicon atom of the unsaturated silicon hydride with electron-donating substituents was found to influence kinetic parameters considerably. The rate coefficients for H-2 addition reactions were found to correlate reasonably well with the difference in energy between the highest occupied molecular orbital of H-2 (E-HOMO) and the lowest unoccupied molecular orbital of the reactant silylene (E-LUMO).

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据