4.6 Article

In situ attenuated total reflection-Fourier transform infrared (ATR-FTIR) spectroscopy combined with non-negative matrix factorization for investigating the synthesis reaction mechanism of 3-amino-4-amino-oxime furazan

期刊

ANALYTICAL METHODS
卷 10, 期 48, 页码 5817-5822

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c8ay01924j

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21873076, 21675123, 21605123]
  2. Natural Science Basic Research Plan in Shaanxi Province of China [2018JQ2013]
  3. Scientific Research Plan Projects of Shaanxi Education Department [17JK0780]
  4. Northwest University Graduate Innovation and Creativity Funds [YZZ17126]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In situ attenuated total reflection-Fourier transform infrared (ATR-FTIR) spectroscopy combined with a non-negative matrix factorization (NMF) algorithm was proposed to elucidate the synthesis reaction mechanism of 3-amino-4-amino-oxime furazan (AAOF). An in situ ATR-FTIR fiber was used to monitor the reaction process, and discrete wavelet transform (DWT) was used to preprocess the IR spectra. A subspace comparison method (SCM) was employed to determine the optimal number of components; then the NMF algorithm was applied to decompose the optimal IR spectra into spectral and concentration profiles of the reactants, intermediates and product. Quantum mechanical calculations based on density functional theory (DFT) were applied to simulate the vibrational spectra of the intermediates at the B3LYP/6-31+G(d,p) level, and the calculated spectra were compared to the decomposed spectra of the intermediates involved in the synthesis. The spectra obtained by the NMF algorithm were consistent with quantum mechanical calculations. Finally, a reliable mechanism for the synthesis of AAOF was proposed based on the shifts in the IR bands of the reactants, intermediates and product. The results indicate that the ATR-FTIR technique combined with an NMF algorithm can be used to explore the mechanism of AAOF formation.

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