Premium
Batch versus Flow Photochemistry: A Revealing Comparison of Yield and Productivity
Author(s) -
Elliott Luke D.,
Knowles Jonathan P.,
Koovits Paul J.,
Maskill Katie G.,
Ralph Michael J.,
Lejeune Guillaume,
Edwards Lee J.,
Robinson Richard I.,
Clemens Ian R.,
Cox Brian,
Pascoe David D.,
Koch Guido,
Eberle Martin,
Berry Malcolm B.,
BookerMilburn Kevin I.
Publication year - 2014
Publication title -
chemistry – a european journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.687
H-Index - 242
eISSN - 1521-3765
pISSN - 0947-6539
DOI - 10.1002/chem.201404347
Subject(s) - yield (engineering) , butane , flow chemistry , chemistry , productivity , flow (mathematics) , ring (chemistry) , explosive material , batch reactor , photochemistry , organic chemistry , thermodynamics , mechanics , catalysis , physics , macroeconomics , economics
The use of flow photochemistry and its apparent superiority over batch has been reported by a number of groups in recent years. To rigorously determine whether flow does indeed have an advantage over batch, a broad range of synthetic photochemical transformations were optimized in both reactor modes and their yields and productivities compared. Surprisingly, yields were essentially identical in all comparative cases. Even more revealing was the observation that the productivity of flow reactors varied very little to that of their batch counterparts when the key reaction parameters were matched. Those with a single layer of fluorinated ethylene propylene (FEP) had an average productivity 20 % lower than that of batch, whereas three‐layer reactors were 20 % more productive. Finally, the utility of flow chemistry was demonstrated in the scale‐up of the ring‐opening reaction of a potentially explosive [1.1.1] propellane with butane‐2,3‐dione.