z-logo
Premium
Gas‐phase reaction of Cl with dimethyl sulfide: Temperature and oxygen partial pressure dependence of the rate coefficient
Author(s) -
Arsene C.,
Barnes I.,
Becker K. H.,
Benter Th.
Publication year - 2005
Publication title -
international journal of chemical kinetics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.341
H-Index - 68
eISSN - 1097-4601
pISSN - 0538-8066
DOI - 10.1002/kin.20051
Subject(s) - chemistry , reaction rate constant , arrhenius equation , partial pressure , analytical chemistry (journal) , atmospheric temperature range , dimethyl sulfide , reaction rate , oxygen , kinetics , thermodynamics , activation energy , organic chemistry , catalysis , sulfur , physics , quantum mechanics
The kinetics of the reaction of Cl atoms with dimethyl sulfide has been investigated using a relative rate technique. Experiments were performed with oxygen partial pressures of 0, 200, and 500 mbar at a total pressure of 1000 mbar (N 2 + O 2 ) over the temperature range 283–308 K in a 1080 L reactor using long path in situ Fourier transform infrared absorption spectroscopy to monitor the reactants. The 254 nm photolysis of trichloroacetyl chloride was used as the Cl atom source. Three reference hydrocarbons, cyclohexane, n ‐butane, and propene were employed. Good agreement was found between the rate coefficients determined using thedifferent reference compounds. The rate coefficients were found to decrease with increasing temperature at constant O 2 pressure and increase moderately with increasing O 2 partial pressure at constant temperature. The temperature dependences of the Cl atom reaction with dimethyl sulfide for the three O 2 partial pressure investigated can be expressed by the simple Arrhenius expressions: k   0 mbar O   2= (4.22 ± 1.78) × 10 −13 exp((1968 ± 379)/ T ), k   200 mbar O   2= (5.42 ± 1.85) × 10 −13 exp((1946 ± 381)/ T ), and k   500 mbar O   2= (6.90 ± 2.04) × 10 −13 exp((1912 ± 381)/ T ). The errors are a combination of the 2σ statistical errors from the kinetic data analysis plus an estimated systematic error that includes the error in the reference hydrocarbon. The mechanistic implications of the results are discussed. © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Int J Chem Kinet 37: 66–73, 2005

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here