Ab initio kinetics of gas phase decomposition reactions

Journal of Physical Chemistry A

Volumn 114, Issue 48, 2010, Pages 12656-12661

  Sharia, Onise ^a   Kuklja, Maija M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AB INITIO; AB INITIO CALCULATIONS; ACTIVATION BARRIERS; CONVENTIONAL TRANSITION STATE THEORIES; DECOMPOSITION PROCESS; DECOMPOSITION REACTION; EXPERIMENTAL DATA; EXPERIMENTAL DETERMINATION; GAS-PHASE DECOMPOSITION; GASPHASE; HOMOLYSIS; KINETIC ASPECTS; NITRAMINES; QUANTUM-CHEMICAL CALCULATION; REACTION ENERGY; REACTION PATHWAYS; THEORETICAL STUDY; THERMAL DECOMPOSITIONS; VARIATIONAL TRANSITION STATE THEORY;

ACTIVATION ENERGY; ASTATINE; ELECTRONIC STATES; GASES; PYROLYSIS; QUANTUM CHEMISTRY; REACTION RATES;

REACTION INTERMEDIATES;

ARTICLE; CHEMICAL STRUCTURE; CHEMISTRY; GAS; KINETICS; QUANTUM THEORY; TEMPERATURE; VIBRATION;

GASES; KINETICS; MODELS, MOLECULAR; QUANTUM THEORY; TEMPERATURE; VIBRATION;

EID: 78649890043     PISSN: 10895639     EISSN: 15205215     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/jp108065c     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Behrens, R. J. Phys. Chem. 1990, 94, 6706-6718
2. Behrens, R.; Bulusu, S. J. Phys. Chem. 1991, 95, 5838-5845
3. Brill, B. T.; Brush, P. G.; Kinloch, S. A.; Gray, P. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London, A: Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 1992, 339, 377-385
4. Chakraborty, D.; Muller, R. P.; Dasgupta, S.; Goddard, W. A., III. J. Phys. Chem. A 2001, 105, 1302-1314
5. Lewis, J. P.; Glaesemann, K. R.; VanOpdorp, K.; Voth, G. A. J. Phys. Chem. A 2000, 104, 11384-11389
6. Cobos, C. J. J. Mol. Struct. (THEOCHEM) 2005, 714, 147-152
7. Hanggi, P.; Talkner, P.; Borkovec, M. Rev. Mod. Phys 1990, 62, 251-341
8. Garret, B. C.; Truhlar, D. G. J. Phys. Chem. 1979, 83, 1052-1079
9. Sturdya, Y.; Claryb, D. C. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2007, 9, 2397-2405
10. Ashcroft, N. W.; Mermin, N. D. Solid State Phys. 1976, 453
11. Wilson, A. H. Thermodynamics and Statistical Mechanis; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, U.K., 1957; p 143.
12. Hohenberg, P.; Kohn, W. Phys. Rev. 1964, 136, B864-B871
13. Kohn, W.; Sham, L. J. Phys. Rev. 1965, 140, A1133-A1138
14. Perdew, J. P.; Burke, K.; Ernzerhof, E. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1996, 77, 3865-3868
15. Blöchl, P. E. Phys. Rev. B 1994, 50, 17953-17979
16. Kresse, G.; Hafner, J. Phys. Rev. B 1993, 47, 558
17. Kresse, G.; Hafner, J. Phys. Rev. B 1994, 49, 14251
18. Kresse, G.; Furthmüller, J. Comput. Mater. Sci. 1996, 6, 15
19. Kresse, G.; Furthmüller, J. Phys. Rev. B 1996, 54, 11169-11186
20. Zhang, L.; Zybin, S. V.; van Duin, A. C. T.; Dasgupta, S.; Goddard, W. A., III. J. Phys. Chem. A 2009, 113, 10619-10640
21. Velardez, G. F.; Alavi, S.; Thompson, D. L. J. Chem. Phys. 2005, 123 074313
22. Henkelman, G.; Uberuaga, B. P.; Jónsson, H. J. Chem. Phys. 2000, 113, 9901-9904
23. 2 distance exceeding 2.6 Å, the dissociated system prefers to stay in the triplet state as its total energy is lower than the singlet state's energy. We show here results of both as the singlet state dissociation vividly illustrates application of VTST. Sharia, O.; Kuklja, M. M. Modeling decomposition mechanisms in gaseous and crystalline cyclotetramethylene-tetranitramine, to be published.
24. 2 is 47.6. Taking the surface area twice as large, ln(A) would become 48.2; hence the corresponding error in the rate constant would be 0.6/47.6 × 100 = 1.26%.
25. Baroni, S.; de Gironcoli, S.; Dal Corso, A. Rev. Mod. Phys. 2001, 73, 515-562
26. Goldstein, H. Classical mechanics; Addison-Wesley: Reading, MA, U.S., 1950; 399 pp.
27. Zhang, S.; Nguyen, H. N.; Truong, T. N. J. Phys. Chem. A 2003, 107, 2981-2989 Our results can be compared with this work with caution, as α-HMX is simulated and a different methodology is used for calculations
28. Manaa, M. R.; Fried, L. E.; Melius, C. F.; Elstner, M.; Frauenheim, Th. J. Phys. Chem. A 2002, 106 (39) 9024-9029 This study is performed for δ-HMX
29. Brill, T. B.; Gongwer, P. E.; Williams, G. K. J. Phys. Chem. 1994, 98, 12242-12247
30. Samoilenko, N. G.; Vinokurov, A. A.; Abramov, V. G.; Merzhanov, A. G. Russ. J. Phys. Chem. 1970, 44, 22-24
31. Campana, J. E.; Doyle, R. J., Jr. J. Chem. Soc., Chem. Commun. 1985, 45-46
32. Zeman, S. Thermochim. Acta 1997, 290, 199-217
33. The experimental range is expected to be broader than the difference in the theoretical predictions because the clustering effect, catalysis, and secondary reactions will all effectively reduce the activation barriers measured. Variations in heating rates will also affect measurements.