Post on 22-Feb-2020
H. Scott FoglerChapter 3 1/19/05
Download Version
Professional Reference Shelf
A. Collision Theory
Overview – Collision TheoryIn Chapter 3 we presented a number of rate laws that depended on
both concentration and temperature. For the elementary reactionA + B C + D
the elementary rate law is
€
−rA = kCACB = Ae−E RT CACB
We want to provide at least a qualitative understanding as to why the rate law takes this form. We will first develop the collision rate, using collision theory for hard spheres of cross section Sr,
€
πσAB2 When all collisions occur
with the same relative velocity, UR the number of collisions between A and B molecules,
€
˜ Z AB, is
€
˜ Z AB = SrUR˜ C A ˜ C B {collisions/s/molecule]
Next we will consider a distribution of relative velocities and only consider those collisions that have an energy of EA or greater in order to react to show
€
−rA = Ae−E A RT CACB
where
€
A = πσ AB2 8k BT
πμ AB
⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟1 2
NAvo
with σAB = collision radius, kB = Boltzmann’s constant, AB = reduced mass, T = temperature and NAvo = Avogadro’s number. To obtain an estimate of EA, we use the Polyani Equation
€
E A = E Ao + γPΔHRx
Where HRx is the heat of reaction and
€
E Ao and P are the Polyani
Parameters. With these equations for A and EA we can make a first approximation to the rate law parameters without going to the lab.
1CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
I. FUNDAMENTALS OF COLLISION THEORYThe objectives of the development that follows are to give the reader insight as to why the rate laws depend on the concentration of the reacting species (i.e., –rA = kCACB) and why the temperature dependence is the form of the Arrhenius law, k=Ae–/RT. To achieve this goal we consider the reaction of two molecules in the gas phase
2CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
A + B
3CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
⏐ → ⏐
4CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
C + D
We will model these molecules as rigid spheres.
A. Rigid SpheresSpecies A and B are modeled as rigid spheres of radius σA and σB, respectively
2σA
AB
2σB
Figure PRS.3A-1 Schematic of molecules A and B
We shall define our coordinate system such that molecule B is stationary wrt molecule A so that molecule A moves towards molecule B with a relative velocity UR. Molecule A moves through space to sweep out a collision volume with a collision cross section πσAB
2 illustrated by the cylinder shown below.
UR
σAB
σAB
Figure PRS.3A-2 Schematic of collision cross section
The collision radius is σAB .
5CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
6CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
If the center of a “B” molecule comes within a distance of σAB of the center of the “A” molecule they will collide.The collision cross section of rigid spheres is Sr =πσAB
2 . As a first approximation we shall consider Sr constant. This constraint will be relaxed when we consider a distribution of relative velocities. The relative velocity between two gas molecules A and B is UR.†
€
UR = 8k BTπμ AB
⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟1 2
(1)
wherekB = Boltzmann’s constant = 1.381 10–23 J/K/molecule
= 1.381 x 10–23 kg m2/s2/K/moleculemA = mass of a molecule of species A (gm)mB = mass of a molecule of species B (gm)
† This equation is given in most physical chemistry books, e.g., see Moore, W. J. Physical Chemistry, 2nd Ed. P.187, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ
7CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
AB = reduced mass =
8CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
mAmBmA + B
9CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
(g), [Let AB]MA = Molecular weight of A (Daltons)NAvo = Avogadros’ number 6.022 molecules/molR = Ideal gas constant 8.314 J/mol•K = 8.314 kg • m2/s2/mol/K
We note that R = NAvo kB and MA = NAvo • mA, therefore we can write the ratio (kB/AB) as
€
k B
μ AB= R
MAMB
MA + MB
⎛
⎝
⎜ ⎜ ⎜ ⎜
⎞
⎠
⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟
(2)
10CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
An order of magnitude of the relative velocity at 300 K is
11CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
UR ≅3000 k hr12CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
, i.e., ten times the speed of Indianapolis 500 Formula 1 car. The fo lowing c
Table PRS.3A-1 Molecular Diameters†
Molecule
Average Velocity,
(meters/second)
Molecular Diameter (Å)
H2 1687 2.74CO 453 3.12Xe 209 4.85He 1200 2.2N2 450 3.5O2 420 3.1
H2O 560 3.7C2H6 437 5.3C6H6 270 3.5CH4 593 4.1NH3 518 4.4H2S 412 4.7CO2 361 4.6N2O 361 4.7NO 437 3.7
Consider a molecule A moving in space. In a time t the volume V swept out by a molecule of A is
† O’Hanlon, J. F., A User’s Guide to Vacuum Technology, Wiley, New York (1980)13
CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
14CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
V = U Rt( )l6 7 4 8 4
πσAB2
15CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
V
A
Figure PRS.3A-3 Volume swept out by molecule A in time t
The bends in the volume represent that even though molecule A may change directions upon collision the volume sweep out is the same. The number of collisions that will take place will be equal to the
16CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
number of B molecules, V
17CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
C B18CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
, that are in the volume swept out by the “A” molecule, i.e.,
˜ C BV =No. of B oleculeσ in V[ ]
where C B is in moleculesdm3 [ ] rather than [moles/dm3]In a time t the number of collisions of this one A molecules with many B molecules is
€
UR˜ C Bπσ AB
2 Δt . The number of collisions of this one A molecule with all the “B” molecules per unit time is
19CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
20CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
Z 1A• B =πσAB2 ˜ C BU R
21CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
(3)
However, we have many A molecules present at a concentration
€
˜ C A, (molecule/dm3). Adding up the collisions of all the A molecules per unit volume, C A , then the number of collisions
€
˜ Z AB of all the A molecules with all B molecules per time per unit volume is
€
˜ Z AB = πσ AB2
Sr6 7 8 UR
˜ C A ˜ C B = SrUR˜ C A ˜ C B
(4)
Where Sr is the collision cross section (Å)2. Substituting for Sr and
UR
€
˜ Z AB = πσ AB2 8k BT
πμ ⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟1 2
˜ C A ˜ C B [molecules/time/volume] (5)
If we assume all collisions result in reactions then
€
− r A = ˜ Z AB = πσ AB2 8k BT
πμ ⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟1 2
˜ C A ˜ C B [molecules/time/volume] (6)
Multiplying and dividing by Avogadrósnumber, NAvo, we can put our equation for the rate of reaction in terms of the number of moles/time/vol.
€
− r ANAvo
⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟
−rA
1 2 3 NAvo = πσ AB
2 8k BTπμ
⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟1 2
˜ C A
NAvoC A
1 2 3
˜ C BNAvo
C B
1 2 3 NAvo
2
(7)
€
−rA = σ AB2 8πk BT
μ
⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟1 2
NAvo
A1 2 4 4 4 3 4 4 4
CACB [moles/time/volume] (8)
where A is the frequency factor
€
A = σ AB2 8πk BT
μ AB
⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟1 2
NAvo (9)
€
−rA = ACACB (10)
22CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
Example Calculate the frequency factor A for the reaction
€
H + O2 → OH + O
at 273K. Additional Information
Using the values in Table PRS.3A-1Collision Radii
Hydrogen H σH=2.74 Å/4 = 0.68Å = 0.68 x 10–10m
Oxygen O2
€
σO 2= 3.1
1 Å 1.55Å = 1.5 x 10–10m
€
R = 8.31J mol K = 8.314 kg m 2 s2 K mol
Solution
€
A = SrURNAvo (E-1)
€
A = πσ AB2 URNAvo = πσ AB
2 8k BTπμ
⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟1 2
NAvo (9)
The relative velocity is
€
UR = 8k BTπμ
⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟1 2
(1)
Calculate the ratio (kB/AB) (Let AB)
€
k B
μ= R
MAMB
MA + MB
= 8.314 kg ⋅m 2 s2 K mol1g mol( ) 32g mol( )1g mol + 32g mol
⎡
⎣ ⎢
⎤
⎦ ⎥
= 8.314kg• m 2 s2 K mol
0.97 g mol × 1kg1000g
€
k B
μ= 8571m 2 s2 K
Calculate the relative velocity
€
UR =8( ) 273K( ) 8571( ) m 2 s2 K
3.14
⎡
⎣ ⎢ ⎢
⎤
⎦ ⎥ ⎥
1 2
= 2441m s = 2.44 ×1013 Å s (E-2)
€
Sr = πσ AB2 = π σ A + σ B[ ]
2 = π 0.68 ×10−10 m +1.55 ×10−10 m[ ]2
=15.6 ×10−20 m 2 molecule
Calculate the frequency factor A
€
A = 15.6 ×10−20 m 2
molecule2441m s[ ] 6.02 ×1023 molecule mol[ ] (E-3)
23CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
€
A = 2.29 ×108 m 3
mol⋅s= 2.29 ×1011 dm3
mol⋅s(E-4)
€
A = 2.29 ×106 m 3
mol⋅s× 1mol
6.02 ×1023 molecule1010 Å
m
⎛
⎝ ⎜
⎞
⎠ ⎟3
€
A = 3.81×1014 Å( )3
molecule s (E-5)
The value reported in Masel† from Wesley is
€
A =1.5 ×1014 Å( )3
molecule s
Close, but no cigar as Groucho Marx would say.
For many simple reaction molecules the calculated frequency factor, Acalc is in good agreement with experiment. For other reactions, Acalc, can be an order of magnitude too high or too low. In general, collision theory tends to over predict the frequency factor A
€
108 dm 3
mol• s< Acalc <1011 dm3
mol• s
Terms of cubic angstroms per molecule per second the frequency factor is
€
1012 Å3 molecule s < Acalc <1015 Å3 molecule s
There are a couple of things that are troublesome about the rate of reaction given by Equation (10), i.e.
€
−rA = ACACB (10)
First and most obvious is the temperature dependence. A is proportional to the square root of temperature and so therefore is –rA, i.e.
€
−rA ~ A ~ T
However we know that the temperature dependence of the rate of chemical reaction on temperature is given by the Arrhenius equation
€
−rA = Ae−E RT CACB (11)or
€
k = Ae−E RT (12)This shortcoming of collision theory along with the assumption that all collisions result in reaction will be discussed next.
† Masel, R. I. Chemical Kinetics and Catalysis, p367, Wiley, New York (2001).24
CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
II. SHORTCOMINGS OF COLLISION THEORY
A. The collision theory outlined above does not account for orientation of the collision, front to back and along the line-of-centers. That is, molecules need to collide in the correct orientation for reaction to occur. Figure PRS.3A-4 shows molecules colliding whose centers are off set by a distance b.
b
B
b = impact parameter
A
Figure PRS.3A-4 Grazing collisions
B. Collision theory does not explain activation barriers. Activation barriers occur because bonds need to be stretched or distorted in order to react and these processes require energy. Molecules must overcome electron-electron repulsion in order to come close together†
C. The collision theory does explain the observed temperature dependence given by Arrhenius Equation
€
k = Ae−E RT
D. Collision theory assumes all A molecules have the same relative velocity, the average one.
€
UR = 8k BTπμ AB
⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟1 2
(1)
However there is a distribution of velocities f(U,T). One distribution most used is the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution.
III. MODIFICATIONS OF COLLISION THEORYWe are now going to account for the fact that we have (1) a distribution of relative velocities UR and (2) that not all collisions result in a reaction, only those collisions with an energy EA or greater. The goal is to arrive at
€
k = Ae−E A RT
† Masel, R. I., lit cit25
CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
A. Distribution of VelocitiesWe will use the Maxwell-Boltzmann Distribution of Molecular Velocities (A6p.26). For a species of mass m, the Maxwell distribution of velocities (relative velocities) is
€
f U,T( )dU = 4π m2πk BT
⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟3 2
e−mU2 2kBT U2dU (13)
A plot of the distribution function, f(U,T), is shown as a function of U in Figure PRS.3A-5.
€
f U,T( )
fT1T2T2 > T1U
Figure PRS.3A-5 Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution of velocities
Replacing m by the reduced mass of two molecules A and B.
€
f U,T( )dU = 4π μ2πk BT
⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟3 2
e−μU 2 2kBT U2dU
The term on the left hand side of Equation (13), [f(U,T)dU] is the fraction of A molecules with relative velocities between U and (U + dU). Recall from Equation (4) that the number of A–B collisions for a reaction cross section Sr is
€
˜ Z AB = Sr U( )U˜ k U( )
1 2 3 ˜ C A ˜ C B (14)
except now the collision cross section is a function of the relative velocity.
Note we have written the collision cross section Sr as a function of velocity U, i.e., Sr(U). Why does the velocity enter into reaction cross section, Sr? Because not all collisions are head on, and those that are not, will not react if the energy, (i.e., U2/2), is not sufficiently high. Consequently, this functionality, Sr = Sr(U), is reasonable because if two molecules collide with a very very low relative velocity it is unlikely that such a small transfer of kinetic energy is likely to activate the internal vibrations of the molecule to cause the breaking of bonds. On the other hand for collisions with large relative velocities most collision will result in reaction.
We now let k(U) be the specific reaction rate for a collision and reaction of A-B velocities with a velocity U.
€
˜ k U( ) = Sr U( )U m 3 molecule s[ ] (15)
26CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
Equation (15) will give the specific reaction rate and hence the reaction rate for only those collisions with velocity U. We need sum up the collisions of all velocities. We will use the Maxwell Boltzmann distribution for f(U,T) and integrate over all relative velocities.
€
˜ k T( ) = k0
∞∫ U( )f(U,T)dU = f U,T( )0
∞∫ Sr U( ) UdU (16)
Maxwell distribution function of velocities for the A/B pair of reduced mass AB is†
€
f U,T( ) = 4π μ2πk BT
⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟3 2
U2 e− μU 2
2k BT (17)
Combining Equations (16) and (17)
€
˜ k T( ) = Sr0
∞∫ U 4π μ2πk BT
⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟3 2
U2 e− μU 2
2k BT dU (18)
We let Sr=Sr(U) for brevity. We will now express the distribution function in terms of the translational energy eT.
We are now going to express the equation for
€
˜ k (T). Equation (18) in terms of kinetic energy rather than velocity. Relating the differential translational kinetic energy, e, to the velocity U.
† Moore, lit.cit p185, Atkins, P. W. Physical Chemistry, 5th ed. p.36 (1994).27
CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
28CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
et =
U 2
2
29CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
noting and multiplying and dividing by 2 and we obtain
€
dε t = μ UdU
and hence the reaction rate
€
˜ k T( ) = 4π μ2πk BT
⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟3 2
Sr0
∞∫ 2μ
μU2
2e
−μU 2
21
kBT
⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟ 1
μ ⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟ μUdU
dμU 2
2dε t
1 2 3
1 2 3
Simplifying
€
=4π μ2πk BT
⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟3 2
2μ 2 Sr0
∞∫ ε t e− ε t
k BT dε t
€
˜ k T( ) = 8
πμ k BT( )3
⎡
⎣ ⎢ ⎢
⎤
⎦ ⎥ ⎥
1 2
Sr0
∞∫ ε t e− ε t
kBT dε t m 3 s molecule[ ] (19)
€
˜ k T( ) = 8
πμ k BT( )3
⎡
⎣ ⎢ ⎢
⎤
⎦ ⎥ ⎥
1 2
Sr ε t( )0
∞∫ ε t e−ε t kBT dε t
Multiplying and dividing by kBT and noting
€
e t k BT( ) = E RT( ), we obtain
€
˜ k T( ) = 8k BTπμ
⎡ ⎣ ⎢
⎤ ⎦ ⎥1 2
Sr E( )0
∞∫ Ee−E RT
RTdERT ⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟ (20)
Again recall the tilde, i.e.,
€
˜ k (T) denotes that the specific reaction rate is per molecule (dm3/molecule/s). The only thing left to do is to specify the reaction cross section, Sr(E) as a function of kinetic energy E for the A/B pair of molecules.
B. Collisions that Result in ReactionWe now modify the hard sphere collision cross section to account for the fact that not all collisions result in reaction. Now we define Sr to be the reaction cross section defined as
30CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
31CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
Sr =PrπσAB2
32CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
Where Pr is the probability of reaction. In the first model we say the probability is either 0 or 1. In the second model Pr varies from 0 to 1 continuously. We will now insert each of these modules into Equation (20).
B.1 Model 1In this model we say only those hard collisions that have kinetic energy EA or greater will react. Let E et. That is, below this energy, EA, the molecules do not have sufficient energy to react so the reaction cross section is zero, Sr=0. Above this kinetic energy, all the molecules that collide react and the reaction cross section is
€
Sr = πσ AB2
€
Pr = 0∴ Sr E,T[ ] = 0 for E < E A
Pr =1 Sr E,T[ ] = πσ AB2 for E ≥ E A
€
(21)
(22)
Figure PRS.3A-6 Reaction cross section for Model 1
Integrating Equation (20) by parts for the conditions given by Equations (21) and (22) we obtain
€
˜ k = 8 k BTπμ
⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟1 2
1+ E A
RT ⎡ ⎣ ⎢
⎤ ⎦ ⎥ e−E A RT πσ AB
2 (23)
€
=UR πσ AB2 1+ E A
RT ⎡ ⎣ ⎢
⎤ ⎦ ⎥ e−E A RT Derive
Derive
€
˜ k T( ) = 8
πμ k BT( )3
⎡
⎣ ⎢ ⎢
⎤
⎦ ⎥ ⎥
1 2
Sro
∞∫ εT( )εT e−εT kBT dεT
€
Sr = 0 ε < ε*
Sr = πσ AB2 ε ≥ ε*
33CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
€
˜ k T( ) = 8
πμ k BT( )3
⎡
⎣ ⎢ ⎢
⎤
⎦ ⎥ ⎥
1 2
πσ AB2 ε tε*
0∫ e−εT kBT dεT
€
=πσ AB2 8
πμ k BT( )3
⎡
⎣ ⎢ ⎢
⎤
⎦ ⎥ ⎥
1 2
k BT( )2 ε T
k BT
E*
∞∫ e−εT k BT dε T
k BT
€
=πσ AB2 8k BT
πμ
⎡ ⎣ ⎢
⎤ ⎦ ⎥1 2
ERT
EA
∞∫ e−E RT dERT
€
X = εT
k BT , dX = dεT
k BT , X = E
RT , εT
k BT= E
RT
€
udv∫ = uv− vdu∫
Derive cont’d
€
˜ k T( ) = πσ AB2 8k BT
μπ ⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟1 2
Xu{E A RT
∞∫ e−XdXdv
1 2 3 = −Xe−X ⎤
⎦ ⎥ ⎥E A RT
∞
− e−XdXE A RT
∞∫
€
=πσ AB2 8k BT
μπ
⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟1 2
E A
RTe−EA RT + e−EA RT ⎡
⎣ ⎢ ⎤ ⎦ ⎥
€
=πσ AB2 8k BT
μπ
⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟1 2
E A
RT+ 1
⎡ ⎣ ⎢
⎤ ⎦ ⎥e−EA RT
€
E A
RT> 1
€
k T( ) = NAvo˜ k T( ) = πσ AB
2 8k BTμπ
⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟1 2
NAvoE A
RT
€
=A E A
RT€
Over predicts thefrequency factor
€
Sr = Pr πσ AB2
Generally
€
E A
RT>>1, so
€
˜ k = UR πσ AB2 E A
RT′ A
1 2 4 4 3 4 4 e−E A RT
Converting
€
˜ k to a per mole basis rather than a per molecular basis we have
34CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
€
′ A = E A
RT ⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟σ AB
2 π8k BTμ AB
⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟1 2
A1 2 4 4 3 4 4
NAvo = E A
RTA
€
˜ k = ′ A e−E A RT = E A
RTAe−E A RT
The good news and the bad news. This model gives the correct temperature dependence but predicted frequency factor A′ is even greater than A given by Equation (9) (which itself is often too large) by a factor (EA/RT). So we have solved one problem, the correct temperature dependence but created another problem, too large a frequency factor. Let’s try Model 2.
B.2 Model 2 Line of CentersIn this model we again assume that the colliding molecules must have an energy EA or greater to react. However, we now assume that only the kinetic energy directed along the line of centers E<<, is important. So below EA the reaction cross section is zero, Sr=0. The kinetic energy of approach of A towards B with a velocity UR is E = AB
€
UR2
( ). However, this model assumes that only the kinetic energy directly along the line of centers contributes to the reaction.
Here, as E increases above EA the number of collisions that result in reaction increases. The probability for a reaction to occur is†
€
Pr = E − E A
E ⎡ ⎣ ⎢
⎤ ⎦ ⎥ for E > E A (24)
and
€
Sr E,T( ) = 0 for E ≤ E A
Sr = πσ AB2 E − E A( )
E for E > E A
Derive
€
(25)
(26)
Derive
A UR
ULC
B
b
† Steinfeld, J. I., J. S. Francisco, and W. L. Hayes, Chemical Kinetics and Dynamics, (p250) Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs NJ (1989).
Masel lit.cit. p483.35
CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
The impact parameter, b, is the off-set distance of the centers as they approach one another. The velocity component along the lines of centers, ULC, can be obtained by resolving the approach velocity into components.
At the point of collision the center of B is within the distance σAB
UR
b
σAB
θ
The energy along the line of centers can be developed by a simple geometry argumentsDerive cont’d
€
sin θ = bσ AB
(1)
The component of velocity along the line of centers
ULC = UR cos θ (2)
The kinetic energy along the line of centers is
€
E LC =ULC
2
2μ AB=
UR2
2μ ABcos2 θ = E cos2 θ (3)
€
E LC = E 1− sin 2 θ[ ] = E 1− b2
σ AB2
⎡
⎣ ⎢
⎤
⎦ ⎥ (4)
The minimum energy along the line of centers necessary for a reaction to take place, EA, corresponds to a critical value of the impact parameter, bcrit. In fact,this is a way of defining the impact parameter and corresponding reaction cross section
€
Sr = πbcrit2 (5)
Substituting for EA and bcrit in Equation (4).
€
E A = E 1− bcrit2
σ AB2
⎛
⎝ ⎜
⎞
⎠ ⎟ (6)
Solving for
€
bcrit2
€
bcr2 = σ AB
2 1− E A
E ⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟ (7)
36CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
The reaction cross section for energies of approach E > EA, is
€
Sr = πbcrit2 = πσ AB
2 1− E A
E ⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟ (8)
The complete reaction cross section for all energies E is
€
Sr = 0 E ≤ E A
Sr = πσ AB2 1− E A
E ⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟ E > E A
€
(9)
(10)
A plot of the reaction cross section as a function of the kinetic energy of approach,
€
E = μ ABUR
2
2is shown in Figure PRS.3A-7.
Model 2
Model 1Sr
EA E
€ πσAB2
Figure PRS.3A-7 Reaction cross section for Models 1 and 2
Derive
€
E ≤ E A Pr = 0 Sr = 0
E > E A Pr =1− ε*ε
Sr = πσ AB2 1− ε*
ε ⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟
Recalling Equation (19) and substituting for Sr
€
˜ k T( ) = 8
πμ kBT( )3
⎡
⎣ ⎢ ⎢
⎤
⎦ ⎥ ⎥
2
πσ AB2 1− ε*
ε ⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟ε*
∞∫ ε e−ε kT dε
= πσ AB2 8
πμ k BT( )3
⎡
⎣ ⎢ ⎢
⎤
⎦ ⎥ ⎥
1 2
kT( )3 ε
kTε*
∞∫ e−ε RT dε − ε* e−ε kTε*
∞∫ dεkT
€
ek BT
= ERT
€
˜ k T( ) = πσ AB2 8k BT
πμ ⎡ ⎣ ⎢
⎤ ⎦ ⎥1 2
E A
RT+1− E A
RT ⎡ ⎣ ⎢
⎤ ⎦ ⎥ e−E RT
37CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
€
˜ k T( ) = πσ AB2 8k BT
πμ ⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟1 2
e−E A RT
Multiplying by Avogodro’s number
€
k T( ) = ˜ k T( )NAvo
€
−rA = πσ AB2 URNAvoe−E A RT CACB (28)
Which is similar to the equation for hard sphere collisions except for the term
€
e−E A RT
€
k T( ) = πσ AB2 8πk BT
μ ⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟1 2
NAvo e−E A RT (29)
This equation gives the correct Arrhenius dependence and the correct order of magnitude for A.
€
−rA = Ae−E RT CACB (11)
Effect of Temperature on Fraction of Molecules Having Sufficient Energy to React
We now will manipulate and plot the distribution function to obtain a qualitative understanding of how temperature increases the number of reacting molecules. Figure PRS.3A-8 shows a plot the distribution function given by Equation (17) after it has been converted to an energy distribution.
We can write the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution of velocities
€
f U,T( )dU = 4π μ2πk BT
⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟3 2
U2e−μU 2
k BT dU
in terms of energy by letting
€
e=U2
2 to obtain
€
f U,T( )dU = 4π μ2πk BT
⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟3 2
U2e− μU 2
2k BT dU
€
f ε t ,T( )dε = 2
π1 2 k BT( )3 2 ε1 2 e
− εk BT dε t
where f(e,T) de is the fraction of molecules with kinetic energies between e and (e+de). We could further multiply and divide by kBT
€
f ε,T( )dE = 2π1 2
εk BT
⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟1 2
e−E RT dεk BT
Recalling
€
ek BT
= ERT
38CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
Bingo!
€
f E,T( )dE = 2π1 2
ERT ⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟1 2
e−E RT dERT
€
f E,T( ) = 2π1 2
ERT ⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟1 2 e−E RT
RT
Fraction of molecules with energy ΕA or reater
Ε Ε
f(Ε, Τ)
By letting
€
X = ERT
, we could have put the distribution in dimensionless form
€
f X,T( )dX = 2π1 2 X1 2e−XdX
f(X,T) dX is the fraction of molecules that have energy ratios between
€
ERT
and
€
E + dERT
€
f E,T( )dE = 2π1 2
ERT ⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟1 2
e−E RT dERT
Fraction of collisions that have EA or above
€
= 4π(RT)3
⎡ ⎣ ⎢
⎤ ⎦ ⎥E A
∞∫1 2
E1 2 e−E RT dE
This integral is shown by the shaded area on Figure PRS.3A-8
Figure PRS.3A-8 Boltzmann distribution of energies
39CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
As we just saw only those collisions that have an energy EA or greater result in reaction. We see form Figure PRS.3A-10 that the higher the temperature the greater number of collision result in reaction.
However, this Equations (9) and (11) cannot be used to calculate A for a number reactions because of steric factors and the molecular orientation upon collision need to be considered. For example, consider a collision in which the oxygen atom, O, hits the middle carbon in the reaction to form the free radical on the middle carbon atom CH3
€
˙ C HCH3
€
CH2|
O → CH3 → CH3˙ C H CH3 + • OH
|CH2
Otherwise if it hits anywhere else, say the end carbon,
€
CH3 ˙ C H CH3 will not be formed†
€
O → CH3CH2CH3 → CH3˙ C HCH3
| → • CH3CH2CH2 + • OH
Consequently, collision theory predicts a rate 2 orders of magnitude too high for the formation of CH3
€
˙ C HCH3.
IV. OTHER DEFINITIONS OF ACTIVATION ENERGYWe will only state other definition is passing, except for the energy barrier concept which will be discussed in transition state theory.
† Masel, Lit cit p.3640
CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
A. Tolman’s Theorem Ea = E* E
* ≡e*( )
41CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
42CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
ea =
Averae Εneryof MoleculeσUnderoinReaction
⎡
⎣
⎢ ⎢
⎤
⎦
⎥ ⎥−
Averae Εneryof ColloidinMoleculeσ
⎡
⎣ ⎢
⎤
⎦ ⎥+ 12kΤ
43CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
The average transitional energy of a reactant molecule is
44CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
32
kT45
CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
.
B. Fowler and Guggenheim
46CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
47CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
ea =
Averae Εneryof MoleculeσUnderoinReaction
⎡
⎣ ⎢ ⎢
⎤
⎦ ⎥ ⎥−
Averae Εneryof ReactantMoleculeσ
⎡
⎣ ⎢ ⎤
⎦ ⎥48
CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
C. Energy BarrierThe energy barrier concept will be discussed in transition state theory, Ch3 Profession Reference Shelf B.
€
A+ BC → AB+ C
E
A, BC
EA
AB, C
A – B – C#
ProductsFigure PRS.3A-9 Reaction coordinate diagram
For simple reactions the energy, EA, can be estimated from computational chemistry programs such as Cerius2 or Spartan, as the heat of reaction between reactants and the transition state
€
E A = HABC# − HA
o − HBCo
V. ESTIMATION OF ACTIVATION ENERGY FROM THE POLYANI EQUATIONA. Polyani EquationThe Polyani equation correlates activation energy with heat of reaction. This correlation
€
E A = γPΔHRx + c (33)
works well for families of reactions. For the reactions
€
R + H ′ R → RH + ′ R where R = OH, H, CH3 the relationship is shown below in Figure
PRS.3A-10.
49CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
Figure PRS.3A-10 Experimental correlation of EA and HRx from Masel (Lit cit). Courtesy of Wiley.
For this family of reactions
€
E A =12 kcal mol + 0.5 ΔHR (34)
For example, when the exothermic heat of reaction is
€
HRx = −10 kcal mol
The corresponding activation energy is
€
E a = 7cal mol
To develop the Polyani equation we consider the elementary exchange reaction†
€
A+ BC → AB+ CWe consider the superposition of two attraction/repulsion potentials VBC, VAB similar to the Lennard-Jones 6-12 potential. For the molecules BC, the Lennard-Jones potential is
€
VBC = 4εLJr0
rBC
⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟12
− r0
rBC
⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟6 ⎡
⎣ ⎢ ⎢
⎤
⎦ ⎥ ⎥ (35)
rBC = Distance between molecules (atoms) B and C. In addition to the Lennard-Jones 6-12 model, another model often
used is the Morse potential which has a similar shape
VBC = e−2β rBC−r0( )−2e−β rBC−r0( )
[ ] (36)
When the molecules are far apart the potential V (i.e., Energy) is zero. As they move closer together they become attracted to one another and the potential energy reaches a minimum. As they are
† after R. I. Masel Lit cit.50
CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
brought closer together the BC molecules begin to repel each other and the potential increases. Recall that the attractive force between the B and C molecules is
€
FBC = − dVBC
dx(37)
The attractive forces between the B–C molecules are shown in Figure PRS.3A-11.
A potential similar to atoms B and C can be drawn for the atoms A and B. The F shown on the figures represents the attractive force between the molecules as they move in the distances shown by the arrows. That is the attractive force increase as we move towards the well (ro) from both directions, rAB>ro and rAB<ro.
VBC
eLJ
rBCrAB
r0
kJolecule
BCÅ
FBC FBC
rBCrAB
r0
VAB
kJmolecule
ÇAB
FAB
(a) (b)Figure PRS.3A-11 Potentials (Morse or Lennard-Jones)
One can also view the reaction coordinate as a variation of the BC distance for a fixed AC distance,
€
| A ← B → C |l6 7 4 4 4 8 4 4 4
| A BC |l6 7 4 4 4 8 4 4 4
| AB C |l6 7 4 4 4 8 4 4 4
rAB rBC
For a fixed AC distance as B moves away from C the distance of separation of B from C, rBC, increases as B moves closer to A. As rBC
increases rAB decreases and the AB energy first decreases then increases as the AB molecules become close. See point in Figure PRS.3A-11. Likewise as B moves away from A and towards C similar energy relationships are found. E.g., as B moves away from A towards C, the BC energy first decreases due to attraction then increases due to repulsion of the BC molecules as they come close together at point in Figure PRS.3A-11. The overlapping Morse potentials are shown in Figure PRS.3A-11. We now superimpose the potentials for AB and BC to form the following figure
51CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
Reference
Energy
rBC rAB
E1R
E2P
HRx=Ε2P – Ε1P
r2r1
BC S2
S1AB
Εa
rBC = rAB
r** *
Reaction Coordinate
Figure PRS.3A-12 Overlap of potentials (Morse or Lennard-Jones)Let S1 be the slope of the BC line between r1 and rBC=rAB. Starting at E1R at r1, the energy E1 at a separation distance of rBC from r1 can be calculated from the product of the slope S1 and the distance from E1R. The energy, E1, of the BC molecule at any position rBC relative to r1 is
€
E1 = E1R +S1 rBC − r1( ) (38)
€
e.g., E1 = −50kJ +10kJnm
× 5 − 2[ ]nm = −20kJ ⎡ ⎣ ⎢
⎤ ⎦ ⎥
Let S2 be the slope of the AB line between r2 and rBC=rAB. Similarly for AB, starting on the product side at E2P, the energy E2 at any position rAB relative to r2 is
€
E 2 = E 2P +S2 rAB − r2( ) (39)
€
e.g., E 2 = −80kJ + − 20kJnm
⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟× 7 −10( )nm = −20kJ
⎡ ⎣ ⎢
⎤ ⎦ ⎥
At the height of the barrier
€
E1∗ = E 2
∗ at rBC∗ = rAB
∗ (40)
Substituting for
€
E1∗ and
€
E 2∗
€
E1R +S1 rBC∗ − r1( ) = E 2P +S2 rAB
∗ − r2( ) (41)
Rearranging
€
S1 rBC∗ − r1( ) = E 2P − E1R( )
ΔH Rx
1 2 4 3 4 +S2 rAB
∗ − r2( ) (42)
52CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
€
rBC∗ = rAB
∗ = r∗
€
S1 r∗ − r1( ) = ΔHRx +S2 r∗ − r2( )
Rearranging
€
S1 −S2( )r∗ = ΔHRx +S1r1 −S2r2 (43)
Solving for r*
€
r∗ = ΔHRx
S1 −S2( )+ S1r1 −S2r2
S1 −S2(44)
Recalling Equation (43)
€
Ea = E1∗− E1R = S1 r∗− r1( ) (45)
Substituting Equation (44) for r* in Equation (45)
€
E a = S1ΔHRx
S1 −S2+ S1r1 −S2r2
S1 −S2
⎡ ⎣ ⎢
⎤ ⎦ ⎥−S1r1 (46)
Rearranging
€
E a = S1
S1 −S2
⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟ΔHRx +S1
S1r1 −S2r2
S1 −S2− r1
⎡ ⎣ ⎢
⎤ ⎦ ⎥ (47)
€
= S1
S1 −S2
⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟ΔHRx +S1
S1r1 −S2r2 −S1r1 +S2r1
S1 −S2
⎡ ⎣ ⎢
⎤ ⎦ ⎥ (48)
Finally, collecting terms we have
€
E a = S1
S1 −S2
⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟
γP
1 2 4 3 4 ΔHRx + S1S2
S1 −S2
⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟ r1 − r2[ ]
E a∗
1 2 4 4 3 4 4 (49)
Note: S1 is positive, S2 is negative, and r2 > r1; therefore Ea∗ is positive
as is P.
Ea =Εa∗ +πH Rx
Solving for r* and substituting back into the Equation Equation (8) gives the Polyani correlation relating activation energy and heat of reaction. Values of
€
E ao and P for different reactions can be
found in Table 5.4 on page 254 of Masel. One of the more common correlations for exothermic and endothermic reactions are given on page 73 of Laidler.(1) Exothermic Reactions
€
Ea = 48.1+ 0.25 ΔHRx( ) kJ mol (50)If
€
HRx = −100kJ molthen
53CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
€
E a = 48.1+ 0.25( ) −100 kJ mol( )
E a = 23.1kJ mol
(2) Endothermic Reactions
€
Ea = 48.1− 0.75 ΔHRx( ) kJ mol (51)
Szabo proposed an extension of Polyani equation
€
E a = ∑D j Breaking( ) − α ∑D j Forming( ) (52)
€
D i = Dissociation Energies
B. Marcus Extension of the Polyani EquationIn reasoning similar to developing the Polyani Equation Marcus shows (see Masel pp.584-586)
€
E A = 1+ ΔHRx
4E A0
⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟2
E A0
C. Blowers-Masel RelationThe Polyani Equation will predict negative activation energies for highly exothermic reactions Blowers and Masel developed a relationship that compares quite well with experiment throughout the entire range of heat of reaction for the family of reactions
€
R + H ′ R → RH + ′ R as shown in Figure PRS.3A-13
Figure PRS.3A-13 Comparison of models with data. From Masel.
Courtesy of Wiley
We see the greatest agreement between theory and experiment is found with the Blowers-Masel model.
54CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
VI. CLOSUREWe have now developed a quantitative and qualitative understanding of the concentration and temperature dependence of the rate law for reactions such as
A + B C + Dwith
–rA = k CACB
We have also developed first estimates for the frequency factor, A from collision theory
€
A = SrURNAvo = πσ AB2 8k BT
πμ AB
⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟1 2
NAvo
and the activation energy, EA from the Polyani Equation
€
E A = E Ao + γPΔHRx
these calculated values for A and EA can be substituted in the rate law to determine rates of reaction.
€
−rA = kCACB = Ae−E A RT
55CollisionTheoryDownload.doc
References for Collision Theory, Transition State Theory and Molecular DynamicsP. Atkins, Physical Chemistry, 6th ed. (New York: Freeman, 1998)P. Atkins, Physical Chemistry, 5th ed. (New York: Freeman, 1994).G. D. Billing and K. V. Mikkelsen, Introduction to Molecular Dynamics and
Chemical Kinetics (New York: Wiley, 1996).P.W. Atkins, The Elements of Physical Chemistry, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Oxford
Press, 1996).K. J. Laidler, Chemical Kinetics, 3rd ed. (New York: Harper Collins, 1987).G. Odian, Principles of Polymerization, 3rd ed. (New York: Wiley 1991).R. I. Masel, Chemical Kinetics and Catalysis, Wiley Interscience, New York,
2001.
As a short hand notation we will use the following references nomenclatureA6p701 Means Atkins, P. W. Physical Chemistry, 6th ed. (1998) page 701.L3p208 Means Laidler, K. J., Chemical Kinetics, 3rd,ed. (1987) page 208.This nomenclature means that if you want background on the principle, topic, postulate, or equation being discussed, go to the specified page of the text referenced.
56CollisionTheoryDownload.doc