2005
DOI: 10.1021/jp054510x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

CF3CH3 → HF + CF2CH2:  A Non-RRKM Reaction?

Abstract: The experimental shock tube data recently reported by Kiefer et al. [J. Phys. Chem. A 2004, 108, 2443-2450] for the title reaction at temperatures between 1600 and 2400 K have been compared to master equation simulations using three models: (a) standard RRKM theory, (b) RRKM theory modified by local random matrix theory, which introduces dynamical corrections arising from slow intramolecular vibrational energy randomization, and (c) an ad hoc empirical non-RRKM model. Only the third model provides a good fit o… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
23
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 66 publications
(155 reference statements)
0
23
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Their hypothesis assumed that the fast stage corresponds to buildup of the torsional excitation and that the IVR transfer occurs when the excitation reaches a certain level. However, no indication of the slow IVR has been found in subsequent computational studies [25,44,45]. Also, collisions with bath gas should induce IVR, which makes the assumption further improbable [44].…”
Section: Master Equation Analysis and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Their hypothesis assumed that the fast stage corresponds to buildup of the torsional excitation and that the IVR transfer occurs when the excitation reaches a certain level. However, no indication of the slow IVR has been found in subsequent computational studies [25,44,45]. Also, collisions with bath gas should induce IVR, which makes the assumption further improbable [44].…”
Section: Master Equation Analysis and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…However, no indication of the slow IVR has been found in subsequent computational studies [25,44,45]. Also, collisions with bath gas should induce IVR, which makes the assumption further improbable [44]. Barker et al proposed an alternative explanation for the double relaxation [44].…”
Section: Master Equation Analysis and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Because of this problem, it has been necessary to limit the number of iterations to, e.g., 2-5, so that normalization at high energy converges sufficiently, while normalization at low energy does not diverge too much. In previous work, more iterations were sometimes used to achieve better performance in certain energy ranges [34]. As the number of iterations is increased, results at higher energies systematically become more accurate, while those at low energies become less so.…”
Section: Problems With Normalizationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, in shock tube simulations [34][35][36] and in simulating reactions with very low energy barriers [26] the relevant energies extend all of the way to the bottom of the energy ladder. Furthermore, in 2D (E,J ) master equation simulations, the normalization problems are exacerbated because the 2D density of states is even more sparse and hence exhibits even greater fluctuations than in the one-dimensional (1D) version.…”
Section: Problems With Normalizationmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation