A R T I C L E S
Cross and Saunders
Table 1. Calculated Energies
namic data. At 1050 °C and 1 atm, ∆G ) 681 kJ/mol (163
kcal/mol). This corresponds to an equilibrium constant of 1 ×
10-27 (using a standard pressure of 1 atm), far too small for the
reaction to be important.
species
symmetry
E/C (kJ/mol)a
C2
C6
D∞h
D∞h
Ih
D5
D2
D3h
D3h′
D3
426
167
0.0
-3.8
-4.6
-5.2
-4.1
-4.9
-5.2
C60
C70
C76
C78
C78
C78
C78
There are two ways to overcome the large endothermicity.
One is a radical chain reaction. A small amount of decomposi-
tion could give rise to small fragments that then add to other
fullerene molecules causing them to decompose as well.
Alternatively, the reaction could occur on the surface of the
fused silica tube. The binding energy of the fragment to the
silica surface greatly reduces the endothermicity. We ran the
reaction with C76 as before, except that the tube was loosely
packed with quartz wool, greatly increasing the surface area. If
the reaction goes by way of radical intermediates, the rate should
decrease substantially since collisions with the surface should
remove the radicals. On the other hand, if the reaction occurs
on a surface, the rate should increase. The experimental results
were unchanged.
C2V
a Energies are calculated as energy per carbon atom, relative to C60.
initially pure, due to incomplete separation in the initial HPLC
run. C78A has a small amount of C76, and C78B has a small
amount of C78A. Again, there is extensive decomposition to
smaller fullerenes: C76, C70, and even C60. In the case of C78A,
there is apparently a small amount of isomerization to C78B
since the size of the C78B peak is significantly larger than it is
in the starting sample.
One mechanism, which avoids these problems, is where two
fullerene molecules collide, join, and then separate into a larger
and a smaller fragment. The problem with this mechanism is
that we have never seen any fullerenes larger than the starting
material. Of course, these larger species could be, or ultimately
form, the insoluble residue that we find at the end of the tube.
To distinguish between a unimolecular and a bimolecular
reaction, we ran two samples of C76 under conditions as closely
matched as possible. One sample was four times as large as the
other. If the reaction is unimolecular, the fractional decomposi-
tion should remain unchanged. If it is bimolecular, the decom-
position should increase. The larger sample gave much less
decomposition than the smaller sample, 7 versus 50%. Clearly,
the mechanism is more complicated than a simple unimolecular
or bimolecular reaction.
We ran the first part of the peak for C84 at 1100 °C. As in
the other cases, there was extensive decomposition to C78A,
C76, C70, and a small amount of C60. There also appeared to be
rearrangement to isomers appearing later in the HPLC separa-
tion. We ran C70 at 1110 °C and found no trace of C60. Since
our oven is rated at 1200 °C, we did not attempt a higher
temperature. Since we saw small amounts of C60 formed at lower
temperatures from C76, C78A, and C78B, it would appear that
this C60 cannot have been formed by a process that passes
through C70 as an intermediate.
There are several possible mechanisms for the observed
reactions. The simplest is that the fullerene molecule eliminates
one or more carbon fragments, such as C2 or C6. To test this,
we ran calculations using Gaussian 20034 using the B3LYP
method and a 6-31G(d,p) basis set. The results are shown in
Table 1. They are tabulated in energy per carbon atom relative
to C60 to facilitate comparison. We see that the reaction
Our group has developed techniques for putting noble gases
inside fullerenes,5,6 so it is natural to ask if the decomposition
reactions open up a hole in the fullerene large enough to allow
a helium atom to escape. We labeled a sample of higher
C78 (C2V) f C76 (D2) + C2
(1)
3
fullerenes with He using our high-pressure method. Since the
yield of soluble product is low for higher fullerenes, we did
not use the cyanide catalyst which works so nicely for C60.7
The labeled fullerenes were separated, as before, with HPLC.
is endothermic by 905 kJ/mol (216 kcal/mol), and that the
reaction
3
3
We then ran He-labeled C76. A He NMR spectrum showed
C76 (D2) f C70 (D5h) + C6
(2)
only the peaks for 3He@C76 and 3He2@C76, both seen before,8
3
but no signal for He@C70. The sample was separated with
is endothermic by 1090 kJ/mol (260 kcal/mol). Reactions that
are this endothermic are unlikely to occur to any extent in the
gas phase. However, both reactions are favored in terms of
entropy. The calculations for reaction 1 were extended to
calculate the vibrational frequencies and, hence, the thermody-
HPLC and clearly showed the presence of C70 and a trace
amount of C60, although the extent of decomposition was not
as much as that shown in Figure 2. From the peak area in the
HPLC trace and our calibration of the detector sensitivity to
C
70 and C76, we can predict both the position and the magnitude
of the expected NMR signal for 3He@C70. This predicted value
is approximately four times the noise level. Thus, most or all
the helium escaped in the decomposition reaction. In a similar
(4) Frisch, M. J.; Trucks, G. W.; Schlegel, H. B.; Scuseria, G. E.; Robb, M.
A.; Cheeseman, J. R.; Montgomery, J. A., Jr.; Vreven, T.; Kudin, K. N.;
Burant, J. C.; Millam, J. M.; Iyengar, S. S.; Tomasi, J.; Barone, V.;
Mennucci, B.; Cossi, M.; Scalmani, G.; Rega, N.; Petersson, G. A.;
Nakatsuji, H.; Hada, M.; Ehara, M.; Toyota, K.; Fukuda, R.; Hasegawa,
J.; Ishida, M.; Nakajima, T.; Honda, Y.; Kitao, O.; Nakai, H.; Klene, M.;
Li, X.; Knox, J. E.; Hratchian, H. P.; Cross, J. B.; Adamo, C.; Jaramillo,
J.; Gomperts, R.; Stratmann, R. E.; Yazyev, O.; Austin, A. J.; Cammi, R.;
Pomelli, C.; Ochterski, J. W.; Ayala, P. Y.; Morokuma, K.; Voth, G. A.;
Salvador, P.; Dannenberg, J. J.; Zakrzewski, V. G.; Dapprich, S.; Daniels,
A. D.; Strain, M. C.; Farkas, O.; Malick, D. K.; Rabuck, A. D.;
Raghavachari, K.; Foresman, J. B.; Ortiz, J. V.; Cui, Q.; Baboul, A. G.;
Clifford, S.; Cioslowski, J.; Stefanov, B. B.; Liu, G.; Liashenko, A.; Piskorz,
P.; Komaromi, I.; Martin, R. L.; Fox, D. J.; Keith, T.; Al-Laham, M. A.;
Peng, C. Y.; Nanayakkara, A.; Challacombe, M.; Gill, P. M. W.; Johnson,
B.; Chen, W.; Wong, M. W.; Gonzalez, C.; Pople, J. A. Gaussian 2003;
Gaussian, Inc.: Pittsburgh, PA, 2003.
4
experiment, we ran He@C60 through the reactor at 1100 °C.
(5) Saunders, M.; Cross, R. J.; Jime´nez-Va´zquez, H. A.; Shimshi, R.; Khong,
A. Science 1996, 271, 1693.
(6) Saunders, M.; Cross, R. J. In Endofullerenes: A New Family of Carbon
Clusters; Akasaka, T., Nagase, S., Eds.; Kluwer: Dordrecht, The Nether-
lands, 2002; Vol. 3, pp 1-11.
(7) Cross, R. J.; Khong, A.; Saunders, M. J. Org. Chem. 2003, 68, 8281-
8283.
(8) Wang, G.-W.; Saunders, M.; Khong, A.; Cross, R. J. J. Am. Chem. Soc.
2000, 122, 3216-3217.
9
3046 J. AM. CHEM. SOC. VOL. 127, NO. 9, 2005