Table 1. Bond Dissociation Energies and Central C-C Bond
Length for Dimers of 1-4
monitored
temp
C-C bond
length (Å)
∆Hdiss
(kcal mol-1
)
radical
λmax (nm)
range (°C)
1
2
3
4
346
346
336
320
48-111
37-100
48-102
80-135
1.586a
1.596b
1.608c
22.8
23.6
26.2
15.2
a From the crystal structure (see Figure S1, Supporting Information).
b Reference 10. c Reference 11.
the process, which corresponds to the bond dissociation
energy (BDE) for the central C-C bond. The data were
analyzed using a simplified form of the van’t Hoff equation,
i.e.
Figure 3. Van’t Hoff plot according to eq 4 for dimer 12 (]), 22
(O), and 32 (4) in toluene and 42 (0) in 1,3-dichlorobenzene under
nitrogen.
change for the dissociation of 12. From the intercept obtained
from the plot according to eq 4 we were able to estimate ∆S
∼ +28 gibbs/mol, a very reasonable value for a dissociation
of this type.
∆S ∆H
ln Keq
)
-
(2)
R
RT
where Keq ) [R]2/[D], and R and D represent the radical
and dimer, respectively. Using Beer’s law, the experimental
absorbance can be expressed as
The BDE found for 12 and 22 are very similar, showing
that the presence of alkyl groups in 1 does not play an
important role in controlling the stability of the radical
generated. In an attempt to provide more evidence to explain
this behavior, we obtained the X-ray structure for dimer 12
(Figure S1, Supporting Information) and compared it with
that reported for 3-phenyl-2-coumaranone dimer 22. In both
molecules the phenyl groups adopt a gauche conformation
to decrease the repulsion between the carbonyl groups;
however, the tert-butyl groups in 1 are oriented toward the
exterior of the molecule to minimize steric interactions near
the central bond. It is clear that in all cases the central C-C
bond is much longer than the typical 1.54 Å for single bonds
between sp3 carbons. The C-C bond dissociation energies
in these dimers are remarkably low; compare for example
with AIBN, a typical initiator for free radical polymerization
that decomposes with an activation energy of 31.3 kcal/mol
and is usually regarded as an unstable compound.12 While
the radicals possess significant resonance stabilization, this
is not enough to prevent their dimerization, and in this sense
tha radicals are not persistent. The apparent stability of the
dimers in Table 1 is probably due to the intrinsic lack of
reactivity of the radicals with oxygen, that makes the back
reaction to reform the dimer the preferred reaction path for
the radicals; thus, while the dimers are stable compounds at
room temperature, their stability reflects the tendency of any
radicals formed to recombine. The compounds are best
described as “dynamically stable”.
A ) ꢀ[R]l
Therefore, eq 2 converts to
(3)
ln(ꢀ2l2[D])
∆S ∆H
+ -
ln A )
(4)
2
2R 2RT
Equation 4 shows that a plot of ln A against the reciprocal
temperature will yield -∆H/2R from the slope, provided that
[D] can be approximated as constant throughout the tem-
perature range studied. This criterion is easily met by the
systems under study. For example, in the case of 12 (see
Figure 1), the absorbance at 111 °C (the highest temperature
used) is approximately 1.4 for an optical path of 1 cm; [D]
) 0.01 M and the use of a previously reported method9
estimated a radical extinction coefficient of 37 500 M-1 cm-1
at 346 nm. From this we evaluate a radical concentration of
3.7 × 10-5 M, or a dimer conversion of ∼ 0.19%, low
enough to assume that [D] is constant. Thus, under these
conditions it is not necessary to know the absolute value of
the radical extinction coefficients, which are frequently
subject to considerable uncertainty.
Figure 3 shows the plots according to eq 4 for dimers of
1-4, from which the corresponding BDE were estimated
and are listed in Table 1.
While all plots gave excellent correlation, with statistical
errors around 0.1 kcal/mol, we estimate that the true
uncertainty of the BDE values is probably (0.5 kcal/mol.
We also took advantage of the availability of an estimated
extinction coefficient for 1 in order to estimate the entropy
Finally, we note that while the dimers studied in this
contribution all show simple mechanistic behavior, with
head-to-head dimer formation, other systems may show a
(10) Mori, Y.; Niwa, A.; Maeda, K. Acta Crystallogr. 1995, B51, 61-
65.
(11) Lam, Y.; Lee, G.-H.; Liang, E. Bull. Chem. Soc. Jpn. 2001, 74,
1033-1034.
(9) Arends, I. W. C. E.; Mulder, P.; Clark, K. B.; Wayner, D. D. M. J.
Phys. Chem. 1995, 99, 8182-8189.
(12) Lewis, F. M.; Matheson, M. S. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1949, 71, 747-
748.
Org. Lett., Vol. 6, No. 15, 2004
2581