88
P.K. Tandon et al. / Journal of Molecular Catalysis A: Chemical 232 (2005) 83–88
Rate in terms of decreasing concentration of cerium(IV) from
step (III) of the mechanism may be given as
readings at low oxidant or high acid concentrations and
reduction of cerium(IV) even in the absence of organic
substrate indicate for this possibility, but instability of
aqueous Ceric perchlorate solution in aqueous perchloric
acid solution as reported by many workers may also result
in the high initial readings. However, even the existence of
this possibility will not affect the final rate law. Thus we can
safely assume the validity of the final rate law and at least
formation of the complexes before the rate determining step.
d[CeIV]
2kK1K2[CeIV][S][IrIII][H+]
1 + K1K2[CeIV][S]
−
=
(5)
dt
Equation is multiplied by 2 because two moles of cerium(IV)
are required to regenerate the catalyst in its original form.
This equation explains all experimental findings except the
nature shown by the [H+] ions at their low concentrations.
Probable reason for the initial decrease in rate values at low
acid concentrations has already been discussed in the begin-
ning. At low concentrations of oxidant and organic substrate
the inequality 1 ꢀ kK1K2[CeIV][S] may hold and Eq. (5) re-
duces to Eq. (6) which, explains the nature shown by various
reactants.
Acknowledgement
S.S. and A.K.S. (C.S.T., U.P. D-3205) and M.P. (U.G.C.
F.12-97/2001,SR-I) are grateful for the financial assistance.
d[CeIV]
−
= 2kK1K2[CeIV][S][IrIII][H+]
(6)
dt
References
At higher concentrations of oxidant and substrate the reverse
inequality 1 ꢁ kK1K2[CeIV][S] holds good and the equation
becomes
[1] M.P. Singh, H.S. Singh, M.K. Verma, J. Phys. Chem. 84 (1980) 256.
[2] V.N. Singh, H.S. Singh, B.B.L. Saxena, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 91 (1969)
2643.
[3] L.M. Barkowitz, P.N. Rylander, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 80 (1950) 6682.
[4] Manibala, H.S. Singh, B. Krishna, P.K. Tandon, J. Indian Chem.
Soc. LXII (1985) 434.
[5] P.K. Tandon, B. Krishna, Kinetika i Kataliz (USSR) 26 (1985)
607.
[6] T.J. Hardwick, E.A. Robertson, J. Chem. Soc. 29 (1951) 828.
[7] F. Feigl, Spot Tests in Organic Chemistry, Elsevier, New York, 1960,
p. 369.
[8] A.Y. Drummond, W.A. Waters, J. Chem. Soc. (1953) 440, 3119;
A.Y. Drummond, W.A. Waters, J. Chem. Soc. (1955) 497.
[9] K.B. Wiberg, Oxidation in Organic Chemistry, Part A, Academic
Press, New York, 1965, p. 406.
[10] K.B. Wiberg, Oxidation in Organic Chemistry, Part A, Academic
Press, New York, 1965, p. 278.
[11] J.C. Chang, C.S. Garner, Inorg. Chem. 4 (1965) 209.
[12] F.A. Cotton, G. Wilkinson, C.A. Murillo, M. Bochmann, Advanced
Inorganic Chemistry, Wiley-Interscience, 1999, p. 1039.
[13] V.I. Kravtsov, G.M. Petrova, Russ. J. Inorg. Chem. (Engl. Transl.) 9
(1964) 552.
−d[CeIV]/dt
2kK1K2[CeIV][S]
1 + K1K2[CeIV][S]
= kꢂ =
(7)
[IrIII]T[H+]
where kꢂ is another constant. Further verification of the rate
law (5) may be given by rewriting Eq. (8) as
1
1
kꢂ
1
1
=
= +
2kK1K2[CeIV][S] 2k
(8)
Vi
From this equation value of k from the intercepts between 1/kꢂ
versus 1/[substrate] and 1/kꢂ versus 1/[cerium(IV)], comes
out to be 16.0; 21.05 and 62.50; 62.50, while the value of
kK1K2 from the slopes comes out to be 5.0; 4.17 (×106) and
1.80; 1.60 (×106) for dimethyl ketone and diethyl ketone,
respectively. Fair constancy in the rate values calculated from
rate law (5).
Possibility of interaction between the organic substrate
and iridium giving up the complex C1 in first step of
Scheme 1, can be ruled out as no reaction between these two
in the absence of oxidant was observed. No effect of chloride
ions on the rate negates the possibility of their release before
the rate determining step. Thus, the only alternative may be
that cerium(IV) reacts with iridium(III) in the first step to
form a complex, which in turn reacts with organic substrate
to give the complex C2. Exceptionally high values of initial
[14] I.A. Poulsen, C.S. Garner, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 84 (1962) 2032.
[15] A.P.J. Domingos, A.M.T.S. Domingos, J.M.P. Gabral, J. Inorg. Nucl.
Chem. 31 (1969) 2568.
[16] M.P. Singh, P.K. Tandon, R.M. Singh, A. Mehrotra, J. Indian Chem.
Soc. 67 (1990) 458.
[17] L.B. Young, W.S. Trahanovsky, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 91 (1969) 5060.
[18] J.S. Littler, J. Chem. Soc. (1962) 832.
[19] S.S. Muhammad, K.V. Rao, Bull. Chem. Soc. Jpn. 36 (1963) 943.
[20] J. Shorter, J. Chem. Soc. (1950) 3425.
[21] J. Shorter, C.N. Hinshelwood, J. Chem. Soc. (1950) 3276.