Please do not adjust margins
Catalysis Science & Technology
Page 9 of 10
DOI: 10.1039/C8CY01691G
Journal Name
ARTICLE
The extent to which the two reaction pathways are followed
depends critically on the choice of the catalyst. By fitting a
kinetic model of the reaction sequence to the recorded reaction
profiles, the corresponding rate constants for the individual
reaction steps were determined for different Brønsted acid and
Lewis acid catalysts. For Brønsted acid catalysts, the rate of
trioxane conversion increased with increasing acidity of the
catalyst. Noteworthy, the reaction pathway with Brønsted acid
catalysts showed a strong influence on the corresponding anion.
Acknowledgements
We acknowledge scientific discussions with Dr. Henning Vogt
and Dr. Burkhard Köhler. We thank Volker Marker, Alexandra
Keldenich and Mario Krautschick for experimental support.
Dirk Engels (S-PACT) is acknowledged for support in
deconvoluting the IR spectra.
Notes and references
Trifluoromethane sulfonic acid (pKa
=
14) catalysed
predominantly the direct pathway for DOD and MOD
formation. In contrast, perchloric acid (pKa = ꢀ10) catalysed
mostly the formation of DOD and MOD via the consecutive
pathway. We believe that the higher nucleophilic character of
the perchlorate stabilises the cationic intermediates by more
pronounced cation/anion interactions.
For Lewis acid catalysts, the activity was found to increase with
the hardness of the cation. Also the electron configuration had a
strong influence on the activity of the catalyst. The main group
Lewis acids SbIII(OTf)3 and BiIII(OTf)3 with their open shell
configuration provided much higher activity compared to the
transition metal Lewis acids ScIII(OTf)3 and YIII(OTf)3. Also
the reaction order with respect to trioxane differed for Brønsted
and main group Lewis acid catalysts (first order) and transition
metal Lewis acid catalysts (second order). While relative rate
constants were similar for Brønsted and main group Lewis acid
catalysts, transition metal Lewis acid catalysts had very
different rate constants. Accordingly, we propose two
alternative reaction mechanisms for the ringꢀopening reaction
1 G. Reuss, W. Disteldorf, A. O. Gamer, A. Hilt, Ullmann’s Encyclopaedia of
Industrial Chemistry, 2012, Vol. 15, WileyꢀVCH, Weinheim, p. 735ꢀ768.
L. E. Heim, H. Konnerth and M. H. G. Prechtl, Green Chemistry, 2017, 19,
2
2347.
3 M. D. Thomas, Journal of the American Chemical Society, 1920, 42, 873.
4 S. Su, P. Zaza and A. Renken, Chemical Engineering Technology, 1994, 17,
34.
5
S. Wesselbaum, T. Vom Stein, J. Klankermayer, W. Leitner, Angewandte
Chemie International Edition, 2012, 51, 7499.
6 J. Klankermayer, S. Wesselbaum, K. Beydoun and W. Leitner, Angewandte
between trioxane and acetic anhydride. Brønsted acid and main Chemie International Edition, 2016, 55, 7296.
7
A. S. Suntana, K. A. Vogt, E. C. Turnblom, R. Upadhye, Applied Energy,
group Lewis acid catalysts most likely follow a cationic
reaction mechanism, while the transition metal Lewis acids
follow a neutral concerted reaction mechanism. The formation
of hemiꢀacetal oxonium intermediates with Brønsted acid and
main group Lewis acid catalysts likewise accounts for the
cationic oligomerisation in the presence of excess trioxane.
Acetic anhydride thereby functions as chainꢀtransfer agent,
whereby a new acylium ion is released, when a growing chain
is terminated.
In summary, trifluoromethane sulfonic acid and bismuth (III)
triflate were identified as promising catalysts for the ringꢀ
opening oligomerisation of trioxane and cyclic anhydrides.
Oxymethylene diacetates with low molecular weight and
similar products obtained by ringꢀopening of trioxane with
other chainꢀtransfer agents, like methanol or dimethoxymethane
(DMME), have an interesting property profile. Application
fields of these highly oxygen containing oxymethylene
derivatives include the use as sustainable fuels.
2009, 86, S215.
8 J. Artz, T. E. Müller, K. Thenert, J. Kleinekorte, R. Meys, A. Sternberg, A.
Bardow and W. Leitner, Chemical Reviews, 2018, 118, 434.
9
T. Grützner, H. Hasse, N. Lang, M. Siegert and E. Ströfer, Chemical
Engineering, 2007, 62, 5613.
10
M. Siegert, N. Lang, E. Ströfer, A. Strammer, T. Friese, H. Hasse,
Deutsches Patent, DE10361516.
11
S. Lüftl, P.M. Visakh, S. Chandran, Polyoxymethylene Handbook, Wiley
VCH, 1st Edition, 2014.
12 a) N. R. MacDonald, US Pat., 2 768 994, 1956; b) C. E. Schweitzer, R. N.
MacDonald and J. O. Punderson, Journal of Applied Polymer Science, 1959,
2, 158.
13 J. Majer, O. Hainova, Kolloid-Zeitschrift, 1965, 1, 23.
14 C. Bizzarri, H. Vogt, G. Baráth, W. Leitner, T. E. Müller, Green Chemistry
2016, 18, 5160ꢀ5168.
15
C. F. Hammer, T. A. Koch and J. F. Whitney, Journal of Applied Polymer
Science, 1959, 1, 169.
16
W. H. Linton and H. H. Goodman, Journal of Applied Polymer Science,
1959, 1, 179.
17 V. Jaacks and W. Kern, Die Makromolekulare Chemie, 1963, 62, 1.
18
Y.ꢀT. Shieh, M.ꢀJ. Yeh and S.ꢀA. Chen, Journal of Polymer Science, A:
Polymer Chemistry, 1999, 37, 4198.
19
Y.ꢀT. Shieh and S.ꢀA. Chen, Journal of Polymer Science, A: Polymer
Chemistry, 1999, 37, 483.
20
J. Masamoto, K. Matsuzaki, T. Iwaisako, K. Yoshida, K. Kagawa and H.
Nagahara, Journal of Applied Polymer Science, 1993, 50, 1317.
J. Burger, E. Ströfer and H. Hasse, Industrial & Engineering Chemistry
Conflicts of interest
21
There are no conflicts to declare.
Research, 2012, 51, 12751.
22
E. Catizzone, G. Bonura, M. Migliori, F. Frusteri, G. Giordano, Molecules
201), 23(1), 31/1ꢀ31/28.
23
S. Roy, A. Cherevotan, S. C. Peter, ACS Energy Letters 2018, 3(8), 1938ꢀ
1966.
24 S. E. Iannuzzi, C. Barro, K. Boulouchos, J. Burger, Jakob, Fuel 2016, 167,
49ꢀ59.
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 20xx
J. Name., 2013, 00, 1-3 | 9
Please do not adjust margins