Calculation of A-factors

The A-factors for H transfer in atom—molecule relations usually fall within the range 10 i mole sec and those for the radical- 

Benson [388] has developed a useful method of estimating bimolecular A-factors which is illustrated by the reaction 

The A-factor can be calculated from the transition theory expression in thermodynamic notation 

The entropies of molecules and radicals are well documented [388] and hence it can be deduced that Sch3...h---ch(CH3)2 65.8 cal mole X (defined for a standard state in concentration units, 1 mole 1 ). It 

Substituting this value in the previous transition theory equation for the i4-factor yields. 42 0 10 1 mole sec in reasonable agreement with the experimental value ot = 10 1 mole sec . The merit of these simple calculations is that they throw immediate suspicion on any experimental 4-factors which are much lower than the estimates. Unfortunately, the method of using the corresponding hydrocarbon as a model for the activated complex is valid in the case of H-transfer reactions only and would not apply, say, for a Cl-transfer reaction. 

---

The calculation of a-factor involves two steps (1) calculation of which varies depending on crystal face and (2) calculation of thermodynamic properties [using AH and solubility with Eq. (3.32), or AH with Eq. (3.29)]. From the unit cell, the number of nearest neighbors of the HMT body centered cubic lattice is known to be 8. Since the number of nearest neighbors on the 110 face is 4, the value of for this face is = /tj/n = 0.5 (Davey 1986). 

Model Calculations of A-factors by Transition State Theory The A-factors for addition of CF (39) and CH3 (40) radicals to fluoro-alkenes have been calculated by transition state theory using the expression derived by Herschbach, Johnston, Pitzer and Powell (52) ... 

The difference of a factor of 2 between these values comes about because the conditions were chosen to give the same rates. Since a given micelle-swollen polymer particle is active only half of the time, it must produce chains which are twice as long to polymerize at the same rate as the bulk case. Reducing Rj by 1/4 produces the following effects on the calculated quantities ... 

The search for the optimum can involve many case studies. Often, if time is limited, a rigorous canned computer program is utilized. However, this is expensive. If time is not as much of a factor, the method prevented here will allow the calculations to be handled conveniently by hand or computer having limited core. 

The disk space (or memory) requirement can be reduced dramatically by performing the SCF in a direct fashion. In the direct SCF method the integrals are calculated from scratch in each iteration. At first this would appear to involve a computational effort which is larger than a conventional FIF calculation by a factor close to the number of iterations. There are, however, a number of considerations which often make direct SCF methods computationally quite competitive or even advantageous. 

The performance is (as expected) very good. MMX provides relative (and absolute) stabilities with a MAD of only 1.2 kcal/mol, which is better than the estimates from the combined theoretical methods in Table 11.31. Considering that force field calculations require a factor of 10 less computer time for these systems than the ab initio methods combined in Table 11.31, this clearly shows that knowledge of the strengths and weakness of different theoretical tools is important in selecting a proper model for answering a given question. 

The designer must be fully aware of what one means when one calculates such a factor or bases a design on it. Improper use of a presumed safety factor may in some case result in a needless waste of material or in other cases even product failure. Thus, one must define what is meant when using a safety factor. 

Lack of exposure data for most organotins together with limited toxicity information for marine organisms preclude the calculation of risk factors for the marine environment. For dibutyltin, measured concentrations in seawater reflect the use of tributyltin as a marine anti-foulant rather than the use of dibutyltin in plastics. It is therefore not possible to conduct a reliable risk assessment for the current uses of the compormd. 

Solution Repeat the calculations in Example 2.3 but now reduce At by a factor of 2 for each successive calculation rather than by the factor of 4 used in the examples. Calculate the corresponding changes in a(tmax) and denote these changes by A. Then A should decrease by a factor of 2 for each calculation of a(t ax)- (The reader interested in rigor will note that the error is halved and will do some algebra to prove that the A are halved as well.) If A was the change that just occurred, then we would expect the next change to be A/2, the one after that to be A/4, and so on. The total... 

The sampling variance of the material determined at a certain mass and the number of repetitive analyses can be used for the calculation of a sampling constant, K, a homogeneity factor, Hg or a statistical tolerance interval (m A) which will cover at least a 95 % probability at a probability level of r - a = 0.95 to obtain the expected result in the certified range (Pauwels et al. 1994). The value of A is computed as A = k 2R-s, a multiple of Rj, where is the standard deviation of the homogeneity determination,. The value of fe 2 depends on the number of measurements, n, the proportion, P, of the total population to be covered (95 %) and the probability level i - a (0.95). These factors for two-sided tolerance limits for normal distribution fe 2 can be found in various statistical textbooks (Owen 1962). The overall standard deviation S = (s/s/n) as determined from a series of replicate samples of approximately equal masses is composed of the analytical error, R , and an error due to sample inhomogeneity, Rj. As the variances are additive, one can write (Equation 4.2) ... 

Qualitative HPLC methods, using area percent, are used to monitor the disappearance of starting material and the formation of byproduct. Without the inclusion of an internal standard and the calculation of response factors, it is not possible to establish with certainty whether all of the starting material can be accounted for. An internal standard must be stable in the reaction mixture, must not co-elute with any of the components, and must be stable in the mobile phase. Ideally, the internal standard has a retention time about half that of the total analysis time. Internal standardization is extremely useful for kinetic studies. Added to the reaction vessel, samples that are withdrawn at various times will contain identical concentrations of internal standard, and chromatograms can be directly compared or adjusted to identical scales to correct for variation in injection volume. 

The importance of the first three of these factors has already been discussed. The temperature factor would include the cost of insulation plus the increase in metal thickness necessary to counteract the poorer structural properties of metals at high temperatures. Zevnik and Buchanan17 have developed curves to obtain the average cost of a unit operation for a given fluid process. They base their method on the production capacity and the calculation of a complexify factor. The complexity factor is based on the maximum temperature (or minimum temperature if the process is a cryogenic one), the maximum pressure (or minimum pressure for vacuum systems) and the material of construction. It is calculated from Equation 2 ... 

As indicated in Figure 10.2, there is a distinct change in the slope of the line at carbon numbers 8 to 12, and this has also been observed by other researchers.2-3 This change in the slope cannot be explained by the ASF model, which is based on the premise that the chain growth probability factor (a) is independent from the carbon number. Some further developments of the ASF model by Wojciechowski et al.3 made use of a number of abstract kinetic parameters for the calculation of a product spectrum. Although it still predicts a straight line for the a plot, they suggested that the break in the line is due to different mechanisms of chain termination and could be explained by the superposition of two ideal distributions. This bimodal distribution explained by two different mechanisms... 

The next two steps in the procedure of Leonard and Ashman are the conversion of the diagonal elements from atomic units into force field units and calculation of scaling factors for bond lengths and angles. The calculated force constants had to be scaled down by approximately 25% and 70% to yield force constants comparable in numerical size with those included in MM2. Neither force constants nor scaling factors can be incorporated directly into a different force field. A modification of the described procedure that meets the requirements of CVFF was developed. Fragments with known force field parameters were chosen. After a full geometry optimization (HF/6-31G ) second derivatives and vibrational frequencies were calculated. The force... 

Finally, it is necessary to remark that the operators xUm) which appeared in Eq. (80) have been expressed in terms of the operators Yg and their derivatives taken at z — 0. This transformation has been effected by means of a factorization theorem.22 The details of the calculation appear in Appendix A.l. 

Bochkarev AV, Trefilova AN, Tsurkov NA, Klinskii GD (2003) Calculations of beta-factors by ab initio quantum-chemical methods. Russian J Phys Chem 77 622-626 Bode BM, Gordon MS (1998) MacMolPlt a graphical user interface for GAMESS. J Mol Graphics and Modeling 16 133-138... 

After data analysis, the statistically significant effects induced by certain factors are identified. This is typically achieved using standardized Pareto plots (Figure 14). The plot shows the standard values of the effects in descending order of magnitude. The length of each bar is proportional to the standardized effect, which is equal to the effect divided by the standard error. This is identical to the calculation of a lvalue for... 

Coefficients of z to various powers in these formulae differ from values of mj in table 3 because the latter reflect a presence of a factor mg in formula 47 all values of constant terms are derived from calculation [122], not from fits to frequency data. Coefficients of corresponding linear and quadratic terms in formulae 74 and 75 have comparable signs and magnitudes. From fitted values of uj, lderive analogously a corresponding formula to represent a radial... 

When AGm is calculated from an equilibrium constant K, what error would result at 25°C from an error of a factor of 2 in K1... 

---