Reaction interfaces interface

The reacting sohd is in granular form. Decrease in the area of the reaction interface occurs as the reaction proceeds. The mathematical modeling is distinguished from that with flat surfaces, which are most often used in experimentation. 

Notice that oxide is utilised by the reaction at interface B at the same rate as it is formed at >1, so that the void effectively moves through the growing oxide with the distance AB remaining constant. It may be recalled that a truly... 

Lipases catalyse reactions at interfaces, and to obtain a high rate of interesterification the reaction systems should have a large area of interface between the water immiscible reactant phase and the more hydrophilic phase which contains the lipase. This can be achieved by supporting the lipase on the surface of macroporous particles. 

The reaction interface can be defined as the nominal boundary surface between reactant and the solid product. This simple representation has provided a basic model that has been most valuable in the development of the theory of kinetics of reactions involving solids. In practice, it must be accepted that the interface is a zone of finite thickness extending for a small number of lattice units on either side of the nominal contact sur-... 

So important are lattice imperfections in the reactions of solids that it is considered appropriate to list here the fundamental types which have been recognized (Table 1). More complex structures are capable of resolution into various combinations of these simpler types. More extensive accounts of crystal defects are to be found elsewhere [1,26,27]. The point which is of greatest significance in the present context is that each and every one of these types of defect (Table 1) has been proposed as an important participant in the mechanism of a reaction of one or more solids. In addition, reactions may involve structures identified as combinations of these simplest types, e.g. colour centres. The mobility of lattice imperfections, which notably includes the advancing reaction interface, provides the means whereby ions or molecules, originally at sites remote from crystal imperfections and surfaces, may eventually react. 

Tenets (i) and (ii). These are applicable only where the reactant undergoes no melting and no systematic change of composition (e.g. by the diffusive removal of a constituent) and any residual solid product phase offers no significant barrier to contact between reactants or the escape of volatile products [33,34]. When all these conditions are obeyed, the shape of the fraction decomposed (a) against time (f) curve for an isothermal reaction can, in principle, be related to the geometry of formation and advance of the reaction interface. The general solution of this problem involves intractable mathematical difficulties but simplifications have been made for many specific applications [1,28—31,35]. 

Since the free energy of a molecule in the liquid phase is not markedly different from that of the same species volatilized, the variation in the intrinsic reactivity associated with the controlling step in a solid—liquid process is not expected to be very different from that of the solid—gas reaction. Interpretation of kinetic data for solid—liquid reactions must, however, always consider the possibility that mass transfer in the homogeneous phase of reactants to or products from, the reaction interface is rate-limiting [108,109], Kinetic aspects of solid—liquid reactions have been discussed by Taplin [110]. 

Measurements of overall reaction rates (of product formation or of reactant consumption) do not necessarily provide sufficient information to describe completely and unambiguously the kinetics of the constituent steps of a composite rate process. A nucleation and growth reaction, for example, is composed of the interlinked but distinct and different changes which lead to the initial generation and to the subsequent advance of the reaction interface. Quantitative kinetic analysis of yield—time data does not always lead to a unique reaction model but, in favourable systems, the rate parameters, considered with reference to quantitative microscopic measurements, can be identified with specific nucleation and growth steps. Microscopic examinations provide positive evidence for interpretation of shapes of fractional decomposition (a)—time curves. In reactions of solids, it is often convenient to consider separately the geometry of interface development and the chemical changes which occur within that zone of locally enhanced reactivity. 

References to the profitable exploitation of microscopic techniques in kinetic studies can be found in the work of Thomas and co-workers [91, 206—210], Herley et al. [211] and of Flanagan and his collaborators [212,213]. The rates of advance of reaction interfaces have been measured from direct observations on single crystals and the kinetic parameters so obtained are compared with results for mass loss determinations. The effects of the introduction of crystal imperfections and the role of such species in mechanisms of reaction are also considered. 

It is important to distinguish clearly between the surface area of a decomposing solid [i.e. aggregate external boundaries of both reactant and product(s)] measured by adsorption methods and the effective area of the active reaction interface which, in most systems, is an internal structure. The area of the contact zone is of fundamental significance in kinetic studies since its determination would allow the Arrhenius pre-exponential term to be expressed in dimensions of area"1 (as in catalysis). This parameter is, however, inaccessible to direct measurement. Estimates from microscopy cannot identify all those regions which participate in reaction or ascertain the effective roughness factor of observed interfaces. Preferential dissolution of either reactant or product in a suitable solvent prior to area measurement may result in sintering [286]. The problems of identify-... 

X= 2) or (P = 0, X = 3) and the distinction between these possibilities is most satisfactorily based upon independent evidence, such as microscopic observations. The growth of compact nuclei inevitably results in the consumption of surfaces and when these outer faces, the sites of nucleation, have been eliminated, j3 necessarily is zero this may result in a diminution of n. The continued inward advance of the reaction interface at high a results in a situation comparable with the contracting volume reaction (discussed below) reference to this similarity was also made in consideration of the Mampel approach discussed above. Shapes of the deceleratory region of a time curves for nucleation and growth reactions and the contracting volume rate process are closely similar [409]. 

Rate equations expressing the a—time variations resulting from the inward advance of a reaction interface from the existing surfaces of other reactant shapes follow directly by the application of simple geometric considerations. The approach can also include quantitative allowance for any... 

Zero-order kinetic behaviour, in an unusual dehydration reaction [62], has been shown to be due to the constant area of reaction interface and this interface has been identified as original surfaces of the reactant crystallites which do not advance. Water molecules are mobile within the... 

Topley and Hume [453], in a study of the dehydration of CaC03 6 H20, assumed the rapid initial formation of (on average) a single nucleus on the surface of each particle of reactant, represented as a sphere of radius a. In the absence of preferential surface development, the reaction interface penetrates the reactant at equal rates in all inward directions (kG = dr/df) and the volume of material reacted at time t is that volume of a sphere, having its centre at the site of surface nucleation and of radius kGt, which falls within the reactant. The fractional reaction, the zone of interpenetrating spheres, at time t is... 

Another reaction mechanism, which is conveniently mentioned under this heading, is due to Hill [479] who suggested that ions (atoms or molecules) frorh the product may move through the dislocation network of the reactant and activate potential nuclei, particularly in the vicinity of the reaction interface. Thus a reaction zone, within which potential nucleusforming sites are activated, is developed in front of an advancing interface. With appropriate assumptions, this reaction model provides an alternative explanation of the exponential rate law, eqn. (8), which in Sect. 3.2 was discussed with reference to chain reactions. 

Fig. 5. Various dispositions of reaction interface which result in obedience to the zero-order kinetic equation. Product is shown shaded for explanation see text.

Shannon assumes that atoms or molecules at the reaction interface have... 

A reaction interface is the zone immediately adjoining the surface of contact between reactant and product and within which bond redistributions occur. Prevailing conditions are different from those characteristic of the reactant bulk as demonstrated by the enhanced reactivity, usually attributed to local strain, catalysis by products, etc. Considerable difficulties attend investigation of the mechanisms of interface reactions because this thin zone is interposed between two relatively much larger particles. Accordingly, many proposed reaction models are necessarily based on indirect evidence. Without wishing to appear unnecessarily pessimistic, we consider it appropriate to mention here some of the problems inherent in the provision of detailed mechanisms for solid phase rate processes. These difficulties are not always apparent in interpretations and proposals appearing in the literature. 

Mechanisms of decomposition reactions at interfaces are conveniently considered with reference to the diagrammatic representations in Fig. 8 (R = reactant, 1,1 = intermediates and P = product) and classified under the following headings. 

---