Big Chemical Encyclopedia

Chemical substances, components, reactions, process design ...

Articles Figures Tables About

Self-bonding limitations

In this contribution, we describe and illustrate the latest generalizations and developments[1]-[3] of a theory of recent formulation[4]-[6] for the study of chemical reactions in solution. This theory combines the powerful interpretive framework of Valence Bond (VB) theory [7] — so well known to chemists — with a dielectric continuum description of the solvent. The latter includes the quantization of the solvent electronic polarization[5, 6] and also accounts for nonequilibrium solvation effects. Compared to earlier, related efforts[4]-[6], [8]-[10], the theory [l]-[3] includes the boundary conditions on the solute cavity in a fashion related to that of Tomasi[ll] for equilibrium problems, and can be applied to reaction systems which require more than two VB states for their description, namely bimolecular Sjy2 reactions ],[8](b),[12],[13] X + RY XR + Y, acid ionizations[8](a),[14] HA +B —> A + HB+, and Menschutkin reactions[7](b), among other reactions. Compared to the various reaction field theories in use[ll],[15]-[21] (some of which are discussed in the present volume), the theory is distinguished by its quantization of the solvent electronic polarization (which in general leads to deviations from a Self-consistent limiting behavior), the inclusion of nonequilibrium solvation — so important for chemical reactions, and the VB perspective. Further historical perspective and discussion of connections to other work may be found in Ref.[l],... [Pg.259]

Both the three-center bond model and the correlation diagram treatment, as just outlined, omit all central-atom orbitals except the s and p orbitals of the valence shell. Indeed the three-center bond model neglects even the s orbital except as a storage place for one electron pair. They can be described as very restricted or incomplete MO treatments. They are also inexact, even within their self-imposed limits, since numerical accuracy is neither sought nor obtained in their usual applications. It would not, of course, be sensible to strive for numerical precision after such sweeping assumptions have been made at the outset. On the other hand, the hybridization or directed valence treatment assumes very full involvement of outer d orbitals whenever more than four pairs of electrons must be accommodated. This extreme assumption is also unlikely to be accurate. Finally, the VSEPR model resorts to a simple electrostatic model, which, however successful it may be, can scarcely be taken literally. [Pg.137]

Adhesive bonding is an integral part of virtually all composite structure. Early composite matrix resins could in some cases act as an adhesive, such as with self-filleting systems used for honeycomb sandwich fabrication. As composite systems became more optimized for minimum resin content and limited flow, supplementary adhesives became more common. Modern-day composite structure relies on adhesives almost as much as bonded metallic structure. [Pg.1145]

Fig. 5.3. Log-log plot of the self-diffusion constant D of polymer melts vs. chain length N. D is normalized by the diffusion constant of the Rouse limit, DRoUse> which is reached for short chain lengths. N is normalized by Ne, which is estimated from the kink in the log-log plot of the mean-square displacement of inner monomers vs. time [gi (t) vs. t]. Molecular dynamics results [177] and experimental data on PE [178] are compared with the MC results [40] for the athermal bond fluctuation model. From [40]... Fig. 5.3. Log-log plot of the self-diffusion constant D of polymer melts vs. chain length N. D is normalized by the diffusion constant of the Rouse limit, DRoUse> which is reached for short chain lengths. N is normalized by Ne, which is estimated from the kink in the log-log plot of the mean-square displacement of inner monomers vs. time [gi (t) vs. t]. Molecular dynamics results [177] and experimental data on PE [178] are compared with the MC results [40] for the athermal bond fluctuation model. From [40]...
Block copolymers have been the focus of much interest during the last 30 years because their constituent blocks are generally immiscible, leading to a microphase separation. Since the different blocks are linked together by covalent bonds, the microphase separation is spatially limited and results in self-assembled structures whose characteristic sizes are of the order of a few times the radius of gyration, Rg, of the constituent blocks and thus range from ca. 10 to 100 nm [1],... [Pg.80]


See other pages where Self-bonding limitations is mentioned: [Pg.127]    [Pg.225]    [Pg.427]    [Pg.202]    [Pg.415]    [Pg.171]    [Pg.2591]    [Pg.2622]    [Pg.199]    [Pg.534]    [Pg.135]    [Pg.363]    [Pg.525]    [Pg.246]    [Pg.308]    [Pg.57]    [Pg.197]    [Pg.131]    [Pg.341]    [Pg.79]    [Pg.142]    [Pg.153]    [Pg.42]    [Pg.11]    [Pg.117]    [Pg.249]    [Pg.126]    [Pg.246]    [Pg.633]    [Pg.156]    [Pg.133]    [Pg.326]    [Pg.262]    [Pg.416]    [Pg.151]    [Pg.193]    [Pg.389]    [Pg.349]    [Pg.20]    [Pg.127]    [Pg.290]    [Pg.121]    [Pg.669]    [Pg.90]   
See also in sourсe #XX -- [ Pg.298 ]




SEARCH



Bonding limitations

Self-bond

Self-limit

© 2024 chempedia.info