Interaction between CO and O

Abstract

The reaction between carbon monoxide and atomic oxygen was studied in a gas flow over a temperature range of 136 to 23OoC at atmospheric pressure. The rate constant of this reaction, considered to be one for a second-order reaction, was found to decrease with increasing temperature and to depend on the ratio of 0, to CO that was varied from 0.1 1 to 2.69. A conclusion was made that under the experimental conditions the reaction was third orderThe rate constant of this reaction k3 = 1011.*3*0.31 exp (2980 f 660/RT) cm6/mole2 sec was determined for a mixture of 0, and CO and it was found that the efficiency of 0, as particle M is four times that of CO.

The second limit of hydrogen + carbon monoxide + oxygen mixtures

“…The high negative activation energy suggested by Lin and Bauer [15] is totally inconsistent with estimates at low temperatures and may suggest a change of mechanism at the highest temperatures. The results of Zeegers [14] and of Kondratiev [18] suggest that 0 2 is relatively more efficient than other molecules, and the location of the results of Baldwin and of Clyne 1171 (though this estimate is an upper limit) are in support of this.…”

“…Although M is essentially 2CO + 02, these values have been calculated for M = H2 by assuming that the coefficients m, m" in reactions (4) and ( 3 3 ) are the same. Figure 2A shows the points, together with other recent determinations [ 15,18,19,21], added to the plot summarized by Baulch, Lloyd, and Drysdale temperature range 429"-502"K, a negative activation energy of 2980 cal/mole was obtained. The values of k 3 3 at the mean temperature are shown in Figure 2A for M = CO and M = 0 2 .…”

“…I n an attempt to make a crude allowance for the effectiveness of different molecules, values relative to Ar of 2.0 for Nz (from Slanger and Black [19]), 3.0 and 7.0 for C O and COz (from the relative efficiencies of Nz, CO, and COZ in reaction (4)), and 12.0 (from Kondratiev [18]) for Oz have been taken. The best line through the modified points in Figure 2B gives k 3 3 = 3 X lo8 exp( -3,000/RT) for M = Ar, but no great confidence can be felt in these parameters.…”