Which is more easily saturated, monocyclic aromatic hydrocarbons or polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, during the hydrogenation process?
Thread Content
Which is more easily saturated, monocyclic aromatic hydrocarbons or polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, during the hydrogenation process?
Theoretically, a single ring should be more prone to saturation. But there are exceptions as well; special key positions might be reversed!
Thank you, but I looked it up later. Bicyclic, tricyclic, and polycyclic structures are more susceptible to saturation than monocyclic ones, as monocyclic structures have the highest bond energy. Moreover, in the lubricant hydrogenation unit I have worked with, single-ring compounds are also not easily removed.
Hexacyclic rings are difficult to hydrogenate and saturate, and they are relatively stable; generally, they are first converted into pentacyclic alkane rings through isomerization reactions, and then the rings are broken to form the corresponding alkanes. For polycyclic compounds, saturation reactions are carried out first, and less energy is required compared to monocyclic compounds, which is why polycyclic compounds can be easily hydrogenated and saturated.
It’s basically about changing the catalyst, the partial pressure of hydrogen in the system, and the operating temperature of the system