Self-Association of Phenol in Nonpolar Solvents

  • Kermit B. Whetsel
  • J. H. Lady


The self-association of phenol in carbon tetrachloride solution has been studied extensively by a variety of techniques, but our understanding of the process is still incomplete. Using data obtained on the second overtone O—H stretching bands of phenol, Kempter and Mecke(1) concluded in 1940 that a series of multimers is formed and that a single constant is sufficient to describe the entire process. In 1951, Coggeshall and Saier(2) carried out a similar study in the fundamental O—H stretching region and obtained better agreement between theory and experiment by using two equilibrium constants, one for the formation of dimer and one for the successive addition of monomeric units to form higher polymers. In 1958, Saunders and Hyne(3) studied the self-association process by nuclear magnetic resonance and concluded that a model based upon a monomer-trimer equilibrium provided the best fit for the experimental data. Delvalle,(4) in 1961, reported vapor-pressure data which supported the single-equilibrium-constant model of Kempter and Mecke. About the same time, Badger and Greenough(5) concluded, from partition and spectroscopic experiments, that the association of phenol in carbon tetrachloride solution is greatly promoted by the presence of water and that the predominant polymer species is a hemihydrate dimer. More recently, however, Johnson et al. (6) have interpreted the results of partition experiments in terms of a monomer-trimer-hexamer model involving both anhydrous and hydrated species.


Carbon Tetrachloride Formation Constant Phenol Concentration Nonpolar Solvent Cyclic Dimer 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    H. Kempter and R. Mecke, Z. Physik. Chem. 46B, 229 (1940).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    N. D. Coggeshall and E. L. Saier, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 73, 5414 (1951).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    M. Saunders and J. B. Hyne, J. Chem. Phys. 29, 1319 (1958).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    P. Delvalle, Compt. Rend. 252, 1457 (1961).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    R. M. Badger and R. C. Greenough, J. Phys. Chem. 65, 2088 (1961).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    James R. Johnson, S. D. Christian, and H. E. Affsprung, J. Chem. Soc. 1965, 1.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    R. Mecke, Discussions Faraday Soc. 9, 161 (1950).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    M. M. Maguire and R. West, Spectrochim. Acta 17, 369 (1961).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    D. L. Powell and R. West, Spectrochim. Acta 20, 983 (1964).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    J. H. Lady and K. B. Whetsel, unpublished results.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    G. C. Pimentel and A. L. McClellan, “The Hydrogen Bond,” W. H. Freeman and Co., San Francisco, California (1960), pp. 96–100.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    H. C. Van Ness, J. Van Winkle, H. H. Richtol, and H. B. Hollinger, J. Phys. Chem. 71, 1483 (1967).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    L. J. Bellamy and R. J. Pace, Spectrochim. Acta 22, 525 (1966).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    D. A. Ibbitson and L. F. Moore, J. Chem. Soc. B 1967, 76.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    J. Dos Santos, P. Pineau, and M. L. Josien, Bull. Soc. Chim. Fr. 1962, 1532.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    J. Malecki, J. Chem. Phys. 43, 1351 (1965).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    A. Hall and J. L. Wood, Spectrochim. Acta 23A, 2657 (1967).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    L. E. Orgel and R. S. Mulliken, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 79, 4839 (1957).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1970

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kermit B. Whetsel
    • 1
  • J. H. Lady
    • 1
  1. 1.Tennessee Eastman Co., Division of Eastman Kodak Co.KingsportUSA

Personalised recommendations