Electrophilic Aromatic Substitution Essay

The experiment focuses on finding out what engaging of initiate set up that four different substituents ordain have on an aromatic benzol ring. The substituents being tested be aniline, anisole, ethanamide (acetanilide), and hydroxy benzine. any four of these groups ar either para or ortho activating. Bromination is the reaction that will be carried out. The resolve focalise ranges of the nett outputs will be taken in order to determine their identities and reactivity. It is predicted that substitution order from most to least(prenominal)(prenominal) reactive should be aniline, carbolic acid, anisole, and ethanamide. TheoryRegioselectivity and the invest of electrophilic aromatic substitution are affected by the substituents attached to the original benzene. In electrophilic aromatic substitution, (EAS for short), the rate determining step is the first step of the reaction. This experiment deals with activating substituents that growth the rate of reaction. In the first rate determining step, the electron closeness rich pi bonds of benzene react with the electrophile (Bromine) to trunk a tintinnabulation becalmd carbocation. This step is the most important actor that decides which substituents gain ground benzene react red-hot. This is because the rate of the reaction can be determined d wholeness the stability of the carbocation transition state hybrid, which is also whapn as resonance effect and the Hammond Postulate. In other words, if a carbocation intermediate is more stable, in that location is less energy needed in the transition state to form the carbocation. Less energy needed translates to a faster reaction.All in all, substituents that increase the electron density on the ring contribute by making the benzene ring more nucleophilic through increased electron density. The increased electron density around the ring would help to stabilize the positively charged carbocation intermediate. This means that this intermediate i s more likely to form. negatron donating substituents would activate the ring towards EAS, which means the overall rate would be faster compared to benzene. The aniline group forms the most stable carbocation because it has the same resonance effects as the other groups but because nitrogen is less electronegative than oxygen, its inducive effects are weaker. Therefore aniline should react the fastest.Acetamide would be last in terms ofreactivity because it has the weakest resonance effects compared to inductive effects, in other words it is the weakest electron donating group. The order of reactivity from strongest activator to least should be aniline, phenol, anisole, and acetamide. It is also predicted that all of the groups should react towards a polyhalogenated crop chuck out for acetamide. Specifically, they should all be tri-substituted except for acetamide. Steric hindrance also plays a factor in preventing Br from being added to the ortho positions, so it should be expe cted that the acetamide harvest should only have a substituent added to the para position.ResultsCompound/ assortMelting Point Range (C)Productacetamide (Johnson/Leo)164.2-168.84-bromoacetamideaniline (Iris/Jenelle)120-130.42,4,6-tribromoanilinephenol (Jack/Kyle)90-932,4,6-tribromophenolanisole (N/A)40-43 and 55.3-73.72,4-dibromoanisoleAnisole product did not recrystallize so info is taken from another research laboratorys.Crude mass product of acetamide 0.235gRecrystallized product mass of acetamide 0.087gTheoretical yield 0.0625gPercent yield 139%DiscussionAniline and phenol both formed a tri-substituted product in two ortho and one para positions according to their respective thawing point ranges. Thisconfirms expectations that these two substituents are the strongest activators. This is because the NH2 and OH groups are very electronegative and reactive which allows their carbocation resonance structures to be stabilized. as yet though both aniline and phenol had the same amo unt of polybromination, we know that since nitrogen is less electronegative than oxygen, aniline has less inductive effects. In turn, it means that aniline would have more electron density which make makes it more reactive to electrophiles. Although the anisole did not form a product, retrieved data suggests that the product is is actually disubstituted this contradicts the prediction that it would be trisubstituted also it is not surprising because anisole has an pointless carbon attached to the oxygen which could weaken resonance effects.Lastly, the melting point ranges for the acetamide product suggest that it formed 4-bromoacetamide. Based on the data gathered, the ranking in order of increasing activity would be aniline, phenol, anisole, and acetamide. This matches up with initial predictions. These results make sense because anisole and acetamide have resonance structures where the electron density is moved outside of the ring so it cannot activate the benzene ring as well as the other two. With regards to the efficiency of the reaction, common chord of the reactions appeared to be efficient. Aniline, phenol, and acetamide all reacted efficiently. This is observed through their products which displayed conclusive melting point ranges that confirmed their predictions. Although 10% bromine solution was used these reactions carried to closure and their yields were decent. ConclusionAniline and Phenol both yield trisubstituted products of 2,4,6-bromoaniline and 2,4,6-bromophenol according to the melting point ranges obtained. This supports predictions that these amine and hydroxyl groups would be the strongest activating groups of benzene. Anisole yielded a disubstituted product which suggests that it is a more moderate activator when compared to aniline and phenol. Acetamide, which has the bulkiest substituent, yield a monosubstituted product which suggests that it is the weakest activator of the four. These results match up with ranking predictions but differ with substituent predictions. It was predicted that anisoles activating strength would be on par with that of phenol and aniline when results debate that it is actually considerably weaker. Sources of ErrorAfter recrystallzation and weighing out the final product identified as 4-bromoacetamide. It was observed that the actual yield was higher(prenominal) than the theoretical yield. This could have been due to impurities in our final product.