Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The enthalpies of formation [Delta(g)] of tricyclo[8.2.2.2(4,7)]hexadeca-1(13),2,4(16),5,7(15),10(14),11-heptaene (2, 1,2-dehydro[2.2]paracyclophane or [2.2]paracyclophane-1-ene) and tricyclo[8.2.2.2(4,7)]hexadeca-1(13),2,4(16),5,7(15),8,10(14),11-octaene (3, 1,2,9,10-dehydro[2.2]paracyclophane or [2.2]paracyclophane-1,9-diene) have been determined by measuring their heats of combustion in a microcalorimeter and their heats of sublimation by the transpiration method. Values of the strain energies (SE) [SE(2) = 34.7 kcal mol(-)(1), SE(3) = 42.0 kcal mol(-)(1)] have been derived from the gas-phase heats of formation and are compared with those from MM3 and PM3 calculations and with the corresponding value SE(1) = 30.1 kcal mol(-)(1) for the parent tricyclo[8.2.2.2(4,7)]hexadeca-1(13),4(16),5,7(15),10(14),11-hexaene (1, [2.2]paracyclophane). The higher strain energies of 2 and 3 (by 4.6 and 11.9 kcal mol(-)(1)) are in accord with the well-known increased reactivities of their aromatic rings as a consequence of their increased bending. As revealed by an X-ray crystal structure analysis, the bending in the monoene 2 corresponds to that of 1 and 3 at one of two bridging corners.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Meijere et al. (2003) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: