Probing the effect of the H-2 rotational state in O(D-1)+H-2 -> OH+H: Theoretical dynamics including nonadiabatic effects and a crossed molecular beam study
Sk. Gray et al., Probing the effect of the H-2 rotational state in O(D-1)+H-2 -> OH+H: Theoretical dynamics including nonadiabatic effects and a crossed molecular beam study, J CHEM PHYS, 113(17), 2000, pp. 7330-7344
Theoretical estimates of reactive cross sections for O(D-1)+H-2(X,upsilon =
0,j)--> OH(X)+H(S-2), with H-2 rotational quantum numbers j=0 and 1, are ob
tained for a range of collision energies, E-col. Crossed molecular beam mea
surements are also used to infer the ratio, r(1,0), of the j=1 and 0 cross
sections at E-col=0.056 eV. The theory indicates that the 1 (1)A' potential
surface is the most important one. However, the 2 (1)A' and 1 (1)A' surfac
es can also contribute. Adiabatic dynamics on the 1 (1)A' surface, particul
arly at E-col above its 0.1 eV barrier to reaction plays a role. The 2 (1)A
' surface, while not correlating with ground electronic state products, can
still lead to products via nonadiabatic interactions with the 1 (1)A' surf
ace. Many quantum dynamics and quasiclassical classical trajectory calculat
ions are carried out. Accurate, ab initio based potential energy surfaces a
re employed. Quantum cross sections are based on helicity decoupled wave pa
cket calculations for several values of total angular momentum. Nonadiabati
c wave packet and trajectory surface hopping calculations, where appropriat
e, are carried out. An interesting, subtle picture emerges regarding the en
ergy dependence of r(1,0). The theoretical results indicate, somewhat surpr
isingly, that, for E-col<0.1 eV,r(1,0) can be less than unity owing to the
anisotropy of the ground state potential. Electronically excited states and
nonadiabatic effects contribute to the overall cross sections for E-col>0.
1 eV, but the full r(1,0) is only weakly sensitive to excited states. Our e
xperimentally inferred r(1,0) at E-col=0.056 eV, 0.95 +/-0.02, is in quanti
tative agreement with our best calculation, which suggests that the effect
of potential anisotropy is correctly described by theory. The relation betw
een these results and previous experimental findings is discussed. (C) 2000
American Institute of Physics. [S0021-9606(00)02041-9].