# Experimental and Theoretical Study of the Reaction of F2 with Thiirane

Yuri Bedjanian, Antoine Roosevelt, Valérie Vallet, Manolis Romanias

► To cite this version:

Yuri Bedjanian, Antoine Roosevelt, Valérie Vallet, Manolis Romanias. Experimental and Theoretical Study of the Reaction of F2 with Thiirane. Molecules, 2024, 29 (15), pp.3636. 10.3390/molecules29153636. [https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules29153636](https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules29153636)

HAL Id: hal-04667172

https://hal.science/hal-04667172v1

Submitted on 27 Aug 2024

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Article

# Experimental and Theoretical Study of the Reaction of F₂ with Thiirane

Yuri Bedjanian 1,* , Antoine Roosevelt 2 , Valérie Vallet 3 and Manolis N. Romanias 2

1 Institut de Combustion, Aérothermique, Réactivité et Environnement (ICARE), CNRS, 45071 Orléans, France

2 IMT Nord Europe, Institut Mines-Télécom, University Lille, Centre for Energy and Environment, 59000 Lille, France; antoine.roose@imt-nord-europe.fr (A.R.); emmanouil.romanias@imt-nord-europe.fr (M.N.R.)

3 University Lille, CNRS, UMR 8523-PhLAM-Physique des Lasers Atomes et Molécules, 59000 Lille, France; valerie.vallet@univ-lille.fr

* Correspondence: yuri.bedjanian@cnrs-orleans.fr

**Abstract:** The kinetics of the F₂ reaction with thiirane (C₂H₄S) was studied for the first time in a flow reactor combined with mass spectrometry at a total helium pressure of 2 Torr and in the temperature range of 220 to 800 K. The rate constant of the title reaction was determined under pseudo-first-order conditions, either monitoring the kinetics of F₂ or C₂H₄S consumption in excess of thiirane or of F₂, respectively: k₁ = (5.79 ± 0.17) × 10⁻¹² exp(−(16 ± 10)/T) cm³ molecule⁻¹ s⁻¹ (the uncertainties represent precision of the fit at the 2σ level, with the total 2σ relative uncertainty, including statistical and systematic errors on the rate constant being 15% at all temperatures). HF and CH₂CHSF were identified as primary products of the title reaction. The yield of HF was measured to be 100% (with an accuracy of 10%) across the entire temperature range of the study. Quantum computations revealed reaction enthalpies ranging from −409.9 to −509.1 kJ mol⁻¹ for all the isomers/conformers of the products, indicating a strong exothermicity. Boltzmann relative populations were then established for different temperatures.

**Keywords:** fluorine; C₂H₄S; gas-phase kinetics; rate constant; Boltzmann population; enthalpy

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

check for
updates

**Citation:** Bedjanian, Y.; Roosevelt, A.; Vallet, V.; Romanias, M.N.

Experimental and Theoretical Study of the Reaction of F₂ with Thiirane. *Molecules* 2024, 29, 3636. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules29153636

Academic Editor: Albin Pintar

Received: 5 July 2024

Revised: 29 July 2024

Accepted: 30 July 2024

Published: 31 July 2024

<figure><img src="image_3.png" /></figure>

**Copyright:** © 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

## 1. Introduction

The reactivity of F₂ molecules has certain specific features and is of interest for both experimental and theoretical studies. One notable feature is that molecular fluorine exhibits surprisingly high reactivity towards certain closed-shell molecules. For example, it has been demonstrated that reactions of F₂ with organosulfur compounds, CH₃SCH₃ and CH₃SSCH₃, and with limonene are barrierless reactions [1–3]. Unexpectedly high rate constants (for reactions between two closed-shell molecules), 1.6 × 10⁻¹¹ at 298 K [4] and 1.9 × 10⁻¹² cm³ molecule⁻¹ s⁻¹ at T = 278–360 K [3], were reported for reaction of F₂ with dimethyl sulfide (CH₃SCH₃) and limonene, respectively. The current kinetic and mechanistic database on F₂ reactions with stable molecules is very limited [5], especially regarding information on reaction products and the temperature dependence of reaction rate constants. To better understand the nature of the specific reactivity of the F₂ molecule, additional kinetic and mechanistic studies (preferably over a wide temperature range) are necessary.

In the present work, we report the results of combined experimental and theoretical study of the reaction of molecular fluorine with another organosulfur compound, thiirane (C₂H₄S), over a wide temperature range (from 220 to 800 K):

$$F_2 + C_2H_4S \rightarrow \text{products} \quad (1)$$

The reaction rate constant as well as the reaction products are reported for the first time. To our knowledge, no information exists in the literature regarding the spontaneity
and thermodynamical stability of this reaction. Quantum computations have been carried out to determine the thermodynamical parameter of the reaction.

## 2. Results and Discussion

The reaction of F₂ with C₂H₄S was studied at a total pressure of 2 Torr of He and at temperatures ranging from 220 to 800 K. The configuration of the flow reactors used in the experiments is shown in Figures 1 and S1 (Supplementary Materials). It should be noted that the microwave discharge shown in Figures 1 and S1 was only used in the HF calibration experiments (see experimental section), but was turned off during the kinetic study of the title reaction.

<figure><img src="image_4.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 1.** Configuration of the high-temperature flow reactor used in the study of reaction (1).</figcaption></figure>

### 2.1. Products of Reaction (1)

#### 2.1.1. Measurements of HF Yield

HF and C₂H₃SF were identified as primary products of reaction (1):

$$F_2 + C_2H_4S \rightarrow HF + C_2H_3SF$$

Both species were monitored by mass spectrometry on their parent peaks at *m/z* = 38 (F₂⁺) and 78 (C₂H₃SF⁺), respectively. Experiments to determine the branching ratio of this reactive channel were carried out with an excess of thiirane over F₂ and consisted of measuring the consumed concentrations of the reactants and those of the two products formed. With the initial C₂H₄S concentrations shown in Table 1 and a reaction time of 0.015 to 0.020 s, the consumed fraction of F₂ (the initial F₂ concentration was varied by a factor of approximately 10) was ≥ 90%. The initial concentrations of the two reactants were comparable, allowing the detection of not only the consumption of F₂, but also that of the excess reagent, C₂H₄S.

<table><caption>**Table 1.** Experimental conditions and results of the measurements of HF yield in reaction (1).</caption><thead><tr><th>T (K)</th><th>[C<sub>2</sub>H<sub>4</sub>S]<sub>0</sub><sup>a</sup></th><th>Δ[F<sub>2</sub>]<sup>b</sup></th><th>Δ[HF]/Δ[C<sub>2</sub>H<sub>4</sub>S]<sup>c</sup></th><th>Δ[HF]/Δ[F<sub>2</sub>]<sup>d</sup></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>220</td><td>3.5–3.8</td><td>0.18–1.80</td><td>1.04 ± 0.01</td><td>1.01 ± 0.01</td></tr><tr><td>253</td><td>4.5–5.0</td><td>0.12–2.08</td><td>1.02 ± 0.01</td><td>1.01 ± 0.01</td></tr><tr><td>298</td><td>3.2–5.0</td><td>0.19–2.07</td><td>1.01 ± 0.02</td><td>1.01 ± 0.01</td></tr><tr><td>325</td><td>4.5–5.0</td><td>0.15–2.04</td><td>1.06 ± 0.01</td><td>1.05 ± 0.01</td></tr><tr><td>360</td><td>2.0–3.8</td><td>0.09–1.51</td><td>0.98 ± 0.01</td><td>0.95 ± 0.01</td></tr><tr><td>500</td><td>3.1–3.5</td><td>0.10–1.09</td><td>1.01 ± 0.01</td><td>1.00 ± 0.01</td></tr><tr><td>670</td><td>2.0–2.5</td><td>0.08–0.72</td><td>1.02 ± 0.01</td><td>1.00 ± 0.01</td></tr><tr><td>800</td><td>3.32–4.0</td><td>0.10–1.89</td><td>0.97 ± 0.01</td><td>0.96 ± 0.01</td></tr></tbody></table>

Examples of the experimental data observed in these experiments are shown in Figure 2, where the formed concentrations of the reaction products are plotted against

<footnote><sup>a</sup> Initial concentration of C₂H₄S (units of 10¹³ molecule cm⁻³); <sup>b</sup> consumed concentration of F₂ (units of 10¹³ cm³ molecule⁻¹ s⁻¹); <sup>c</sup> ratio of [HF] formed to [C₂H₄S] consumed; <sup>d</sup> ratio of [HF] formed to [F₂] consumed. For HF yield statistical 2σ uncertainty is given, total estimated uncertainty is 10%.</footnote>
the [F₂] and [C₂H₄S] consumed. Note that the concentrations of C₂H₃SF in Figure 2 are presented in relative units; absolute concentrations were measured only for HF. The yields of HF determined from the slopes of the black lines in Figure 2 ([HF]/Δ[F₂] and [HF]/Δ[C₂H₄S]) at different temperatures are listed in Table 1. The results show that one molecule of HF is formed per one molecule of F₂ and C₂H₄S consumed. This observation, along with the linearity of the corresponding plots for C₂H₃SF, seems to indicate a negligible impact of possible secondary and side reactions under the experimental conditions of the measurements and that the HF + C₂H₃SF forming channel is the main, if not only, reaction pathway in the entire temperature range of the study (220–800 K). Combining the statistical uncertainty of measurements with the accuracy of measuring the absolute concentrations of F₂, C₂H₄S and HF of around 5%, a branching ratio equal to unity with an error of 10% can be recommended for the HF forming channel of reaction (1).

<figure><img src="image_5.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 2.** Concentration of the products, HF and C₂H₃SF, formed in reaction (1) as a function of the consumed concentration of the reactants, C₂H₄S and F₂: (a) T = 220 K; (b) T = 298 K; (c) T = 500 K; and (d) T = 800 K.</figcaption></figure>

As previously noted, all measurements were carried out with an excess of C₂H₄S. The fact is that in an excess of F₂, we observed signs of a secondary reaction of F₂ with C₂H₃SF. The kinetics of C₂H₃SF exhibited a characteristic behavior: [C₂H₃SF] initially increased to a maximum and then decreased due to the secondary reaction with F₂. Concurrently, we observed the formation of SF₂ (at *m/z* = 70). Studying this secondary reaction was beyond the scope of this work, so we limited the branching ratio measurements to experiments with excess of C₂H₄S, where the secondary chemistry could be neglected. However, it
should be noted that at T = 800 K (the highest temperature of the study), we observed evidence of C₂H₃SF removal, albeit slowly, even in the absence of F₂ in the reactor. We are inclined to think that this is due to thermal decomposition of C₂H₃SF, although other processes of C₂H₃SF removal cannot be ruled out. For this reason, in Figure 2d we do not present the measurements of [C₂H₃SF].

The structure of the C₂H₃SF formed in reaction (1) was not determined, but some considerations can nevertheless be discussed. Most probably, reaction (1) proceeds through the addition of F₂ to the sulfur atom followed by the elimination of HF, as proposed by Nelson et al. [6]:

$$F_2 + C_2H_4S \rightarrow [C_2H_4S(F-F)]^* \rightarrow HF + C_2H_3SF$$

In this case, the most likely product is CH₂=CH-SF (ethenyl thiohypofluorite). Mass spectrometry analysis of C₂H₃SF (formed in reaction (1)) revealed a prominent fragment peak at *m/z* = 51 (SF⁺), which, although indirectly, supports this hypothesis. The presence of this peak in the mass spectrum of other conformers, for example, 2-fluorotiirane or S=CH-CH₂F, seems to be unlikely. In addition, signals at *m/z* = 63 and 64, which can be attributed to C-SF⁺ and CH-SF⁺, respectively, are observed and are consistent with the mass spectrometric fragments of CH₂=CHSF.

For the analogous reaction of F₂ with DMS, Turnipseed and Birks [4] observed a reaction product, thought to be H₂C=S(F)CH₃, when DMS was in excess over F₂. This product was found to be destroyed in an excess of F₂ in the reactor, similar to how CH₂=CH-SF behaves in the present work. The authors proposed that the reaction proceeds through a charge-transfer complex with subsequent elimination of H and F atoms or of molecular HF. The HF production channel was thought to constitute a small part of the reaction pathway, although there was no experimental evidence for that. In contrast, for the F₂ reaction with C₂H₄S investigated in the present work, a significant contribution of the F atom forming channel can apparently be excluded, given that in an excess of thiirane it was observed that [HF] = Δ[F₂] = Δ[C₂H₄S].

## 2.1.2. Theoretical Findings

The enthalpies (including Zero-Point Energy, ZPE) and Gibbs free energies of the thiirane reaction with F₂ were computed for all possible isomers and conformers of the products C₂H₃FS (Table 2). These isomers and conformers (for the case of 2-fluoroethenethiol) are shown in Figure 3. The computed reaction enthalpies range from −509.1 kJ mol⁻¹ (for the case of thioacetylfluoride) to −409.9 kJ mol⁻¹ (in the case of Ethenylhypofluorite). The Gibbs free energies are in the same order of magnitude, indicating a spontaneous reaction.

<figure><img src="image_6.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 3.** Geometries of the reactants and C₂H₃SF isomers/conformers optimized at the MP2/aug-cc-pVTZ level of theory. Sulfur atoms are yellow, fluorine in blue, carbon atoms in dark gray and hydrogen in light gray.</figcaption></figure>
<table><caption>**Table 2.** Summary of the enthalpies (in kJ/mol, including the ZPE correction), Gibbs free energies and Boltzmann population for the isomers and conformers at temperature of 298, 500 and 1000 K, computed at the CCSD(T)-CBS/(aug-cc-pVTZ:aug-cc-pVQZ)//MP2/aug-cc-pVTZ level.</caption><thead><tr><th>Molecule</th><th>ΔG (kJ/mol)</th><th>ΔH (kJ/mol)</th><th>Boltzmann Population T = 298 K</th><th>Boltzmann Population T = 500 K</th><th>Boltzmann Population T = 1000 K</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1-fluoroethenethiol</td><td>-470.7</td><td>-473.1</td><td>2.0 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>1.0 × 10<sup>-4</sup></td><td>9.8 × 10<sup>-3</sup></td></tr><tr><td>Cis-2-fluoroethenethiol</td><td>-467.1</td><td>-467.8</td><td>2.4 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>2.9 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>5.2 × 10<sup>-3</sup></td></tr><tr><td>Ethenylthyhypofluorite</td><td>-409.9</td><td>-411.3</td><td>3.0 × 10<sup>-18</sup></td><td>3.6 × 10<sup>-11</sup></td><td>5.9 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td></tr><tr><td>Fluoroethanethiol</td><td>-456.3</td><td>-456.6</td><td>2.6 × 10<sup>-10</sup></td><td>1.9 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>1.4 × 10<sup>-3</sup></td></tr><tr><td>Fluorothiirane</td><td>-462.0</td><td>-466.2</td><td>1.3 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>2.0 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>4.3 × 10<sup>-3</sup></td></tr><tr><td>Thioacetylfluoride</td><td>-509.1</td><td>-511.3</td><td>1</td><td>1</td><td>9.8 × 10<sup>-1</sup></td></tr><tr><td>Trans-2-fluoroethenethiol</td><td>-463.4</td><td>-465.5</td><td>9.3 × 10<sup>-9</sup></td><td>1.6 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>4.0 × 10<sup>-3</sup></td></tr></tbody></table>

From the energies of the different products, we can compute the relative Boltzmann population as function of the temperature using the following equation:

$$ \text{Boltzmann population} = e^{\frac{\Delta H}{RT}} / \sum e^{\frac{\Delta H}{RT}} $$

with ΔH being the relative enthalpy, R the gas constant and T the temperature. The Boltzmann population analysis indicates that thioacetylfluoride is the predominant species formed, with 1-fluoroethenethiol being the second most abundant species. These species could be source of CHSF and CSF fragments but not of the SF fragment, which was observed experimentally. It should be noted that calculations provide insights into the thermochemistry, pointing to a highly exergonic reaction, but not into the kinetics, since the energy barrier of the transition states was not calculated. Given the exergonic nature of the reaction, products that have high energy barriers, or include rearrangements, and could proceed through multiple transition states may not be kinetically favored.

## 2.2. Measurements of the Rate Constant of Reaction (1)

In most experiments, the reaction rate constant was determined from the kinetics of C₂H₄S consumption ([C₂H₄S]₀ = (1.5 – 5.0) × 10¹¹ molecule cm⁻³), monitored in an excess of F₂ in the reactor (for concentrations of F₂ see Table 3).

<table><caption>**Table 3.** Summary of the measurements of the rate constant of reaction (1).</caption><thead><tr><th>T (K) <sup>a</sup></th><th>Excess Reactant</th><th>[Excess Reactant] <sup>b</sup></th><th>k<sub>1</sub>(±2σ) <sup>c</sup></th><th>Reactor Surface <sup>d</sup></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>220</td><td>F<sub>2</sub></td><td>0.52–5.35</td><td>6.30 ± 0.08</td><td>HW</td></tr><tr><td>235</td><td>F<sub>2</sub></td><td>0.39–4.70</td><td>6.28 ± 0.09</td><td>HW</td></tr><tr><td>253</td><td>F<sub>2</sub></td><td>0.39–5.53</td><td>6.15 ± 0.06</td><td>HW</td></tr><tr><td>265</td><td>C<sub>2</sub>H<sub>4</sub>S</td><td>0.24–4.82</td><td>6.34 ± 0.05</td><td>HW</td></tr><tr><td>275</td><td>F<sub>2</sub></td><td>0.30–4.60</td><td>6.06 ± 0.06</td><td>HW</td></tr><tr><td>298</td><td>F<sub>2</sub></td><td>0.36–5.45</td><td>5.92 ± 0.07</td><td>HW</td></tr><tr><td>315</td><td>C<sub>2</sub>H<sub>4</sub>S</td><td>0.23–2.31</td><td>6.22 ± 0.09</td><td>Q</td></tr><tr><td>325</td><td>F<sub>2</sub></td><td>0.18–5.24</td><td>5.91 ± 0.09</td><td>HW</td></tr><tr><td>340</td><td>F<sub>2</sub></td><td>0.20–4.00</td><td>6.00 ± 0.06</td><td>Q</td></tr><tr><td>360</td><td>F<sub>2</sub></td><td>0.36–4.02</td><td>6.03 ± 0.07</td><td>Q</td></tr><tr><td>390</td><td>F<sub>2</sub></td><td>0.35–4.68</td><td>6.13 ± 0.10</td><td>Q</td></tr><tr><td>420</td><td>C<sub>2</sub>H<sub>4</sub>S</td><td>0.22–1.94</td><td>5.87 ± 0.05</td><td>Q</td></tr><tr><td>460</td><td>F<sub>2</sub></td><td>0.36–3.69</td><td>6.06 ± 0.12</td><td>Q</td></tr><tr><td>500</td><td>F<sub>2</sub></td><td>0.29–3.19</td><td>5.86 ± 0.06</td><td>Q</td></tr><tr><td>560</td><td>F<sub>2</sub></td><td>0.22–3.30</td><td>5.83 ± 0.11</td><td>Q</td></tr><tr><td>625</td><td>C<sub>2</sub>H<sub>4</sub>S</td><td>0.18–1.73</td><td>6.07 ± 0.06</td><td>Q</td></tr><tr><td>710</td><td>F<sub>2</sub></td><td>0.21–2.88</td><td>6.03 ± 0.09</td><td>Q</td></tr><tr><td>800</td><td>F<sub>2</sub></td><td>0.27–2.51</td><td>5.99 ± 0.06</td><td>Q</td></tr></tbody></table>

<footnote><sup>a</sup> 8–12 decay traces at each temperature; <sup>b</sup> units of 10¹³ molecule cm⁻³; <sup>c</sup> units of 10⁻¹² cm³ molecule⁻¹ s⁻¹, statistical 2σ uncertainty is given, total estimated uncertainty of k₁ is 15%; <sup>d</sup> HW: halocarbon wax; Q: quartz.</footnote>
Examples of observed C₂H₄S decays are shown in Figure 4. The temporal profiles of C₂H₄S were fitted to an exponential function [C₂H₄S]₀ × exp(-k₁' × t), where [C₂H₄S]₀ and [C₂H₄S] are the initial and time-dependent concentrations of thiirane, respectively, and k₁' = k₁ × [F₂] is the pseudo-first-order rate constant. The diffusion corrections made in [7] to the k₁' values measured in this way were less than 10%.

<figure><img src="image_7.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 4.** Example of the kinetics of C₂H₄S consumption in reaction (1) at different concentrations of F₂ observed at T = 325 K.</figcaption></figure>

Examples of second-order plots measured at different temperatures are shown in Figure 5. A linear least-square fit through the origin of the k₁' data as a function of [F₂] provides the rate constant of reaction (1) at the corresponding temperature. All the results obtained for k₁ are given in Table 3.

<figure><img src="image_8.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 5.** Pseudo-first-order rate constant, k₁' = k₁ × [F₂], as a function of F₂ concentration at different temperatures: (a) T = 220 and 325 K; (b) T = 500 and 800 K.</figcaption></figure>

In some experiments, the rate constant of reaction (1) was determined from the kinetics of F₂ consumption monitored in an excess of thiirane in the reactor. The initial concentration of F₂ in these experiments was ≤ 10¹² molecule cm⁻³. The observed C₂H₄S consumption (within a few %) was taken into account by using the average C₂H₄S concentration over
the reaction zone. Examples of second-order plots and final values of $k_1$ obtained in this series of experiments are shown in Figure 6 and Table 3, respectively.

<figure><img src="image_9.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 6.** Pseudo-first-order rate constant, $k_1' = k_1 \times [C_2H_4S]$, as a function of $C_2H_4S$ concentration observed at T = 420 and 625 K.</figcaption></figure>

The results of all $k_1$ measurements are summarized in Figure 7.

<figure><img src="image_10.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 7.** Temperature dependence of the rate constant of reaction (1). Partially shown error bars correspond to estimated total uncertainty of 15% on the measurements of $k_1$.</figcaption></figure>

It can be noted that there is an excellent agreement between the data obtained under different experimental conditions, from $F_2$ and $C_2H_4S$ kinetics in excess of $C_2H_4S$ and $F_2$, respectively. Fitting the dependence of $k_1$ on temperature to the exponential function (solid line in Figure 6) gives the following Arrhenius expression:

$$k_1 = (5.79 \pm 0.17) \times 10^{-2} \exp(-(16 \pm 10)/T) \text{ cm}^3 \text{ molecule}^{-1} \text{ s}^{-1}$$
at T = 220–800 K with 2σ uncertainties representing the precision of the fit. We estimate this expression to be accurate within an overall 2σ uncertainty of 15% over the investigated temperature range. Considering the virtual independence of the rate constant of temperature, the temperature independent value of

$$k_1 = (6.05 \pm 0.90) \times 10^{-12} \text{ cm}^3 \text{ molecule}^{-1} \text{ s}^{-1}$$

can be recommended for the rate constant of reaction (1) (dashed line in Figure 6) in the temperature range (220–800) K. The observed temperature independence of $k_1$ appears to be consistent with a reaction mechanism consisting of barrier-free formation of an intermediate followed by its decomposition into reactants or reaction products.

Turnipseed and Birks [4] in their study of the F₂+DMS reaction speculated that the reaction can be initiated by the transfer of an electron from the sulfur compound to F₂, forming a charge-transfer complex. Considering that the electron transfer process must be either exothermic or thermoneutral for the reaction to proceed at a measurable rate they calculated a critical distance, $r_c = 14.4/(\text{IP(reactant)} - \text{EA(F}_2))$, which corresponds to the maximum distance at which the charge-transfer complex can be stable and the electron can be transferred (EA(F₂): electron affinity of molecular fluorine; IP(reactant): ionization potential of the second reactant). By analyzing the $r_c$ for F₂ interactions with a number of compounds, the authors estimated that a critical distance greater than 2.3 Å is required for the reaction to occur [4]. The present data for the reaction of F₂ with thiirane are consistent with this reasoning, given that $r_c = 2.4$ Å (calculated with IP(C₂H₄S) = 9.05 eV [8] and EA(F₂) = 3.08 eV [9]) and a relatively high value was measured for the reaction rate constant.

### 3. Materials and Methods

#### 3.1. Experimental

The experimental setup consisted of a discharge flow reactor combined with a modulated molecular beam mass spectrometer with electron impact ionization operated at 30 eV energy (Figure 1) [10,11]. The reaction time was determined by the position of the movable injector relative to the sampling cone of the mass spectrometer; changing its position makes it possible to vary the reaction time. Linear flow velocities in the reactor ranged from 1730 to 2400 cm s⁻¹. The chemical composition of the reactive system was monitored by sampling gas-phase molecules from the flow reactor and detecting them with a mass spectrometer. All species involved were detected at their parent peaks.

Two flow reactors were used in this study to cover a wide temperature range for kinetic measurements. The first reactor, operated at high temperatures (315–800 K), consisted of an electrically heated quartz tube (45 cm length and 2.5 cm i.d.) with water-cooled attachments (Figure 1) [12]. The temperature in the reactor was measured with a K-type thermocouple positioned in the middle of the reactor in contact with its outer surface [12]. The second flow reactor (Figure S1) used at lower temperatures (220–325 K) consisted of a Pyrex tube (45 cm length and 2.4 cm i.d.); temperature regulation was achieved by circulating thermostated ethanol. The walls of the Pyrex reactor, as well as the mobile injector of fluorine atoms, were coated with halocarbon wax to prevent the reaction of the F atom with the glass surface.

The absolute concentrations of F₂, H₂ and C₂H₄S were calculated from their flow rates, obtained from pressure drop measurements of their mixtures in He stored in calibrated volume flasks. Absolute calibration of the mass spectrometer to HF was carried out by titrating a known concentration of H₂ with an excess of F atoms ([HF] = [H₂]) in a fast reaction:

$$F + H_2 \rightarrow HF + H \quad (2)$$

$k_2 = 1.24 \times 10^{-10} \exp(-507/T) \text{ cm}^3 \text{ molecule}^{-1} \text{ s}^{-1}$ (T = 220–960 K) [13]. Fluorine atoms in these experiments were generated in a microwave discharge of trace amounts of F₂ in He. It was verified by mass spectrometry that more than 95% of F₂ was dissociated in
the microwave discharge. To reduce F atom reactions with the glass surface inside the microwave cavity, a ceramic (Al₂O₃) tube was inserted in this part of the injector.

The purities of the gases used were as follows: He (>99.9995%, Alphagaz, Air Liquide, Paris, France), passed through liquid nitrogen trap; H₂ (> 99.998%, Alphagaz); and F₂, 5% in helium (Alphagaz); C₂H₄S (Merck, Merck SA, Lyon, France), 98%.

## 3.2. Computational Methodology

In order to select the correct methodology to perform the computation, a thorough benchmark was carried out. Based on Vila et al. [14], we used density functional theory (DFT) with a B3LYP function in comparison with the Schrödinger-based MP2 method and CCSD method, which is used as reference, having the highest level of accuracy among the benchmarked methods. In practice, DFT, MP2 and CCSD calculations were performed with the Gaussian 16 software [15], while the more time-consuming CCSD(T)-CBS calculations were carried out using the Molpro 2023.2.0 software [16–18].

B3LYP and MP2 methods were compared using the same basis set (6-311++G(3d2f,3p2d)) as the CCSD methodology. The criteria to determine the accuracy of B3LYP and MP2 compared to CCSD were based on the geometries of the molecules and their energies once corrected with single-point computation at the same level of methodology as when using CCSD(T) with a CBS correction (aug-cc-pVTZ:aug-cc-pVQZ). In Figure S2, the energy differences are introduced and it is shown that only the MP2 method remains with differences under chemical accuracy (4.18 kJ/mol). Figures S3–S10 illustrate the geometry differences for each product, showing negligible discrepancies in bond lengths (maximum of 0.02 Å), indicating the minimal impact of the method on this parameter. Concerning angles, small differences are observed with a maximum of 1.28 degrees. However, we can start to observe some indication that MP2 is slightly better than B3LYP to reproduce the angles. Finally, concerning dihedral angles, strong differences can be observed in the case of the B3LYP methodology compared to MP2. Indeed, in the case of cis-2-fluoroethenethiol, ethenylthiohypofluorite and fluoroethanethial some dihedral angles increase a lot (up to 127.55 degrees) in the case of B3LYP. Such differences indicate a clear change in the configuration of the molecule. In MP2, the differences are up to 7.02 degrees, which is more reasonable. In conclusion, the MP2 methodology seems more reliable in comparison to the CCSD method. The computational cost increases slightly compared to DFT but is still reasonable compared to the CCSD methodology, which is prohibitively expensive.

Using both B3LYP and MP2, which are reasonable in terms of computational cost, the 6-311++G(3d2f,3p2d) and aug-cc-pVDZ were compared to the aug-cc-pVTZ basis set, which is the largest among the three. Geometries and energies are compared, as they are in the benchmark of the method. In Figure S11, energy differences clearly indicate that basis set size has an effect, as the energy is above chemical accuracy in the case of 6-311++G(3d2f,3p2d) and for ethenylthiohypofluorite with the aug-cc-pVDZ. Figures S12–S19 introduce geometry differences. It is evident that the 6-311++G(3d2f,3p2d) basis set struggles to accurately represent bonds involving sulfur and fluorine atoms. It is even more remarkable in the case of ethenylthiohypofluorite, where the error is around 0.16 Å (B3LYP) and 0.18 Å (MP2). These differences can significantly impact the calculated energies. Dihedral angles are notably impacted by the size of the basis set for both methods. Therefore, the larger aug-cc-pVTZ basis set is recommended.

**Supplementary Materials:** The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/molecules29153636/s1, Figure S1: configuration of the low-temperature flow reactor; Figure S2: single-point energy differences between B3LYP, MP2 and CCSD methods; Figures S3–S10: bond length differences calculated with different methods; Figure S11: single-point energy differences for different basis set sizes; Figures S12–S19: geometry differences between different basis sets; Figure S20: Boltzmann relative distribution of the reaction products as a function of temperature; optimized geometry; inputs.
**Author Contributions:** Conceptualization, experimental investigation, data analysis and interpretation, writing, Y.B.; computation, methodology, validation, formal analysis, writing, A.R.; validation, writing, supervision, V.V.; review, editing, supervision, M.N.R. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

**Funding:** This research was partly funded by ANR through the PIA (Programme d'Investissement d'Avenir, grant number ANR-10-LABX-100-01), Labex CaPPA, funded by ANR through the PIA under contract ANR-11-LABX-0005-01, and CPER ECRIN project, both funded by the Hauts-de-France Regional Council and the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF).

**Institutional Review Board Statement:** Not applicable.

**Informed Consent Statement:** Not applicable.

**Data Availability Statement:** The data supporting reported results are available in this article.

**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

## References

1. Lu, Y.-J.; Lee, L.; Pan, J.-W.; Xie, T.; Witek, H.A.; Lin, J.J. Barrierless reactions between two closed-shell molecules. I. Dynamics of $F_2+CH_3SCH_3$ reaction. *J. Chem. Phys.* **2008**, *128*, 104317. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

2. Shao, H.-C.; Xie, T.; Lu, Y.-J.; Chang, C.-H.; Pan, J.-W.; Lin, J.J. Barrierless reactions between two closed-shell molecules. II. Dynamics of $F_2+CH_3SSCH_3$ reaction. *J. Chem. Phys.* **2009**, *130*, 014301. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

3. Bedjanian, Y.; Romanias, M.N.; Morin, J. Reaction of Limonene with $F_2$: Rate Coefficient and Products. *J. Phys. Chem. A* **2014**, *118*, 10233–10239. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

4. Turnipseed, A.A.; Birks, J.W. Kinetics of the reaction of molecular fluorine with dimethyl sulfide. *J. Phys. Chem.* **1991**, *95*, 6569–6574. [CrossRef]

5. Manion, J.A.; Huie, R.E.; Levin, R.D.; Burgess, D.R.; Orkin, V.L.; Tsang, W.; McGivern, W.S.; Hudgens, J.W.; Knyazev, V.D.; Atkinson, D.B.; et al. NIST Chemical Kinetics Database, NIST Standard Reference Database 17, Version 7.0 (Web Version), Release 1.6.8, Data version 2015.12, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, Maryland, 20899-8320. Available online: http://kinetics.nist.gov/ (accessed on 3 July 2024).

6. Nelson, J.K.; Getty, R.H.; Birks, J.W. Fluorine induced chemiluminescence detector for reduced sulfur compounds. *Anal. Chem.* **1983**, *55*, 1767–1770. [CrossRef]

7. Kaufman, F. Kinetics of elementary radical reactions in the gas phase. *J. Phys. Chem.* **1984**, *88*, 4909–4917. [CrossRef]

8. Butler, J.J.; Baer, T. A photoionization study of organosulfur ring compounds—Thiirane, thietane and tetrahydrothiophene. *Org. Mass Spectrom.* **1983**, *18*, 248–253. [CrossRef]

9. Bartmess, J.E.; McIver, R.T. Chapter 11—The gas-phase acidity scale. In *Gas Phase Ion Chemistry*; Bowers, M.T., Ed.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1979; pp. 87–121.

10. Bedjanian, Y. Rate Coefficients of the Reactions of Fluorine Atoms with $H_2S$ and SH over the Temperature Range 220–960 K. *Molecules* **2022**, *27*, 8365. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

11. Bedjanian, Y. Temperature-Dependent Kinetic Study of the Reactions of Hydrogen Atoms with $H_2S$ and $C_2H_4S$. *Molecules* **2023**, *28*, 7883. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

12. Morin, J.; Romanias, M.N.; Bedjanian, Y. Experimental study of the reactions of OH radicals with propane, *n*-pentane, and *n*-heptane over a wide temperature range. *Int. J. Chem. Kinet.* **2015**, *47*, 629–637. [CrossRef]

13. Bedjanian, Y. Rate constants for the reactions of F atoms with $H_2$ and $D_2$ over the temperature range 220–960 K. *Int. J. Chem. Kinet.* **2021**, *53*, 527–535. [CrossRef]

14. Vila, A.; Puente, E.d.l.; Mosquera, R.A. QTAIM study of the electronic structure and strain energy of fluorine substituted oxiranes and thiiranes. *Chem. Phys. Lett.* **2005**, *405*, 440–447. [CrossRef]

15. Frisch, M.J.; Trucks, G.W.; Schlegel, H.B.; Scuseria, G.E.; Robb, M.A.; Cheeseman, J.R.; Scalmani, G.; Barone, V.; Petersson, G.A.; Nakatsuji, H.; et al. *Gaussian* 16, Rev. C.01; Gaussian, Inc.: Wallingford, CT, USA, 2016.

16. Werner, H.-J.; Knowles, P.J.; Manby, F.R.; Black, J.A.; Doll, K.; Heßelmann, A.; Kats, D.; Köhn, A.; Korona, T.; Kreplin, D.A.; et al. The Molpro quantum chemistry package. *J. Chem. Phys.* **2020**, *152*. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

17. Werner, H.-J.; Knowles, P.J.; Knizia, G.; Manby, F.R.; Schütz, M. Molpro: A general-purpose quantum chemistry program package. *WIREs Comput. Mol. Sci.* **2012**, *2*, 242–253. [CrossRef]

18. Werner, H.-J.; Knowles, P.J.; Celani, P.; Györffy, W.; Hesselmann, A.; Kats, D.; Knizia, G.; Köhn, A.; Korona, T.; Kreplin, D.; et al. MOLPRO, Version, a Package of ab Initio Programs. Available online: https://www.molpro.net (accessed on 3 July 2024).

**Disclaimer/Publisher's Note:** The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.