High Energy Chemistry, Vol. 38, No. 3, 2004, pp. 135–142. Translated from Khimiya Vysokikh Energii, Vol.

38, No. 3, 2004, pp. 163–170.

Original Russian Text Copyright © 2004 by Margulis.

REVIEWS

Sonochemistry as a New Promising Area

of High Energy Chemistry
M. A. Margulis1
Andreev Institute of Acoustics, State Research Center, ul. Shvernika 4, Moscow, 107005 Russia
Received March 26, 2002

Abstract—Sonochemistry is one of the most intensively developing areas of high energy chemistry in both the-
oretical and applied aspects. There has been considerable progress in sonochemistry: many sonochemical reac-
tions in nonaqueous systems were revealed, power yields for some sonochemical reactions and the initial power
yields of ultrasonic degradation of water were determined, single-bubble sonoluminescence was discovered, the
formation of radicals in an ultrasound field was detected by spin trapping, a method for the generation of pow-
erful low-frequency (of the order of 10–200 Hz) cavitation fields was developed and chemical and physico-
chemical effects in these fields were revealed, high-performance hydrodynamic apparatus were designed and
sonoluminescence and chemical effects were observed in such systems, ultrasound-induced oscillating reac-
tions were discovered, and the generalized electric theory of cavitation processes was elaborated.

1 Among the traditional high-energy chemistry areas
of principal theoretical and practical importance [1],
such as radiation chemistry, plasma chemistry, photo-
chemistry, and laser chemistry, sonochemistry occupies
a special place as it studies the chemical and physico-
chemical processes induced by acoustic vibrations in a
medium.
The chemical effect of ionizing radiation [2] was
discovered shortly before that of ultrasound [3]; how-
ever, many scientists, not to mention general public,
either have never heard or have a very vague idea of this
subject.
During the two last decades, five comprehensive
books [4–8] on the issue and hundreds of scientific
papers have been published and eleven international
conferences on the chemical effects of ultrasound
(including those of the European Sonochemical Soci-
ety) have been held; there is also the international jour-
nal Ultrasonics Sonochemistry.
Note the most important advances that enabled con-
siderable progress in this area: many sonochemical
reactions were found to occur in nonaqueous systems,
power yields for some sonochemical reactions and the
initial power yields of ultrasonic degradation of water
molecules were determined [5], the single-bubble
sonoluminescence (SL) was discovered [9–12] and the
reason for its difference from multibubble SL was the-
oretically substantiated [13, 14], the formation of free
radicals in an ultrasound field was detected by spin
trapping [15], a method for generating powerful low-
frequency (of the order of 10–200 Hz) cavitation fields
was developed [16] and chemical and physicochemical
effects in these fields were revealed [5], high-perfor-
mance hydrodynamic apparatus were designed and SL
1 E-mail: margulis@akin.ru
rise and chemical effects in such systems were
observed [17], ultrasound-induced oscillating reactions
were discovered [18–20], and the theory of local elec-
trization was elaborated and generalized for cavitation
processes [21–23]. Another interesting and promising
line of research is the detection of acoustic emission,
which arises in solids under mechanical strain, as well
as upon crack nucleation and propagation [24].
ENERGETICS OF SONOCHEMICAL
REACTIONS
Only such energy of acoustic vibration as is
absorbed by a system is sonochemically active [5]. In
photochemistry, this statement is equivalent to the
Grotthus–Draper law according to which only
absorbed light is photochemically effective. A part of
light flux energy that has not been absorbed by the sys-
tem is not taken into account in calculation. In radioly-
sis, the power yield is referred to 100 eV of absorbed
energy. In energy calculations in sonochemistry, it is
also reasonable to take into account not all acoustic
energy E input to a solution but only its small portion
consumed for the formation of radicals, the chemicoa-
coustic energy Eca. In this connection, by analogy with
radiolysis, we introduced the concept of power yield
F(Y) of a sonochemical-reaction participant Y produced
(or disappeared) per 100 eV of Eca [4]. Since it was pos-
sible to successively consider radical recombination in
the cavitation bubble and reaction in the liquid with sol-
utes, the concept of the initial power yield of the prod-
uct Y of sonochemical degradation of solvent (water)
molecules formed per 100 eV of Eca disregarding sec-
ondary reactions in solution, FY , was advanced. The ini-
tial power yields, the radical recombination factors

0018-1439/04/3803-0135 © 2004 MAIK “Nauka /Interperiodica”

136 MARGULIS
Initial power yields, chemicoacoustic efficiencies,* and radical recombination factors** [5]
FH F HO2 FOH F H2
Gas ηca × 103
molecule (or radical)/100 eV of Eca
Ar 1.5 0.13 – 0.11 1.46
He 0.22 0.22 – 0.18 1.44
O2 0.98 – 0.52 1.08 – 1.45
* The chemicoacoustic efficiency is defined by ηca ≡ Eca /E.
'' O and F H
** F H ' O are the initial yields of H2O2 produced by the recombination of radicals HO2 and OH, respectively.
2 2 2 2
βH ≡ F H2 /FH and βOH ≡ F H2 O2 /FOH, and the chemicoa-
coustic efficiencies in the sonolysis of water and aque-
ous solution in an Ar, He, or O2 atmosphere were
obtained (table) [5].
ULTRASONIC ENERGY COMPARED
WITH OTHER PHYSICAL IMPACTS ON MATTER
Considering in the general form the reaction kinet-
ics of radicals produced in an ultrasound field, it is nec-
essary to take into account the pulse character of their
generation and their inhomogeneous distribution in the
bulk. True, local concentrations of radicals significantly
exceed the average concentrations. In the core of a cav-
itation bubble, the concentration of electrons upon elec-
tric breakdown can be high enough and, thus, can lead
to the formation of both hydrated and “dry” electrons
[5]. A comparative study on the sonolysis and radioly-
sis of aqueous solutions was reported in [25, 26].
The radical recombination factor β is a fundamental
characteristic of any type of radiation and a generalized
parameter suitable for comparing ultrasound waves
with other nonthermal methods of impact on matter.
This factor depends on the energy density, the size of its
localization region, the overall number and concentra-
tion of produced species, and their spatial distribution,
as well as on the physicochemical parameters of the
energy release region. In moderate sound fields, the
steady-state number density of bubbles oscillating dur-
ing a wave period in 1 cm3 is of the order of 103–
104 cm–3. The mean distance between neighboring bub-
bles is at least 〈l〉 = 10–2 cm. The time tl taken by the rad-
icals to diffuse over a distance 〈l〉 is 〈l〉2/2D (where D is
the diffusion coefficient). Since tl ≈ 0.5 s  T0 (where
T0 is the acoustic vibration period), each imploding
cavitation bubble and a small volume of liquid with a
radius of ρ  〈l〉 that surrounds this bubble may be con-
sidered an isolated region and interactions between rad-
icals produced in neighboring bubble may be ignored.
To determine β, we considered the probability of
recombination and diffusion of radicals [27]. In the
presence of a solute with a spherically symmetric dis-
tribution with respect to the bubble center, the curves
describing the radical and solute concentration overlap
F H'' 2 O2 F H' 2 O2 F H2 O2 F -H2 O
βH βOH
– – 1.47 3.05 11.2 13.4
– – 1.46 3.10 6.5 8.1
1.17 2.62 3.42 2.8 1.1
at t = tβ and the radical recombination factor βR ≡
F R2 /FR is obtained. Here, the time tβ is determined by
the half-width of radical distribution (simplifying con-
dition for indistinguishable radicals):
bβ = 4Dtβ.
In [27] the following equation was derived for the
Gaussian distribution of radicals with initial and final
half-widths b0 and bβ, respectively, at which the radical
recombination factor β is attained:
N 0 σ0 bβ – b0
β = -----------------------
3/2
---------------- ,
2 ( 8π ) λ b β b 0
where λ is the mean free path of a particle.
This equation can be applied not only to sonochem-
ical reactions but also to studying radiation-chemical,
mechanochemical, and other high-energy chemistry
processes when the initial amount of active species in
the energy deposition region, as well as the half-widths
b0 and bβ of their distribution (or at least the ratio bβ/b0),
can be estimated. The evaluation of β gave β ≈ 10,
which is close enough to the experimental values of βH
and βOH in an Ar or He atmosphere [5] (see table).
The minimal size of the mean cavitation bubble and
the initial number of particles in this bubble, N0 ≈ 104–
106, are respectively many orders of magnitude greater
than the dimensions of spurs produced by ionizing radi-
ation and the number of radicals in each spur (e.g., N0 ≤
10 under radiolysis [28]) and, moreover, the number of
radicals in the “cage” upon photolysis. Figure 1 shows
the recombination factors βç and βéç for H and OH
radicals, respectively, as a function of linear energy
transfer ∂E/∂x for different types of ionizing radiation
and includes corresponding data obtained upon US cav-
itation in Ar- and He-saturated water [5]. In terms of the
radical distribution density, ultrasonic cavitation
approaches the effect of particulate radiation produced
in the nuclear reaction
10B + n 7Li + 4He,
in which the recoil Li atoms and α-particles separate
with a mean energy of 2.35 MeV (where ∂E/∂x ≈
200 eV/nm)), or that of 210Po α-particles but greatly
differs from the effect of β-, γ-, and X-rays (∂E/∂x ≈
HIGH ENERGY CHEMISTRY Vol. 38 No. 3 2004
 SONOCHEMISTRY AS A NEW PROMISING AREA
0.2–2 eV/nm). Like the effect of heavy particles, ultra-
sonic cavitation is also characterized by a high density
of energy concentration. With a decrease in the ioniza-
tion and excitation energies of inert gases, the concen-
tration of radicals in a cavitation bubble increases as a
result of excitation transfer and charge exchange;
hence, β(Ar) > β(He). Therefore, it may be expected that
βç and βéç will increase through the series He, Ne, Ar,
Kr, Xe, Rn.
THE SPECIFICS OF INDUSTRIAL APPLICATION
OF HIGH-POWER ULTRASOUND
Unlike the case of radiation-chemical and photo-
chemical processes, sonochemistry is free of radioac-
tive waste management and radiation protection prob-
lems and does not require the use of light-transparent
materials, respectively. Sonochemical processes can be
conducted in reactors made from any engineering mate-
rials—in the continuous mode, under pressure, at high
temperatures, etc. In addition, high-intensity cavitation
fields can be created by mechanical or hydrodynamic
means. For some processes, the generator of low-fre-
quency acoustic vibrations in the audio and subsonic
range (10–200 Hz) that we have designed recently [29]
holds good promise. In the case of low-frequency cavi-
tation, there is no need to use powerful ultrasonic gen-
erators and transducers with a high unit power. Low-
frequency transducers are nonresonant sources, so that
tunable acoustic vibrations can be generated by their
means (unlike the case of magnetostrictive or piezo-
electric devices). For such transducers, there is virtually
no limit on the reactor capacity.
CLASSIFICATION OF SONOCHEMICAL
REACTIONS
There are many reactions that significantly change
their rate and product composition under ultrasonic
radiation; however, they can proceed without sonica-
tion (e.g., catalytic oxidation of SO2 [30], oxidation of
carboxymethylcellulose [26], etc.). The reasons for
their strong acceleration are not always understandable;
nonetheless, the chemical effect of ultrasound cannot
be reduced only to transition to the kinetic region [5].
Another group of sonochemical reactions includes the
processes that cannot proceed at all without sonication
Eca. Depending on the mechanism, these reactions can
be arbitrarily subdivided into the following classes [5].
(1) Oxidation–reduction reactions in water occur-
ring in the liquid phase between solutes and the prod-
ucts of ultrasonic breakdown of water molecules,
which are generated in the cavitation bubble and diffuse
into solution (the mechanism of sonication effect is
indirect [4], as in the case of radiolysis of aqueous sys-
tems [31, 32]).
(2) Reactions inside the bubble between dissolved
gases and high-vapor-pressure solutes (e.g., synthesis
HIGH ENERGY CHEMISTRY Vol. 38 No. 3 2004
137
logβ
βH βOH
6'
8' 8
1 6
7' 7
5'
5
4
0
3
2
4'
1 3'
2'
1'
–1 0 1 logdE/dx, [eV/nm]
Fig. 1. The logarithmic plot of the recombination factors for
H and OH radicals versus the LET value ∂E/∂x of ionizing
radiations: (1, 1') γ-radiation, (2, 2') X-rays, (3, 3') deuter-
ons, (4, 4') helium ions, (5, 5') 210Po α-particles, (6, 6') B(n,
α) recoil particles, and ultrasonic waves in (7, 7') a helium
and (8, 8') an argon atmosphere.
of nitrogen oxides upon sonication of water containing
dissolved air or sonolysis of water containing dissolved
ëç3ëééç and nitrogen, etc.). The mechanism of cer-
tain steps of these reactions is similar to that of gas-
phase radiolysis [33].
(3) Chain reactions in solution initiated by a sub-
stance that dissociates in the cavitation bubble (not by
radical products of water degradation); e.g., the bro-
mine- or alkyl bromide-initiated isomerization reaction
of maleic acid and its esters to fumaric acid.
(4) Reactions involving macromolecules (e.g., deg-
radation of polymer molecules and induced polymer-
ization by this degradation); these processes resemble
in many respects mechanically initiated or radiation-
induced polymerization.
(5) Initiation of ultrasonic explosion in liquid or
solid explosives (e.g., explosions in NI3, tetrani-
tromethane, trinitrotoluene, etc.).
(6) Sonochemical reactions in nonaqueous systems.
Until 1963, it was believed that the sonochemical
reactions could occur only in aqueous solutions, since
“water is the most favorable and unique medium for
radical generation in cavitation fields” [34]. After first
successful works on sonochemistry of nonaqueous sys-
tems [35] (or water-containing systems where the for-
138 MARGULIS

% In anhydrous ethylene glycol, peroxide compounds are

100 produced upon sonication at 0°ë in an oxygen atmo-
2 sphere (thermal reactions can be ignored under these
conditions). This reaction did not take place upon the
sonolysis of ethylene glycol in an argon medium.
Detailed determination of methanol sonolysis products
is reported in [46, 47].
Degradation and dimerization of alkyl halides.
60 The ultrasonic treatment of both aqueous solutions and
dry alkyl halides results in the release of halogen atoms.
The release of iodine was observed upon the sonication
of a CHI3 solution in carbon tetrachloride [48], the
addition of dry kaolin sharply increasing the I2 forma-
tion rate. The mechanism of these catalytic effects is
still unclear.
20 Reactions of halogenated derivatives with metals
(Wurtz reaction). When exposed to an ultrasonic field,
1 3 many halogenated organic compounds in the presence
of alkali metals form dimers at a high rate under mild
100 300 500 t, min conditions [49, 50]:
(Li)
Fig. 2. Time dependence for (1) the MePhSiCl2 concentra- RX ))) R–R + LiX,
tion and for the yield of (2) cyclic pentamer and (3) linear
oligomer in toluene in an ultrasonic bath; The sodium where R is alkyl, aryl, benzyl, or benzoyl. It was shown
excess was 50%. [49] that the reaction of Me2Cl2Si or MePhCl2Si with
an Li suspension in mineral oil was considerably
enhanced by ultrasound waves. The products of the
mation of H and OH radicals does not play a significant reaction were linear or cyclic oligomers:
role), the number of publications on sonochemistry of
nonaqueous systems continuously increases. R2
+Li
R1R2SiCl2 ))) ( Si )n + LiCl,
SOME SONOCHEMICAL REACTIONS R1
IN NONAQUEOUS SYSTEMS Ph Ph
Sonochemical reactions in nonaqueous systems are Si Si
Me Me
discussed in detail in the book [8]. Let us consider only Li Ph Ph
some results of theoretical and practical interest. MePhSiCl2 ))) Si Si + LiCl.
Me Me
Pyrolysis [36] and oxidation [37] of saturated Si
hydrocarbons are processes with the highest power Me Me
consumption. In the sonolysis of alkanes under argon,
the principal products were found to be H2, CH4, C2H2, The sonolysis of dialkydichlorosilanes in a tetrahy-
drofuran solution in the presence of sodium gives poly-
C2H4, and C3H6. The same products were formed dur-
organosilanes in a high yield and polymers [51]:
ing pyrolysis [38], electric-discharge treatment [39],
vacuum UV irradiation [40], radiolysis [41], and shock R' R'
wave treatment [42]. The oxidation of some aromatic +Na
Cl Si Cl ))) ( Si )n.
hydrocarbons is enhanced by ultrasound; for example,
the yield of indanone in the oxidation of indan increases R'' R''
from 22 to 78% under certain conditions [43]. In a more close study of the reaction of MePhCl2Si
Oxidation of aliphatic aldehydes proceeds at a with alkali metals, we revealed an interesting effect [52,
substantially higher rate in an ultrasonic field; the selec- 53]: the emergence of a lasting oscillatory reaction
tivity of the reaction of aldehydes that are difficult to with a period of 200 min, which was initiated by ultra-
oxidize increases [44]. sound waves (Fig. 2). In the MePhCl2Si–Na–toluene
Oxidation of alcohols with KMnO4 is accelerated system, the formation of cyclic oligomers and linear
by a factor of 25–40 in an ultrasonic field2 [45]: polymer is observed, where their interconversion
occurs at a certain sonolysis time and methylphenylcy-
OH O clopentasilanes are produced under fairly long sonica-
KMnO4
CH3(CH2)5 CH CH3 ))) CH3(CH2)5 C CH3. tion (Fig. 2). In the absence of ultrasound, the conven-
tional slow parallel reactions of the formation of linear
2 The sign ))) symbolizes the chemical action of ultrasound. polymers proceed to give cyclic oligomers in a low

HIGH ENERGY CHEMISTRY Vol. 38 No. 3 2004

 SONOCHEMISTRY AS A NEW PROMISING AREA 139

yield: the oscillating reaction is initiated by ultrasound and magnesium organometallic compounds from vari-
waves. Along with these long-term oscillatory reac- ous alkyl halides:
tions, interesting sonochemical and resonant effects RX + Li RLi + LiX,
[54] were revealed in Belousov–Zhabotinskii oscillat-
ing systems [55]. Further investigation of reactions of RX + Mg RMgX.
this type probably will allow oscillating processes to be When a synthesis reaction is carried out in an ultra-
classified with the seventh group (see the preceding sonic field, there is no need to thoroughly dry and
section). purify the solvent and to use initiator additives, the
Alkylation of aromatic compounds. Various alkyl induction period is strongly shortened, and the process
halides in the presence of an alkali and a phase-transfer becomes safe and reproducible. Ultrasonic waves sub-
catalyst are able to N-alkylate diphenylamine [56] or stantially accelerate and increase the yield of reactions
other aromatic amines at a low rate [57]. Ultrasound of direct synthesis of Al, Zn, Pd, Ga, and other metal
waves increase the rate of these reactions by one or compounds [62–64]; e.g.,
more orders of magnitude [57]. Reacting with various RHal + Al R3AlHal3,
phenols, alkyl halides alkylate the aromatic ring. How-
ever, it was shown [58] that O-alkylation took place in Br + Al ))) Al2Br3.
an ultrasonic field: 3
OH OPr The organic lithium and magnesium compounds
Me Me Me Me obtained can be isolated as desired products and be
PrI/K2CO3 used in various Grignard syntheses. These organome-
)))
tallic compounds can also be used in situ (without iso-
lation). When an alkyl halide is reacted with lithium
Preparation of thioamides and thiocarbamates. and a carbonyl compound (Barbier reaction), the orga-
Thioamides are an interesting class of organic com- nometallic compound is first produced, which rapidly
pounds and are used in many organic syntheses. They reacts with an aldehyde or ketone, and subsequent
are obtained by heating a corresponding amide with hydrolysis yields the corresponding alcohol:
excess P4S10:
R' R' OLi H2O R' OH
RLi + CO ))) C C ,
RCONH2 + P4S10 RCSNH2 + P2O5. R'' R'' R LiOH
R'' R
These reactions take a long time and require a large where R, R', and R" are various alkyls or aryls. The
excess of P4S10 and elevated temperature. The reaction Barbier reaction of allyl or vinyl bromide proceeds
is strongly accelerated by ultrasonic treatment [59]. smoothly and with a high yield; although the formation
of an organic lithium compound with them is not easy
Thiocarbamine acid esters (thiocarbamates) pre- [65]. Side reactions (reduction, enolization, etc.) are
pared by the reaction of salts with alkyl halides have reduced to minimum.
progressively widening application as herbicides. The
reaction slowly proceeds with certain alkyl halides, and The organic Li and Mg compounds RM produced in
temperature elevation is needed. However, salts of thio- an ultrasonic field can rapidly and selectively react in
carbamic acids are thermally unstable, and a yield situ with dimethylformamide in the Bouveault reac-
greater than 50–60% is usually unattainable. We have tion [65] yielding aldehydes or dialdehydes related to
shown [60] that the reaction rate is dramatically the starting alkyl halides:
increased (approximately by a factor of 100) by expo- OLi H+
sure to ultrasound waves: RM + Me2NCHO ))) CO
R
O O
RCHO + NMe2H.
N C SNa + RCl ))) N C SR + NaCl,
Ullmann reaction is strongly accelerated by the
action of ultrasonic waves, and the yield of correspond-
where R is alkyl. The selective acceleration of the ing biphenyl derivatives increases. For example, the
desired reaction in an ultrasound field makes it possible rate of 2,2'-dinitrobiphenyl formation in the reactions
to obtain the product in a quantitative yield and to elim-
inate the product isolation and purification steps. Note NO2 NO2 NO2
that the decomposition products of the starting salt
+Cu
make up to 33% in the 3-h reaction in the absence of I ))) + CuI2
ultrasound.
Synthesis of organometallic compounds. It was increases approximately by a factor of 50 [66] and the
shown [61] that sonication made it possible to signifi- yield reaches 81% against 1.5% under intense mechan-
cantly improve the process of preparation of lithium ical stirring in the absence of ultrasound.

HIGH ENERGY CHEMISTRY Vol. 38 No. 3 2004

140 MARGULIS

Cycloaddition reactions are quite various, many of R(f)I + Zn CuI

))) [R(f)ZnI]
them can be enhanced to increase the product yield. For
example, the yield of the following reactions in an RC≡CH H+
ultrasonic field ))) [R(f)CuZnI] R(f)CH=CHR,
Br CH2 HC Ar Ar where R(f) is the perfluorinated alkyl radical. Such reac-
Zn/I2
O C OEt + N Ar' ))) O N Ar' tions do not proceed at all in the absence of ultrasound.
The number of known ultrasound-induced reactions of
can reach 70–95% [67]. perfluoroalkyl compounds is very great.
Halogen exchange reactions are also induced by
ultrasound. For example, Carbene syntheses usually involve the generation
of the carbene radicals :ëH2 or :CCl2. Their formation
HO
RHal + NaN3 2 ))) RN3 + NaHal, is enhanced by sonication, and they smoothly react with
unsaturated compounds [71]:
where RX is alkyl chloride, alkyl halide, or chloroace-
tonitrile. In the absence of ultrasound, the reaction does R R'
not proceed. The following exchange reaction was :CCl2 + R CH CHR' .
found to be strongly accelerated [68]:
Cl Cl
(R ' N) SO
RHal + KSCN 4 2 4 ))) RSCN + KHal. In [72], we gave an example of preparing a more
The reactions of perfluoroalkyl iodides with a zinc sophisticated set of products via the Simmons–Smith
powder and CuI yields perfluoroalkyl cuprates, which reaction in an ultrasound field. The following products
smoothly react with alkynes [69, 70]: were obtained from vinylidenecyclopropane:

= +
+Zn/Cu
= • = + CH2I2 )))

CH3
I CH2CH
OEt

Nitrile synthesis in an ultrasound field was studied
by Ando et al. [73]. They showed that acyl cyanides or
their dimers were produced in a high yield:
O ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
RCOCl + KCN ))) RC + KCl,
CN
O O CN
2RC ))) RC O C R.
CN CN
There are also many other chemical reactions that
are initiated or strongly accelerated in ultrasound fields;
however, their mechanism is basically not understood.
There is also no answer to the fundamental question:
what are particular reactions in nonaqueous media that
can be in principle enhanced by ultrasound. Unlike
other processes of high-energy chemistry, the chemical
effect of ultrasound waves is more versatile and com-
plex. Many problems await their solution, although
there are many processing units that make use of power
ultrasound. Within the scope of the present review, it is
impossible to cover even briefly the aspects of indus-
trial application of ultrasound; an interested reader is
referred to relevant books, e.g. [5, 8]. However, the
potential of application of ultrasound in industrial
chemistry, medicine, agriculture is far from being
exhausted. Experimental studies went beyond the labo-
ratory scale experiments long ago; their results are
being widely applied in industry.
The author is grateful to L.T. Bugaenko for the fruit-
ful discussions.
This work was supported by the Russian Foundation
for Basic Research, project nos. 02-02-16397A and 03-
02-16232, and the International Scientific and Techni-
cal Center, project no. 1471.
REFERENCES
1. Pikaev, A.K., Abstracts of Papers, 1 Vserossiiskaya kon-
ferentsiya po prikladnym aspektam khimii vysokikh
energii (1st All-Russian Conf. on Applied Aspects of
High Energy Chemistry), Moscow, 2001, p. 54.
2. Kailan, A., Monatsh. Chem., 1912, vol. 33, p. 71.
3. Richards, W.T. and Loomis, A.L., J. Am. Chem. Soc.,
1927, vol. 49, p. 3086.
4. Margulis, M.A., Osnovy zvukokhimii (Fundamentals of
Acoustic Chemistry), Moscow: Vysshaya Shkola, 1984,
p. 288.
5. Margulis, M.A., Zvukokhimicheskie reaktsii i sono-
lyuminestsentsiya (Sonochemical Reactions and Sonolu-
minescence), Moscow: Khimiya, 1986, p. 286.

HIGH ENERGY CHEMISTRY Vol. 38 No. 3 2004

 SONOCHEMISTRY AS A NEW PROMISING AREA
6. Mason, T.J. and Lorimer, J.Ph., Sonochemistry: Theory,
Application and Uses of Ultrasound in Chemistry, Lon-
don: Ellis Harwood, 1988.
7. Ultrasound, Its Chemical, Physical, and Biological
Effects, Suslick, K.S., Ed., New York: VCH, 1988.
8. Margulis, M.A., Sonochemistry and Cavitation, London:
Gordon and Breach, 1996, p. 543.
9. Gaitan, D.F., Crum, L.A., Churh, C.C., and Roy, R.A.,
J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 1992, vol. 91, no. 6, p. 3166.
10. Crum, L.A. and Reynolds, G.T., J. Acoust. Soc. Am.,
1985, vol. 78, no. 6, p. 137.
11. Hiller, R., Putterman, S.J., and Barber, B.P., Phys. Rev.
Lett., 1992, vol. 69, no. 8, p. 1182.
12. Barber, B.P., Hiller, R.A., Lofstedt, R., Putterman, S.J.,
and Weninger, K.R., Phys. Reports, 1997, vol. 281, p. 65.
13. Margulis, M.A., Usp. Fiz. Nauk, 2000, vol. 173, no. 3,
p. 263.
14. Margulis, I.M. and Margulis, M.A., Dokl. Ross. Akad.
Nauk, 2002, vol. 385, no. 4, p. 478.
15. Misik, V. and Riesz, P., J. Phys. Chem., 1994, vol. 98,
no. 6, p. 1634.
16. Margulis, M.A. and Grundel’, L.M., Zh. Fiz. Khim.,
1982, vol. 56, no. 6, p. 1445.
17. Kurochkin, A.K., Smorodov, E.A., Badikov, Yu.V., and
Margulis, M.A., Zh. Fiz. Khim., 1986, vol. 60, no. 4,
p. 893.
18. Margulis, M.A., Los’, G.P., and Zinov’ev, O.I., Zh. Fiz.
Khim., 1991, vol. 65, no. 11, p. 3054.
19. Zinoviev, O.I. and Margulis, M.A., Adv. Sonochem.,
1993, vol. 3, p. 165.
20. Maksimenko, N.A. and Margulis, M.A., Dokl. Akad.
Nauk SSSR, 1989, vol. 309, no. 6, p. 1399.
21. Margulis, M.A., Zh. Fiz. Khim., 1985, vol. 59, no. 6,
p. 1497.
22. Margulis, M.A., Zh. Fiz. Khim., 1997, vol. 71, no. 10,
p. 1885.
23. Margulis, M.A. and Margulis, I.M., Ultrasonics
Sonochem., 2002, vol. 9, no. 1, p. 1.
24. Andreikiv, A.E. and Lysak, N.V., Metod akusticheskoi
emissii v issledovanii protsessov razrusheniya (Acoustic
Emission in Investigation of Destruction Processes),
Kiev: Naukova Dumka, 1989, p. 176.
25. Rossochin, D.N., Kovalev, G.V., and Bugaenko, L.T.,
Mendeleev Commun., 1992, p. 103.
26. Rossochin, D.N., Gokjaev, M.B., Bugaenko, L.T., and
Kovalev, G.V., Mendeleev Commun., 1994, p. 25.
27. Margulis, M.A., Zh. Fiz. Khim., 1976, vol. 50, no. 4,
p. 897.
28. Pikaev, A.K., Impul’snyi radioliz vody i vodnykh ras-
tvorov (Pulse Radiolysis of Water and Aqueous Solu-
tions), Moscow: Nauka, 1965, p. 260.
29. Margulis, M.A. and Grundel’, L.M., Zh. Fiz. Khim.,
1982, vol. 56, no. 6, p. 1445.
30. Rossochin, D.N., Kovalev, G.V., Bugaenko, L.T., and
Rudnev, A.V., Mendeleev Commun., 1992, p. 71.
31. Pikaev, A.K., Sovremennaya radiatsionnaya khimiya.
Osnovnye polozheniya, eksperimental’naya tekhnika i
metody (Modern Radiation Chemistry: General Aspects,
Experimental Equipment, and Methods), Moscow:
Nauka, 1985, p. 375.
HIGH ENERGY CHEMISTRY Vol. 38 No. 3 2004
141
32. Bugaenko, L.T. and Kabakchi, S.A., Metod statsionar-
nykh kontsentratsii v radiatsionnoi khimii (Steady-State
Treatment in Radiation Chemistry), Moscow: Mosk.
Gos. Univ., 1971, p. 101.
33. Pshezhetskii, S.Ya., Mekhanizm radiatsionno-khimiches-
kikh reaktsii (Mechanism of Radiation-Chemical Reac-
tions), Moscow: Goskhimizdat, 1962.
34. El’piner, I.E., Ul’trazvuk. Fiziko-khimicheskoe i biolog-
icheskoe deistvie (Ultrasound. Physicochemical and
Biological Effects), Moscow: Fizmatgiz, 1963, p. 420.
35. Skorik, Yu.I., Gileva, K.G., Kukharskaya, E.V., and
Fedoseev, A.D., Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR, Ser. Khim., 1963,
no. 5, p. 932.
36. Suslick, K.S., Gawienovski, J.J., Schubert, P.S., and
Wang, H.H., J. Phys. Chem., 1983, vol. 87, no. 13,
p. 2299.
37. Zil’berg, G.A. and Zodboev, D.D., Ul’trazvukovaya
Tekh., 1966, no. 3, p. 134.
38. Khimiya plazmy (Plasma Chemistry), Smirnov, B.M.,
Ed., Moscow: Atomizdat, 1974.
39. Repic, O. and Vogt, S., Tetrahedron Lett., 1982, vol. 23,
p. 2729.
40. Wojnarovits, L. and Foldjak, G., Acta Chim. Hung.,
1980, vol. 10, p. 27.
41. Rappoport, S.A. and Gaumann, T., Helv. Chim. Acta,
1973, vol. 57, p. 2861.
42. Lifshitz, A. and Frenklash, M., J. Phys. Chem., 1975,
vol. 79, no. 7, p. 686.
43. Cum, G., Galli, G., Gallo G, and Spadaro A., J. Chem.
Soc., J. Perkin Trans., 1988, no. 11, p. 375.
44. Mokryi, E.N. and Starchevskii, V.L., Ul’trazvuk v pro-
tsessakh okisleniya organicheskikh soedinenii (Ultra-
sound in Oxidation of Organic Compounds), L’vov:
Vysshaya Shkola, 1987, p. 119.
45. Yamawaki, J., Sumi, S., Ando, T., and Hanafusa, T.,
Chem. Lett., 1983, no. 4, p. 379.
46. Rossochin, D.N., Kovalev, G.V., and Bugaenko, L.T.,
J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1995, vol. 117, no. 1, p. 344.
47. Rossochin, D.N., Bugaenko, L.T., and Kovalev, G.V.,
Radiat. Phys. Chem., 1995, vol. 45, no. 2, p. 251.
48. Kukharskaya, E.V. and Skorik, Yu.I., Dokl. Akad. Nauk
SSSR, 1964, vol. 159, no. 2, p. 369.
49. Boudjouk, P. and Han, B.-H., Tetrahedron Lett., 1981,
vol. 22, no. 39, p. 3813.
50. Han, B.-H. and Boudjouk, P., J. Org. Chem., 1982,
vol. 47, p. 5030.
51. Price, G.J., Proc. 2nd Meeting Eur. Soc. Sonochemistry,
Gargnano, 1991, p. 68.
52. Margulis, M.A., Los’, G.P., and Zinov’ev, O.I., Zh. Fiz.
Khim., 1991, vol. 65, no. 11, p. 3054.
53. Zinoviev, O.I. and Margulis, M.A., Adv. Sonochem.,
1993, vol. 3, p. 165.
54. Margulis, M.A. and Maximenko, N.A., Adv. Sonochem.,
1991, vol. 2, p. 253.
55. Zhabotinskii, A.M., Oscillations and Travelling Waves
in Chemical Systems, Field, R.J. and Burger M., Eds.,
New York: Wiley, 1985. Translated under the title Kole-
baniya i begushchie volny v khimicheskikh sistemakh,
Moscow: Mir, 1988, p. 720.
142 MARGULIS

56. Goodwin, T., Tibbles, J., Butler, C., and Caems, P.W.,
Proc. 1st Meeting of Sonochemistry, Grenoble, 1990,
p. 58.
57. Davidson, R.S., Patel, A.M., and Thornwaite, D., Tetra-
hedron Lett., 1983, vol. 24, p. 5904.
58. Mason, T.J., Lorimer, J.P., Turner, A.T., and Harris, A.R.,
J. Chem. Res., Synop., 1988, vol. 80, p. 68.
59. Raucher, S. and Klein, P., Tetrahedron Lett., 1981,
vol. 46, p. 3558.
60. Galiakhmetov, R.N., Kurochkin, A.K., and Margu-
lis, M.A., Zh. Fiz. Khim., 1986, vol. 60, no. 4, p. 1024.
61. Petrier, C., Gemal, A.L., and Luche, J.-L., Tetrahedron
Lett., 1982, vol. 23, p. 3361.
62. Kuchin, A.V., Nurushev, R.A., and Tolstikov, G.A., Zh.
Obshch. Khim., 1983, vol. 53, no. 11, p. 2519.
63. Knochel, P. and Normant, J.F., Tetrahedron Lett., 1984,
vol. 25, p. 1475.
64. Inoue, Y., Yamashita, J., and Hashimoto, H., Synthesis,
1984, p. 244.
65. Luche, J.-L. and Damiano, J.-C., J. Am. Chem. Soc.,
1980, vol. 102, p. 7926.
66. Lindley, J., Lorimer, J.P., and Mason, T.J., Ultrasonics,
1986, vol. 24, p. 292.
67. Bose, A.K., Gupta, K., and Manhas, M.S., J. Chem. Soc.,
Chem. Commun., 1984, p. 86.
68. Reeves, W.-P. and McClucky, J.V., Tetrahedron Lett.,
1983, vol. 24, p. 1585.
69. Ishikawa, N. and Kitazume, T., Synth. Chem. Jpn., 1983,
vol. 41, p. 432.
70. Kitazume, T. and Kitazume, T., Chem. Lett., 1982,
no. 12, p. 1453.
71. Regen, S.L. and Sign, A., J. Org. Chem., 1982, vol. 47,
p. 1587.
72. Zefirov, N.S., Lukin, K.A., Politanskii, S.F., and Margu-
lis, M.A., Zh. Org. Khim., 1987, vol. 23, no. 8, p. 1799.
73. Ando, T., Kuwate, T., Yamawaki, J., and Hanafuza, T.,
Synthesis, 1985, vol. 8, p. 637.

HIGH ENERGY CHEMISTRY Vol. 38 No. 3 2004