The world of hydrocarbons extends far beyond straight and branched chains — it loops into fascinating cyclic structures known as cycloalkanes. These closed-ring compounds, often described as the “circular cousins” of alkanes, hold a special place in organic chemistry because of their unique stability, strain, and structural behavior.
Among them, cyclopropane and cyclobutane stand out for their intriguing chemical properties and their role in explaining molecular strain and reactivity. Through the lens of various theories — from Baeyer’s strain theory to Sachse and Mohr’s strain-free ring concept — chemists have uncovered the mysteries behind these ring systems.
Download UNIT 5 – Unraveling the Chemistry of Cycloalkanes: From Ring Strain to Reactivity Notes
Get simplified revision notes for this unit:
Download Unit 5 Notes PDF
Introduction to Cycloalkanes
Cycloalkanes are saturated hydrocarbons containing carbon atoms arranged in a ring and bonded exclusively through single covalent bonds. They have the general molecular formula CₙH₂ₙ, reflecting the loss of two hydrogen atoms compared to open-chain alkanes due to ring closure.
The most common cycloalkanes include cyclopropane (C₃H₆), cyclobutane (C₄H₈), cyclopentane (C₅H₁₀), and cyclohexane (C₆H₁₂). While they share the same basic structure, their stabilities differ dramatically, largely due to ring strain — a concept that revolutionized understanding of cyclic compounds.
Baeyer’s Strain Theory — The First Explanation
The story of cycloalkane stability begins in 1885 with Adolf von Baeyer, a pioneering chemist who proposed the Baeyer’s strain theory. According to this theory, the stability of a cyclic compound depends on how closely its bond angles approach the ideal tetrahedral angle of 109.5° found in alkanes.
Baeyer argued that any deviation from this angle introduces angle strain, making smaller or larger rings less stable. For example:
Cyclopropane has bond angles of 60°, causing severe strain.
Cyclobutane has 90° angles, still strained but less so.
Cyclopentane and cyclohexane, with angles closer to 108° and 109.5°, are far more stable.
Thus, Baeyer concluded that five- and six-membered rings were the most stable, while very small or large rings were inherently unstable due to angular distortion.
Limitations of Baeyer’s Theory
While revolutionary for its time, Baeyer’s theory could not explain everything. Experimental evidence showed that larger rings like cycloheptane and cyclooctane do exist and are relatively stable, contradicting Baeyer’s predictions.
Baeyer’s model also assumed all rings were planar, but later discoveries revealed that many cycloalkanes adopt non-planar, puckered conformations to relieve strain. This realization set the stage for more advanced theories to refine his ideas.
Coulson and Moffitt’s Modification — A Quantum Leap
In the 1940s, Coulson and Moffitt introduced a quantum mechanical explanation for the unusual stability and reactivity of strained rings like cyclopropane. They proposed that the C–C bonds in cyclopropane are not simple sigma bonds formed by head-on overlap of orbitals.
Instead, due to the small ring size, carbon atoms use bent or “banana bonds”, where the orbitals overlap at an angle. These bonds have reduced overlap efficiency, increasing strain energy but explaining the existence and bonding in highly strained rings.
This model provided a clearer understanding of bonding geometry in small cycloalkanes and helped bridge the gap between classical strain theory and modern molecular orbital concepts.
Sachse–Mohr Theory — The Concept of Strainless Rings
In 1890, Hermann Sachse and later Mohr introduced a crucial improvement by proposing that cyclic compounds are not necessarily planar. According to the Sachse–Mohr strain-free ring theory, rings with more than three carbon atoms can adopt puckered conformations to eliminate or reduce strain.
Chair and Boat Conformations of Cyclohexane
Sachse demonstrated that cyclohexane can exist in chair and boat forms, where the bond angles are very close to 109.5°, making the molecule almost free from angular strain.
This theory successfully explained why cyclohexane — previously predicted by Baeyer to be unstable — is actually one of the most stable cycloalkanes known.
Extension to Other Rings
While smaller rings like cyclopropane and cyclobutane cannot achieve such strain-free arrangements due to geometric constraints, larger rings can twist and bend, achieving relative stability.
Reactions of Cyclopropane and Cyclobutane
Despite being saturated hydrocarbons, cyclopropane and cyclobutane are much more reactive than normal alkanes. Their ring strain energy makes them eager to undergo reactions that relieve this tension.
Cyclopropane
Cyclopropane exhibits significant angle strain (60°) and torsional strain due to eclipsed hydrogen atoms. As a result, it reacts readily in ways typical of alkenes:
Halogenation: Cyclopropane reacts with chlorine or bromine under light to give halogenated products, similar to alkane substitution.
Hydrogenation: Converts to propane, releasing a considerable amount of energy as the strained ring opens.
Reaction with HBr: Under acidic conditions, cyclopropane opens up to form n-propyl bromide or isopropyl bromide, depending on the reaction mechanism.
These reactions illustrate that although cyclopropane lacks a double bond, its strained C–C bonds behave like a pseudo double bond, undergoing addition reactions typical of unsaturated compounds.
Cyclobutane
Cyclobutane, with slightly larger angles (90°), is less strained than cyclopropane but still reactive compared to acyclic alkanes.
It can undergo ring-opening reactions under heat or catalytic conditions to form butenes.
Substitution reactions occur similarly to alkanes but require milder conditions due to the high strain energy released upon ring cleavage.
Hydrogenation of cyclobutane yields butane, again with a substantial release of energy.
Both compounds highlight how strain relief drives chemical reactivity, making them key examples in understanding the relationship between structure and reactivity.
The Concept of Strain — Why It Matters
The stability of cycloalkanes depends on three types of strain:
Angle Strain: Deviation of bond angles from the ideal tetrahedral value.
Torsional Strain: Repulsion between eclipsed hydrogen atoms on adjacent carbons.
Steric Strain: Repulsion between non-bonded atoms that are forced too close together.
Smaller rings like cyclopropane suffer heavily from all three, while larger rings relieve these effects through flexible, non-planar conformations.
Understanding these strains not only explains chemical stability but also helps predict reactivity, energy release, and product formation during reactions.