Seyed Hossein Jamali1, Ludger Wolff2, Tim M Becker1, André Bardow2, Thijs J H Vlugt1, Othonas A Moultos1. 1. Engineering Thermodynamics, Process & Energy Department, Faculty of Mechanical, Maritime and Materials Engineering , Delft University of Technology , Leeghwaterstraat 39 , 2628CB Delft , The Netherlands. 2. Institute of Technical Thermodynamics , RWTH Aachen University , 52056 Aachen , Germany.
Abstract
Molecular dynamics simulations were performed for the prediction of the finite-size effects of Maxwell-Stefan diffusion coefficients of molecular mixtures and a wide variety of binary Lennard-Jones systems. A strong dependency of computed diffusivities on the system size was observed. Computed diffusivities were found to increase with the number of molecules. We propose a correction for the extrapolation of Maxwell-Stefan diffusion coefficients to the thermodynamic limit, based on the study by Yeh and Hummer ( J. Phys. Chem. B , 2004 , 108 , 15873 - 15879 ). The proposed correction is a function of the viscosity of the system, the size of the simulation box, and the thermodynamic factor, which is a measure for the nonideality of the mixture. Verification is carried out for more than 200 distinct binary Lennard-Jones systems, as well as 9 binary systems of methanol, water, ethanol, acetone, methylamine, and carbon tetrachloride. Significant deviations between finite-size Maxwell-Stefan diffusivities and the corresponding diffusivities at the thermodynamic limit were found for mixtures close to demixing. In these cases, the finite-size correction can be even larger than the simulated (finite-size) Maxwell-Stefan diffusivity. Our results show that considering these finite-size effects is crucial and that the suggested correction allows for reliable computations.
Molecular dynamics simulations were performed for the prediction of the finite-size effects of Maxwell-Stefan diffusion coefficients of molecular mixtures and a wide variety of binary Lennard-Jones systems. A strong dependency of computed diffusivities on the system size was observed. Computed diffusivities were found to increase with the number of molecules. We propose a correction for the extrapolation of Maxwell-Stefan diffusion coefficients to the thermodynamic limit, based on the study by Yeh and Hummer ( J. Phys. Chem. B , 2004 , 108 , 15873 - 15879 ). The proposed correction is a function of the viscosity of the system, the size of the simulation box, and the thermodynamic factor, which is a measure for the nonideality of the mixture. Verification is carried out for more than 200 distinct binary Lennard-Jones systems, as well as 9 binary systems of methanol, water, ethanol, acetone, methylamine, and carbon tetrachloride. Significant deviations between finite-size Maxwell-Stefan diffusivities and the corresponding diffusivities at the thermodynamic limit were found for mixtures close to demixing. In these cases, the finite-size correction can be even larger than the simulated (finite-size) Maxwell-Stefan diffusivity. Our results show that considering these finite-size effects is crucial and that the suggested correction allows for reliable computations.
The
knowledge of diffusion in liquid mixtures is essential for
the design and optimization of various industrial processes.[1−9] Although experimental methods are constantly improving,[10−16] measurements of diffusion coefficients for multicomponent systems
are not always feasible or straightforward to perform. Diffusion experiments
may require specialized equipment and materials and they can be very
time-consuming and expensive.[11,17] For these reasons,
semiempirical models such as the Stokes–Einstein,[18] Chapman–Enskog,[19] and Wilke–Chang[20] models have
been developed for predicting diffusion coefficients.[21−27] However, the applicability of these models is usually limited to
gases or infinitely dilute mixtures.In this context, molecular
dynamics (MD) simulations are a powerful
tool to complement or even, in some cases, substitute experiments
for computing diffusion coefficients.[28−41] In MD simulations, the trajectories of molecules in a simulation
box are obtained by integrating Newton’s second law. Conventional
MD simulations yield Maxwell–Stefan (MS) diffusion coefficients,
from which Fick diffusivities can be calculated using the so-called
thermodynamic factor.[6−8,42−44]One of the advantages of MD is that these simulations are
not limited
to diffusion in bulk fluids but can also be employed for more complex
systems like the diffusion of gases/liquids in porous membranes.[45−50] Due to the intrinsic inclusion of the nonideal behavior of mixtures,
MD simulations have the potential to foster the deep understanding
of diffusion phenomena[51−53] and verify empirical correlations for predicting
diffusivities.[54−58] It is important to note that, even with modern computers, the number
of molecules considered in a typical MD simulation is orders of magnitude
lower than the thermodynamic limit. Thus, it is important to take
into account finite-size effects when calculating diffusion coefficients.
Previously, simulations of thermodynamic and transport properties
for systems close to critical points[59−61] and phase transitions[62−64] have also shown that corrections for the finite size effects should
be applied.It has been shown that self-diffusivities computed
from MD simulations
scale linearly with N–1/3, where N is the number of molecules in the simulation box.[65] Yeh and Hummer[66] performed
a detailed investigation of this behavior for Lennard–Jones
(LJ) particles and water molecules. The authors found that the finite-size
effects originate from hydrodynamics and derived a correction term.
By adding this term to the computed self-diffusivity by MD simulation,
the self-diffusivity in the thermodynamic limit can be accurately
determined. Several studies verified the applicability of the YH correction
for systems of nonspherical molecules.[67−69] According to Yeh and
Hummer,[66] the system size effects of the
diffusivity of charged molecules in a polar or ionic medium cannot
be accurately corrected with the proposed term. These deviations are
due to the strong electrostatic interactions, and thus, the correction
term needs rescaling.To the best of our knowledge, no study
has focused on the finite-size
effects of MS or Fick diffusivities and noninfinitely diluted mixtures,
obtained from MD simulations. In this study, we show that, depending
on the size of the system, there can be significant differences between
the simulated (finite size) and real (thermodynamic limit) MS diffusion
coefficients in binary mixtures. For systems close to demixing, the
finite-size correction can be even larger than the simulated diffusivity.
For self-diffusion, the finite-size effects depend only on the box
size, temperature, and viscosity, but for MS diffusivity, there is
also a strong dependence on the nonideality of the mixture (represented
by the thermodynamic factor). We propose a finite-size correction
for MS diffusion and verify its accuracy for a large number of LJ
and molecular mixtures.This paper is organized in five sections.
In Section , theoretical
aspects of self and MS diffusion
are briefly discussed. In Section , details of the MD simulations and the studied mixtures
are explained. A detailed analysis of the results of the MD simulations
and the proposed correction term to finite-size mutual diffusivities
is provided in Section . Finally, the conclusions of this study are summarized.
Theory
There are two approaches for obtaining transport
properties from
MD simulations: (a) nonequilibrium molecular dynamics (NEMD), which
employ an external driving force generating a net flux in the system,[28,70−77] and (b) equilibrium molecular dynamics (EMD), where transport coefficients
are computed from time-correlation functions in a system at equilibrium,
without the presence of external forces.[9,75,77,78] In this work, we perform
only EMD simulations. Sampling time correlations can be achieved via
two formulations, which are intrinsically identical: Einstein and
Green–Kubo.[75,77,78] The Einstein formulation is used in this work. For an overview of
EMD and NEMD methods, the reader is referred to the reviews by Liu
et al.[9] and Peters et al.[11]The following three types of diffusion coefficients
are discussed
in this manuscript: (1) the self-diffusion coefficient (Dself), which is the diffusivity of a tagged particle in
a medium due to its Brownian motion; (2) the Fick diffusivity (DFick), which is the coefficient of the linear
relation between the mass flux and the concentration gradient in the
system; (3) the MS diffusivity (ĐMS), which describes mass transport due to the gradient in chemical
potential of a species in a mixture. Dself has to do with the motion of individual molecules, while DFick and ĐMS are due to the collective motion of all molecules in the system.
Hence, for DFick and ĐMS, the term “collective” or “mutual”
diffusion is used. Although the MS diffusivity provides a more general
description of transport diffusion in multicomponent mixtures,[42] the Fick diffusivity is widely used in industry
due to its simplicity. For homogeneous mixtures, the Fick and MS diffusion
coefficients are related by the so-called thermodynamic factor (Γ),
which is related to the nonideality of the system.[79,80] An extensive analysis and comparison of Fick and MS diffusion coefficients
can be found in literature.[42−44] A more detailed description of
these three types of diffusion coefficients is provided in the following
two subsections.
Self-Diffusion Coefficients
The self-diffusion
coefficient of species i (D) can be expressed as the mean-square
displacement of each molecule of species i:where t is the correlation
time, N is the number
of molecules of species i, and is the position
of j-th molecule of species i. The
angle brackets denote an ensemble average. Self-diffusion coefficients
computed from MD simulations depend strongly on the number of molecules, N, in the simulation box. More specifically, it was shown
that self-diffusivity scales linearly with 1/N1/3, which is equivalent to 1/L, where L is the side length of the simulation box.[65] Yeh and Hummer[66] studied the
size dependency of computed self-diffusion coefficients and derived
an analytic correction term to compensate for the observed system-size
effects. The correction term was developed on the basis of the hydrodynamic
theory for a spherical particle in a Stokes flow with imposed periodic
boundary conditions. These authors showed that the difference between
the self-diffusivity in an infinite (nonperiodic) and a finite (periodic)
system is due to the difference in hydrodynamic self-interactions.[65,81] For the rest of this manuscript, we will refer to their correction
term as the “YH correction”. Accordingly, the self-diffusion
coefficient of species i in the thermodynamic limit
(D∞) can be estimated from the finite-size
self-diffusion coefficient obtained from MD simulations (DMD) by adding the YH correction (DYH):[66]where kB is the
Boltzmann constant, L is the side length of the simulation
box, and η is the shear viscosity of the system at temperature T. ξ is a dimensionless constant equal to 2.837297
for cubic simulation boxes with periodic boundary conditions.[66] Similar to the YH correction, equations have
been derived for simulations in noncubic boxes[82−84] and for confined
fluids.[85] It is important to note that
the YH correction does not explicitly depend on the size of molecules
in a fluid or intermolecular interactions. This means that all species
of a multicomponent mixture experience identical finite-size effects.In EMD simulations, the required shear viscosity can be computed
from the autocorrelation of the off-diagonal components of the stress
tensor (Pαβ):[77,78,86,87]where V is the volume of
the system. The components of the stress tensor are composed of two
parts: an ideal and a virial term. The first part is due to the total
kinetic energy of particles, and the second is constructed from intra-
and intermolecular interactions.[77,88,89] The three off-diagonal components of the stress tensor
(P, P, and P) yield three values for the shear viscosity, which
are equal for isotropic fluids. As shown in the work of Yeh and Hummer[66] and Moultos et al.[69] as well as in the current study (Supporting Information), the shear viscosity is independent of the system
size. Therefore, the viscosity is a constant in eq .
Maxwell–Stefan and
Fick Diffusion Coefficients
MS diffusion coefficients can
be obtained from the Onsager coefficients
(Λ), computed from the crosscorrelation
of the displacement of the molecules of species i and j:[5−7,9,32,54]where N and N are the
number of molecules of species i and j, respectively, and N is the total number of molecules
in the mixture. is the position of the l-th molecule of species j. The Onsager coefficients
(Λ) in eq are defined in a reference frame in which
the velocity of the center of mass is zero.[32] Hence, the Onsager coefficients of a binary mixture are correlated
by means of the molar masses of the two constituent species (M1 and M2):[32]The Onsager
coefficient of species i (Λ) can be split into
an autocorrelation term, which is the self-diffusivity of species i (D),
and a crosscorrelation term (CC):[6,51]The Onsager
coefficient of two different species (Λ, where i ≠ j) is
a displacement crosscorrelation of the constituent two species:The MS diffusion coefficient of a binary system is a linear
combination
of the Onsager coefficients. These relations for binary, ternary,
and quaternary mixtures are listed in the articles by Krishna and
van Baten[32] and Liu et al.[54] For a binary mixture with mole fractions of x1 and x2, a single MS diffusion
coefficient is defined (Đ12,MS = Đ21,MS = ĐMS):[32]Using the constraint of eq , eq can be
rewritten as separate functions of the Onsager coefficients:Equations and 9 are valid for both ideal and nonideal diffusing
binary mixtures. For ideal diffusing mixtures, the crosscorrelation
between the particles is rather small compared to the self-diffusivities,
which means that in eqs –8 (x2/x1)CC11 + (x1/x2)CC22 – 2CC12 ≪ x2D1,self + x1D2,self, and therefore,
the MS diffusivity (eq ) can be simplified to the Darken equation (ĐDarken):[6,51,54]Converting MS to Fick diffusivities
requires the so-called thermodynamic
factor Γ:[7,42,79]where
Γ is the thermodynamic factor
of a binary mixture and γ1 is the activity coefficient
of species 1. For an n-component mixture, the thermodynamic
factor is defined as a matrix whose elements are[43]where δ is the
Kronecker delta. Σ indicates that the derivative is
taken at constant mole fractions of all species, except for the nth species.[43]A stable single-phase binary mixture requires that Γ > 0.[79,80] For systems approaching phase separation, Γ approaches zero.
For ideal mixtures, Γ = 1 by definition. Binary mixtures with
a thermodynamic factor between 0 and 1 favor interactions between
the same species over interactions between different species. Systems
with a thermodynamic factor larger than one exhibit associating behavior.[28,43] Thermodynamic factors can be calculated with equations of state,[32,42] Kirkwood–Buff integrals,[9,90−92] or the permuted Widom test particle insertion method.[93,94] In this study, the thermodynamic factors for binary systems are
obtained from finite-size Kirkwood–Buff coefficients. The finite-size
Kirkwood–Buff integral equals:[9]where g(r) is the radial distribution function, r = |1 – 2|, and the integration is over
a finite spherical subvolume V with radius R. As G scales linearly
with 1/R, the Kirkwood–Buff coefficient in
the thermodynamic limit can be obtained by extrapolating the linear
regime to 1/R → 0.[95] It is important to note that one needs to correct for finite-size
effects of the radial distribution function. This correction is performed
using the procedure outlined by Ganguly and van der Vegt[96] and Milzetti et al.,[97] For a binary system, the thermodynamic factor follows fromSimilar expressions exist for ternary
and
muticomponent systems.[91,92]
Simulation
Details
All simulations in this study were performed in cubic
simulation
boxes. Periodic boundary conditions were imposed in all directions.
All MD simulations were conducted with LAMMPS[98] (version 16 Feb. 2016). The initial configurations and LAMMPS input
files were constructed with PACKMOL[99] and
VMD.[100]To study the finite-size
effects of MS diffusion coefficients in
binary mixtures, two sets of MD simulations were carried out. The
first set consists of binary LJ systems. All parameters and properties
of these simulations are reported in dimensionless units with the
ϵ and σ parameters of the first species as the base units:
σ1 = σ = 1, ϵ1 = ϵ =
1, and mass = m1 = m =
1. The characteristics of the second species (ϵ2,
σ2, and m2 = σ23), mole fractions
(x), and adjustable parameters (k) of all studied LJ systems are listed
in Table . The applied
temperature T and pressure p in
the simulations are 0.65 and 0.05, respectively. The number density
of the studied systems is between 0.14 and 0.89. A time step of 0.001
is used for the integration of equations of motion. Displacement and
stress correlation functions are computed for a total length of 200
million time steps. In total, 320 distinct LJ systems with four system
sizes (500, 1000, 2000, and 4000 particles) are simulated. To create
a sound data set, systems in which phase separation occurs or a considerable
deviation of the pressure or temperature from the specified conditions
is observed are excluded from the data analysis. These systems correspond
to a small fraction of the total data set. The second set of MD simulations
includes 9 binary mixtures consisting of molecular systems. An overview
of these mixtures, consisting of methanol as the first component and
water, ethanol, acetone, methylamine, or carbon tetrachloride as the
second component, is listed in Table . For each mixture, four system sizes (250, 500, 1000,
and 2000 molecules) are considered. The temperature and pressure are
specified to be 298 K and 1.0 atm. The total length of each simulation
is 200 ns with an integration time step of 1 fs.
Table 1
Specifications of the Studied LJ Systemsa
specification
values
total number of particles
500, 1000, 2000, 4000
independent
simulations
10, 10, 5, 5
x1
0.1, 0.3, 0.5, 0.7, 0.9
ϵ2/ϵ1
1.0, 0.8, 0.6, 0.5
σ2/σ1
1.0, 1.2, 1.4, 1.6
m2/m1
(σ2/σ1)3
kij
0.05, 0.0, −0.3, −0.6
LJ particle
type 1 has σ1 = σ = 1.0, ϵ1 = ϵ = 1.0, and
mass = m1 = 1.0 in dimensionless units.[77] As explained in the Supporting Information (eq. S3), k is an adjustable parameter to the Lorentz–Berthelot
mixing rules, controlling the nonideality in the mixtures.
Table 2
Specifications of
All Studied Binary
Molecular Systemsa
specification
values
total number of molecules
250, 500, 1000, 2000
independent simulations
10, 10, 10,
10
second component (mole fraction)
water (0.1, 0.3, 0.5, 0.7, 0.9)
ethanol (0.5)
acetone
(0.5)
methylamine (0.5)
carbon tetrachloride (0.1)
The first component for all mixtures
is methanol. The mole fraction of the second component is specified
in parentheses. The force field parameters are available in the Supporting Information.
LJ particle
type 1 has σ1 = σ = 1.0, ϵ1 = ϵ = 1.0, and
mass = m1 = 1.0 in dimensionless units.[77] As explained in the Supporting Information (eq. S3), k is an adjustable parameter to the Lorentz–Berthelot
mixing rules, controlling the nonideality in the mixtures.The first component for all mixtures
is methanol. The mole fraction of the second component is specified
in parentheses. The force field parameters are available in the Supporting Information.The force fields used in this work for both LJ and
molecular systems
are explained in detail in the Supporting Information. For the LJ systems, interactions are truncated and shifted to zero
at a cutoff radius of 4σ.[77] The Lorentz–Berthelot
mixing rules with an adjustment parameter (k), controlling the nonideality of mixtures,
are applied to the LJ parameters of dissimilar particles.[77] For the molecular systems, the SPC/E model[101] and the model proposed by Tummala and Striolo[102] are used for water and carbon tetrachloride
molecules, respectively. The force field parameters for methanol,[103] ethanol,[103] acetone,[104] and methylamine[105,106] are obtained
from the Transferable Potential for Phase Equilibria (TraPPE) force
field.[106] The LJ interactions are truncated
at 10.0 Å, and analytic tail corrections for energy and pressure
are included.[77] The Lorentz–Berthelot
mixing rules for dissimilar interaction sites are applied.[77] Long-range electrostatic interactions are taken
into account by means of the particle–particle particle–mesh
(PPPM) method with a relative precision of 10–6.[77] It is important to note that the aim of this
study is not to compare computed transport properties with experiments
but to study finite-size effects observed in mutual diffusion coefficients.
We adopt these well-known force fields, which have already been used
by many researchers for computing transport properties.[6−8,55,69,107−109]For both data
sets and each data point, at least five independent
simulations were carried out to obtain the average properties and
their 95% confidence intervals. For better sampling of displacement
and stress correlation functions, the order-n algorithm
was used.[75,110] As explained in the previous
section, the thermodynamic factors were calculated from the RDFs of
the constituent species using finite-size Kirkwood–Buff integrals.[92] The RDFs were computed from MD simulations of
large systems in the canonical ensemble. These systems contain 25 000
LJ particles (first set of simulations) and 13 500 molecules
(second set of simulations). The total length of simulations for computing
the Kirkwood–Buff integrals is 10 million time steps for the
LJ systems and 10 ns for the molecular mixtures.
Results
and Discussions
We performed two sets of simulations. The
first set consists of
250 distinct binary LJ systems, and the second set includes 9 binary
mixtures consisting of methanol, water, ethanol, acetone, methylamine,
and carbon tetrachloride. For each set, four system sizes were considered
(Tables and 2). All raw data for diffusion coefficients, shear
viscosities, and thermodynamic factors is provided in the Supporting Information.Previous studies
on the system-size dependencies of self-diffusion
coefficients are limited to pure fluids and infinitely diluted mixtures. Figure shows an example
of the self-diffusivities of the two components of a binary LJ systems
as a function of the length of the simulation box (L). Like in pure fluids, the computed self-diffusion coefficients
vary linearly with the inverse of the simulation box length. The linear
regression at 1/L = 0 yields the self-diffusivity
for an infinite system size (D∞),
which is shown in the same figure as a horizontal line. The finite-size
self-diffusivities corrected with DYH (Equation ) are plotted as
red squares. As expected, the corrected self-diffusivities collapse
on the horizontal line, indicating the validity of YH correction.
Figure 1
Self-diffusion
coefficients of a binary LJ mixture (x1 = 0.9) as a function of the simulation box length (L). Blue circles are the computed self-diffusion coefficients
in the finite systems, and red squares are the corrected values using
the YH correction term (eq ). The dashed lines indicate extrapolation to the thermodynamic
limit, and the solid lines show the extrapolated self-diffusivities.
The second component has ϵ2 = 0.5 × ϵ1 and σ2 = 1.2 × σ1,
and the adjustable parameter (k) to the Lorentz–Berthelot mixing rules is 0. The error
bars are smaller than the symbols.
Self-diffusion
coefficients of a binary LJ mixture (x1 = 0.9) as a function of the simulation box length (L). Blue circles are the computed self-diffusion coefficients
in the finite systems, and red squares are the corrected values using
the YH correction term (eq ). The dashed lines indicate extrapolation to the thermodynamic
limit, and the solid lines show the extrapolated self-diffusivities.
The second component has ϵ2 = 0.5 × ϵ1 and σ2 = 1.2 × σ1,
and the adjustable parameter (k) to the Lorentz–Berthelot mixing rules is 0. The error
bars are smaller than the symbols.In Figure , the
differences between the infinite and finite-size self-diffusivities
(D∞ – DMD) are plotted as a function of the YH correction (DYH), for all entries in the data set examined.
For the majority of the cases, the YH correction term is able to predict
the finite-size discrepancies very accurately. However, while the
correction is almost perfect for molecular mixtures, a systematic
overprediction of self-diffusivities can be observed for LJ systems.
This overprediction becomes more pronounced as the difference between
the size and the interaction energies of the species in the system
increases. Out of the 250 LJ systems considered, 13 correspond to
systems containing particles with large dissimilarities in size (σ2/σ1 equal to 1.6 and 1.4) and interaction
energy (ϵ2/ϵ1 equal to 0.5 and 0.6).
This finding indicates that, although the YH correction can be safely
applied to binary systems with a wide variety of composition, nonideality,
and relative size of particles, limitations exist for mixtures with
significant differences between the size of the molecules and interaction
energies.
Figure 2
Finite-size corrections required for self-diffusion coefficients
as a function of the YH correction (DYH, Equation ) for (a)
LJ and (b) molecular mixtures computed with 500 LJ particles/250 molecules
(blue circles), 1000 LJ particles/500 molecules (red squares), 2000
LJ particles/1000 molecules (green diamonds), and 4000 LJ particles/2000
molecules (magenta pentagons). Closed and open symbols represent the
corrections to the self-diffusivity of species 1 and species 2, respectively.
The dashed lines indicate perfect agreement. Statistical uncertainties
are listed in the Supporting Information.
Finite-size corrections required for self-diffusion coefficients
as a function of the YH correction (DYH, Equation ) for (a)
LJ and (b) molecular mixtures computed with 500 LJ particles/250 molecules
(blue circles), 1000 LJ particles/500 molecules (red squares), 2000
LJ particles/1000 molecules (green diamonds), and 4000 LJ particles/2000
molecules (magenta pentagons). Closed and open symbols represent the
corrections to the self-diffusivity of species 1 and species 2, respectively.
The dashed lines indicate perfect agreement. Statistical uncertainties
are listed in the Supporting Information.Figure illustrates
the finite-size effects of the Darken equation (ĐDarken, eq ) and MS diffusivities (ĐMS, eq ) for the same binary LJ
mixture of Figure . In the top figure, it is shown that the application of the YH correction, DYH, to the self-diffusivities of species 1 and
2 to the Darken equation (Equation ) accurately accounts for the finite-size effects of ĐDarken. In the bottom figure, the application
of the same corrections to MS diffusion coefficients is shown. The
corrected ĐMS (red squares) are
systematically lower than the extrapolated MS diffusivity, indicating
that DYH is not a valid correction for
the finite effects of ĐMS. To further
investigate this, the finite-size effect of the MS diffusivity can
be obtained from eq and 9 as follows:where α′ is
a constant, which is unknown at this point. ĐMS∞ and ĐMSMD are the MS diffusivities in the thermodynamic limit and
finite-size systems, respectively. CC∞ and CCMD are the infinite and finite-size displacement
crosscorrelation functions of species i. As shown
in Figure , in nonideal
mixtures, the total displacement crosscorrelation function of all
particles has a considerable contribution to the finite-size effect.
At this point, we hypothesize that a modified YH correction term can
be applied directly to the MS diffusion coefficients. Thus, the crosscorrelation
terms of eq , CC∞–CCMD, can be a function or simply a modification factor of the YH correction.
Since the crosscorrelation terms are directly related to the nonideality
of a mixture, it is expected that this modification factor is a function
of the thermodynamic factor (Γ):where α(Γ)
is the modification
factor to the YH correction, accounting for the finite-size effects
of the MS diffusion coefficient. In the example shown in Figure , the thermodynamic
factor of the mixture, Γ, is 0.35 and the modification factor
required to scale the YH correction from the red squares to the green
squares is roughly 3, which is approximately equal to 1/Γ. To
examine if 1/Γ is a suitable modification of the YH correction
for correcting the finite-size effect of MS diffusion coefficients,
a phenomenological approach is followed: In Figure , 1/Γ is compared to the required modification
factor to DYH for all LJ (blue circles)
and molecular (green diamonds) systems. The good agreement observed
suggests that 1/Γ is a suitable modification factor to the YH
correction for MS diffusion coefficients. Hence, eq can be rewritten as
Figure 3
Diffusion coefficients of a binary LJ mixture
(x1 = 0.9) as a function of the simulation
box length (L). Blue circles are the computed Darken
(eq ) and MS (eq ) diffusivities. Red and
green squares are
the corrected values according to the YH (eq ) and the MSYH (eq ), respectively. The dashed lines show extrapolation
to the thermodynamic limit, and the solid lines show the extrapolated
values. The second component has ϵ2 = 0.5 ×
ϵ1 and σ2 = 1.2 × σ1, and the adjustment parameter (k) to the Lorentz–Berthelot mixing rules is
0. The error bars are smaller than the symbols.
Figure 4
Modification factor to the YH correction (α) as a function
of the thermodynamic factor (Γ) for nonideal mixtures according
to eq . Blue circles
and green diamonds show the modification factors for the LJ and molecular
systems, respectively. The thermodynamic factor for ideal mixtures
equals 1. The dashed line indicates perfect agreement. Statistical
uncertainties are listed in the Supporting Information.
Diffusion coefficients of a binary LJ mixture
(x1 = 0.9) as a function of the simulation
box length (L). Blue circles are the computed Darken
(eq ) and MS (eq ) diffusivities. Red and
green squares are
the corrected values according to the YH (eq ) and the MSYH (eq ), respectively. The dashed lines show extrapolation
to the thermodynamic limit, and the solid lines show the extrapolated
values. The second component has ϵ2 = 0.5 ×
ϵ1 and σ2 = 1.2 × σ1, and the adjustment parameter (k) to the Lorentz–Berthelot mixing rules is
0. The error bars are smaller than the symbols.Modification factor to the YH correction (α) as a function
of the thermodynamic factor (Γ) for nonideal mixtures according
to eq . Blue circles
and green diamonds show the modification factors for the LJ and molecular
systems, respectively. The thermodynamic factor for ideal mixtures
equals 1. The dashed line indicates perfect agreement. Statistical
uncertainties are listed in the Supporting Information.In the rest of the manuscript,
the last term (DYH/Γ) will be called
the “Maxwell–Stefan
Yeh−Hummer (MSYH)” correction (ĐMSYH = DYH/Γ). The results
shown in Figure suggest
that describing the correction for MS as a function of only Γ
seems to be sufficient; however, the possibility that other (still
unknown) factors contribute to the correction cannot be ruled out.
The applicability of ĐMSYH in multicomponent
mixtures is not examined in this work.By combining eqs and 17, the finite-size correction to the
Fick diffusion coefficient for a binary mixture can be calculated
fromwhere DFick∞ and DFickMD are
Fick diffusivities in infinite and finite-size systems, respectively.
Interestingly, the same YH correction that is applied to self-diffusivities
can mitigate the finite-size effects of Fick diffusion coefficients,
regardless of the ideality or nonideality of the mixture.In Figure , the
correction for the finite-size effects of MS diffusion coefficients
(ĐMS∞ – ĐMSMD) are compared
to the predicted MSYH correction (ĐMSYH) for the studied LJ (Figure a) and molecular systems (Figure b). As expected from Figure , a rather good agreement can be seen for
both sets. These results suggest that ĐMSYH works equally good for simple systems such as LJ systems
and for nonspherical molecular systems with long-range electrostatic
interactions. As proposed by Moultos et al.,[69] a minimum number of 250 molecules was used for all molecular systems.
For a smaller number of particles, the shape and anisotropic structure
of constituent molecules may play a role and affect the accuracy of
the YH correction. Since no outlier is observed for the molecular
systems in Figure b, the same criterion for the minimum number of molecules seems to
be applicable to the MSYH correction.
Figure 5
Correction needed for the MS diffusion
coefficients versus the
MSYH correction term (ĐMSYH, eq ) for (a) LJ and (b)
molecular systems computed with 500 LJ particles/250 molecules (blue
circles), 1000 LJ particles/500 molecules (red squares), 2000 LJ particles/1000
molecules (green diamonds), and 4000 LJ particles/2000 molecules (magenta
pentagons). The dashed lines show perfect agreement. The statistical
uncertainties are listed in the Supporting Information.
Correction needed for the MS diffusion
coefficients versus the
MSYH correction term (ĐMSYH, eq ) for (a) LJ and (b)
molecular systems computed with 500 LJ particles/250 molecules (blue
circles), 1000 LJ particles/500 molecules (red squares), 2000 LJ particles/1000
molecules (green diamonds), and 4000 LJ particles/2000 molecules (magenta
pentagons). The dashed lines show perfect agreement. The statistical
uncertainties are listed in the Supporting Information.While the proposed MSYH correction
(see Figure ) seems
to perform fairly accurately, two
important points should be noted. (1) The MSYH correction overpredicts
the finite-size effects of MS diffusivities for LJ systems. This is
consistent with the earlier observations for self-diffusivities (Figure a). The MSYH correction
is based on the YH correction (Equation ), so any overprediction of DYH will affect ĐMSYH. To show the cause of this overprediction, the same comparison as
in Figure , between
the required corrections, is considered. However, instead of the analytic
YH correction, the differences between the computed infinite and finite-size
Darken diffusivities are used (see Figure ). For molecular mixtures, no difference
is noticed. This is expected since the YH correction performs well
according to Figure b. Note that the overprediction observed in Figures a and 5a is not present
in Figure a and the
data points are symmetrically distributed on both sides of the diagonal
line. This indicates that the less accurate predictions by the YH
correction resulted in the overpredictions shown in Figure and that the proposed modification
of eq does not introduce
any systematic deviations. (2) The data points shown in Figures –6 for MS diffusivities are more scattered compared to those of self-diffusion
coefficients illustrated in Figure . The cause can be the large statistical uncertainties
of thermodynamic factors and finite-size MS diffusivities as well
as the extrapolation of MS diffusion coefficients (ĐMS) to the thermodynamic limit (reported in the Supporting Information). These influences are
expected to contribute to the scattering of the data in Figures and 5.
Figure 6
Correction needed for the MS diffusion coefficients versus the
extrapolated Darken equation with the modification factor included
(Γ–1(ĐDarken∞ – ĐDarkenMD)) for (a) LJ and (b) molecular systems computed with 500
LJ particles/250 molecules (blue circles), 1000 LJ particles/500 molecules
(red squares), 2000 LJ particles/1000 molecules (green diamonds),
and 4000 LJ particles/2000 molecules (magenta pentagons). The dashed
lines show perfect agreement. The statistical uncertainties are listed
in the Supporting Information.
Correction needed for the MS diffusion coefficients versus the
extrapolated Darken equation with the modification factor included
(Γ–1(ĐDarken∞ – ĐDarkenMD)) for (a) LJ and (b) molecular systems computed with 500
LJ particles/250 molecules (blue circles), 1000 LJ particles/500 molecules
(red squares), 2000 LJ particles/1000 molecules (green diamonds),
and 4000 LJ particles/2000 molecules (magenta pentagons). The dashed
lines show perfect agreement. The statistical uncertainties are listed
in the Supporting Information.As the MSYH correction is related to the YH correction
via the
thermodynamic factor, three possible scenarios for studying the significance
of the MSYH correction can be conceived: (1) In the case of Γ
= 1, the behavior of the mixture is ideal. The YH correction can directly
be applied to self, MS, and Fick diffusivities. (2) For 0 < Γ
< 1, the constituent species of the mixture tend to self-associate
and the cross-interactions are less pronounced. Since Γ is smaller
than 1, the modification factor makes the MSYH correction larger than
the YH correction. (3) For associating mixtures with thermodynamic
factors larger than 1, the correction decreases to smaller values
than the YH correction. For mixtures with very large thermodynamic
factors, the finite-size correction becomes negligible and overlaps
with the statistical uncertainty of the computed MS diffusion coefficient.To show the importance of the MSYH correction for systems with
0 < Γ < 1, we consider a mixture of methanol–carbon
tetrachloride (xmethanol = 0.90). This
mixture has a small thermodynamic factor approximately equal to 0.18.
Accordingly, the modification factor to the YH correction for MS diffusivities
would be approximately 6 (≈1/0.18). To investigate the magnitude
of the finite-size effect, in Figure , the Darken and MS diffusion coefficients of this
mixture are shown for four system sizes. As expected, both the YH
and MSYH corrections can accurately predict the finite-size diffusivities.
Whereas the finite-size effect for the self-diffusivites is at most
20% of the uncorrected value, the finite-size effect for MS diffusivites
can be as large as 60% of the computed values in the current MD simulations.
The contribution of the finite-size effect becomes even more pronounced
for Γ → 0, i.e., close to demixing. Therefore, considering
the MSYH correction is particularly important for such systems.
Figure 7
Binary Darken
(Equation ) and MS
(Equation ) diffusivities
for a mixture of methanol–carbon tetrachloride
(xmethanol = 0.9) as a function of the
simulation box (L). Blue circles are the computed
diffusion coefficients in MD simulations. Red and green squares are
the corrected diffusivities according to the YH (Equation ) and MSYH (eq ) corrections, respectively. Dashed lines show extrapolation
to the thermodynamic limit, and solid lines are the extrapolated values.
Binary Darken
(Equation ) and MS
(Equation ) diffusivities
for a mixture of methanol–carbon tetrachloride
(xmethanol = 0.9) as a function of the
simulation box (L). Blue circles are the computed
diffusion coefficients in MD simulations. Red and green squares are
the corrected diffusivities according to the YH (Equation ) and MSYH (eq ) corrections, respectively. Dashed lines show extrapolation
to the thermodynamic limit, and solid lines are the extrapolated values.
Conclusion
Molecular
dynamics is a powerful tool to predict binary diffusion
coefficients of nonideal mixtures. Even with modern computers, the
number of molecules used in a typical simulation is orders of magnitude
lower than the thermodynamic limit; therefore, it is important to
take into account finite-size effects when calculating diffusion coefficients.
Yeh and Hummer have developed a correction term (DYH) to compensate for the finite-size effects of self-diffusion
coefficients of pure fluids. This correction is a function of only
the shear viscosity and the length of the simulation box. In this
work, we verified the applicability of this correction to a wide range
of nonideal binary mixtures. On the basis of the work of Yeh and Hummer,
we present a Maxwell–Stefan YH correction, ĐMSYH, for finite-size effects of computed Maxwell–Stefan
diffusion coefficients, ĐMSYH = DYH/Γ, in which Γ is the thermodynamic
factor. This correction is verified for a large set of Lennard–Jones
systems as well as several molecular mixtures, and excellent predictions
are obtained. For mixtures with a thermodynamic factor close to zero
(i.e., close to demixing), this correction may become even larger
than the computed finite-size Maxwell–Stefan diffusion coefficient.
This highlights the importance of the finite-size corrections. In
future work, a similar correction may be derived for multicomponent
mixtures, in which the formulation of Maxwell–Stefan diffusivities
is much more complex than those for binary mixtures.[42,80]
Authors: Othonas A Moultos; Ioannis N Tsimpanogiannis; Athanassios Z Panagiotopoulos; Ioannis G Economou Journal: J Phys Chem B Date: 2014-05-01 Impact factor: 2.991
Authors: Othonas A Moultos; Yong Zhang; Ioannis N Tsimpanogiannis; Ioannis G Economou; Edward J Maginn Journal: J Chem Phys Date: 2016-08-21 Impact factor: 3.488