Seyed Hossein Jamali1, Remco Hartkamp1, Christos Bardas1, Jakob Söhl2, 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. Delft Institute of Applied Mathematics , Delft University of Technology , van Mourik Broekmanweg 6 , 2628XE Delft , The Netherlands.
Abstract
A method is proposed for calculating the shear viscosity of a liquid from finite-size effects of self-diffusion coefficients in Molecular Dynamics simulations. This method uses the difference in the self-diffusivities, computed from at least two system sizes, and an analytic equation to calculate the shear viscosity. To enable the efficient use of this method, a set of guidelines is developed. The most efficient number of system sizes is two and the large system is at least four times the small system. The number of independent simulations for each system size should be assigned in such a way that 50%-70% of the total available computational resources are allocated to the large system. We verified the method for 250 binary and 26 ternary Lennard-Jones systems, pure water, and an ionic liquid ([Bmim][Tf2N]). The computed shear viscosities are in good agreement with viscosities obtained from equilibrium Molecular Dynamics simulations for all liquid systems far from the critical point. Our results indicate that the proposed method is suitable for multicomponent mixtures and highly viscous liquids. This may enable the systematic screening of the viscosities of ionic liquids and deep eutectic solvents.
A method is proposed for calculating the shear viscosity of a liquid from finite-size effects of self-diffusion coefficients in Molecular Dynamics simulations. This method uses the difference in the self-diffusivities, computed from at least two system sizes, and an analytic equation to calculate the shear viscosity. To enable the efficient use of this method, a set of guidelines is developed. The most efficient number of system sizes is two and the large system is at least four times the small system. The number of independent simulations for each system size should be assigned in such a way that 50%-70% of the total available computational resources are allocated to the large system. We verified the method for 250 binary and 26 ternary Lennard-Jones systems, pure water, and an ionic liquid ([Bmim][Tf2N]). The computed shear viscosities are in good agreement with viscosities obtained from equilibrium Molecular Dynamics simulations for all liquid systems far from the critical point. Our results indicate that the proposed method is suitable for multicomponent mixtures and highly viscous liquids. This may enable the systematic screening of the viscosities of ionic liquids and deep eutectic solvents.
The
shear viscosity plays an important role in quantifying the
required energy for mechanical and chemical processes, and it is essential
for solving the Navier–Stokes equations. Various empirical/semiempirical
models for predicting the shear viscosity have been developed, including
equations of state combined with scaling relations,[1−11] free-volume theory,[12] friction theory,[13] as well as fitting to functional forms.[14,15] Alternatively, the shear viscosity can be computed via equilibrium
or nonequilibrium molecular dynamics (MD) simulations.[7,8,16−24] In nonequilibrium MD (NEMD), the viscosity is calculated from the
response of the system to an external shear field.[18,25−29] Although NEMD is computationally efficient at large external fields,[17,30] the computed viscosity can depend on the applied shear rate.[20,21] In equilibrium MD (EMD), the shear viscosity can be computed from
the Einstein relation:[31−34]where Pαβ represents the off-diagonal components of the stress tensor (i.e., P, P, and P), kB is the Boltzmann constant, t is the correlation time, and V and T are the volume and temperature of the system, respectively.
The angle brackets denote an ensemble average. Since the stress tensor
is defined for the entire simulation box, the shear viscosity is a
property of the system as a whole. This means that an increase in
the system size does not improve the statistical uncertainty of the
computed shear viscosity.[35] Due to the
slow relaxation of highly viscous fluids such as ionic liquids[14,36] and deep eutectic solvents,[37] and due
to the large fluctuations in the components of the stress tensor[17] (see Figure S1 in the Supporting Information), very long MD simulations are required to sufficiently
sample the stress tensor components.Unlike the shear viscosity,
the self-diffusivity is a single-molecule
property and can be calculated from the mean-squared displacement
(MSD) of all individual molecules of the same species:[34,38−40]where r(t) is the position of
the jth molecule of species i at
time t, and N is the number of molecules of species i in
the system. The statistical uncertainties of self-diffusivities decrease
as the number of molecules in the system increases.[35,41,42] The simulation length needed to obtain a
linear relation between the MSD and time is much smaller than the
length of an MD simulation required for computing the shear viscosity.
Therefore, accurate self-diffusivities can be computed from short
MD simulations with a large number of molecules. In the same short
simulation, such a high accuracy cannot be achieved for the shear
viscosity due to the smaller number of samples for the stress tensor
components.[35]Typical MD simulations
for computing transport properties use hundreds
to thousands of molecules, which is orders of magnitude smaller than
the thermodynamic limit. To overcome this issue, simulation boxes
with periodic boundary conditions are used.[38] While this approach mimics the presence of an infinite bulk system
surrounding the simulated system, computed properties may depend on
the size of the simulation box. Large finite-size effects for thermodynamic
properties such as activity coefficients,[43] chemical potentials,[44] and Kirkwood–Buff
coefficients[45,46] have been reported in literature.
In the case of transport properties, self-diffusion coefficients computed
from MD simulations depend strongly on the system size while the shear
viscosity does not show any system-size dependency.[47−49] Dünweg
and Kremer[50] showed a linear increase of
the self-diffusivity of polymers in a good solvent with the inverse
of the simulation box length. Yeh and Hummer[47] investigated the system-size dependency of computed self-diffusivities
of pure liquids, consisting of spherical molecules, and derived a
relation between the infinite (Dself∞) and finite-size (DselfMD) self-diffusivity:[47]where DYH is the
finite-size correction, here referred to as the Yeh–Hummer
(YH) correction, L is the length of the simulation
box, which is proportional to N1/3, where N is the number of molecules, η is the shear viscosity
of the liquid, and ξ is a dimensionless constant equal to 2.837297
for a cubic simulation box with periodic boundary conditions.[47,51−53] For the derivation of this analytic correction, Yeh
and Hummer[47] used a hydrodynamic model
of a spherical particle diffusing in a medium of viscosity η
in a box with periodic boundary conditions imposed in every direction.
In this model, the hydrodynamic interactions of the particle with
the surrounding molecules and the periodic images affect the self-diffusion
coefficient. The finite-size effect of the self-diffusivity is caused
from the latter, i.e., the self-interaction of the particle through
the periodic boundaries. Based on this hydrodynamic model, Yeh and
Hummer[47] derived eq for spherical particles and verified this
correction for a single-component Lennard-Jones (LJ) fluid and pure
water. Moultos et al.[48] showed that the
YH correction is also applicable to molecules of varying size and
shape, such as n-alkanes and glymes, provided that
the system size exceeds 250 molecules.In the studies by Spångberg
et al.,[54] Kühne et al.,[55] and others,[56−58] the shear viscosities
and self-diffusivities of water in the thermodynamic
limit were calculated from eq . In these studies, several systems sizes were used to compute
finite-size self-diffusivities, which were then fitted with a linear
regression. To the best of our knowledge, the computation of shear
viscosities from finite-size self-diffusivities has not been considered
previously for multicomponent mixtures or highly viscous liquids.
In this study, we use weighted least-squares linear regression analysis
to develop a well-structured methodology for computing shear viscosities
from finite-size effects of self-diffusivities. To allocate the available
computational resources efficiently, a set of guidelines for choosing
simulation parameters, such as the optimum number of system sizes
and their size differences is provided. The application of the proposed
method is verified for pure water, a large number of binary and ternary
LJ systems, and the ionic liquid [Bmim][Tf2N].This
paper is organized in five sections. The proposed method is
described in Section . In Section , details
of MD simulations are briefly explained. The results of the MD simulations
for pure water, binary and ternary LJ systems, and [Bmim][Tf2N] are discussed in Section , along with a set of guidelines for the efficient use of
the proposed method. The conclusions are provided in Section .
Method
To develop a systematic method to compute shear viscosities from
the finite-size effects of self-diffusivities, we write eq in a linear form, y = ax + b:where −ξkBT/6πL and DselfMD are the independent and dependent variables,
respectively. The intercept
of this line with the vertical axis (L → ∞)
is the self-diffusivity in the thermodynamic limit, Dself∞. The inverse of the slope is the shear viscosity of the fluid, η.To compute the shear viscosity, this method uses self-diffusivities
of at least two system sizes. For each system size, the average self-diffusivity
and its variance can be estimated from the mean (D̅) and sample variance (S2) of the self-diffusivities
computed from several independent simulations:where Nsim, is the number of independent simulations
for the jth system size and D indicates the self-diffusivity computed
from the kth independent simulation for system size j. The
parameters of interest (1/η and DselfMD) are then
fitted to eq with weighted
least-squares linear regression.[59] The
weighted least-squares linear regression is briefly explained in the Supporting Information. The linear regression
analysis requires the standard errors (SEs) of the average self-diffusivities
for all system sizes. The inverse of squared SEs are used as the weighting
factors for each data point. Since no prior knowledge of these SEs
is available, the SE of the self-diffusivity of each system size can
be estimated from the sample variance:According to the work of Pranami and Lamm,[41] multiple independent simulations are required
to correctly compute the sample variance of the mean self-diffusivity.
For a single MD simulation, the computed MSD depends on the initial
configuration regardless of the simulation length. Weighted least-squares
linear regression analysis yields both the averages and the variances
of the parameters in eq . The self-diffusivity in the thermodynamic limit is a direct outcome
of this analysis. The average shear viscosity is equal to the inverse
of the average slope of the fitted line, a̅. If this slope has a statistical uncertainty of δa, the statistical uncertainty of the shear viscosity, δη,
can be calculated from error propagation:In a recent study, we showed that finite-size
corrections to self-diffusivities
of different species in a mixture are identical and equal to the YH
correction (eq ).[49] This conclusion is based on a detailed study
of 250 binary LJ systems with a wide range of LJ energy (ε),
size (σ), and mass (m) ratios. The results
show that the viscosity of a mixture can be predicted from the finite-size
effects of the self-diffusivity of each species regardless of the
mass or size ratios. To maximize the statistical information on a
single simulation, we introduce a new quantity, the average self-diffusivity
(Davg), which is the arithmetic mean of
the self-diffusion coefficients of all species, weighted by their
corresponding mole fractions. By using the definition of the MSD in
multicomponent mixtures (eq ),[60−62] it can be shown that Davg is constructed from the self-diffusion of all molecules in the mixture:where n and N are
the total number of species
and molecules in the mixture, respectively,
and x is the mole fraction
of species i. Since the self-diffusivities of all
species experience an identical finite-size effect,[49] the same YH correction (eq ) can be applied to Davg:By combining eqs and 10, the shear viscosity
of a mixture can be obtained from Davg, similar to the approach used for pure liquids. Hereafter, the proposed
method will be called the D-based method, and η denotes the corresponding computed
shear viscosity.The D-based method can be
used to compute shear
viscosities of highly viscous systems such as ionic liquids and deep
eutectic solvents. The shear viscosity of these systems can be as
large as several hundred cP at room temperature.[37,63−65] The length of MD simulations for computing self-diffusivities
depends directly on how fast the constituent ions diffuse in the bulk
liquid. In MD simulations, Fickian diffusion is observed at time scales
in which a linear relation between the MSD and time (i.e., a slope
of 1 on a log–log plot) is established.[66] However, this criterion does not ensure Gaussian diffusion,
which corresponds to a Gaussian distribution for the displacement
probability of ions.[67] Ionic liquids and
deep eutectic solvents consist of highly associated pairs of ions
and temporarily form cages.[68] While cage
effects can also be present in simple fluids,[69] it plays an important role in determining the minimum length of
an MD simulation for ionic systems.[68,70] As discussed
in detail in the work of Casalegno et al.,[68] for short time scales, each ion fluctuates around a certain position
in the cage. Due to dynamical heterogeneity,[67,68,71] a non-Gaussian distribution is observed
for the diffusion probability of ions trapped in the cage. For longer
time scales, ions jump from a cage to another. The displacement probability
forms a Gaussian distribution corresponding to Gaussian diffusion.[68] According to Casalegno et al.,[68] for room-temperature ionic liquids, a rough estimate of
the time scale corresponding to Gaussian diffusion can be made based
on a minimum average displacement of 1.5 nm for all constituent ions.
This criterion ensures that the simulation time is sufficiently long
for all ions to break the local ion cages and diffuse in the bulk
liquid.[70,72] This criterion can be used for room-temperature
ionic liquids for performing long enough MD simulations to compute
finite-size self-diffusivities with the D-based method.
Simulation Details
To validate the D-based method, three different
systems are considered: binary and ternary LJ systems, pure water,
and the ionic liquid [Bmim][Tf2N]. All MD simulations are
carried out with LAMMPS (version 16, Feb 2016).[73] The order-n algorithm is used for an efficient
sampling of time correlations for the calculation of self-diffusivities
and shear viscosities.[66]MD simulations
of 26 ternary LJ systems were carried out. The results
for 250 binary LJ systems are obtained from the Supporting Information
of our previous work, ref (49). For the interaction between dissimilar LJ particles (i and j), we use the Lorentz–Berthelot
mixing rules with a modification factor (k) to include nonideality in the systems:[34]where
ε and σ are the parameters
of the LJ potential. The simulation parameters of all binary and ternary
systems are provided in Tables and 2, respectively. All parameters
are reported in reduced units, where σ1 = σ
= 1, ε1 = ε = 1, and m1 = m = 1 (mass) are the basis units.[34] All LJ interactions are truncated and shifted
at a cutoff radius of 4σ. Simulations for two system sizes (500
and 4000 LJ particles) were performed at a reduced temperature of
0.65 and a reduced pressure of 0.05. The number densities of the binary[49] and ternary systems are in the range of 0.14–0.89
and 0.78–0.88, respectively. An integral time step of 0.001
is used, and the simulation lengths of the binary and ternary systems
are 200 million and 100 million time steps, respectively.
Table 1
Specifications of 250 Binary LJ Systems
at a Temperature of 0.65 and a Pressure of 0.05[49]a
specification
values
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 species 1 has σ1 = σ
= 1.0, ε1 = ε = 1.0, and
mass = m1 = 1.0 in reduced units.[34]k is an adjustable parameter in the Lorentz–Berthelot mixing
rules (eq ).
Table 2
Specifications of
26 Ternary LJ Systems
at a Temperature of 0.65 and a Pressure of 0.05a
specification
values
k12
0.05, −0.3, −0.6
k13
0.05, −0.3, −0.6
k23
0.05,
0.0, −0.3, −0.6
The LJ interaction
parameters
of species 1, 2, and 3 are ε1 = ε = 1.0, ε2 = 0.8, and ε3 = 0.6, respectively. All species
have the same size (σ1 = σ2 = σ3 = σ = 1.0) and mass (m1 = m2 = m3 = 1.0). All values are reported in reduced units.[34]x indicates
the mole fraction of species i, where x1 = 0.4, x2 = 0.3, and x3 = 0.3.
LJ species 1 has σ1 = σ
= 1.0, ε1 = ε = 1.0, and
mass = m1 = 1.0 in reduced units.[34]k is an adjustable parameter in the Lorentz–Berthelot mixing
rules (eq ).The LJ interaction
parameters
of species 1, 2, and 3 are ε1 = ε = 1.0, ε2 = 0.8, and ε3 = 0.6, respectively. All species
have the same size (σ1 = σ2 = σ3 = σ = 1.0) and mass (m1 = m2 = m3 = 1.0). All values are reported in reduced units.[34]x indicates
the mole fraction of species i, where x1 = 0.4, x2 = 0.3, and x3 = 0.3.For the molecular systems, the initial configurations were made
in Packmol,[74] and the LAMMPS input files
were created with VMD.[75] The three-site
SPC/E model is used for water.[76] The force
field parameters of [Bmim][Tf2N] are obtained from the
work of Zhang et al.[77] The LJ interactions
for water and the ionic liquid are truncated at 9 and 12 Å, respectively,
with analytic tail corrections considered for energy and pressure.
The particle–particle particle–mesh (PPPM) method with
a relative precision of 10–6 is used for the long-range
electrostatic interactions. The Verlet algorithm is used to integrate
Newton’s equations of motion with a time step of 1 fs. MD simulations
for water performed at 298 K and 1 atm. MD simulations of [Bmim][Tf2N] were performed at three temperatures of 300, 400, and 500
K and a pressure of 1 atm. The simulation times used for computing
shear viscosities of water and [Bmim][Tf2N] are 50 and
200 ns, respectively. Self-diffusivities of water and [Bmim][Tf2N] are computed from independent simulations of 0.5 and 20
ns, respectively. Due to the slow relaxation of [Bmim][Tf2N] at 300 K, MD simulations of 50 and 450 ns are needed to obtain
the self-diffusivities and shear viscosity at this low temperature,
respectively. The choice of these simulation lengths is made so that
a minimum average displacement of 1.5 nm is obtained for all systems
(discussed thoroughly in Section ).
Results and Discussions
Pure Water
A set of simulations consisting of seven
system sizes—250, 500, 1000, 2000, 4000, 8000, and 16 000
water molecules—was carried out. The average self-diffusivities
were obtained from 100 independent simulations of 0.5 ns for each
system size. In Figure , the average self-diffusivities of water are shown as a function
of the system size. These finite-size self-diffusivities lie on the
line fitted to eq :where N equals the number
of water molecules in the simulation box. From the intercept with
the vertical axis, the self-diffusivity of the SPC/E water model in
the thermodynamic limit at 298 K and 1 atm is estimated to be (2.870
± 0.004) × 10–9 m2 s–1 and the shear viscosity 0.708 ± 0.014 cP. The shear viscosity
of water computed from the Einstein relation (eq ) is 0.694 ± 0.010 cP. These two values
are in excellent agreement, considering the wide range of shear viscosities
reported in the literature for the SPC/E water model at the same conditions:
0.68,[56] 0.71,[54] 0.729,[78,79] and 0.82 cP.[80] This agreement confirms the applicability of the D-based method for pure water.
Figure 1
Computed self-diffusion coefficients of
the SPC/E water model at
298 K and 1 atm for seven system sizes: N = 250,
500, 1000, 2000, 4000, 8000, and 16 000 water molecules. A
total of 100 independent simulations of 0.5 ns were performed for
each system size. The dashed line is fitted with the weighted least-squares
linear regression (eq ) to the YH equation (eq ). Error bars are smaller than the symbol sizes. The self-diffusivities
are tabulated in Table S1 of the Supporting Information.
Computed self-diffusion coefficients of
the SPC/E water model at
298 K and 1 atm for seven system sizes: N = 250,
500, 1000, 2000, 4000, 8000, and 16 000 water molecules. A
total of 100 independent simulations of 0.5 ns were performed for
each system size. The dashed line is fitted with the weighted least-squares
linear regression (eq ) to the YH equation (eq ). Error bars are smaller than the symbol sizes. The self-diffusivities
are tabulated in Table S1 of the Supporting Information.The extensive data set of finite-size
water self-diffusivities
provides a suitable estimation of the variances (S2) and the standard deviations (S) of
self-diffusivities as a function of the system size. These standard
deviations will be used in the next section for optimizing the D-based method. Figure shows the estimated standard deviations as a function
of the number of molecules (N–1/3). Since no prior knowledge of the functional form is available,
an initial guess for the functional form would be a power-law function
(aN) with two fitting
parameters:The exponent
−0.31 and the linear arrangement
of the data points in Figure suggest that the standard deviation can also be a linear
function in N–1/3, which decreases
the number of fitting parameters to one (aN–1/3):
Figure 2
Estimated standard deviations of the self-diffusion
coefficients
of the SPC/E water model at 298 K and 1 atm, computed for seven system
sizes: N = 250, 500, 1000, 2000, 4000, 8000, and
16 000 water molecules. A total of 100 independent simulations
of 0.5 ns were performed for each system size. The red and blue dashed
lines are fits to a power-law (eq ) and a linear function (eq ), respectively.
Estimated standard deviations of the self-diffusion
coefficients
of the SPC/E water model at 298 K and 1 atm, computed for seven system
sizes: N = 250, 500, 1000, 2000, 4000, 8000, and
16 000 water molecules. A total of 100 independent simulations
of 0.5 ns were performed for each system size. The red and blue dashed
lines are fits to a power-law (eq ) and a linear function (eq ), respectively.In the next section, eq combined with eq will be used as a model for the normal distribution
of finite-size
self-diffusivities of water as a function of system size.
Optimization
In this section, a set of optimum simulation
parameters for which the computed shear viscosities have a minimum
statistical uncertainty is proposed. The following parameters are
considered: the number of system sizes, the size difference between
systems, and the allocation of computational resources to each system
size. The size difference between system i and system j is normalized by the size of the smallest system (system
1): (N – N)/N1. According to the work of Moultos et al.,[48] the smallest system should contain at least 250 molecules. This
criterion ensures that the YH correction (eq ) provides an accurate prediction for the
finite-size effects of self-diffusivities. As a constraint on the
optimization problem, the total computational resources are fixed.
The computational resources scale linearly with the number of independent
simulations (Nsim,)
and polynomially with the number of molecules (N) in the simulation box, depending on computer
hardware, the employed computational methods, and the scalability
of MD simulations.[34] Thus, the ratio, α,
between the computational resources allocated to system i and system j iswhere γ indicates the
scalability of MD simulations. Two values of γ are considered
here for the scalability of MD simulations: γ = 1 and 2. For
γ = 1, computational requirements grow linearly with the system
size. For γ = 2, the growth in computational requirements is
quadratic and thus faster than the linear growth. Current state-of-the-art
MD packages[73,81,82] have a good computational scalability, γ, close to 1.The simulation results presented for the SPC/E water model can be
used as a basis for finding the optimum combination of the simulation
parameters for the D-based method. eqs and 14 are
used to model the average and standard deviation of finite-size self-diffusivity
of water as a function of system size. This model enables us to predict
the self-diffusivity of water for a hypothetical MD simulation with
a specified number of molecules. This can be achieved by generating
a random number from a normal distribution with a mean self-diffusivity
and a standard deviation determined by eqs and 14. For a set
of simulations with a number of system sizes and independent simulations
per system size, a set of finite-size self-diffusivities is constructed
and the corresponding shear viscosity is calculated from the D-based method. Since this shear viscosity depends on the
set of finite-size self-diffusivities, the procedure should be repeated
for many times and all shear viscosities are recorded in a histogram.
For a specific set of simulation parameters, the data stored in the
histogram yield an estimate for the variance (S2) and standard deviation (S) of the shear
viscosity. The aim of this optimization procedure is to find the simulation
parameters that minimize the standard deviation (S) of the shear viscosity.The first scenario considered here
is the optimization for two
system sizes. The simulation parameters studied are (i) the normalized
size difference ((N2 – N1)/N1), and (ii)
the ratio between the computational resources allocated to system
1 and 2 (α). The objective function is the estimated standard
deviation of shear viscosities normalized by Smin, the global minimum estimated standard deviation of the
shear viscosity for a specified value of γ and all values of
α and (N2 – N1)/N1. In Figure , the normalized estimated
standard deviations (S/Smin) are shown for several values of α,
ranging
from 0.2 to 5.0, and the two values of γ. As can be seen in Figure , a range of α
between 1 and 2 yields the smallest value of S/Smin. This means that the number of independent
simulations for each system size should be distributed in such a way
that 50%–70% of the computational resources is allocated to
the large system. Furthermore, it can be observed that the large system
should be at least 4 times the size of the small system. Depending
on the scalability of MD simulations, the optimum normalized size
difference ((N2 – N1)/N1) ranges from 3 (γ
= 2) to 40 (γ = 1).
Figure 3
Normalized estimated standard deviation (S/Smin) of the shear viscosity
as a function of
the normalized size difference between two systems ((N2 – N1)/N1). The total amount of computational resources is fixed.
Different colors indicate various ratios α of the computational
resources allocated to large and small system sizes (eq ): 0.2 (black), 0.5 (magenta),
1.0 (green), 2.0 (red), and 5.0 (blue). Two types of scalability for
MD simulations are considered: (a) high scalability (γ = 1)
and (b) low scalability (γ = 2).
Normalized estimated standard deviation (S/Smin) of the shear viscosity
as a function of
the normalized size difference between two systems ((N2 – N1)/N1). The total amount of computational resources is fixed.
Different colors indicate various ratios α of the computational
resources allocated to large and small system sizes (eq ): 0.2 (black), 0.5 (magenta),
1.0 (green), 2.0 (red), and 5.0 (blue). Two types of scalability for
MD simulations are considered: (a) high scalability (γ = 1)
and (b) low scalability (γ = 2).A similar investigation can be carried out for three system
sizes.
Here, α is set to 1, indicating that the computational resources
are equally distributed between the three system sizes. In Figure , normalized estimated
standard deviations (S/Smin) are shown as a function of the normalized size difference between
the small and medium systems ((N2 – N1)/N1), and the
medium and large systems ((N3 – N2)/N1). Figure a (γ = 1) shows
that a minimum cost function (S/Smin) is achieved for (N2 – N1)/N1 > 10. This
suggests that, while the choice of the size difference between the
small and medium systems is important, the size difference between
the medium and large systems does not play a significant role. For
very small values of the normalized size difference between the medium
and large systems ((N3 – N2)/N1 → 0),
it can be deduced that the optimization problem reduces to a problem
of two system sizes, which has already been discussed. In Figure b, this is also observed
for γ = 2. The optimum condition is achieved at (N2 – N1)/N1 = 3, which is in agreement with what is shown in Figure b for two system
sizes. This suggests that the optimum condition observed for three
system sizes can also be achieved with two systems.
Figure 4
Normalized estimated
standard deviations (S/Smin) of the shear viscosities as a function
of the normalized size difference between small and medium systems
((N2 – N1)/N1), and between medium and large system
sizes ((N3 – N2)/N1). A fixed amount of
computational resources is equally distributed between the three system
sizes. Two types of scalability for the MD simulations are considered:
(a) high scalability (γ = 1) and (b) low scalability (γ
= 2).
Normalized estimated
standard deviations (S/Smin) of the shear viscosities as a function
of the normalized size difference between small and medium systems
((N2 – N1)/N1), and between medium and large system
sizes ((N3 – N2)/N1). A fixed amount of
computational resources is equally distributed between the three system
sizes. Two types of scalability for the MD simulations are considered:
(a) high scalability (γ = 1) and (b) low scalability (γ
= 2).Based on the optimization results,
the use of either two or three
system sizes yields optimum shear viscosities. In the case of a limited
amount of computational resources, adding more system sizes leads
to a smaller number of independent simulations per system size. As
a consequence, the limited number of independent simulations leads
to poor sampling that may not yield an accurate average and standard
deviation for self-diffusivities. This adversely affects the accuracy
of average finite-size self-diffusivities and consequently the computed
shear viscosity. Hence, the use of more than two system sizes is not
justified. The choice of the optimum conditions may vary depending
on the MD software[73,81,82] as well as the algorithms used in the software (e.g., handling of
long-range electrostatic interactions, details of the neighbor lists[34]). These specifications determine the optimum
size of the system and number of independent simulations according
to the results shown in Figure , and consequently affect the computational requirements of
the D-based method.
Lennard-Jones Systems
To examine the accuracy of the D-based method
for multicomponent fluid mixtures, the shear
viscosities of 250 binary[49] and 26 ternary
LJ systems were computed. The comparison between the D-based shear viscosities and those computed from the Einstein relation
(ηEMD, eq ) are shown in Figure . By varying the characteristics of the studied LJ systems
as mentioned in Tables and 2, a wide range of shear viscosities
is covered. While all data points show a good agreement between the
two methods, the smallest deviation from the diagonal dashed lines
is observed for the quantity Davg, for
both binary and ternary systems. This is expected since Davg is constructed from the self-diffusivities of all
species present in the mixture. Therefore, for multicomponent mixtures, Davg should be used for calculating the shear
viscosity rather than the self-diffusivity of only a single species.
Figure 5
Comparison
between the shear viscosities of (a) 250 binary and
(b) 26 ternary LJ systems computed from the Einstein relation (ηEMD, eq ) and
the D-based method (η, eq ) at a reduced temperature of 0.65 and a reduced pressure of 0.05.
The D-based shear viscosities are computed from the
self-diffusion coefficients of species 1 (blue circles), species 2
(green squares), and species 3 (cyan diamonds; only for ternary systems)
as well as the average self-diffusivity (eq , red crosses). Error bars are omitted for
clarity. All computed shear viscosities and their statistical uncertainties
are listed in the Supporting Information, Tables S4 and S7.
Comparison
between the shear viscosities of (a) 250 binary and
(b) 26 ternary LJ systems computed from the Einstein relation (ηEMD, eq ) and
the D-based method (η, eq ) at a reduced temperature of 0.65 and a reduced pressure of 0.05.
The D-based shear viscosities are computed from the
self-diffusion coefficients of species 1 (blue circles), species 2
(green squares), and species 3 (cyan diamonds; only for ternary systems)
as well as the average self-diffusivity (eq , red crosses). Error bars are omitted for
clarity. All computed shear viscosities and their statistical uncertainties
are listed in the Supporting Information, Tables S4 and S7.In Figure , the
maximum deviation from the diagonal line, which represent perfect
agreement between the D-based method and the Einstein
relation, are observed for binary LJ systems with very low densities
(inset of Figure a).
As discussed in our previous study,[49] these
outliers have very dissimilar size (σ2/σ1 = 1.4 or 1.6) and interaction (ε2/ε1 = 0.5 or 0.6) parameters. According to the work of Heyes
et al.[83] for a hard-sphere fluid, the exponent
−1/3 in N–1/3 (i.e., L–1) in eq is valid only for a range of packing fractions. Since
the validity of the YH correction have been shown for many real molecular
liquids,[47−50] it is expected that the range of packing fractions for which the
YH correction holds correspond to a liquid phase. From Figure , a similar observation to
the work of Heyes et al.[83] can be made
for LJ systems. In this figure, the normalized difference between
the shear viscosities computed from the D-based method
(using Davg) and the Einstein relation
is shown as a function of (a) the shear viscosity and (b) the density
for all binary and ternary LJ systems. For LJ systems at high densities,
a good agreement between the two methods is observed. For the systems
with low densities/viscosities, shown also in the inset of Figure , substantial deviations
(up to 30%) between the D-based method and the Einstein
relation are observed. Figure shows that as the density of a system decreases and thus
hydrodynamic interactions become weaker, the scaling proposed by Yeh
and Hummer does not hold anymore. At low densities, the finite-size
effects of self-diffusivities do not scale as N–1/3, and the exponent varies according to the packing
fraction of the fluid (e.g., see the work of Heyes et al.[83]). As discussed briefly in the Supporting Information, the outliers shown in Figures and 6 correspond to conditions close to the critical point. This suggests
that neither the YH correction nor the D-based method
is applicable at conditions close to the critical point. Nevertheless,
our findings show that the D-based method is able
to predict accurate shear viscosities for all real molecular systems
in a liquid phase far from the critical point.
Figure 6
Normalized absolute difference
between shear viscosities computed
from the Einstein relation and the D-based method
as a function of (a) the shear viscosity and (b) the density. Data
are shown for binary (blue diamonds) and ternary (green squares) LJ
systems at a temperature of 0.65 and a pressure of 0.05. The D-based method shear viscosities are computed from average
self-diffusivities (Davg).
Normalized absolute difference
between shear viscosities computed
from the Einstein relation and the D-based method
as a function of (a) the shear viscosity and (b) the density. Data
are shown for binary (blue diamonds) and ternary (green squares) LJ
systems at a temperature of 0.65 and a pressure of 0.05. The D-based method shear viscosities are computed from average
self-diffusivities (Davg).
[Bmim][Tf2N]
As a representative
test case,
shear viscosities of the ionic liquid [Bmim][Tf2N] are
calculated from the D-based method and the Einstein
relation (eq ) at a
pressure of 1 atm and three temperatures: 300, 400, and 500 K. MD
simulations of 20 ns were performed for computing self-diffusivities
of [Bmim][Tf2N] at 400 and 500 K. To fulfill the minimum
average displacement criterion of 1.5 nm (explained in Section ), the MD simulations at 300
K were carried out for 50 ns. According to the set of guidelines proposed
for the D-based method, 40 and 8 independent MD simulations
were performed for two systems of 150 and 1200 pairs of ions, respectively.In Figure , the
computed self-diffusivities for both [Bmim] and [Tf2N]
ions as well as Davg are shown. It can
be seen that the finite-size self-diffusivities of [Bmim] and [Tf2N] greatly differ from each other, but the finite-size effects
remain equal for both ions and Davg. Therefore,
shear viscosities computed from the slopes of the lines connecting
finite-size self-diffusivities are equal within the error bars. The
computed shear viscosities from the D-based method
and the Einstein relation, and their 95% confidence intervals are
reported in Table S11 in the Supporting Information. Figure shows that
the use of Davg for the D-based method is not limited to molecular mixtures and that this
quantity can be used for ionic systems as well.
Figure 7
Computed self-diffusion
coefficients of [Bmim][Tf2N]
at 300, 400, and 500 K and 1 atm. In all, 40 and 8 independent simulations
were performed for two system sizes of 150 and 1200 ion pairs, respectively.
Self-diffusivities are shown for [Bmim] (blue circles), [Tf2N] (green diamonds), and Davg (red squares).
The slope of the line connecting each two points yields the shear
viscosity. The simulation length at 400 and 500 K is 20 ns. Simulations
at 300 K were performed for 50 ns. All self-diffusivities are listed
in Tables S8–S10 of the Supporting Information. Error bars are smaller than the symbol sizes.
Computed self-diffusion
coefficients of [Bmim][Tf2N]
at 300, 400, and 500 K and 1 atm. In all, 40 and 8 independent simulations
were performed for two system sizes of 150 and 1200 ion pairs, respectively.
Self-diffusivities are shown for [Bmim] (blue circles), [Tf2N] (green diamonds), and Davg (red squares).
The slope of the line connecting each two points yields the shear
viscosity. The simulation length at 400 and 500 K is 20 ns. Simulations
at 300 K were performed for 50 ns. All self-diffusivities are listed
in Tables S8–S10 of the Supporting Information. Error bars are smaller than the symbol sizes.Figure shows
the
computed shear viscosities of the ionic liquid as a function of temperature.
The lines are the fits to the Vogel equation:[84]where A, B, and C are the coefficients
of this equation. For
all temperatures, a good agreement is observed between the D-based method, the Einstein relation (eq ), and the estimates of shear viscosities
from the work of Zhang et al.[77] This agreement
confirms the applicability of the D-based method
to complex and highly viscous mixtures of nonspherical molecules/ions.
To compute the shear viscosity of any ionic liquid or deep eutectic
solvent, the set of guidelines for the D-based method
along with the criterion on the minimum average displacement can be
used to specify an optimum set of MD simulations.
Figure 8
Shear viscosity of [Bmim][Tf2N] as a function of temperature
at 1 atm, computed from the D-based method (blue
circles, eq ) and the
Einstein relation (red squares, eq ). The lines are fits to the Vogel equation[84] (eq ) for the D-based method (blue dashed, eq ), Einstein relation (red
dashed), and Green–Kubo relation (green solid; data extracted
from the work of Zhang et al.[77]). The shear
viscosities and coefficients of the Vogel equation are provided in
Tables S11 and S12 of the Supporting Information.
Shear viscosity of [Bmim][Tf2N] as a function of temperature
at 1 atm, computed from the D-based method (blue
circles, eq ) and the
Einstein relation (red squares, eq ). The lines are fits to the Vogel equation[84] (eq ) for the D-based method (blue dashed, eq ), Einstein relation (red
dashed), and Green–Kubo relation (green solid; data extracted
from the work of Zhang et al.[77]). The shear
viscosities and coefficients of the Vogel equation are provided in
Tables S11 and S12 of the Supporting Information.
Conclusion
A systematic methodology, called the D-based method,
is proposed for accurately computing the shear viscosity of a liquid
from the finite-size effects of self-diffusivities. The computational
requirements of this method and the statistical uncertainty of the
computed viscosity are comparable to the conventional methods, e.g.,
the Einstein relation. By performing weighted least-squares linear
regression analysis, the shear viscosity can be computed from the
slope of a line fitted to computed finite-size self-diffusivities.
To obtain accurate shear viscosities at a minimum computational requirement,
a set of guidelines for this method was proposed. The optimum number
of system sizes is two, and depending on the available computational
resources and the scalability of the MD simulations, the large system
size should be 4–40 times the small system size. The number
of independent simulations per system size should be assigned in such
a way that 50%–70% of the computational resources is allocated
to the MD simulations of the large system. For multicomponent mixtures,
the D-based method performs best when the average
self-diffusivity of all species (Davg)
is used instead of using the self-diffusivity of a single species.
The D-based method was verified for pure water, a
large number of binary and ternary Lennard-Jones systems, and an ionic
liquid ([Bmim][Tf2N]). The results of the D-based method were in good agreement with those obtained from the
Green–Kubo and Einstein relations for all molecular systems.
These results suggest that the D-based method can
be a potential method for computing shear viscosities of highly viscous
liquids and multicomponent mixtures.
Authors: Peter Krüger; Sondre K Schnell; Dick Bedeaux; Signe Kjelstrup; Thijs J H Vlugt; Jean-Marc Simon Journal: J Phys Chem Lett Date: 2012-12-28 Impact factor: 6.475
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
Authors: Noura Dawass; Jilles Langeveld; Mahinder Ramdin; Elena Pérez-Gallent; Angel A Villanueva; Erwin J M Giling; Jort Langerak; Leo J P van den Broeke; Thijs J H Vlugt; Othonas A Moultos Journal: J Phys Chem B Date: 2022-05-04 Impact factor: 3.466