| Literature DB >> 33719447 |
Enrico Bodo1, Matteo Bonomo1,2, Alessandro Mariani1,3,4.
Abstract
We present a computational analysis of the short-range structure of three protic ionic liquids based on strongEntities:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33719447 PMCID: PMC8041315 DOI: 10.1021/acs.jpcb.1c00249
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Phys Chem B ISSN: 1520-5207 Impact factor: 2.991
Parameters of MD Simulationsa
| system | side length/Å | number of pairs | density/g cm–3 | production/ps |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| [TEA][MS] | 20 | 27 | 1.10 | 30 |
| 17 | 16 | 1.06 | 380 | |
| [TEA][TFA] | 20 | 26 | 1.16 | 30 |
| 17 | 16 | 1.16 | 370 | |
| [TEA][Trf] | 20 | 24 | 1.25 | 30 |
| 17 | 15 | 1.27 | 430 |
The experimental densities of the three liquids are 1.12 for MS, 1.14 for TFA, and 1.27 g cm–3 for Trf.[30]
Proton Affinities Computed with the SCC-DFTB3 Method versus Experimental Data from Refs[54,56]
| molecule | DFTB (kcal/mol) | expt. (kcal/mol) | error (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| TEA | 240.8 | 234.5 | –2.6 |
| TFA | 332.3 | 323 | –2.9 |
| MS | 325.3 | 321 | –1.3 |
| Trf | 304.2 | 305.5 | –0.4 |
Figure 1D-B3LYP/def2-TZVP-optimized structures of the ionic couples. From left to right: [TEA][TFA], [TEA][MS], and [TEA][Trf]. Proton–acceptor distances expressed in Å are reported in red.
Geometric Parameters of the HB in the Isolated Ionic Couples, as Obtained by Different Methodsa
| molecule | method | O–H/Å | O–N/Å | O–H–N/deg |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| [TEA][TFA] | D3-B3LYP | 1.44 | 2.56 | 178.5 |
| B3LYP | 1.44 | 2.57 | 179.1 | |
| PBEh-3c | 1.05 | 2.60 | 179.5 | |
| DFTB | 1.44 | 2.59 | 175.7 | |
| 2.56 | 175.4 | |||
| [TEA][MS] | D3-B3LYP | 1.53 | 2.61 | 176.4 |
| B3LYP | 1.53 | 2.62 | 177.9 | |
| PBEh-3c | 1.43 | 2.54 | 175.7 | |
| DFTB | 1.57 | 2.66 | 176.2 | |
| 1.52 | 2.60 | 174.5 | ||
| [TEA][Trf] | D3-B3LYP | 1.58 | 2.64 | 174.6 |
| B3LYP | 1.60 | 2.67 | 174.4 | |
| PBEh-3c | 1.50 | 2.58 | 173.5 | |
| DFTB | 1.64 | 2.71 | 174.4 | |
| 1.59 | 2.65 | 170.2 |
Data from previous calculations have also been added.
The proton is on the oxygen.
B3LYP-GD3/6–31++G(d,p) from ref (58).
B3LYP-GD3/6–31++G(d,p) from ref (59).
Figure 2Geometric (relaxed) scan of the O–H distance in the three ionic couples: left, [TEA][TFA]; center, [TEA][MS]; and right, [TEA][Trf]. At 0.8 Å, we find a situation with the proton on the oxygen atom. At 1.5 Å, the proton is on the nitrogen. The zero has been arbitrarily set to the lowest energy values for each method.
Binding Energies in kcal/mol of the Ionic Couples with Respect to the Relaxed Ionic Fragmentsa
| D-B3LYP | B3LYP | PBEh-3c | DFTB | D-B3LYP + ZPE | CCSD | previous calc. | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| [TEA][TFA] | –110.71 | –105.01 | –116.41 | –106.70 | –110.65 | –109.59 | –112.4 |
| [TEA][MS] | –111.39 | –103.97 | –114.69 | –105.59 | –111.02 | –108.36 | –113.5 |
| [TEA][Trf] | –100.17 | –92.91 | –102.81 | –94.32 | –99.53 | –97.62 | –101.1 |
Data from the literature have also been added.
B3LYP-GD3/6–31++G(d,p) from ref (58).
B3LYP-GD3/6–31++G(d,p) from ref (59).
Separate Components of the Vertical Binding Energy in kcal/mol, as Computed using DLPNO-CCSD at the Gometric Minimum Obtained with D-B3LYPa
| Δ | Δ | Δ | net charge of ions | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| [TEA][TFA] | –251.8 | –21.2 | –8.0 | ±0.82 |
| [TEA][MS] | –219.0 | –18.0 | –8.5 | ±0.86 |
| [TEA][Trf] | –182.7 | –15.0 | –8.2 | ±0.89 |
The relaxation energy due to the geometric rearrangement is not included. In the last column, we report the net charges of the two ions (from natural atomic orbital populations).
Figure 3NBOs participating in the HB in the ionic couples. The first one is an atomic orbital localized on the donor oxygen (two lobes, p-shaped). The second one is an empty anti-bonding orbital localized on the acceptor N–H bond (three lobes, σ*-shaped). These plots contain two independent NBOs; hence, their relative phase (colors) is irrelevant. From left to right: [TEA][TFA], [TEA][MS], and [TEA][Trf].
Figure 4Raman spectra computed at the D-B3LYP/Def2-TZVP level compared with experimental measurements from ref (30). Left, [TEA][MS]; right, [TEA][Trf]; and bottom, [TEA][TFA]. The computed frequencies have been scaled by a uniform factor of 0.98 to account for anharmonicity.
Figure 5Averaged atomic densities over 100 ps MD runs for the acceptor oxygen atoms (red) and the atoms directly bound to them (cyan for C on TFA and yellow for S). From left to right: TFA, MS, and Trf.
Figure 6Average interaction energies ΔEfi (left) and ΔEic (right) as a function of simulation time. In the right panel, to ease the visualization, the average values of the energies are shown as horizontal lines. See text for details.
Figure 7RDFs for the N–O distances in the three clusters. The inset shows an enlargement of the maximum region plus the equilibrium values of the same distances, as obtained in the isolated ionic couples.
Figure 8RDFs for the N–O distances in the three liquid bulk simulations. Black lines: 173 Å3 cells. Red lines: 203 Å3 cells. The superimposed structures depict the SDs computed in the bulk phase in the same fashion as in Figure .
Figure 9NHO angle/NO distance correlation map. Brighter regions correspond to the highest occurrence counts. Left: [TFA]. Center: [MS]. Right: [Trf].
Figure 10VDOS for the three liquids in the mid-IR range. In the middle panel, the contribution of CH includes both TEA and MS. The N–H contribution (in red) has been enlarged to make it visible on this scale. The arrows indicate less visible features of the VDOS because of the scale choice.