4.6 Article

Hydrogen and Deuterium Molecular Escape from Clathrate Hydrates: Leaky Microsecond-Molecular-Dynamics Predictions

期刊

JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY C
卷 125, 期 15, 页码 8430-8439

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jpcc.1c00987

关键词

-

资金

  1. SFI-NSFC bilateral funding scheme [SFI/17/NSFC/5229]
  2. Irish Research Council by a Government-of-Ireland postdoctoral fellowship [GOIPD/2016/365]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The passage predicts the leakage of hydrogen and deuterium from sII clathrate hydrates through simulations, and analyzes the impact of different large-cage occupancies on the intercage hopping of hydrogen and deuterium.
It is predicted herewith that the leakage of both hydrogen (H-2) and deuterium (D-2) from sII clathrate hydrates, borne of guest chemical-potential equalization driving enhanced nonequilibrium intercage hopping, should be observable exper-imentally. To this end, we have designed simulations to realize and study this process by microsecond molecular dynamics within the temperature range of 150-180 K-for which the hydrate lattice was found to be stable. In this pursuit, we considered initial large-cage (5(12)6(4)) guest occupancies of 1-4, with single occupation of 5(12) cavities. Examining transient, nonequilibrium intercage hopping, we present a lattice-escape activation energy for the four nominal large-cage occupancies (1-4), by fitting to the hydrate-leakage rate. The intercage hopping of H-2 and D-2 was studied using Markov-chain models and expressed at different temperatures and large-cage occupancies. The free energy of guest binding in the large and small cages was also computed for all of the occupancies. Toward equilibrium, following the majority of H-2/D-2 escape via leakage, the percentage of occupancies was calculated for both H-2 and D-2 for all of the systems for all initial nominal large-cage occupancies; her; not unexpectedly, double occupancies occurred more favorably in large cages and single occupancies dominated in small cages.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据