4.5 Article

Resurrection of Huckel's idea: Decoupling ion-ion and ion-water terms in activity coefficients via the state-dependent dielectric constant

期刊

FLUID PHASE EQUILIBRIA
卷 572, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.fluid.2023.113826

关键词

Electrolyte; Activity coefficient; Monte Carlo; Born theory; Dielectric constant

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Although Huckel proposed the idea of using a concentration dependent dielectric constant to compute activity coefficients of ions in electrolytes in 1925, significant modeling studies were not published until after 2010 when the II+IW theory was introduced. This theory splits the excess chemical potential into two terms corresponding to ion-ion interactions and ion-water interactions. This review discusses various issues related to the theory and its application in a broader context.
Although Huckel proposed the basic idea of using a concentration dependent dielectric constant,..(..), to compute the activity coefficients of ions in electrolytes in 1925 (Huckel, 1925), a large amount of modeling studies appeared in the literature only after 2010 when we published our II+IW theory (Vincze et al., 2010) that splits the excess chemical potential into two terms corresponding to interactions between ions (II) and interactions between ions and water (IW). In this approach, the two terms are decoupled, which means that they can be computed independently with epsilon(c) being the only link between them. Here, we review our theory and other works based on Huckel's suggestion by discussing several issues that are partly cornerstones of the theory, partly make it possible to put the theory into a larger context. These issues include the role of epsilon(c) and the ionic radii used in the II and IW term, the statistical mechanical methods to estimate the II term, the existence and interpretation of individual activities, phenomena associated with strong ionic correlations in multivalent electrolytes, and explicit-water models used in molecular dynamics simulations.

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

4.5
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