4.6 Article

Predicting gas selectivity in organic ionic plastic crystals by free energy calculations

期刊

RSC ADVANCES
卷 11, 期 32, 页码 19623-19629

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/d1ra01844b

关键词

-

资金

  1. Australian Research Council (ARC) [CE140100012, FL110100013]
  2. Australian Government

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Gas absorption in organic ionic plastic crystals can be predicted using two methods, with analysis showing good selectivity for CO2 and N-2, while the selectivity of CH4 and O-2 is position-dependent. This highlights the significant impact of structural order and chemical environment on gas absorption.
Organic ionic plastic crystals (OIPCs) are molecularly disordered solids, and their potential for the development of gas separation membranes has recently been demonstrated. Here, the gas absorption capability of the OIPC, diethyl(methyl)(isobutyl)phosphonium hexafluorophosphate ([P-122i4][PF6]), for four gases is predicted through potential of mean force (PMF) calculations based on two methods - average force method and adaptive biasing force method. Both methods correctly predicted the different trends of adsorption and absorption of these gases across the OIPC-gas interface. The distinct energy barriers of the PMF profiles of CO2 and N-2 near the interface directly reflect the good selectivity of OIPC to these two gases. However, the selectivity of CH4 and O-2 cannot be accurately reflected by the PMF curve near the interface, because the relative energy varies greatly at different positions inside the OIPC. Thus the average free energy change should be calculated over the entire OIPC box to evaluate the difference in selectivity between the two gases. This also suggests that gas absorption in OIPCs is greatly affected by the structural order and chemical environment. The adaptive biasing force method overall outperforms the average force method. The method should be able to provide a prediction of gas selectivity for a wider range of organic ionic plastic crystals and other solid materials.

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