4.5 Review

Molecular rotation as a tool for exploring specific solute-solvent interactions

期刊

CHEMPHYSCHEM
卷 6, 期 3, 页码 413-418

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/cphc.200400337

关键词

ab initio calculations; dielectric friction; hydrogen bonds; rotational relaxation; solute-solvent interactions

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Solute-solvent interactions play an important role in determining the physicochemical properties of liquids and solutions. As a consequence, understanding these interactoions has been one of the long-standing problems in physical chemistry. This Minireview describes our approach towards attaining this goal, which is to investigate rotational relaxtion of a pair of closely related medium-sized nondipolar solutes in a set of appropriately chosen solvents. Our studies indicate that solute-solvent hydrogen bonding significantly hinders solute rotation. We have also examined the role of solvent size both in the absence and presence of specific interactions ans it has been observed that the size of the solvent has a bearing on solute rotation especially in the specific interactions. Our results point to the fact that only strong solute-solvent hydrogen bonds have the ability to impede the rotation of the solute molecule because, in such a scenario, hydrogen-bonding dynamics and rotational dynamics transpire on comparable time scales. This apsect has been substantiated by measuring the reorientation times of the chosen solutes in solvents such as ethanol and trifluoroethanol, which have distinct hydrogen-bonding donating and accepting abilities, and correlating them with solute-solvent interaction strengths. As as alternative treatment, it has been shown that specific interactions between the solute and the solvent can be modeled as dielectric friction with the extended charge distribution model. This approach is not unrealistic considering the fact that specific as well as non-specific interactions are electrostatic by nature and the differences between them are subtle.

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