07.04.2013 Views

Essentials of Computational Chemistry

Essentials of Computational Chemistry

Essentials of Computational Chemistry

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

11.2 ELECTROSTATIC INTERACTIONS WITH A CONTINUUM 395<br />

is the Debye–Hückel parameter given by<br />

κ 2 = 8πq2 I<br />

εkBT<br />

(11.7)<br />

where I is the ionic strength <strong>of</strong> the electrolyte solution. The inverse <strong>of</strong> κ is also called the<br />

Debye length.<br />

Thus, in order to determine the electrostatic potential in solvents containing either nonelectrolytes<br />

or electrolytes, we need only solve Eqs. (11.5) or (11.6), respectively, using the<br />

known charge density <strong>of</strong> the solute and some cavity defining how the dielectric constant<br />

varies about the solute. As differential equations go, Eq. (11.5) is straightforward, but<br />

Eq. (11.6) is fairly unpleasant. As a result, it is <strong>of</strong>ten simplified at low ionic strength by<br />

using a truncated power expansion for the hyperbolic sine, giving the so-called linearized<br />

PB equation<br />

∇ε (r) ·∇φ (r) − ε (r) λ (r) κ 2 φ (r) =−4πρ (r) (11.8)<br />

Note that it is fairly common in the literature for continuum solvation calculations to be<br />

reported as having been carried out using Poisson–Boltzmann electrostatics even when no<br />

electrolyte concentration is being considered, i.e., the Poisson equation is considered a special<br />

case <strong>of</strong> the PB equation and not named separately.<br />

For certain ideal cavity shapes, the relevant PB equations have particularly simple analytic<br />

solutions. While such ideal cavities are not typically to be expected for arbitrary solute<br />

molecules, consideration <strong>of</strong> some examples is instructive in illustrating how more sophisticated<br />

modeling may be undertaken by generalization therefrom.<br />

11.2.1.1 Ideal cavities<br />

Consider a conducting sphere bearing charge q, which may be taken as an approximation to<br />

a monatomic ion. The charge on such an object spreads out uniformly on the surface, and<br />

the charge density at any point on the surface may thus be expressed as<br />

ρ (s) = q<br />

4πa 2<br />

(11.9)<br />

where s is a surface point and a is the radius <strong>of</strong> the sphere. So, in order to evaluate Eq. (11.3),<br />

we will need to integrate only on the surface <strong>of</strong> the sphere (since the charge density is zero<br />

everywhere else). To determine the electrostatic potential at the surface we must approach<br />

from the outside (the dielectric constant <strong>of</strong> a conductor is infinite and the electrostatic potential<br />

everywhere inside is zero, so there is a formal discontinuity in the potential at the<br />

surface). From the outside, the electrostatic potential is well known to be equivalent to that<br />

for a point charge q at the origin, giving the central field result<br />

φ (r) =− q<br />

ε |r|<br />

(11.10)

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!