Research Article  Open Access
W. Wongsinlatam, T. Remsungnen, "Molecular Dynamics Simulations of CO_{2} Molecules in ZIF11 Using Refined AMBER Force Field", Journal of Chemistry, vol. 2013, Article ID 415027, 10 pages, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/415027
Molecular Dynamics Simulations of CO_{2} Molecules in ZIF11 Using Refined AMBER Force Field
Abstract
Nonbonding parameters of AMBER force field have been refined based on ab initio binding energies of CO_{2}–[C_{7}H_{5}N_{2}]^{−} complexes. The energy and geometry scaling factors are obtained to be 1.2 and 0.9 for and parameters, respectively. Molecular dynamics simulations of CO_{2} molecules in rigid framework ZIF11, have then been performed using original AMBER parameters (SIM I) and refined parameters (SIM II), respectively. The sitesite radial distribution functions and the molecular distribution plots simulations indicate that all hydrogen atoms are favored binding site of CO_{2} molecules. One slight but notable difference is that CO_{2} molecules are mostly located around and closer to hydrogen atom of imidazolate ring in SIM II than those found in SIM I. The ZnZn and ZnN RDFs in free flexible framework simulation (SIM III) show validity of adapting AMBER bonding parameters. Due to the limitations of computing resources and times in this study, the results of flexible framework simulation using refined nonbonding AMBER parameters (SIM IV) are not much different from those obtained in SIM II.
1. Introduction
The increase in carbon dioxide (CO_{2}) in Earth’s atmosphere is a subject of worldwide attention as being the cause of global warming. Human activities such as combustion of fossil fuels (coal, oil, and natural gas) in power plants, automobiles, and industrial facilities are main sources of CO_{2} emission. The costeffective and scalable technologies to capture and store CO_{2} are now of great interest [1–7]. The low energy requirement technologies based on adsorption processes are highlighted as promising methods, stimulating recent works to investigate suitable adsorbent materials. Metalorganic frameworks (MOFs) are a class of nanoporous materials that are promising candidates for CO_{2} capture, due to their potential applications in separation processes, catalysis, and gas storage [8–14]. Zeolitic imidazolate frameworks (ZIFs) are subclass of MOFs, in which positive metal ions such as Zn, Co, and Cu are linked by ditopic imidazolate ligands [15, 16]. Some ZIFs are attracted as materials which are used to keep the emissions of CO_{2} out of the atmosphere in hot energyproducing environments like power plants due to their exceptional chemical and thermal stabilities and nontoxic crystals [17–19]. The ZIF11 is one of ZIFs which exhibits the RHO topology. It is composed of Zn^{2+} ion clusters linked by dipotic benzimidazolate ([C_{7}H_{5}N_{2}]^{−}) ligands with chemical formula Zn[C_{7}H_{5}N_{2}]_{2} [15] (see Figure 1).
The highthroughput methods can be successfully applied to the development a robust synthesis protocol for several ZIFs in short time [20]. Computer models and simulations can be used to rapidly screen and develop promising ZIFs with large savings in experimental time and cost [9]. There are some computer simulations where bonding and nonbonding parameters of general force fields such as AMBER are applied [21]. This is one of wellknown force fields that supplies reliable intramolecular force constants within the organic linker; however it is not developed directly for the system of MOFs or ZIFs as in this study.
In this study, the protocol to refine and validate molecular interactions was obtained from general force fields in order to meet both accuracy and time saving for using in specific system like adsorption of CO_{2} in ZIF11. Since some investigations show that the imidazolate organic linker is most favored adsorption site of guest molecules [17–19], by assumption the interactions between CO_{2} and ZIF11 frameworks are almost contributed by interactions between CO_{2} molecule and [C_{7}H_{5}N_{2}]^{−} groups. Nonbonding parameters obtained from AMBER force field are refined using ab initio data corresponding to the calculated partial atomic charge. The bonding parameters of AMBER force field are also adapted to represent the flexible framework of ZIF11. Molecular dynamics simulations of rigid and flexible frameworks are done in order to validate the parameters.
2. Material and Methods
2.1. Models of CO_{2} and ZIF11 Framework
In this study, a geometrical structure of [C_{7}H_{5}N_{2}]^{−} is cut directly from ZIF11 framework [15] and is not theoretical optimized (see Figure 1). The linear rigid model of CO_{2} molecule is taken from [22] with C–O bond length of 1.16 Å and O–C–O bond angle of 180°. The partial atomic charges of [C_{7}H_{5}N_{2}]^{−} were computed according to the MerzSinghKollman scheme [23, 24] and then further refined these ESP charges to socalled RESP charges using an Antechamber package [21, 25] with a total charge of −1, while the partial charge of the Zn^{2+} was fixed to be +2. The force fields and simulations atom types and their corresponding atomic partial charges are shown in Table 1.

2.2. Single Point Energies of CO_{2}–[C_{7}H_{5}N_{2}]^{−} Complexes
The binding energy, , of a CO_{2}–[C_{7}H_{5}N_{2}]^{−} complex is defined on the basis of the supermolecular approach according to where , , and are the total energy of complex, the energy of CO_{2} molecule, and the energy of [C_{7}H_{5}N_{2}]^{−}, respectively. The binding energy without basis set superposition error (BSSE) correction of a complex is defined as where denotes the total energy of the complex AB calculated with the full basis set of the complex. The and denote the total energies of the monomers and , each calculated with its basis sets, respectively. The counterpoise BSSE corrected binding energy [26] is represented by where , , and denote the total energy of complex, the energy of monomer , and the energy of monomer which are computed using the union of the two basis sets of monomer and , respectively.
Several structures of CO_{2}–[C_{7}H_{5}N_{2}]^{−} complexes are generated by varying positions and orientations of CO_{2} molecule around [C_{7}H_{5}N_{2}]^{−} (see Figure 2). Then their corresponding binding energies without and with BSSE correction were calculated at level of HF/631G* using Gaussian 09 package [27]. These energies are used as data for refinement nonbonding parameters of AMBER force field.
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)
2.3. The Parameters of the Intramolecular and Intermolecular Interactions
In this study, the functions in the AMBER force field which is known to be reliable for biomolecules and organic species are adopted to represent CO_{2} molecules in ZIF11 framework system as follows: The intramolecular energy, , includes bond stretching and bending and proper and improper torsional potentials: The parameters used to describe the flexibility of ZIF8 framework from previous studies [28–30] are adopted for ZIF11 framework in this study and are summarized in Table 2.

The AMBER force field describes the nonbonding interaction of two atom sites, and with LennardJones parameters and the following formula
The LorentzBerthelot mixing rules were applied to obtain the crossinteractions parameters and (see Table 3) between different atom types, and [31–33], with and . Formula (6) can be transformed into where and , respectively.

2.4. Molecular Dynamics Simulations of CO_{2} Molecules in ZIF11
All MD simulations are performed using DL_POLY (version 2.20) package [34] in canonical ensemble (NVT) for 9 CO_{2} molecules in the ZIF11 frameworks (see Figure 3).
(a)
(b)
The simulations box with a cubic length of 57.52 Å, subject to periodic boundary conditions, consists of unit cells of ZIF11, which contains at least 9 full cages (see Figure 3). This corresponds to a loading of about one CO_{2} molecule per unit cell. The precision of Ewald summation for long length dispersion force had been set to 0.0001. In order to maintain a constant temperature of 300 K, the NoséHoover thermostat with a relaxation time and time step of 0.001 ps was applied along the whole simulations. The simulations were equilibrated for 1,000,000 time steps (1 ns), and then further simulations of 1 ns were carried out in order to provide data for structural and dynamical properties evaluation. There are four simulations in this study and denote as SIM I, SIM II, SIM III, and SIM IV for the rigid framework simulations using original AMBER force field, the rigid framework simulations using sAMBER force field, the flexible framework simulations for free ZIF11, and the flexible framework simulations for CO_{2} in the ZIF11 using sAMBER force field, respectively.
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Obtained Refined Parameters
By using the BSSE corrected ab initio binding energies as data to refine the AMBER parameters, the energy and geometry scaling factors are obtained to be 1.2 and 0.9 for and , respectively. The consequence and parameters for original and scaled parameters are summarized in Table 4 while Figure 4 shows the comparison between , , and energies of CO_{2}–[C_{7}H_{5}N_{2}]^{−} complexes. The results show that all and parameters of scaled AMBER are less than those obtained from original AMBER but the total binding energy is more close to the ab initio data. Then only the sAMBER parameters are used in the flexible framework simulation.

(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
3.2. Molecular Dynamics Simulations of CO_{2} Molecules in Rigid ZIF11 Framework
The radial distribution functions (RDFs) are used to measure the distribution of intermolecular distances between CO_{2} molecules and the framework of ZIF11. All RDFs for rigid simulations (see Figures 5 and 6) show notable difference between both simulations, that is, in SIM II, the CO_{2} molecules lie closer to the [C_{7}H_{5}N_{2}]^{−} groups than those obtained from SIM I. The smallest distance is found of about 2.5 Å with a first peak of about 3.0 Å in H1O RDF (see Figure 5(d)) of SIM II, while these distances are increased by about 0.9 Å in H1O RDF of SIM I. This makes sense, since the energies and the geometrical parameters of sAMBER are stronger and shorter than those of original AMBER. The favorite adsorption sites of CO_{2} molecules are found at H3 and H4 positions in SIM I, while all hydrogen atoms (H1, H3, and H4) are equally favored in SIM II. One can say that CO_{2} molecules are found more located around H1 in SIM II than those found in SIM I. The distribution plots in Figure 7 indicate that in both simulations, all CO_{2} molecules are located only in one pore along the whole simulation times. In addition, CO_{2} molecules in SIM II obtained a bit wider distribution than those in SIM I. The selfdiffusion coefficients of CO_{2} molecules are obtained as m^{2}/s and m^{2}/s in SIM I and SIM II, respectively, being less than those obtained in ZIF8 [18, 35], ZIF68, and ZIF69 [19].
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(a)
(b)
(c)
3.3. Molecular Dynamics Simulations of CO_{2} Molecules in Flexible ZIF11 Framework
The flexibility of the framework is modeled by AMBER force field with the RESP partial atomic charges. The free framework simulation (SIM III) had been done first. The RDFs of ZnZn and ZnN of ZIF11 frameworks (see Figure 8) are plotted in comparison to those obtained from XRD data (SIM I). The results show that the flexible model can remain the main structure of the frameworks without collapsing during the whole simulations. This indicates the validity of the flexible model at least for NVT ensembles that used in this study. Moreover the CO_{2}framework interactions models in SIM IV simulation have no significant effect on the main flexible structure of the framework.
(a)
(b)
The RDFs of ZIF11 framework and CO_{2} molecules are shown in Figures 9 and 10. The oriented structure of CO_{2} molecules in ZIF11 obtained from flexible framework simulation is similar to those obtained from rigid framework simulations (SIM II). Slight difference can be obtained in the distribution plot (see Figure 7) which indicates that H1 is more favorable binding site than H3 and H4. The distributed areas which obtained from the flexible simulation (Figure 7(c)) are smaller than those obtained from the rigid simulations (Figures 7(a) and 7(b)). This corresponding to almost zero value (less than 10^{−14} m^{2}/s) of obtained selfdiffusion coefficient of CO_{2} in flexible framework. It is difficult to point here that this value is realizable or not. However some previous work [18] convinces that ZIF11 framework is promising to use for separate CO_{2} from natural gases.
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
4. Conclusion
Several single point interaction energies of CO_{2}–[C_{7}H_{5}N_{2}]^{−} complexes are calculated and this data was used in the processes of modifying the general AMBER force field. The method of calculations at HF/631G* gives large BSSE which needs to be corrected in order to have accurate binding energies. The rigid framework simulations, SIM I and SIM II, give similar results; that is, all hydrogen sites are favored binding site but CO_{2} molecules are found more located around H1 in SIM II than those found in SIM I. Due to the limited time and computer resources, we success only a flexible simulations for testing parameters both intramolecular and intermolecular interactions. However the results which obtained from flexible simulations are not much different from those obtained from rigid framework simulations. The distribution plots are slightly different which indicates that H1 is more favorable binding site than H3 and H4. Until now this study is one of the successful works on flexible ZIF11.
In further works, one should focus to try some other both rigid and flexible models of CO_{2} molecules and also other flexible force fileds of ZIF11. Several simulations such as varying number of CO_{2} molecules in the framework and mixing CO_{2} molecules with other natural gases molecules are of great interest.
Conflict of Interests
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this paper.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the Higher Education Research Promotion and National Research University Project of Thailand, Office of Higher Education Commission, through the Advanced Functional Materials Cluster of Khon Kaen University.
References
 G. I. Panov, A. K. Uriarte, M. A. Rodkin, and V. I. Sobolev, “Generation of active oxygen species on solid surfaces. Opportunity for novel oxidation technologies over zeolites,” Catalysis Today, vol. 41, no. 4, pp. 365–385, 1998. View at: Google Scholar
 J. A. Z. Pieterse, G. Mul, I. MelianCabrera, and R. W. van den Brink, “Synergy between metals in bimetallic zeolite supported catalyst for NOpromoted N_{2}O decomposition,” Catalysis Letters, vol. 99, no. 12, pp. 41–44, 2005. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 W. F. Hoelderich, “Environmentally benign manufacturing of fine and intermediate chemicals,” Catalysis Today, vol. 62, no. 1, pp. 115–130, 2000. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 Q. M. Wang, D. Shen, M. Bülow et al., “Metalloorganic molecular sieve for gas separation and purification,” Microporous and Mesoporous Materials, vol. 55, no. 2, pp. 217–230, 2002. View at: Google Scholar
 H. Rodhe, “A comparison of the contribution of various gases to the greenhouse effect,” Science, vol. 248, no. 4960, pp. 1217–1219, 1990. View at: Google Scholar
 G. Centi, S. Perathoner, and F. Vazzana, “Catalytic control of nonCO_{2} greenhouse gases: methane, fluorocarbons, and especially nitrous oxide can be decomposed and even reused by implementing new catalytic techniques,” ChemTech, vol. 29, no. 12, pp. 48–55, 1999. View at: Google Scholar
 H. K. Song, K. W. Cho, and K. H. Lee, “Adsorption of carbon dioxide on the chemically modified silica adsorbents,” Journal of NonCrystalline Solids, vol. 242, no. 23, pp. 69–80, 1998. View at: Google Scholar
 J. R. Li, Y. Ma, M. C. McCarthy et al., “Carbon dioxide capturerelated gas adsorption and separation in metalorganic frameworks,” Coordination Chemistry Reviews, vol. 255, no. 1516, pp. 1791–1823, 2011. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 A. O. Yazaydin, R. Q. Snurr, T. Park et al., “Screening of metalorganic frameworks for carbon dioxide capture from flue gas using a combined experimental and modeling approach,” Journal of the American Chemical Society, vol. 131, no. 51, pp. 18198–18199, 2009. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 D. Saha, Z. Bao, F. Jia, and S. Deng, “Adsorption of CO_{2}, CH_{4}, N_{2}O, and N_{2} on MOF5, MOF177, and zeolite 5A,” Environmental Science and Technology, vol. 44, no. 5, pp. 1820–1826, 2010. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 C. M. Lu, J. Liu, K. Xiao, and A. T. Harris, “Microwave enhanced synthesis of MOF5 and its CO_{2} capture ability at moderate temperatures across multiple capture and release cycles,” Chemical Engineering Journal, vol. 156, no. 2, pp. 465–470, 2010. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 Q. Yang, C. Zhong, and J. F. Chen, “Computational study of CO_{2} storage in metalorganic frameworks,” Journal of Physical Chemistry C, vol. 112, no. 5, pp. 1562–1569, 2008. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 A. G. WongFoy, A. J. Matzger, and O. M. Yaghi, “Exceptional H_{2} saturation uptake in microporous metalorganic frameworks,” Journal of the American Chemical Society, vol. 128, no. 11, pp. 3494–3495, 2006. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 Y. Li and R. T. Yang, “Gas adsorption and storage in metalorganic framework MOF177,” Langmuir, vol. 23, no. 26, pp. 12937–12944, 2007. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 K. S. Park, Z. Ni, A. P. Côté et al., “Exceptional chemical and thermal stability of zeolitic imidazolate frameworks,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 103, no. 27, pp. 10186–10191, 2006. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 J. C. Tan, T. D. Bennett, and A. K. Cheetham, “Chemical structure, network topology, and porosity effects on the mechanical properties of zeolitic imidazolate frameworks,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 107, no. 22, pp. 9938–9943, 2010. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 B. Wang, A. P. Côté, H. Furukawa, M. O'Keeffe, and O. M. Yaghi, “Colossal cages in zeolitic imidazolate frameworks as selective carbon dioxide reservoirs,” Nature, vol. 453, no. 7192, pp. 207–211, 2008. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 M. William, H. Ning, G. Keith et al., “A combined experimentalcomputational study on the effect of topology on carbon dioxide adsorption in zeolitic imidazolate frameworks,” Journal of Physical Chemistry C, vol. 116, no. 45, pp. 24084–24090, 2012. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 D. Liu, C. Zheng, Q. Yang, and C. Zhong, “Understanding the adsorption and diffusion of carbon dioxide in zeolitic imidazolate frameworks: a molecular simulation study,” Journal of Physical Chemistry C, vol. 113, no. 12, pp. 5004–5009, 2009. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 R. Banerjee, A. Phan, B. Wang et al., “Highthroughput synthesis of zeolitic imidazolate frameworks and application to CO_{2} capture,” Science, vol. 319, no. 5865, pp. 939–943, 2008. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 J. M. Wang, R. M. Wolf, J. W. Caldwell, P. A. Kollman, and D. A. Case, “Development and testing of a general amber force field,” Journal of Computational Chemistry, vol. 25, no. 9, pp. 1157–1174, 2004. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 C. S. Murthy, K. Singer, and I. R. Mcdonald, “Interaction site models for carbon dioxide,” Molecular Physics, vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 135–143, 1981. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 U. C. Singh and P. A. Kollman, “An approach to computing electrostatic charges for molecules,” Journal of Computational Chemistry, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 129–145, 1984. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 B. H. Besler, K. M. Merz Jr., and P. A. Kollman, “Atomic charges derived from semiempirical methods,” Journal of Computational Chemistry, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 431–439, 1990. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 J. Wang, W. Wang, P. A. Kollman, and D. A. Case, “Automatic atom type and bond type perception in molecular mechanical calculations,” Journal of Molecular Graphics and Modelling, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 247–260, 2006. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 S. F. Boys and F. Bernardi, “The calculation of small molecular interactions by the differences of separate total energies,” Molecular Physics, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 553–566, 1970. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 M. J. Frisch, H. B. Schlegel, G. E. Scuseria et al., Gaussian 09 Revision A1, Gaussian Inc., Wallingford, Conn, USA, 2009.
 L. Hertäg, H. Bux, J. Caro et al., “Diffusion of CH_{4} and H_{2} in ZIF8,” Journal of Membrane Science, vol. 377, no. 12, pp. 36–41, 2011. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 H. Zhongqiao, Z. Liling, and J. Jianwen, “Development of a force field for zeolitic imidazolate framework8 with structural flexibility,” Journal of Chemical Physics, vol. 136, no. 3, pp. 244–703, 2012. View at: Google Scholar
 B. Zheng, M. Sant, P. Demontis, and G. B. Suffritti, “Force field for molecular dynamics computations in flexible ZIF8 framework,” Journal of Physical Chemistry C, vol. 116, no. 1, pp. 933–938, 2012. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 H. A. Lorentz, “Ueber die Anwendung des Satzes vom Virial in der kinetischen Theorie der Gase,” Annalen der Physik, vol. 248, no. 1, pp. 127–136, 1881. View at: Google Scholar
 D. Berthelot, “Sur le mélange des gaz,” Comptes Rendus Hebdomadaires des Séances de l'Académie des Sciences, vol. 126, pp. 1703–1855, 1898. View at: Google Scholar
 J. Delhommelle and P. Millié, “Inadequacy of the LorentzBerthelot combining rules for accurate predictions of equilibrium properties by molecular simulation,” Molecular Physics, vol. 99, no. 8, pp. 619–625, 2001. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 W. Smith and T. R. Forester, “DLPOLY2.0: a generalpurpose parallel molecular dynamics simulation package,” Journal of Molecular Graphics, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 136–141, 1996. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
 P. Puphasuk and T. Remsungnen, “Structures and dynamics of CO_{2} molecules in zeolitic imidazolate frameworks8: molecular dynamics simulations using ab initio fitted interaction and generic force fields,” Journal of Computational and Theoretical Nanoscience, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 227–231, 2013. View at: Publisher Site  Google Scholar
Copyright
Copyright © 2013 W. Wongsinlatam and T. Remsungnen. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.