Comparison of simple potential functions for simulating liquid water

Journal of Chemical Physics - Tập 79 Số 2 - Trang 926-935 - 1983
William L. Jorgensen1, Jayaraman Chandrasekhar1, Jeffry D. Madura1, Roger Impey2, Michael L. Klein2
1Department of Chemistry, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907.
2Chemistry Division, National Research Council of Canada, Ottawa, Canada K1A OR6

Tóm tắt

Classical Monte Carlo simulations have been carried out for liquid water in the NPT ensemble at 25 °C and 1 atm using six of the simpler intermolecular potential functions for the water dimer: Bernal–Fowler (BF), SPC, ST2, TIPS2, TIP3P, and TIP4P. Comparisons are made with experimental thermodynamic and structural data including the recent neutron diffraction results of Thiessen and Narten. The computed densities and potential energies are in reasonable accord with experiment except for the original BF model, which yields an 18% overestimate of the density and poor structural results. The TIPS2 and TIP4P potentials yield oxygen–oxygen partial structure functions in good agreement with the neutron diffraction results. The accord with the experimental OH and HH partial structure functions is poorer; however, the computed results for these functions are similar for all the potential functions. Consequently, the discrepancy may be due to the correction terms needed in processing the neutron data or to an effect uniformly neglected in the computations. Comparisons are also made for self-diffusion coefficients obtained from molecular dynamics simulations. Overall, the SPC, ST2, TIPS2, and TIP4P models give reasonable structural and thermodynamic descriptions of liquid water and they should be useful in simulations of aqueous solutions. The simplicity of the SPC, TIPS2, and TIP4P functions is also attractive from a computational standpoint.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

1982, Chem. Phys., 64, 95, 10.1016/0301-0104(82)85006-4

1981, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 103, 335, 10.1021/ja00392a016

1982, J. Chem. Phys., 77, 4156, 10.1063/1.444325

1974, J. Chem. Phys., 60, 1545, 10.1063/1.1681229

1933, J. Chem. Phys., 1, 515, 10.1063/1.1749327

1982, J. Chem. Phys., 77, 2656, 10.1063/1.444090

1974, J. Chem. Phys., 60, 2929, 10.1063/1.1681463

1980, J. Chem. Phys., 72, 5062, 10.1063/1.439795

1979, J. Chem. Phys., 71, 2703, 10.1063/1.438628

1972, Mol. Phys., 23, 41, 10.1080/00268977200100031

1975, J. Chem. Eng. Data, 20, 97, 10.1021/je60064a005

1973, J. Phys. Chem., 77, 685, 10.1021/j100624a025

1982, Chem. Phys. Lett., 92, 405, 10.1016/0009-2614(82)83437-4

1977, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 99, 7403, 10.1021/ja00465a001

1982, J. Chem. Phys., 76, 593, 10.1063/1.442707

1978, J. Chem. Phys., 68, 666, 10.1063/1.435738

1979, J. Chem. Phys., 71, 3366, 10.1063/1.438725

1980, Mol. Phys., 40, 661, 10.1080/00268978000101781

1976, J. Chem. Phys., 64, 2314, 10.1063/1.432539

1971, J. Chem. Phys., 55, 2263, 10.1063/1.1676403

1982, Science, 217, 1033, 10.1126/science.217.4564.1033

1972, J. Chem. Phys., 56, 5681, 10.1063/1.1677087

1977, Mol. Phys., 34, 525, 10.1080/00268977700101881

1982, Phys. Rev. Lett., 49, 471, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.49.471

1980, Chem. Phys. Lett., 70, 326, 10.1016/0009-2614(80)85344-9