the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Collision-sticking rates of acid–base clusters in the gas phase determined from atomistic simulation and a novel analytical interacting hard-sphere model
Abstract. Kinetics of collision-sticking processes between vapor molecules and clusters of low volatile compounds govern the initial steps of atmospheric new particle formation. Conventional non-interacting hard-sphere models underestimate the collision rate by neglecting long-range attractive forces, and the commonly adopted assumption that every collision leads to the formation of a stable cluster (unit mass accommodation coefficient) is questionable for small clusters, especially at elevated temperatures. Here, we present a generally applicable analytical interacting hard-sphere model for evaluating collision rates between molecules and clusters, accounting for long-range attractive forces. In the model, the collision cross section is calculated based on an effective molecule-cluster potential, derived using Hamaker's approach. Applied to collisions of sulfuric acid or dimethylamine with neutral bisulphate-dimethylammonium clusters composed of 1–32 dimers, our new model predicts collision rates 2–3 times higher than the non-interacting model for small clusters, while decaying asymptotically to the non-interacting limit as cluster size increases, in excellent agreement with a collision rate theory-atomistic molecular dynamics simulation approach. Additionally, we calculated sticking rates and mass accommodation coefficients (MAC) using atomistic molecular dynamics collision simulations. For sulfuric acid, unit MAC is observed for collisions with all cluster sizes at temperatures between 200 K and 400 K. For dimethylamine, we find that MACs decrease with increasing temperature and decreasing cluster size. At low temperatures, the unit MAC assumption is generally valid, but at elevated temperatures MACs can drop below 0.2 for small clusters.
-
Notice on discussion status
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
-
Preprint
(3130 KB)
-
Supplement
(448 KB)
-
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
- Preprint
(3130 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(448 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
- Final revised paper
Journal article(s) based on this preprint
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2022-1449', Anonymous Referee #1, 15 Feb 2023
In this work, the authors developed an ‘analytical interacting hard sphere’ model based on an effective molecule-cluster potential using Hamaker’s approach. This model is verified by comparison with point particle molecular dynamics and atomistic MD simulations. Overall, I enjoy reading this work, especially the discussion on relevant time scales, which I believe helps clarify confusions on the cluster formation process. However, I’m a bit doubtful about the applicability of the proposed methods and how much difference it makes compared to current approaches of calculating enhancement factors.The manuscript can be published after the following comments have been addressed.
- In the discussion of the enhancement factor, I’d like to see comparisons with previous works (such as the work by Sceats). By doing so the readers can have a quantitively understanding of the difference between the current work and previous ones and decide whether to implement proposed model.
- Although from the text one can figure out how to apply the proposed model, it is better if a step by step procedure is given in the supplementary information, specifying at each step what technique is used and what quantities are calculated.
- If one intends to do calculations for collision rates involving (SA)1(DMA)1 or other atmospherically relevant clusters, is it necessary calculate the interactions parameters with MD simulations? If this is the case, the applicability of the model is somewhat restricted.
- How to proceed with the model if the clusters are heterogeneous containing several types of ‘monomers’?
- Line 391: Some citations on the vibrational coupling between vapor molecules and clusters can be added here. For readers with no formal training in physical chemistry, this does not seem to be common knowledge.
Technical corrections:
In Fig. 4a, the horizontal white line in the middle should be removed.
Line 383: Revise this sentence. ‘When considering the quantum mechanical nature of the system, some high frequency intramolecular vibrations possess no, or at least significantly less, energy than kBT/2 at finite temperature.’
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2022-1449-RC1 -
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', huan yang, 18 Apr 2023
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2023/egusphere-2022-1449/egusphere-2022-1449-AC1-supplement.pdf
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2022-1449', Anonymous Referee #2, 26 Feb 2023
This manuscript focuses on extending the “Central field approach” to collision rate calculations to monomer-cluster calculations. It is somewhat dense- it took several readthroughs to fully understand manuscript. However, in the end I found the manuscript well-written, thorough in its presentation (both of prior work and the present model), and I believe it to be a substantial contribution to the literature. I only have a few remarks for the authors to consider in revision:
- (General). Recent trajectory calculation models (by the authors and others) have shown that the sticking rate is very weakly sensitive to temperature- at higher temperatures the Maxwell Boltzmann distribution is shifted to higher speeds, but the influence of potential interactions is diminished. I suggest also including plots for fixed cluster size as a function of temperature, perhaps over a wider temperature range, to see what temperature dependencies result here.
- (General). Can the approach be extended to non-pairwise potentials? This was not clear to me in reading the manuscript how to do this.
- Figure 3a. While I do not see anything wrong with showing the critical impact parameter for the Coulomb potential, for long range, Coulombically attractive collisions at atmospheric pressure, the free molecular assumption is not valid, and the method the authors are using will not work (this is the problem of ion-ion recombination: doi: 10.5194/acp-22-12443-2022, doi: 10.1063/1.5144772)
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2022-1449-RC2 -
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', huan yang, 18 Apr 2023
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2023/egusphere-2022-1449/egusphere-2022-1449-AC2-supplement.pdf
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2022-1449', Anonymous Referee #1, 15 Feb 2023
In this work, the authors developed an ‘analytical interacting hard sphere’ model based on an effective molecule-cluster potential using Hamaker’s approach. This model is verified by comparison with point particle molecular dynamics and atomistic MD simulations. Overall, I enjoy reading this work, especially the discussion on relevant time scales, which I believe helps clarify confusions on the cluster formation process. However, I’m a bit doubtful about the applicability of the proposed methods and how much difference it makes compared to current approaches of calculating enhancement factors.The manuscript can be published after the following comments have been addressed.
- In the discussion of the enhancement factor, I’d like to see comparisons with previous works (such as the work by Sceats). By doing so the readers can have a quantitively understanding of the difference between the current work and previous ones and decide whether to implement proposed model.
- Although from the text one can figure out how to apply the proposed model, it is better if a step by step procedure is given in the supplementary information, specifying at each step what technique is used and what quantities are calculated.
- If one intends to do calculations for collision rates involving (SA)1(DMA)1 or other atmospherically relevant clusters, is it necessary calculate the interactions parameters with MD simulations? If this is the case, the applicability of the model is somewhat restricted.
- How to proceed with the model if the clusters are heterogeneous containing several types of ‘monomers’?
- Line 391: Some citations on the vibrational coupling between vapor molecules and clusters can be added here. For readers with no formal training in physical chemistry, this does not seem to be common knowledge.
Technical corrections:
In Fig. 4a, the horizontal white line in the middle should be removed.
Line 383: Revise this sentence. ‘When considering the quantum mechanical nature of the system, some high frequency intramolecular vibrations possess no, or at least significantly less, energy than kBT/2 at finite temperature.’
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2022-1449-RC1 -
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', huan yang, 18 Apr 2023
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2023/egusphere-2022-1449/egusphere-2022-1449-AC1-supplement.pdf
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2022-1449', Anonymous Referee #2, 26 Feb 2023
This manuscript focuses on extending the “Central field approach” to collision rate calculations to monomer-cluster calculations. It is somewhat dense- it took several readthroughs to fully understand manuscript. However, in the end I found the manuscript well-written, thorough in its presentation (both of prior work and the present model), and I believe it to be a substantial contribution to the literature. I only have a few remarks for the authors to consider in revision:
- (General). Recent trajectory calculation models (by the authors and others) have shown that the sticking rate is very weakly sensitive to temperature- at higher temperatures the Maxwell Boltzmann distribution is shifted to higher speeds, but the influence of potential interactions is diminished. I suggest also including plots for fixed cluster size as a function of temperature, perhaps over a wider temperature range, to see what temperature dependencies result here.
- (General). Can the approach be extended to non-pairwise potentials? This was not clear to me in reading the manuscript how to do this.
- Figure 3a. While I do not see anything wrong with showing the critical impact parameter for the Coulomb potential, for long range, Coulombically attractive collisions at atmospheric pressure, the free molecular assumption is not valid, and the method the authors are using will not work (this is the problem of ion-ion recombination: doi: 10.5194/acp-22-12443-2022, doi: 10.1063/1.5144772)
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2022-1449-RC2 -
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', huan yang, 18 Apr 2023
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2023/egusphere-2022-1449/egusphere-2022-1449-AC2-supplement.pdf
Peer review completion
Journal article(s) based on this preprint
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
291 | 86 | 17 | 394 | 39 | 7 | 6 |
- HTML: 291
- PDF: 86
- XML: 17
- Total: 394
- Supplement: 39
- BibTeX: 7
- EndNote: 6
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1
Huan Yang
Ivo Neefjes
Valtteri Tikkanen
Jakub Kubečka
Theo Kurtén
Hanna Vehkamäki
Bernhard Reischl
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
- Preprint
(3130 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(448 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
- Final revised paper