I found the following article as the result of a Google Scholar email alert.
Besides being a good review article, it has the additional benefit of being
absolutely free. The link to the source appears at the end of the post.
TIP:
Study the article’s introduction. It is better than the abstract at explaining
the point of the review. Keep it in mind when you write your next article.
///////
Towards operando computational modeling in heterogeneous
catalysis
Lukáš Grajciar ORCID (a), Christopher J. Heard ORCID (a), Anton A. Bondarenko (b),
Mikhail V. Polynski ORCID (b), Jittima Meeprasert ORCID (c), Evgeny A. Pidko
ORCID *(b)(c) and Petr Nachtigall ORCID *(a)
a Department of Physical and Macromolecular Chemistry, Faculty of Science,
Charles University in Prague, 128 43 Prague 2, Czech Republic. E-mail: lukas.grajciar@natur.cuni.cz ; petr.nachtigall@natur.cuni.cz ;
heardc@natur.cuni.cz
b TheoMAT group, ITMO University, Lomonosova 9, St. Petersburg, 191002, Russia
c Inorganic Systems Engineering group, Department of Chemical Engineering,
Faculty of Applied Sciences, Delft University of Technology, Van der Maasweg 9,
2629 HZ Delft, The Netherlands. E-mail: e.a.pidko@tudelft.nl
First published on 11th September 2018
DOI: 10.1039/C8CS00398J (Review Article) Chem. Soc. Rev., 2018, Advance Article
Abstract
An increased synergy between experimental and theoretical investigations in
heterogeneous catalysis has become apparent during the last decade.
Experimental work has extended from ultra-high vacuum and low temperature
towards operando conditions. These developments have motivated the
computational community to move from standard descriptive computational models,
based on inspection of the potential energy surface at 0 K and low reactant
concentrations (0 K/UHV model), to more realistic conditions. The transition
from 0 K/UHV to operando models has been backed by significant developments in
computer hardware and software over the past few decades. New methodological
developments, designed to overcome part of the gap between 0 K/UHV and operando
conditions, include (i) global optimization techniques, (ii) ab initio
constrained thermodynamics, (iii) biased molecular dynamics, (iv) microkinetic
models of reaction networks and (v) machine learning
approaches. The importance of the transition is highlighted by discussing how
the molecular level picture of catalytic sites and the associated reaction
mechanisms changes when the chemical environment, pressure and temperature
effects are correctly accounted for in molecular simulations. It is the purpose
of this review to discuss each method on an equal footing, and to draw
connections between methods, particularly where they may be applied in
combination.
Lukáš Grajciar
Lukáš Grajciar received his MSc and PhD degrees in chemistry from the Charles
University in Prague in 2009 and 2013, respectively, developing and applying
dispersion-corrected DFT methods for adsorption in zeolites and metal–organic
frameworks. At his postdoctoral position at Jena University in Germany, he
became involved in development of high-performance algorithms for ab initio
treatment of large molecules and periodic system within the TURBOMOLE program,
including implementation of a new tool for global structure optimization of
clusters in confinement. Currently, he is a researcher at the Charles
University in Prague, investigating reactivity of zeolites using biased ab
initio molecular dynamics.
1. Introduction
Most of the chemicals produced nowadays are obtained using processes based on
catalysis. The on-going search for optimal process conditions and the most
suitable catalyst is driven by various concerns, including (i) environmental
impact, (ii) resource utilization, (iii) safety and (iv) overall process
economy. While this has traditionally been the domain of experimental
investigations, the input from computational investigations has been steadily
increasing over the last 40 years. An increased synergy between theory and
experiment has become apparent during the last decade, in particular, in the
field of heterogeneous catalysis.
By definition a heterogeneous catalyst shifts the reference reaction onto a
different free energy surface where the energy of critical transition states
with respect to relevant intermediates becomes lower. Mechanisms of chemical
reactions were traditionally explored within the concept of the potential
energy surface (PES), considering simplified models of a catalytic system
working under idealized conditions of, basically, infinite dilution. Such a
heterogeneous catalysis model represents ultra-high vacuum conditions, for
which calculations provide information at 0 K; we will refer to this model as
the 0 K/UHV model. Strictly speaking, such a description corresponds to rather
unrealistic reaction conditions and its validity decreases with increasing
temperature and pressure. A great number of mechanisms have been proposed based
on calculations with such a simplistic model and results were often at least in
qualitative agreement with available experimental data. Computational results
obtained with 0 K/UHV model correspond reasonably well with experimental data
obtained for well-defined surfaces under UHV conditions. However, the overlap of
such calculated data and catalytic experiments carried out under realistic
conditions is rather small, and a good agreement between 0 K/UHV theory and
catalytic experiments was often just fortuitous.
The success of the simple PES concept applied within the 0 K/UHV approximation
can be expected only when the following assumptions hold: (i) the structure of
the active site under realistic conditions is known (or correctly guessed),
(ii) both the structure of the active site and the reaction mechanism do not
depend on the surface coverage of individual reaction intermediates, (iii) the
reaction mechanism found under nearly UHV conditions is not different from that
at the realistic composition of the surrounding gas or liquid phase and (iv)
temperature effects, including the transition from PES to free energy surface
(FES), can be safely neglected. Unfortunately, all such assumptions are rarely
satisfied at once. If the temperature is relatively low it follows that
reactants, products and/or reaction intermediates are adsorbed on the surface;
and in contrast, one can expect that the reaction proceeds on a clean catalyst
surface only at elevated temperature.
A deeper atomistic insight into the reaction mechanisms, the catalyst
structure/activity relationship and catalyst stability/transformation during
the reaction greatly increases our chances to find the optimal catalyst for a
particular process. The most detailed experimental evidence about the catalyst
at the molecular level can be obtained by a combination of characterization
techniques under UHV conditions. More and more information becomes available
from experimental investigations gathered under the conditions of a model
catalytic reaction – in situ conditions – and also under conditions where the
applied catalytic process takes place – operando conditions. For details of
experimental in situ and operando conditions see, e.g., ref. 1–3. A great
development of in situ and in particular operando experimental techniques for
studying catalytic reactions in the last 20 years has brought an increasing
amount of information about the state of the catalysts under realistic
conditions.4,5
Among the most important findings emerging from such studies is the evidence of
the dynamic nature of the catalyst surface, whose structure constantly changes
under the catalytic reaction conditions. For example, in oxidation catalysis by
supported metal nanoparticles, in situ and operando techniques revealed the
formation of ultra-thin oxide layers covering the metal nanoparticles in an
oxidizing atmosphere, which provide the active sites for the target catalytic
reactions. Obviously, such an active site model could not be proposed based on
the UHV surface science experiments or computations carried out in the 0 K/UHV
regime. A problem of how the structure of the catalyst depends on the realistic
chemical environment and temperature that are relevant for a particular process
is thus the key for a proper understanding of catalysis at the molecular level
and for a design of improved catalysts.6–8
Similar to the shift of experimental investigations in catalysis from UHV to
operando conditions, theoretical investigations in the field of catalysis are
moving more and more from 0 K/UHV models to computational operando
investigations. In analogy with the experimental operando conditions, a
computational operando model is defined by the following conditions: the
structure of the active catalyst surface and the reaction coordinates must
reflect realistic conditions during the reaction and a complex reaction network
must be established (see Fig. 1 and corresponding text for more details).
However, a transition from the 0 K/UHV to operando model dramatically
influences the complexity of the problem and increases computational demands. A
number of methods have been developed in the past few decades that ease the 0
K/UHV ? operando transition and it is the goal of this review to discuss the
current state of the computational investigations of catalysis, with the goal
to enable the long-sought after paradigm of catalysis by design.
Fig. 1 Schematic of the various
computational methods applied to heterogeneous catalysis, which lie between an
idealised UHV model and a realistic, operando model. The traffic light key
depicts the quality of each method with respect to catalyst model complexity
(Cat), reaction coordinate accuracy (RCN) and reaction network complexity
(RxN). Adapted with permission from Piccini et al., Journal of Physical
Chemistry C, 2015, 119, 6128–6137, Copyright 2015, American Chemical Society,
Vilhelmsen et al., Journal of Chemical Physics, 2014, 141, 044711, Copyright
2014, American Institute of Physics, Chen et al., Journal of Catalysis, 2018,
358, 179–186, Copyright 2018, Elsevier, Pavan et al., Journal of Chemical
Physics, 2015, 143, 184304, Copyright 2015, American Institute of Physics,
Heard et al., ACS Catalysis, 2016, 6, 3277–3286, Copyright 2016, American
Chemical Society.
A huge gap between the 0 K/UHV models on one side and operando models on the
other side cannot be overcome by a single computational method that would
explicitly account for the whole complexity of the underlying phenomena. A
multiscale modeling approach can be followed to construct a composite
methodology that includes all the crucial physical phenomena. In our opinion,
the following five methods appear to be the most important for bridging this
gap: (i) global optimization techniques, (ii) ab initio constrained
thermodynamics, (iii) biased MD simulations, (iv) microkinetic models of
reaction networks. The fifth class of methods is a conceptually different
approach that does not necessarily imply the explicit account of the complex
physics of a catalyst system and yet holds great promise as a tool to enable
catalysis by design. This class is the broad family of machine learning
methods. The latest development of each of these five techniques is addressed
individually in the following five sections of this review.
A transition from the 0 K/UHV to operando model is schematically depicted in
Fig. 1. The 0 K/UHV model corresponds to the situation at the lower left
corner, corresponding to vanishing partial pressures of reaction components
(expressed in terms of chemical potentials) and low temperature. The operando
model corresponds to the upper right corner. Going from bottom to top of the figure
the reaction environment (in terms of chemical potentials and temperature)
becomes more realistic. Any model improvement results in the increased
complexity of the problem (from left to right), mostly in the number of
configurations that are considered. Basics of the 0 K/UHV model include the
following approximations: (i) idealized catalyst surface (denoted as Cat in
Fig. 1), (ii) idealized reaction coordinates with minimum number of reactants
on the PES at 0 K (reaction coordinate environment – RCE) and (iii) elementary
reaction steps are considered (reaction network – RxN). All these
approximations must be lifted to move forward to an operando model.
Methods presented in Fig. 1 from left to right start with Hessian-based thermal
corrections, followed by a global optimization approach, ab initio constrained
thermodynamics and biased MD; microkinetic modeling and machine learning
techniques are taken off this order since they can be used at any level of the
0 K/UHV ? operando transition. The order presented in Fig. 1 is motivated by
the fact that if all extensions are applied for a particular system, they would
be applied in the order presented in the figure, with the exception of
Hessian-based thermal corrections. Hessian-based thermal corrections allow a
proper transition from potential- to free-energy surfaces while the complexity
of the system remains unchanged; they can be used either to improve the 0 K/UHV
model or in combination with global optimization or ab initio constrained
dynamics (improving the quality of partition functions). It is important to
note that it is common to apply just one or two extensions (or even three in
some cases) and by no means does it have to be the first methods from left to
right. For example, it is rather common to combine Hessian-based thermal
corrections directly with microkinetics. It depends on the particular problem
under investigation as to which of the extensions is crucial. Global
optimization techniques mostly help in finding relevant configurations when
these are difficult or impossible to obtain from relevant experimental data. Ab
initio thermodynamics is critically important for the investigation of catalyst
surfaces that are changed in the reaction environment. Biased molecular
dynamics (MD) techniques become essential for the localization of transition
states in complex environments when these are strongly affected by the
surrounding molecules. Microkinetic modeling of the reaction network is
essential for situations in which a large number of reaction intermediates
exist. Last but not least, machine learning techniques are emerging as a useful
tool in rationalization of the system descriptors and finding important
correlations in large data sets.
Each of the methods presented in Fig. 1 is designed to overcome part of the gap
between 0 K/UHV and operando conditions. Each method is discussed in the
following sections and each of the methods has been reviewed separately in
recent years in a comprehensive way. It is the purpose of this review to
discuss them on an equal footing with respect to the gap between 0 K/UHV and
operando. It should be stressed that the simultaneous application of all these
extensions is computationally prohibitive in a general sense. But it should be
noted that it is often not necessary to apply all these model extensions for a
particular catalytic system; instead it is important to identify which of the
extensions is critical for the problem investigated.
Free full text source: https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlehtml/2018/cs/c8cs00398j
///////
No comments:
Post a Comment