Atom center distances

There are differences between the scientific commimities working on molecular sieves and conventional solid state chemistry, respectively, with respect to the conventions used to describe pore dimensions. While in the zeolite community usually open diameters are given, which are important for the applications in sorption or catalysis, mostly atom center distances over the channels are quoted by solid state chemists who are usually more interested in the structural details. In the following we will mostly refer to open diameters, imless specifically stated otherwise. These values are less precise than the atom center distances, which can be determined with high precision by X-ray diffraction, but are more important when applications of such materials are envisaged. 

The neighborhoods of the atoms directly bonded to tbe chiral center must be defined. The neighborhood of an atom A. dircetly bonded to the ehiral eenter, is dc-fned as the set of atoms whose distance (in number of bonds) to A is less than their distance to any of the other three atoms bonded to the chiral center (Figure 8-9. In cyclic structures different neighborhoods can overlap. 

However, one of the most successfiil approaches to systematically encoding substructures for NMR spectrum prediction was introduced quite some time ago by Bremser [9]. He used the so-called HOSE (Hierarchical Organization of Spherical Environments) code to describe structures. As mentioned above, the chemical shift value of a carbon atom is basically influenced by the chemical environment of the atom. The HOSE code describes the environment of an atom in several virtual spheres - see Figure 10.2-1. It uses spherical layers (or levels) around the atom to define the chemical environment. The first layer is defined by all the atoms that are one bond away from the central atom, the second layer includes the atoms within the two-bond distance, and so on. This idea can be described as an atom center fragment (ACF) concept, which has been addressed by several other authors in different approaches [19-21]. 

The fiuid-phase simulation approach with the longest tradition is the simulation of large numbers of the molecules in boxes with artificial periodic boundary conditions. Since quantum chemical calculations typically are unable to treat systems of the required size, the interactions of the molecules have to be represented by classical force fields as a prerequisite for such simulations. Such force fields have analytical expressions for all forces and energies, which depend on the distances, partial charges and types of atoms. Due to the overwhelming importance of the solvent water, an enormous amount of research effort has been spent in the development of good force field representations for water. Many of these water representations have additional interaction sites on the bonds, because the representation by atom-centered charges turned out to be insufficient. Unfortunately it is impossible to spend comparable parameterization work for every other solvent and... 

According to wave mechanics, the electron density in an atom decreases asymptotically towards zero with increasing distance from the atomic center. An atom therefore has no definite size. When two atoms approach each other, interaction forces between them become more and more effective. 

In a statistical Monte Carlo simulation the pair potentials are introduced by means of analytical functions. In the election of that analytical form for the pair potential, it must be considered that when a Monte Carlo calculation is performed, the more time consuming step is the evaluation of the energy for the different configurations. Given that this calculation must be done millions of times, the chosen analytic functions must be of enough accuracy and flexibility but also they must be fastly computed. In this way it is wise to avoid exponential terms and to minimize the number of interatomic distances to be calculated at each configuration which depends on the quantity of interaction centers chosen for each molecule. A very commonly used function consists of a sum of rn terms, r being the distance between the different interaction centers, usually, situated at the nuclei. In particular, non-bonded interactions are usually represented by an atom-atom centered monopole expression (Coulomb term) plus a Lennard-Jones 6-12 term, as indicated in equation (51). 

Table 2. Binding Energy Per Atom Eb, Distance D from Atoms to the Cluster Center, and Average Magnetic Moment Per Atom p for Octahedral Six-Atom Clusters. Data Collected from Zhang et al.107... 

An important difference between the BO and non-BO internal Hamiltonians is that the former describes only the motion of electrons in the stationary field of nuclei positioned in fixed points in space (represented by point charges) while the latter describes the coupled motion of both nuclei and electrons. In the conventional molecular BO calculations, one typically uses atom-centered basis functions (in most calculations one-electron atomic orbitals) to expand the electronic wave function. The fermionic nature of the electrons dictates that such a function has to be antisymmetric with respect to the permutation of the labels of the electrons. In some high-precision BO calculations the wave function is expanded in terms of basis functions that explicitly depend on the interelectronic distances (so-called explicitly correlated functions). Such... 

Center-to-center distance derived from PR spectra of Cu-sobstituted derivatives Strati-bisporphyrin, two TPP ring systems linked by four 5-atom-long bridges, Diporphyrins linked by two 7-, 6-, or 5-atom-long bridges. (W Recent EPR measurements show that the distance between the porphyrin planes in these three dimers in virtually constant. 

---