Dispersion interactions, solute-solvent

Polar van der Waal s retention forces are a consequence of dipole-dipole interactions and hydrogen bonding between molecules. Only components with dipoles similar to the solvent (stationary phase) will disperse, producing solute-solvent pairs. Dipole induced dipole interactions arise from the charge on one molecule (component or stationary phase) disturbing the electrons in a second associated molecule, producing a shift in charge which then forms the induced dipole. 

McMillan-Mayer theory of solutions [1,2], which essentially seeks to partition the interaction potential into tln-ee parts that due to the interaction between the solvent molecules themselves, that due to die interaction between the solvent and the solute and that due to the interaction between the solute molecules dispersed within the solvent. The main difference from the dilute fluid results presented above is that the potential energy u(r.p is replaced by the potential of mean force W(rp for two particles and, for particles of solute in the solvent, by the expression... 

The McMillan-Mayer theory allows us to develop a fomialism similar to that of a dilute interacting fluid for solute dispersed in the solvent provided that a sensible description of W can be given. At the Ihnit of dilution, when intersolute interactions can be neglected, we know that the chemical potential of a can be written as = W (a s) + IcT In where W(a s) is the potential of mean force for the interaction of a solute... 

Aguilar M A and Olivares del Valle F J 1989 A computation procedure for the dispersion component of the interaction energy in continuum solute solvent models Ohem. Rhys. 138 327-36... 

Alhedai et al also examined the exclusion properties of a reversed phase material The stationary phase chosen was a Cg hydrocarbon bonded to the silica, and the mobile phase chosen was 2-octane. As the solutes, solvent and stationary phase were all dispersive (hydrophobic in character) and both the stationary phase and the mobile phase contained Cg interacting moieties, the solute would experience the same interactions in both phases. Thus, any differential retention would be solely due to exclusion and not due to molecular interactions. This could be confirmed by carrying out the experiments at two different temperatures. If any interactive mechanism was present that caused retention, then different retention volumes would be obtained for the same solute at different temperatures. Solutes ranging from n-hexane to n hexatriacontane were chromatographed at 30°C and 50°C respectively. The results obtained are shown in Figure 8. 

In a solution of a solute in a solvent there can exist noncovalent intermolecular interactions of solvent-solvent, solvent-solute, and solute—solute pairs. The noncovalent attractive forces are of three types, namely, electrostatic, induction, and dispersion forces. We speak of forces, but physical theories make use of intermolecular energies. Let V(r) be the potential energy of interaction of two particles and F(r) be the force of interaction, where r is the interparticle distance of separation. Then these quantities are related by... 

Attempts have been made to distinguish between these theories on the basis of the AH° and values anticipated for the two theories, but it may be illusory to think of them as independent alternatives. The eavity model has been criticized on the basis that it eannot account for certain observations such as the denaturing effect of urea, but it must be noted that the cavity theory includes not only the cavity term AAy, but also a term (or terms) for the interaction of the solutes and the solvent. A more eogent objeetion might be to the extension of the macroseopic concepts of surface area and tension to the molecular scale. A demonstration of the validity of the cavity concept has been made with silanized glass beads, which aggregate in polar solvents and disperse in nonpolar solvents. 

The Self-Consistent Reaction Field (SCRF) model considers the solvent as a uniform polarizable medium with a dielectric constant of s, with the solute M placed in a suitable shaped hole in the medium. Creation of a cavity in the medium costs energy, i.e. this is a destabilization, while dispersion interactions between the solvent and solute add a stabilization (this is roughly the van der Waals energy between solvent and solute). The electric charge distribution of M will furthermore polarize the medium (induce charge moments), which in turn acts back on the molecule, thereby producing an electrostatic stabilization. The solvation (free) energy may thus be written as... 

Where FCl is the solute gas-liquid partition coefficient, r is the tendency of the solvent to interact through k- and n-electron pairs (Lewis basicity), s the contribution from dipole-dipole and dipole-induced dipole interactions (in molecular solvents), a is the hydrogen bond basicity of the solvent, b is its hydrogen bond acidity and I is how well the solvent will separate members of a homologous series, with contributions from solvent cavity formation and dispersion interactions. 

The pore structure of most cross-linked polystyrene resins are the so called macro-reticular type which can be produced with almost any desired pore size, ranging from 20A to 5,000A. They exhibit strong dispersive type interaction with solvents and solutes with some polarizability arising from the aromatic nuclei in the polymer. Consequently the untreated resin is finding use as an alternative to the C8 and Cl8 reverse phase columns based on silica. Their use for the separation of peptide and proteins at both high and low pH is well established. 

The mobile phase is interesting in that the water is buffered appropriately to complement the dissociation constants of the solutes. A mixture of methanol and acetonitrile is employed, the acetonitrile being used to increase the dispersive interactions in the mobile phase. The reason for the particular solvent mixture is not clear and it would appear that the separation might be achieved equally well by using a stronger solution of methanol alone or a more dilute solution acetonitrile alone. There is no particular advantage to one solvent mixture over another except for the fact that waste acetonitrile produces greater solvent disposal problems than methanol. 

The peak capacity is not pertinent as the separation was developed by a solvent program. The expected efficiency of the column when operated at the optimum velocity would be about 5,500 theoretical plates. This is not a particularly high efficiency and so the separation depended heavily on the phases selected and the gradient employed. The separation was achieved by a complex mixture of ionic and dispersive interactions between the solutes and the stationary phase and ionic, polar and dispersive forces between the solutes and the mobile phase. The initial solvent was a 1% acetic acid and 1 mM tetrabutyl ammonium phosphate buffered to a pH of 2.8. Initially the tetrabutyl ammonium salt would be adsorbed strongly on the reverse phase and thus acted as an adsorbed ion exchanger. During the program, acetonitrile was added to the solvent and initially this increased the dispersive interactions between the solute and the mobile phase. 

Virtually all interactive mechanisms that control retention in chromatography are, in fact, mixed interactions as shown by the previous application examples. It has already been suggested that reverse phases can exhibit almost exclusively dispersive interactions with solutes. However, as they are almost always employed with aqueous solvent mixtures then, polar and dispersive interactions will still be operative in the mobile phase. Consequently, the examples given here will be taken where the mixed interactions are either unique or represent a separation of special interest. 

In general, the majority of separations are achieved by exploiting dispersive interactions in the stationary phase and modifying and controlling the absolute and relative retention of the solutes by adjusting the composition of the mobile phase. It is far easier to adjust the mobile phase by selecting different mixtures of water and the solvents methanol, acetonitrile and/or tetrahydrofuran than change from column to column. 

The solvatochromic classification of solvents takes into consideration only the polar interactions of the solvents and not their cohesion. The transfer of a solute from one solvent to another occurs with the cancellation of dispersion interactions [38]. 

H-bonding is an important, but not the sole, interatomic interaction. Thus, total energy is usually calculated as the sum of steric, electrostatic, H-bonding and other components of interatomic interactions. A similar situation holds with QSAR studies of any property (activity) where H-bond parameters are used in combination with other descriptors. For example, five molecular descriptors are applied in the solvation equation of Kamlet-Taft-Abraham excess of molecular refraction (Rj), which models dispersion force interactions arising from the polarizability of n- and n-electrons the solute polarity/polarizability (ir ) due to solute-solvent interactions between bond dipoles and induced dipoles overall or summation H-bond acidity (2a ) overall or summation H-bond basicity (2(3 ) and McGowan volume (VJ [53] ... 

The author assumed that the Born radii of atoms can be estimated from the solvent exposure factors for sampling spheres around the atoms. Two spheres were used in a five-parameter equahon to calculate the Born radii. The parameters of the equahon were eshmated using numerical calculahons from X-ray protein structures for dihydrofolate reductase. In addition to AGol the author also considered the AGJ term accounting for cavity formahon and dispersion of the solute-solvent interactions as ... 

Solvent selectivity is a measure of the relative capacity of a solvent to enter into specific solute-solvent interactions, characterized as dispersion, induction, orientation and coaplexation interactions, unfortunately, fundamental aiq>roaches have not advanced to the point where an exact model can be put forward to describe the principal intermolecular forces between complex molecules. Chromatograidters, therefore, have come to rely on empirical models to estimate the solvent selectivity of stationary phases. The Rohrschneider/McReynolds system of phase constants [6,15,318,327,328,380,397,401-403], solubility... 

The solvent triangle classification method of Snyder Is the most cosDBon approach to solvent characterization used by chromatographers (510,517). The solvent polarity index, P, and solvent selectivity factors, X), which characterize the relative importemce of orientation and proton donor/acceptor interactions to the total polarity, were based on Rohrscbneider s compilation of experimental gas-liquid distribution constants for a number of test solutes in 75 common, volatile solvents. Snyder chose the solutes nitromethane, ethanol and dloxane as probes for a solvent s capacity for orientation, proton acceptor and proton donor capacity, respectively. The influence of solute molecular size, solute/solvent dispersion interactions, and solute/solvent induction interactions as a result of solvent polarizability were subtracted from the experimental distribution constants first multiplying the experimental distribution constant by the solvent molar volume and thm referencing this quantity to the value calculated for a hypothetical n-alkane with a molar volume identical to the test solute. Each value was then corrected empirically to give a value of zero for the polar distribution constant of the test solutes for saturated hydrocarbon solvents. These residual, values were supposed to arise from inductive and... 

---