From Femtoseconds to Nanoseconds: Simulation of IBr− Photodissociation Dynamics in CO2 Clusters

50 %
50 %
Information about From Femtoseconds to Nanoseconds: Simulation of IBr− Photodissociation...
Education

Published on October 14, 2008

Author: TheMatt

Source: slideshare.net

Description

This is my thesis defense talk. Be afraid!

IBr− Simulations Motivation Solvation Dynamics Previous IX− (CO2 )n Systems Why IBr− (CO2 )n ? From Femtoseconds to Nanoseconds Theory Simulation of IBr− Photodissociation Dynamics in Model Hamiltonian Minimal Structures CO2 Clusters Simulated Spectrum Nonadiabatic MD Near-IR Results Branching Ratios Ground-State Matt Thompson Recombination Excited-State Trapping Long-time Simulations JILA UV Results University of Colorado at Boulder Branching Ratios Spin-Orbit Quenching Summary 2007-04-13 Future Directions Doctoral Dissertation Defense

IBr− Simulations Outline Motivation Solvation Dynamics Previous IX− (CO2 )n Systems Why IBr− (CO2 )n ? Motivation Theory Model Hamiltonian Minimal Structures Simulated Spectrum Theory Nonadiabatic MD Near-IR Results Branching Ratios Near-IR Results Ground-State Recombination Excited-State Trapping Long-time Simulations Ground-State Recombination UV Results Branching Ratios Spin-Orbit Quenching UV Results Summary Future Directions

IBr− Simulations Outline Motivation Solvation Dynamics Previous IX− (CO2 )n Systems Why IBr− (CO2 )n ? Motivation Theory Model Hamiltonian Minimal Structures Simulated Spectrum Theory Nonadiabatic MD Near-IR Results Branching Ratios Near-IR Results Ground-State Recombination Excited-State Trapping Long-time Simulations Ground-State Recombination UV Results Branching Ratios Spin-Orbit Quenching UV Results Summary Future Directions

IBr− Simulations Solvation Dynamics Why Clusters? Motivation Solvation Dynamics Previous IX− (CO2 )n Systems Why IBr− (CO2 )n ? Solvation in bulk liquids: size O(1023 ) Theory Model Hamiltonian Minimal Structures Large size often means averaging is necessary Simulated Spectrum Nonadiabatic MD Clusters allow us to study solvation while avoiding Near-IR Results the averaging effects Branching Ratios Ground-State Recombination Lineberger group pioneered the use of charged Excited-State Trapping Long-time Simulations clusters: use of MS to select clusters UV Results Allows study of solvation effects from a single Branching Ratios Spin-Orbit Quenching solvent molecule to those from tens of solvent Summary molecules Future Directions Focus on the IX− (CO2 )n work—but many more have been successfully studied

IBr− Simulations How To Do IX− (CO2 )n Photodissociation Lineberger Group Motivation Solvation Dynamics Previous IX− (CO2 )n Systems Why IBr− (CO2 )n ? Theory Model Hamiltonian Minimal Structures Simulated Spectrum Nonadiabatic MD Cluster anions generated in expansion Near-IR Results Ions size-selected via TOF mass spectrometer Branching Ratios Ground-State Laser pulse dissociates cluster Recombination Excited-State Trapping Product ratios detected by mass spectrometry Long-time Simulations UV Results Ground-state recombination studied via Branching Ratios Spin-Orbit Quenching pump-probe Summary Future Directions

IBr− Simulations Previous I− (CO2 )n Work 2 Lineberger and Parson Groups Motivation Solvation Dynamics Previous IX− (CO2 )n 2 Systems Why IBr− (CO2 )n ? 2 + B Σ g,1/2 Theory Model Hamiltonian Minimal Structures Simulated Spectrum − Nonadiabatic MD 1 I* + I 2 Near-IR Results a' Πu,1/2 Energy (eV) Branching Ratios 2 a Πu,3/2 Ground-State 2 Recombination A' Πg,1/2 Excited-State Trapping − I+I Long-time Simulations 0 2 A Πg,3/2 UV Results Branching Ratios Spin-Orbit Quenching Summary 2 + X Σ u,1/2 Future Directions -1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 R (Ang) Good agreement in ratios, sims predicted mech. of efficient SO quenching in UV

IBr− Simulations Previous ICl− (CO2 )n Work Lineberger and Parson Groups 100 Motivation 2 Solvation Dynamics 2 + 80 Experiment B Σ Previous IX− (CO2 )n 1/2 60 − Theory Systems 40 I Why IBr− (CO2 )n ? Theory 20 Model Hamiltonian 2 a' Π1/2 − 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Minimal Structures 1 I* + Cl 100 Simulated Spectrum 2 − a Π3/2 Nonadiabatic MD Energy (eV) I + Cl* 80 Near-IR Results − 60 − 2 A' Π1/2 I + Cl 40 Cl Branching Ratios Ground-State 20 Recombination − I + Cl 0 Excited-State Trapping 0 2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 A Π3/2 100 Long-time Simulations 80 UV Results Branching Ratios 60 − Spin-Orbit Quenching 2 + 40 ICl X Σ 1/2 Summary 20 -1 Future Directions 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 R (Ang) No. of CO2 Diff. at large sizes due to formation of ES-trapped ICl− species; low abs. cross section makes time-resolved expts hard

IBr− Simulations IBr− (CO2 )n A “Gentler” System? Motivation Solvation Dynamics Previous IX− (CO2 )n Systems Why IBr− (CO2 )n ? Theory Model Hamiltonian Minimal Structures ICl− (CO2 )n showed interesting dynamics possible Simulated Spectrum Nonadiabatic MD with a heteronuclear solute but had expt. and sim. Near-IR Results challenges Branching Ratios Ground-State IBr− (CO2 )n : Better system to study a heteronuclear Recombination Excited-State Trapping solvent? Long-time Simulations UV Results Electronegativity diff. btw. I/Br smaller than I/Cl Branching Ratios Intuition suggests abs. cross section btw. I− and ICl− 2 Spin-Orbit Quenching Well-known Br-CO2 E − V interaction: could we see Summary this? Future Directions

IBr− Simulations Outline Motivation Solvation Dynamics Previous IX− (CO2 )n Systems Why IBr− (CO2 )n ? Motivation Theory Model Hamiltonian Minimal Structures Simulated Spectrum Theory Nonadiabatic MD Near-IR Results Branching Ratios Near-IR Results Ground-State Recombination Excited-State Trapping Long-time Simulations Ground-State Recombination UV Results Branching Ratios Spin-Orbit Quenching UV Results Summary Future Directions

IBr− Simulations Model Hamiltonian Maslen, Faeder, and Parson Motivation Solvation Dynamics Previous IX− (CO2 )n Systems Why IBr− (CO2 )n ? Theory Solute ab initio Model Hamiltonian Minimal Structures Eigenstates of bare anion Simulated Spectrum icMRCISD calculated via MOLPRO Nonadiabatic MD Near-IR Results Spin-orbit coupling, transition DMA, and transition Branching Ratios angular momentum calculated Ground-State Recombination Solute-solvent interactions Excited-State Trapping Long-time Simulations Distributed multipoles for solute charge density UV Results Solvent polarizes solute wavefunctions Branching Ratios Spin-Orbit Quenching Dispersion-repulsion Summary Pairwise Lennard-Jones atom-atom potentials Future Directions Fit to replicate experimental I− · · · CO2 interaction and CCSD(T) Br− · · · CO2 calculations

IBr− Simulations Potential Energy Curves Motivation Solvation Dynamics Previous IX− (CO2 )n Systems Why IBr− (CO2 )n ? 2 Theory 2 + 6-state icMRCI using Model Hamiltonian B Σ 1.5 1/2 ECPnMDF ECPs with CPP Minimal Structures Simulated Spectrum Nonadiabatic MD 2 a' Π1/2 Augmented basis: Near-IR Results − 1 I* + Br (7s7p3d2f)/[5s5p3d2f] Branching Ratios Energy (eV) − Ground-State 0.5 2 I + Br* Spin-orbit effects via Recombination a Π3/2 2 − I + Br SO-ECP Excited-State Trapping Long-time Simulations A' Π1/2 0 2 I + Br − Transition DMA, NACME, UV Results A Π3/2 Branching Ratios transition angular Spin-Orbit Quenching -0.5 momentum Summary 2 + X Σ 1/2 Future Directions -1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 R (Ang)

IBr− Simulations Potential Energy Curves Table of Energetics (in eV) Motivation Solvation Dynamics Previous IX− (CO2 )n Systems Why IBr− (CO2 )n ? Theory Model Hamiltonian Minimal Structures Simulated Spectrum Nonadiabatic MD Calc. Expt. Near-IR Results Spin-Orbit: Br: 0.4237 0.4569 -0.0332 Branching Ratios Ground-State I: 0.8932 0.9427 -0.0495 Recombination EA: 0.3156 0.3045 0.0111 Excited-State Trapping Long-time Simulations D0 : 0.946 0.954 -0.008 UV Results Branching Ratios Re (Å): 3.05 Spin-Orbit Quenching Summary Future Directions

IBr− Simulations Model Hamiltonian Maslen, Faeder, and Parson Motivation Solvation Dynamics Previous IX− (CO2 )n Systems Why IBr− (CO2 )n ? Theory Solute ab initio Model Hamiltonian Minimal Structures Eigenstates of bare anion Simulated Spectrum icMRCISD calculated via MOLPRO Nonadiabatic MD Near-IR Results Spin-orbit coupling, transition DMA, and transition Branching Ratios angular momentum calculated Ground-State Recombination Solute-solvent interactions Excited-State Trapping Long-time Simulations Distributed multipoles for solute charge density UV Results Solvent polarizes solute wavefunctions Branching Ratios Spin-Orbit Quenching Dispersion-repulsion Summary Pairwise Lennard-Jones atom-atom potentials Future Directions Fit to replicate experimental I− · · · CO2 interaction and CCSD(T) Br− · · · CO2 calculations

IBr− Simulations Solute-Solvent Interactions Distributed Multipole Analysis Motivation Solvation Dynamics Previous IX− (CO2 )n Systems Why IBr− (CO2 )n ? Theory Model Hamiltonian Minimal Structures Simulated Spectrum Nonadiabatic MD Near-IR Results Branching Ratios Ground-State Recombination Excited-State Trapping Long-time Simulations UV Results Branching Ratios Spin-Orbit Quenching Summary Future Directions

IBr− Simulations Model Hamiltonian Maslen, Faeder, and Parson Motivation Solvation Dynamics Previous IX− (CO2 )n Systems Why IBr− (CO2 )n ? Theory Solute ab initio Model Hamiltonian Minimal Structures Eigenstates of bare anion Simulated Spectrum icMRCISD calculated via MOLPRO Nonadiabatic MD Near-IR Results Spin-orbit coupling, transition DMA, and transition Branching Ratios angular momentum calculated Ground-State Recombination Solute-solvent interactions Excited-State Trapping Long-time Simulations Distributed multipoles for solute charge density UV Results Solvent polarizes solute wavefunctions Branching Ratios Spin-Orbit Quenching Dispersion-repulsion Summary Pairwise Lennard-Jones atom-atom potentials Future Directions Fit to replicate experimental I− · · · CO2 interaction and CCSD(T) Br− · · · CO2 calculations

IBr− Simulations Minimum Energy IBr− (CO2 )n Structures Motivation Solvation Dynamics Previous IX− (CO2 )n Systems Why IBr− (CO2 )n ? Theory Model Hamiltonian Minimal Structures Simulated Spectrum Nonadiabatic MD Near-IR Results Branching Ratios Ground-State Recombination Excited-State Trapping Long-time Simulations UV Results Branching Ratios Spin-Orbit Quenching Summary Future Directions

IBr− Simulations Simulated Abs. Spectrum Bare Ion Motivation Solvation Dynamics Previous IX− (CO2 )n Systems 1.5 Why IBr− (CO2 )n ? Theory 0.04 Model Hamiltonian cm ) 2 + B Σ 2 Minimal Structures 1/2 Simulated Spectrum -16 0.03 Nonadiabatic MD Absorption Cross Section ( x10 1 Near-IR Results Branching Ratios 0.02 Ground-State Recombination 0.01 2 Excited-State Trapping 2 a Π3/2 A Π3/2 Long-time Simulations UV Results 0 0.5 400 600 800 1000 1200 Branching Ratios Spin-Orbit Quenching Summary 2 Future Directions Expt. peak A' Π1/2 2 740 nm a' Π1/2 0 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 Wavelength (nm)

IBr− Simulations Nonadiabatic Molecular Dynamics Maslen, Faeder, and Parson Motivation Solvation Dynamics Previous IX− (CO2 )n Systems Why IBr− (CO2 )n ? Theory Model Hamiltonian Classical path surface-hopping using least switches Minimal Structures Simulated Spectrum (Tully, 1990) Nonadiabatic MD Near-IR Results Nuclear deg. of freedom, R(t) Branching Ratios Elec. deg. of freedom quantum, c (t) Ground-State Recombination quantum: ι c (t) = c E − ι ˙ ˙ j cj R(t) · d j Excited-State Trapping Long-time Simulations classical: MR(t) = 〈ϕn |∇R H|ϕn 〉 ¨ UV Results Branching Ratios Hops preserve probabilities |c (t)|2 in an ensemble Spin-Orbit Quenching of trajectories Summary Future Directions Requires only H(R) and its derivatives

IBr− Simulations Outline Motivation Solvation Dynamics Previous IX− (CO2 )n Systems Why IBr− (CO2 )n ? Motivation Theory Model Hamiltonian Minimal Structures Simulated Spectrum Theory Nonadiabatic MD Near-IR Results Branching Ratios Near-IR Results Ground-State Recombination Excited-State Trapping Long-time Simulations Ground-State Recombination UV Results Branching Ratios Spin-Orbit Quenching UV Results Summary Future Directions

IBr− Simulations 790-nm Simulations 100 Traj. per Ensemble, 50-ps Run-time Motivation Solvation Dynamics Previous IX− (CO2 )n 100 Systems 80 I− channel remains open Why IBr− (CO2 )n ? Theory 60 Experiment at larger cluster size − Model Hamiltonian %I Theory Br− more prevalent in 40 Minimal Structures Simulated Spectrum 20 Nonadiabatic MD 0 simulation usu. at cost Near-IR Results 100 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 of IBr− in medium Branching Ratios 80 clusters Ground-State Recombination 60 At n > 8, IBr− product − Excited-State Trapping % Br Long-time Simulations 40 dominates, but... UV Results 20 Branching Ratios 0 Spin-Orbit Quenching 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 100 Summary 80 Future Directions − 60 % IBr 40 20 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 No. of CO2

IBr− Simulations 790-nm Simulations - GS Product Only 100 Traj. per Ensemble, 50-ps Run-time Motivation Solvation Dynamics Previous IX− (CO2 )n 100 Systems 80 IBr− product in Why IBr− (CO2 )n ? Theory 60 Experiment medium-size clusters − Model Hamiltonian %I Theory 40 are primarily trapped on Minimal Structures Simulated Spectrum 20 excited-state Nonadiabatic MD 0 Near-IR Results 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 100 What is the correct Branching Ratios 80 picture to use for Ground-State Recombination 60 simulated − Excited-State Trapping % Br Long-time Simulations 40 photoproducts? UV Results 20 Branching Ratios 0 Spin-Orbit Quenching 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 100 Summary 80 Future Directions − 60 % IBr 40 20 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 No. of CO2

IBr− Simulations 790-nm Simulations Extrapolation to “Infinite” Time Motivation Solvation Dynamics Previous IX− (CO2 )n 100 Systems 80 Final product ratios Why IBr− (CO2 )n ? Theory 60 Experiment extrapolated using − Model Hamiltonian %I Theory 40 results of Minimal Structures Simulated Spectrum 20 nanosecond-long Nonadiabatic MD 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 trajectories Near-IR Results Branching Ratios 100 80 What is causing this Ground-State Recombination 60 excited-state trapping − Excited-State Trapping % Br 40 and can we visualize it? Long-time Simulations UV Results 20 Branching Ratios 0 Spin-Orbit Quenching 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 100 Summary − % Ground-State IBr 80 Future Directions 60 40 20 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 No. of CO2

IBr− Simulations Outline Motivation Solvation Dynamics Previous IX− (CO2 )n Systems Why IBr− (CO2 )n ? Motivation Theory Model Hamiltonian Minimal Structures Simulated Spectrum Theory Nonadiabatic MD Near-IR Results Branching Ratios Near-IR Results Ground-State Recombination Excited-State Trapping Long-time Simulations Ground-State Recombination UV Results Branching Ratios Spin-Orbit Quenching UV Results Summary Future Directions

IBr− Simulations Expt. Evidence of Trapping in IBr− (CO2 )8 Sanford, et al, JCP, 2005 Motivation Solvation Dynamics Previous IX− (CO2 )n 0.8 Systems Why IBr− (CO2 )n ? Theory Normalized two-photon Model Hamiltonian Minimal Structures 0.6 Simulated Spectrum Nonadiabatic MD Near-IR Results Branching Ratios counts 0.4 Ground-State Recombination Excited-State Trapping Long-time Simulations 0.2 UV Results Branching Ratios Spin-Orbit Quenching Summary 0.0 Future Directions 0 200 5000 8000 Pump-probe delay (ps) GSR recovery time slower than the 10-20 ps seen in I− (CO2 )n clusters 2

IBr− Simulations IBr− (CO2 )8 PE Surface Possible Way to Visualize Trapping Motivation Solvation Dynamics Previous IX− (CO2 )n Systems Why IBr− (CO2 )n ? 2.5 Theory Generated as a quot;pullquot; Model Hamiltonian Minimal Structures 2 surface from an Simulated Spectrum IBr− (CO2 )8 minimal Nonadiabatic MD 1.5 Near-IR Results energy structure Branching Ratios Energy (eV) Ground-State 1 Surface shows a well Recombination 0.5 generated due to Excited-State Trapping Long-time Simulations solvent effects on A UV Results 0 state Branching Ratios Spin-Orbit Quenching -0.5 Increase in excitation Summary energy (730 nm) does Future Directions 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 R (Ang) increase 50-ps IBr− GS yield

IBr− Simulations IBr− (CO2 )8 PE Surface Problems Motivation Solvation Dynamics Previous IX− (CO2 )n Systems Why IBr− (CO2 )n ? Theory 2.5 Model Hamiltonian PES is good only for a Minimal Structures Simulated Spectrum 2 single solute and solvent Nonadiabatic MD configuration Near-IR Results 1.5 Branching Ratios Provides no information Energy (eV) Ground-State 1 on how the solute and Recombination Excited-State Trapping 0.5 solvent move in concert Long-time Simulations UV Results Can we define a solvent Branching Ratios 0 coordinate and plot that Spin-Orbit Quenching Summary -0.5 against solute Future Directions geometry? 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 R (Ang)

IBr− Simulations Solvent Coordinate, Motivation Solvation Dynamics Previous IX− (CO2 )n Systems Why IBr− (CO2 )n ? Change in energy when Theory charge of −e is moved Model Hamiltonian Minimal Structures from one solute atom to Simulated Spectrum Nonadiabatic MD another Near-IR Results For a fixed nuclear Branching Ratios Ground-State configuration, provides Recombination measure of the solvent Excited-State Trapping Long-time Simulations asymmetry UV Results Branching Ratios Plots of R v. provide Spin-Orbit Quenching a picture of concerted Summary solvent and solute Future Directions movement in a trajectory

IBr− Simulations Excited-State Trapping of IBr− (CO2 )8 50-ps Trajectories Motivation Solvation Dynamics Previous IX− (CO2 )n Systems Why IBr− (CO2 )n ? 89% of trajectories Theory Model Hamiltonian trapped in A state after Minimal Structures Simulated Spectrum 50 ps Nonadiabatic MD Near-IR Results Only 5% relax to Branching Ratios ground-state Ground-State Recombination Expt. agrees that Excited-State Trapping Long-time Simulations long-time trapping is UV Results happening Branching Ratios Spin-Orbit Quenching Summary Future Directions

IBr− Simulations Excited-State Trapping of IBr− (CO2 )8 50-ps Trajectories Motivation Solvation Dynamics Previous IX− (CO2 )n Systems Why IBr− (CO2 )n ? 89% of trajectories Theory Model Hamiltonian trapped in A state after Minimal Structures Simulated Spectrum 50 ps Nonadiabatic MD Near-IR Results Only 5% relax to Branching Ratios ground-state Ground-State Recombination Expt. agrees that Excited-State Trapping Long-time Simulations long-time trapping is UV Results happening Branching Ratios Spin-Orbit Quenching Summary Future Directions

IBr− Simulations 790-nm ns-Simulations of IBr− (CO2 )8 100 2-ns traj., 75 relaxed Motivation Solvation Dynamics Previous IX− (CO2 )n Systems Why IBr− (CO2 )n ? Theory Model Hamiltonian Minimal Structures Simulated Spectrum Nonadiabatic MD Near-IR Results Branching Ratios Ground-State Recombination Excited-State Trapping Long-time Simulations UV Results Branching Ratios Spin-Orbit Quenching Summary Future Directions Cluster needs to achieve more symmetric configuration to allow transition to ground state

IBr− Simulations Ground-State Recovery Dynamics of IBr− (CO2 )n Motivation Solvation Dynamics 10000 Previous IX− (CO2 )n Systems Why IBr− (CO2 )n ? Theory Model Hamiltonian Minimal Structures Simulated Spectrum Absorption Recovery Time (ps) 1000 Nonadiabatic MD Near-IR Results Branching Ratios Ground-State

Add a comment

Related presentations

Related pages

From Femtoseconds to Nanoseconds: Simulation of IBr ...

Title: From Femtoseconds to Nanoseconds: Simulation of IBr− Photodissociation Dynamics in CO2 Clusters: Publication Type: Thesis: Year of Publication
Read more

ProQuest Document View - From femtoseconds to nanoseconds ...

From femtoseconds to nanoseconds: Simulation of IBr- photodissociation dynamics in CO2 clusters by Thompson, Matthew Alan, Ph.D., UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO AT ...
Read more

Photodissociation dynamics of perfluorinated anhydrides ...

Photodissociation dynamics of perfluorinated ... From Femtoseconds to Nanoseconds: Simulation of IBr − Photodissociation Dynamics in CO 2 Clusters.
Read more

Theoretical Investigations of the Time-Resolved ...

... the Time-Resolved Photodissociation Dynamics of IBr ... Femtoseconds to Nanoseconds: Simulation of IBr- Photodissociation Dynamics in CO2 Clusters.
Read more

Robert Parson | JILA Science

» Robert Parson; Robert Parson. Content ... From Femtoseconds to Nanoseconds: Simulation of IBr− Photodissociation Dynamics in CO2 Clusters. Published: ...
Read more

Chemistry - scribd.com

1 . of femtoseconds to take ... in the gas phase and in clusters. highlighting how the ... dynamics simulation studies have also ...
Read more

A combined experimental/theoretical investigation of the ...

... A combined experimental/theoretical investigation of the near-infrared photodissociation of IBr-(CO2 ... dynamics during photodissociation ...
Read more

Chemistry and Life Science - Mallek AbdeRRAHMANE

... of femtoseconds ... illustrates how pump and probe pulses initiate and monitor the progress of H CO2 ... Computational molecular dynamics simulation ...
Read more

Matt Thompson | LinkedIn

View Matt Thompson’s professional ... recombination dynamics of photodissociated IBr−(CO2)n clusters. ... Photodissociation dynamics of IBr-(CO2)n ...
Read more