Chemical potentials of alkaline earth metal halide aqueous electrolytes and solubility of their hydrates by molecular simulation: Application to CaCl2, antarcticite, and sinjarite
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present a molecular-level simulation study of CaCl2 in water and crystalline hydrates formed by CaCl2 at ambient (298.15 K, 1 bar) conditions and at a high-temperature high-pressure state (365 K, 275 bars) typical of hydraulic fracturing conditions in natural-gas extraction, at which experimental properties are poorly characterized. We focus on simulations of chemical potentials in both solution and crystalline phases and on the salt solubility, the first time to our knowledge that such properties have been investigated by molecular simulation for divalent aqueous electrolytes. We first extend our osmotic ensemble Monte Carlo simulation technique [F. Moučka et al., J. Phys. Chem. B 115, 7849–7861 (2011)] to such solutions. We then describe and apply new methodology for the simulation of the chemical potentials of the experimentally observed crystalline hydrates at ambient conditions (antarcticite, CaCl2·6H2O) and at high-temperature conditions (sinjarite, CaCl2·2H2O). We implement our methodologies using for both phases the CaCl2 transferable force field (FF) based on simple point charge-extended water developed by Mamatkulov et al. [J. Chem. Phys. 138, 024505 (2013)], based on training sets involving single-ion and ion-pair low-concentration solution properties at near-ambient conditions. We find that simulations of the solution chemical potentials at high concentrations are somewhat problematic, exhibiting densities diverging from experimental values and accompanied by dramatically decreasing particle mobility. For the solid phases, the sinjarite crystalline lattice differs from experiment only slightly, whereas the simulations of antarcticite completely fail, due to instability of the crystalline lattice. The FF thus only successfully yields the sinjarite solubility, but its value m = 8.0(7) mol kg−1H2O lies well below the experimentally observed solubility range at 1 bar pressure of (12m, 15m) in the temperature interval (320 K, 400 K). We conclude that the used FF does not provide a good description of the experimental properties considered and suggest that improvement must take into account the crystalline properties.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".