Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 22, 2026

Computation of Atmospheric Concentrations of Molecular Clusters from ab initio Thermochemistry
Published on: April 8, 2020
Comparison of gas-solid chromatography and MM2 force field molecular binding energies for greenhouse gases on a
Thomas R Rybolt1, Kevin T Bivona, Howard E Thomas
1Department of Chemistry, University of Tennessee at Chattanooga, Chattanooga, Tennessee 37403, United States. tom-rybolt@utc.edu
Abstract:
Gas-solid chromatography was used to determine B(2s) (gas-solid virial coefficient) values for eight molecular adsorbates interacting with a carbon powder (Carbopack B, Supelco). B(2s) values were determined by multiple size variant injections within the temperature range of 313-553 K. The molecular adsorbates included: carbon dioxide (CO(2)); tetrafluoromethane (CF(4)); hexafluoroethane (C(2)F(6)); 1,1-difluoroethane (C(2)H(4)F(2)); 1-chloro-1,1-difluoroethane (C(2)H(3)ClF(2)); dichlorodifluoromethane (CCl(2)F(2)); trichlorofluoromethane (CCl(3)F); and 1,1,1-trichloroethane (C(2)H(3)Cl(3)). Two of these molecules are of special interest because they are "super greenhouse gases". The global warming potential, GWP, for CF(4) is 6500 and for C(2)F(6) is 9200 relative to the reference value of 1 for CO(2). The GWP index considers both radiative blocking and molecular lifetime. For these and other industrial greenhouse gases, adsorptive trapping on a carbonaceous solid, which depends on molecule-surface binding energy, could avoid atmospheric release. The temperature variations of the gas-solid virial coefficients in conjunction with van't Hoff plots were used to find the experimental adsorption energy or binding energy values (E(*)) for each adsorbate. A molecular mechanics based, rough-surface model was used to calculate the molecule-surface binding energy (Ecal(*)) using augmented MM2 parameters. The surface model consisted of parallel graphene layers with two separated nanostructures each containing 17 benzene rings arranged in linear strips. The separation of the parallel nanostructures had been optimized in a prior study to appropriately represent molecule-surface interactions for Carbopack B. Linear regressions of E(*) versus Ecal(*) for the current data set of eight molecules and the same surface model gave E(*)=0.926 Ecal(*) and r(2)=0.956. A combined set of the current and prior Carbopack B adsorbates studied (linear alkanes, branched alkanes, cyclic alkanes, ethers, and halogenated hydrocarbons) gave a data set with 33 molecules and a regression of E(*)=0.991 Ecal(*) and r(2)=0.968. These results indicated a good correlation between the experimental and the MM2 computed molecule-surface binding energies.
Related Concept Videos
Gas Chromatography: Introduction
In GC, a sample is vaporized and mixed with an inert carrier gas (the mobile phase), which transports it through a column.
Molecular Comparison of Gases, Liquids, and Solids
Adsorption of Gases on Solids
Gas Chromatography–Mass Spectrometry (GC–MS)
A gas chromatograph consists of a long, narrow capillary column with a polysiloxane coating on the inner wall. The coating...
Real Gases: Effects of Intermolecular Forces and Molecular Volume Deriving Van der Waals Equation
Comparing Intermolecular Forces: Melting Point, Boiling Point, and Miscibility
Temporary attractive forces like dispersion are present in all molecules, whether they are polar or nonpolar. They...

