Abstract

For Au and Au 2 species at three types of defects as adsorption sites (non-bridging oxygen centers, silanolate groups, E′ centers), we carried out periodic supercell DFT calculations to compare two models of amorphous silica, derived from the walls of MCM-41 or from edingtonite. For atomic adsorption, both types of models afforded similar adsorption geometries and binding energies. Striking differences were found for Au 2 adsorption, where the structural characteristics of edingtonite automatically lead to simultaneous interactions of adsorbates with neighboring sites, whereas the MCM models allowed the structural isolation of defects, hence are more flexible when one wants to describe varying defect densities.

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.