corrosim — multiscale corrosion-inhibitor report

Substrate Fe(110)  |  Medium 1 M HCl  |  DFT level B3LYP/6-311++G(d,p) (ddCOSMO:water)  |  Generated 2026-07-18 18:23

The molecules modelled here are screened in silico as representative candidates, not a verified analysis of any real sample. Confirm the actual composition experimentally (e.g. by LC-MS/GC-MS) before drawing firm conclusions.

1. Overview

corrosim pipeline

2. Summary & ranking

Of the 3 molecules screened, quercetin ranks highest on the composite electronic score (+0.70), which averages three independent axes — a small HOMO–LUMO gap (3.59 eV), the Lukovits ΔN and the molecular dipole — the strongest all-round electron-donating profile of the set. It adsorbs flat on Fe in the physisorption regime (E_ads ≈ -16 kJ/mol). The lead holds across all 4 descriptor bases evaluated (geometry and protonation). This is a computational screening prediction requiring electrochemical confirmation (see the Method section and caveats).

QuercetinIsorhamnetinKaempferol
Gap (eV)3.594 3.6663.682
ΔN0.1910.2260.182
Dipole (D)8.0213.4686.143
E_ads (kJ/mol)-15.97-16.74 -16.55
Fe–O (Å)3.253.152.95
Score0.698 -0.133-0.565
Ranking basisTop candidate
force-field geometry, neutralQuercetin
force-field geometry, pH-weightedQuercetin
DFT-relaxed geometry, neutralQuercetin
DFT-relaxed geometry, pH-weightedQuercetin

Lead robust: the same candidate tops all 4 descriptor bases (geometry and protonation).

Scored on three independent axes of the canonical basis (DFT-relaxed geometry, pH-weighted; z-scored; higher = stronger): the HOMO–LUMO gap, the Lukovits ΔN (electron donation to the metal) and the dipole (a weak tie-breaker — its direction vs efficiency is disputed). The geometry / protonation panels below are a sensitivity check, not separate rankings. E_ads and the Fe–O distance validate the lead, they do not enter the score. Full method: docs/pipeline.md.

3. DFT electronic descriptors

Modelled molecules
Frontier-orbital energies vs the metal work function

3.1 Frontier-orbital isosurfaces (HOMO / LUMO)

kaempferol HOMO
quercetin HOMO
isorhamnetin HOMO
kaempferol LUMO
quercetin LUMO
isorhamnetin LUMO
Reactivity descriptors
Protonation effect (DFT-optimised cations)

3.2 Full descriptor table (neutral, aqueous)

DescriptorKaempferolQuercetinIsorhamnetin
FormulaC15H10O6C15H10O7C16H12O7
HOMO (eV)-6.193-6.134-6.009
LUMO (eV)-2.047-2.052-1.91
Gap ΔE (eV)4.1464.0824.099
η hardness (eV)2.0732.0412.049
σ softness (1/eV)0.4820.490.488
χ electronegativity (eV)4.124.0933.959
ω electrophilicity (eV)4.0944.1043.824
ΔN0.1690.1780.21
E_back-donation (eV)-0.518-0.51-0.512
Dipole (D)5.5316.3374.42
TNC-4.422-4.714-5.525
E_ads (kJ/mol)-16.55-15.97-16.74

3.3 Geometry refinement (FF vs DFT-optimised)

Force-field vs DFT-optimised geometry

3.4 Optimised-geometry descriptors (DFT-relaxed)

DescriptorKaempferolQuercetinIsorhamnetin
FormulaC15H10O6C15H10O7C16H12O7
HOMO (eV)-5.971-5.911-5.805
LUMO (eV)-2.281-2.307-2.118
Gap ΔE (eV)3.693.6043.687
η hardness (eV)1.8451.8021.843
σ softness (1/eV)0.5420.5550.542
χ electronegativity (eV)4.1264.1093.962
ω electrophilicity (eV)4.6134.6854.257
ΔN0.1880.1970.233
E_back-donation (eV)-0.461-0.451-0.461
Dipole (D)6.1438.0213.468
TNC-6.092-6.552-6.85

Sensitivity: descriptors on the DFT-relaxed geometry (the geometry axis of the ranking ensemble). The headline ranks on the canonical basis; see the Summary.

Optimised protonated cations (in-acid)

DescriptorKaempferol+H+Quercetin+H+Isorhamnetin+H+
FormulaC15H11O6+C15H11O7+C16H13O7+
HOMO (eV)-6.601-6.477-6.269
LUMO (eV)-3.188-3.214-3.261
Gap ΔE (eV)3.4133.2633.008
η hardness (eV)1.7071.6311.504
σ softness (1/eV)0.5860.6130.665
χ electronegativity (eV)4.8944.8464.765
ω electrophilicity (eV)7.0187.1967.547
ΔN-0.022-0.0080.018
E_back-donation (eV)-0.427-0.408-0.376
Dipole (D)
TNC-4.205-4.754-7.044

3.5 Species in the acidic medium (protonated cation)

DescriptorKaempferol+H+Quercetin+H+Isorhamnetin+H+
FormulaC15H11O6+C15H11O7+C16H13O7+
HOMO (eV)-6.881-6.668-6.427
LUMO (eV)-3.277-3.324-3.295
Gap ΔE (eV)3.6043.3443.132
η hardness (eV)1.8021.6721.566
σ softness (1/eV)0.5550.5980.639
χ electronegativity (eV)5.0794.9964.861
ω electrophilicity (eV)7.1577.4657.546
ΔN-0.072-0.053-0.013
E_back-donation (eV)-0.451-0.418-0.391
Dipole (D)
TNC-4.014-4.438-4.993

Protonated +1 cation descriptors in 1 M HCl; a component of the pH-weighted canonical basis (see the Summary), shown here on its own.

3.6 Speciation in 1 M HCl (pH ≈ -0.0)

97% neutral / 3% protonated at this pH — the neutral form dominates. Population-weighted descriptors (the speciation axis of the ranking ensemble; the headline ranks on the canonical basis):

DescriptorKaempferolQuercetinIsorhamnetin
FormulaC15H10O6C15H10O7C16H12O7
HOMO (eV)-6.214-6.151-6.022
LUMO (eV)-2.085-2.091-1.952
Gap ΔE (eV)4.1294.064.069
η hardness (eV)2.0642.032.035
σ softness (1/eV)0.4850.4930.492
χ electronegativity (eV)4.1494.1213.987
ω electrophilicity (eV)4.1884.2073.938
ΔN0.1620.1710.203
E_back-donation (eV)-0.516-0.507-0.509
Dipole (D)5.5316.3374.42
TNC-4.41-4.705-5.509

Computed pKaH (DFT deprotonation cycle)

KaempferolQuercetinIsorhamnetin
computed pKaH-12.9-13.3-3.9
% protonated @ this pH0.00%0.00%0.01%

B3LYP/6-311++G(d,p) + ddCOSMO deprotonation cycle (frequency-corrected).

3.7 Local reactivity (Fukui)

Strongest electron-donating oxygens (highest f⁻) per molecule:

kaempferol — condensed Fukui
quercetin — condensed Fukui
isorhamnetin — condensed Fukui

3.8 Electrostatic-potential (ESP) map

kaempferol — ESP map
quercetin — ESP map
isorhamnetin — ESP map

4. Monte Carlo adsorption

kaempferol — best pose
quercetin — best pose
isorhamnetin — best pose
kaempferol — MC annealing
quercetin — MC annealing
isorhamnetin — MC annealing

5. Brownian MD — Fe–donor RDF

kaempferol — Fe–donor RDF
quercetin — Fe–donor RDF
isorhamnetin — Fe–donor RDF

6. Method & caveats

DFT level: B3LYP/6-311++G(d,p) (ddCOSMO:water). Global descriptors come from the frontier-orbital energies via Koopmans' theorem; ΔN uses the metal work function with η(metal) = 0. The Monte-Carlo and Brownian-MD stages use a classical van-der-Waals adsorption model — a physics-based screening surrogate, not a substitute for periodic DFT or for electrochemical validation. The composite ranking is a heuristic that orders candidates; it does not prove inhibition. Full methodology: docs/pipeline.md; validation record: docs/validation.md.