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 19:37

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, pyrazolopyrimidine propanamide ranks highest on the composite electronic score (+0.44), which averages three independent axes — a small HOMO–LUMO gap (4.66 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).

Pyrazolopyrimidine propanamidePyrazolopyrimidine ethyl esterPyrazolopyrimidine propanoic acid
Gap (eV)4.6654.6594.655
ΔN0.1710.1680.166
Dipole (D)6.5424.6023.63
E_ads (kJ/mol)-15.55-8.81-20.42
Fe–O (Å)3.953.953.75
Score0.442 -0.082-0.36
Ranking basisTop candidate
force-field geometry, neutralPyrazolopyrimidine propanamide
force-field geometry, pH-weightedPyrazolopyrimidine propanamide
DFT-relaxed geometry, neutralPyrazolopyrimidine propanamide
DFT-relaxed geometry, pH-weightedPyrazolopyrimidine propanamide

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)

pyrazolopyrimidine propanoic acid HOMO
pyrazolopyrimidine propanamide HOMO
pyrazolopyrimidine ethyl ester HOMO
pyrazolopyrimidine propanoic acid LUMO
pyrazolopyrimidine propanamide LUMO
pyrazolopyrimidine ethyl ester LUMO
Reactivity descriptors
Protonation effect (DFT-optimised cations)

3.2 Full descriptor table (neutral, aqueous)

DescriptorPyrazolopyrimidine propanoic acidPyrazolopyrimidine propanamidePyrazolopyrimidine ethyl ester
FormulaC15H14N4O3C15H15N5O2C17H18N4O3
HOMO (eV)-6.298-6.289-6.293
LUMO (eV)-1.827-1.809-1.822
Gap ΔE (eV)4.4714.484.471
η hardness (eV)2.2352.242.235
σ softness (1/eV)0.4470.4460.447
χ electronegativity (eV)4.0634.0494.057
ω electrophilicity (eV)3.6923.6593.683
ΔN0.1690.1720.171
E_back-donation (eV)-0.559-0.56-0.559
Dipole (D)3.2526.1983.351
TNC-4.001-4.268-4.565
E_ads (kJ/mol)-20.42-15.55-8.81

3.3 Geometry refinement (FF vs DFT-optimised)

Force-field vs DFT-optimised geometry

3.4 Optimised-geometry descriptors (DFT-relaxed)

DescriptorPyrazolopyrimidine propanoic acidPyrazolopyrimidine propanamidePyrazolopyrimidine ethyl ester
FormulaC15H14N4O3C15H15N5O2C17H18N4O3
HOMO (eV)-6.347-6.334-6.337
LUMO (eV)-1.684-1.665-1.67
Gap ΔE (eV)4.6624.6694.667
η hardness (eV)2.3312.3352.333
σ softness (1/eV)0.4290.4280.429
χ electronegativity (eV)4.0153.9994.003
ω electrophilicity (eV)3.4583.4263.434
ΔN0.1730.1760.175
E_back-donation (eV)-0.583-0.584-0.583
Dipole (D)3.636.5424.602
TNC-3.947-4.2-4.432

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)

DescriptorPyrazolopyrimidine propanoic acid+H+Pyrazolopyrimidine propanamide+H+Pyrazolopyrimidine ethyl ester+H+
FormulaC15H15N4O3+C15H16N5O2+C17H19N4O3+
HOMO (eV)-7.202-6.938-7.208
LUMO (eV)-2.798-2.412-2.786
Gap ΔE (eV)4.4044.5264.422
η hardness (eV)2.2022.2632.211
σ softness (1/eV)0.4540.4420.452
χ electronegativity (eV)5.04.6754.997
ω electrophilicity (eV)5.6774.8295.648
ΔN-0.0410.032-0.04
E_back-donation (eV)-0.551-0.566-0.553
Dipole (D)
TNC-4.329-4.458-4.903

3.5 Species in the acidic medium (protonated cation)

DescriptorPyrazolopyrimidine propanoic acid+H+Pyrazolopyrimidine propanamide+H+Pyrazolopyrimidine ethyl ester+H+
FormulaC15H15N4O3+C15H16N5O2+C17H19N4O3+
HOMO (eV)-6.978-6.736-6.965
LUMO (eV)-3.071-2.902-3.024
Gap ΔE (eV)3.9083.8343.941
η hardness (eV)1.9541.9171.97
σ softness (1/eV)0.5120.5220.507
χ electronegativity (eV)5.0254.8194.994
ω electrophilicity (eV)6.466.0566.329
ΔN-0.0520.0-0.044
E_back-donation (eV)-0.488-0.479-0.493
Dipole (D)
TNC-4.247-4.562-4.704

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):

DescriptorPyrazolopyrimidine propanoic acidPyrazolopyrimidine propanamidePyrazolopyrimidine ethyl ester
FormulaC15H14N4O3C15H15N5O2C17H18N4O3
HOMO (eV)-6.319-6.303-6.313
LUMO (eV)-1.866-1.842-1.859
Gap ΔE (eV)4.4544.464.454
η hardness (eV)2.2272.232.227
σ softness (1/eV)0.4490.4490.449
χ electronegativity (eV)4.0924.0724.086
ω electrophilicity (eV)3.7773.7323.764
ΔN0.1620.1670.164
E_back-donation (eV)-0.557-0.558-0.557
Dipole (D)3.2526.1983.351
TNC-4.008-4.278-4.569

3.7 Local reactivity (Fukui)

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

pyrazolopyrimidine propanoic acid — condensed Fukui
pyrazolopyrimidine propanamide — condensed Fukui
pyrazolopyrimidine ethyl ester — condensed Fukui

3.8 Electrostatic-potential (ESP) map

pyrazolopyrimidine propanoic acid — ESP map
pyrazolopyrimidine propanamide — ESP map
pyrazolopyrimidine ethyl ester — ESP map

4. Monte Carlo adsorption

pyrazolopyrimidine propanoic acid — best pose
pyrazolopyrimidine propanamide — best pose
pyrazolopyrimidine ethyl ester — best pose
pyrazolopyrimidine propanoic acid — MC annealing
pyrazolopyrimidine propanamide — MC annealing
pyrazolopyrimidine ethyl ester — MC annealing

5. Brownian MD — Fe–donor RDF

pyrazolopyrimidine propanoic acid — Fe–donor RDF
pyrazolopyrimidine propanamide — Fe–donor RDF
pyrazolopyrimidine ethyl ester — 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.