ViewVC Help
View File | Revision Log | Show Annotations | View Changeset | Root Listing
root/group/trunk/iceWater/iceWater.tex
Revision: 3918
Committed: Mon Jul 15 15:07:36 2013 UTC (11 years, 2 months ago) by gezelter
Content type: application/x-tex
File size: 23114 byte(s)
Log Message:
Added an RNEMD section, updated bib file

File Contents

# User Rev Content
1 gezelter 3914 \documentclass[journal = jpccck, manuscript = article]{achemso}
2     \setkeys{acs}{usetitle = true}
3     \usepackage{achemso}
4     \usepackage{natbib}
5     \usepackage{multirow}
6     \usepackage{wrapfig}
7     \usepackage{fixltx2e}
8     %\mciteErrorOnUnknownfalse
9 gezelter 3897
10 gezelter 3914 \usepackage[version=3]{mhchem} % this is a great package for formatting chemical reactions
11     \usepackage{url}
12 gezelter 3897
13    
14 gezelter 3914 \title{Do the facets of ice $I_\mathrm{h}$ crystals have different
15     friction coefficients? Simulating shear in ice/water interfaces}
16 gezelter 3897
17     \author{P. B. Louden}
18 gezelter 3914 \author{J. Daniel Gezelter}
19     \email{gezelter@nd.edu}
20     \affiliation[University of Notre Dame]{251 Nieuwland Science Hall\\
21     Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry\\ University of Notre
22     Dame\\ Notre Dame, Indiana 46556}
23 gezelter 3897
24 gezelter 3914 \keywords{}
25 gezelter 3897
26 gezelter 3914 \begin{document}
27 gezelter 3897
28 gezelter 3914 \begin{abstract}
29     We have investigated the structural properties of the basal and
30     prismatic facets of an SPC/E model of the ice Ih / water interface
31     when the solid phase is being drawn through liquid water (i.e. sheared
32     relative to the fluid phase). To impose the shear, we utilized a
33     reverse non-equilibrium molecular dynamics (RNEMD) method that creates
34     non-equilibrium conditions using velocity shearing and scaling (VSS)
35     moves of the molecules in two physically separated slabs in the
36     simulation cell. This method can create simultaneous temperature and
37     velocity gradients and allow the measurement of friction transport
38     properties at interfaces. We present calculations of the interfacial
39     friction coefficients and the apparent independence of shear rate on
40     interfacial width and show that water moving over a flat ice/water
41     interface is close to the no-slip boundary condition.
42     \end{abstract}
43 gezelter 3897
44 gezelter 3914 \newpage
45 gezelter 3897
46     \section{Introduction}
47    
48     %Other people looking at the ice/water interface
49     %Geologists are concerned with the flow of water over ice
50     %Antifreeze protein in fish--Haymet's group has cited this before
51    
52 plouden 3899 %Paragraph explaining why the ice/water interface is important
53     %Paragraph on what other people have done / lead into what hasn't been done
54     %Paragraph on what I'm going to do
55 plouden 3898
56    
57 gezelter 3897
58    
59 plouden 3902 With the recent development of velocity shearing and scaling reverse non-equilibrium molecular dynamics (VSS-RNEMD), it is now possible to calculate transport properties from heterogeneous systems.\cite{Kuang12} This method can create simultaneous temperature and velocity gradients and allow the measurement of friction and thermal transport properties at interfaces. This allows for the study of the width of the ice/water interface as the ice is sheared through the liquid, while imposing a thermal gradient to prevent frictional heating of the interface.
60 plouden 3898
61 plouden 3902 as well as determining the friction coefficient of the interface.
62    
63 plouden 3899 In this paper, we investigate the width and the friction coefficient of the ice/water interface as the ice is sheared through the liquid.
64    
65    
66    
67 gezelter 3897 \section{Methodology}
68    
69 gezelter 3914 \subsection{Stable ice I$_\mathrm{h}$ / water interfaces}
70    
71     The structure of ice I$_\mathrm{h}$ is well understood; it
72     crystallizes in a hexagonal space group P$6_3/mmc$, and the hexagonal
73     crystals of ice have two faces that are commonly exposed, the basal
74     face $\{0~0~0~1\}$, which forms the top and bottom of each hexagonal
75     plate, and the prismatic $\{1~0~\bar{1}~0\}$ face which forms the
76     sides of the plate. Other less-common, but still important, faces of
77     ice I$_\mathrm{h}$ are the secondary prism face, $\{1~1~\bar{2}~0\}$,
78     and the prismatic face, $\{2~0~\bar{2}~1\}$.
79    
80     Ice I$_\mathrm{h}$ is normally proton disordered in bulk crystals,
81     although the surfaces probably have a preference for proton ordering
82     along strips of dangling H-atoms and Oxygen lone
83     pairs.\cite{Buch:2008fk}
84    
85     For small simulated ice interfaces, it is useful to have a
86     proton-ordered, but zero-dipole crystal that exposes these strips of
87     dangling H-atoms and lone pairs. Also, if we're going to place
88     another material in contact with one of the ice crystalline planes, it
89     is useful to have an orthorhombic (rectangular) box to work with. A
90     recent paper by Hirsch and Ojam\"{a}e describes how to create
91     proton-ordered bulk ice I$_\mathrm{h}$ in alternative orthorhombic
92 gezelter 3915 cells.\cite{Hirsch04}
93 gezelter 3914
94     We have using Hirsch and Ojam\"{a}e's structure 6 which is an
95     orthorhombic cell ($P2_12_12_1$) that produces a proton-ordered
96     version of ice Ih. Table \ref{tab:equiv} contains a mapping between
97     the Miller indices in the P$6_3/mmc$ crystal system and those in the
98     Hirsch and Ojam\"{a}e $P2_12_12_1$ system.
99    
100     \begin{wraptable}{r}{3.5in}
101     \begin{tabular}{|ccc|} \hline
102     & hexagonal & orthorhombic \\
103     & ($P6_3/mmc$) & ($P2_12_12_1$) \\
104     crystal face & Miller indices & equivalent \\ \hline
105     basal & $\{0~0~0~1\}$ & $\{0~0~1\}$ \\
106     prism & $\{1~0~\bar{1}~0\}$ & $\{1~0~0\}$ \\
107     secondary prism & $\{1~1~\bar{2}~0\}$ & $\{1~3~0\}$ \\
108     pryamidal & $\{2~0~\bar{2}~1\}$ & $\{2~0~1\}$ \\ \hline
109     \end{tabular}
110     \end{wraptable}
111    
112     Structure 6 from the Hirsch and Ojam\"{a}e paper has lattice
113     parameters $a = 4.49225$, $b = 7.78080$, $c = 7.33581$ and two water
114     molecules whose atoms reside at the following fractional coordinates:
115    
116     \begin{wraptable}{r}{3.25in}
117     \begin{tabular}{|ccccc|} \hline
118     atom label & type & x & y & z \\ \hline
119     O$_{a}$ & O & 0.75 & 0.1667 & 0.4375 \\
120     H$_{1a}$ & H & 0.5735 & 0.2202 & 0.4836 \\
121     H$_{2a}$ & H & 0.7420 & 0.0517 & 0.4836 \\
122     O$_{b}$ & O & 0.25 & 0.6667 & 0.4375 \\
123     H$_{1b}$ & H & 0.2580 & 0.6693 & 0.3071 \\
124     H$_{2b}$ & H & 0.4265 & 0.7255 & 0.4756 \\ \hline
125     \end{tabular}
126     \end{wraptable}
127    
128     To construct the basal and prismatic interfaces, the crystallographic
129     coordinates above were used to construct an orthorhombic unit cell
130     which was then replicated in all three dimensions yielding a
131     proton-ordered block of ice I$_{h}$. To expose the desired face, the
132     orthorhombic representation was then cut along the ($001$) or ($100$)
133     planes for the basal and prismatic faces respectively. The resulting
134     block was rotated so that the exposed faces were aligned with the $z$
135     axis normal to the exposed face. The block was then cut along two
136     perpendicular directions in a way that allowed for perfect periodic
137     replication in the $x$ and $y$ axes, creating a slab with either the
138     basal or prismatic faces exposed along the $z$ axis. The slab was
139     then replicated in the $x$ and $y$ dimensions until a desired sample
140     size was obtained.
141    
142     Although experimental solid/liquid coexistant temperature under normal
143     pressure are close to 273K, Haymet \emph{et al.} have done extensive
144     work on characterizing the ice/water
145     interface.\cite{Karim88,Karim90,Hayward01,Bryk02,Hayward02} They have
146     found for the SPC/E water model,\cite{Berendsen87} which is also used
147     in this study, the ice/water interface is most stable at
148     225$\pm$5K.\cite{Bryk02} To create a ice / water interface, a box of
149     liquid water that had the same dimensions in $x$ and $y$ was
150     equilibrated at 225 K and 1 atm of pressure in the NPAT ensemble (with
151     the $z$ axis allowed to fluctuate to equilibrate to the correct
152     pressure). The liquid and solid systems were combined by carving out
153     any water molecule from the liquid simulation cell that was within 3
154     \AA\ of any atom in the ice slab.
155    
156     Molecular translation and orientational restraints were applied in the
157     early stages of equilibration to prevent melting of the ice slab.
158     These restraints were removed during NVT equilibration, well before
159     data collection was carried out.
160    
161 gezelter 3918 \subsection{Shearing ice / water interfaces without bulk melting}
162    
163     As one drags a solid through a liquid, there will be frictional
164     heating that will act to melt the interface. To study the frictional
165     behavior of the interface without causing the interface to melt, it is
166     necessary to apply a weak thermal gradient along with the momentum
167     gradient. This can be accomplished with of the newly-developed
168     approaches to reverse non-equilibrium molecular dynamics (RNEMD). The
169     velocity shearing and scaling (VSS) variant of RNEMD utilizes a series
170     of simultaneous velocity exchanges between two regions within the
171     simulation cell.\cite{Kuang12} One of these regions is centered within
172     the ice slab, while the other is centrally located in the liquid phase
173     region. VSS-RNEMD provides a set of conservation constraints for
174     simultaneously creating either a momentum flux or a thermal flux (or
175     both) between the two slabs. Satisfying the constraint equations
176     ensures that the new configurations are sampled from the same NVE
177     ensemble as previously.
178    
179     The VSS moves are applied periodically to scale and shift the particle
180     velocities ($\mathbf{v}_i$ and $\mathbf{v}_j$) in two slabs ($H$ and
181     $C$) which are separated by half of the simulation box,
182     \begin{displaymath}
183     \begin{array}{rclcl}
184    
185     & \underline{\mathrm{shearing}} & &
186     \underline{~~~~~~~~~~~~\mathrm{scaling}~~~~~~~~~~~~} \\
187     \mathbf{v}_i \leftarrow &
188     \mathbf{a}_c\ & + & c\cdot\left(\mathbf{v}_i - \langle\mathbf{v}_c
189     \rangle\right) + \langle\mathbf{v}_c\rangle \\
190     \mathbf{v}_j \leftarrow &
191     \mathbf{a}_h & + & h\cdot\left(\mathbf{v}_j - \langle\mathbf{v}_h
192     \rangle\right) + \langle\mathbf{v}_h\rangle .
193    
194     \end{array}
195     \end{displaymath}
196     Here $\langle\mathbf{v}_c\rangle$ and $\langle\mathbf{v}_h\rangle$ are
197     the center of mass velocities in the $C$ and $H$ slabs, respectively.
198     Within the two slabs, particles receive incremental changes or a
199     ``shear'' to their velocities. The amount of shear is governed by the
200     imposed momentum flux, $\mathbf{j}_z(\mathbf{p})$
201     \begin{eqnarray}
202     \mathbf{a}_c & = & - \mathbf{j}_z(\mathbf{p}) \Delta t / M_c \label{vss1}\\
203     \mathbf{a}_h & = & + \mathbf{j}_z(\mathbf{p}) \Delta t / M_h \label{vss2}
204     \end{eqnarray}
205     where $M_{\{c,h\}}$ is the total mass of particles within each of the
206     slabs and $\Delta t$ is the interval between two separate operations.
207    
208     To simultaneously impose a thermal flux ($J_z$) between the slabs we
209     use energy conservation constraints,
210     \begin{eqnarray}
211     K_c - J_z\Delta t & = & c^2 (K_c - \frac{1}{2}M_c \langle\mathbf{v}_c
212     \rangle^2) + \frac{1}{2}M_c (\langle \mathbf{v}_c \rangle + \mathbf{a}_c)^2 \label{vss3}\\
213     K_h + J_z\Delta t & = & h^2 (K_h - \frac{1}{2}M_h \langle\mathbf{v}_h
214     \rangle^2) + \frac{1}{2}M_h (\langle \mathbf{v}_h \rangle +
215     \mathbf{a}_h)^2 \label{vss4}.
216     \label{constraint}
217     \end{eqnarray}
218     Simultaneous solution of these quadratic formulae for the scaling
219     coefficients, $c$ and $h$, will ensure that the simulation samples from
220     the original microcanonical (NVE) ensemble. Here $K_{\{c,h\}}$ is the
221     instantaneous translational kinetic energy of each slab. At each time
222     interval, it is a simple matter to solve for $c$, $h$, $\mathbf{a}_c$,
223     and $\mathbf{a}_h$, subject to the imposed momentum flux,
224     $j_z(\mathbf{p})$, and thermal flux, $J_z$, values. Since the VSS
225     operations do not change the kinetic energy due to orientational
226     degrees of freedom or the potential energy of a system, configurations
227     after the VSS move have exactly the same energy (and linear
228     momentum) as before the move.
229    
230     As the simulation progresses, the VSS moves are performed on a regular
231     basis, and the system develops a thermal and/or velocity gradient in
232     response to the applied flux. In a bulk material it is quite simple
233     to use the slope of the temperature or velocity gradients to obtain
234     the thermal conductivity or shear viscosity.
235    
236     The VSS-RNEMD approach is versatile in that it may be used to
237     implement thermal and shear transport simultaneously. Perturbations
238     of velocities away from the ideal Maxwell-Boltzmann distributions are
239     minimal, as is thermal anisotropy. This ability to generate
240     simultaneous thermal and shear fluxes has been previously utilized to
241     map out the shear viscosity of SPC/E water over a wide range of
242     temperatures (90~K) with a single 1 ns simulation.\cite{Kuang12}
243    
244     Here we are using this method primarily to generate a shear between
245     the ice slab and the liquid phase, while using a weak thermal gradient
246     to maintaining the interface at the 225K target value. This will
247     insure minimal melting of the bulk ice phase and allows us to control
248     the exact temperature of the interface.
249    
250 gezelter 3897 \subsection{Computational Details}
251 gezelter 3918 All simulations were performed using OpenMD with a time step of 2 fs,
252     and periodic boundary conditions in all three dimensions. The systems
253     were divided into 100 artificial bins along the $z$-axis for the
254     VSS-RNEMD moves, which were attempted every 50 fs. The gradients were
255     allowed to develop for 1 ns before data collection was began. Once
256     established, snapshots of the system were taken every 1 ps, and the
257     average velocities and densities of each bin were accumulated every
258     attempted VSS-RNEMD move.
259 gezelter 3897
260     %A paragraph on the equilibration procedure of the system? Shenyu did some amount of equilibration to the files and then I was handed them. I performed 5 ns of NVT at 225K for both systems, then 5 ns of NVE at 225K for both systems, with no gradients imposed.
261     %For the basal, once the thermal gradient was found which gave me the interfacial temperature I wanted (-2.0E-6 kcal/mol/A^2/fs), I equilibrated the file for 5 ns letting this gradient stabilize. Then I continued to use this thermal gradient as I imposed momentum gradients and watched the response of the interface.
262     %For the prismatic, a gradient was not found that would give me the interfacial temperature I desired, so while imposing a thermal gradient that had the interface at 220K, I raised the temperature of the system to 230K. This resulted in a thermal gradient which gave my interface at 225K, equilibrated for ins NVT, then ins NVE while this gradient was still imposed, then I began dragging.
263     %I have run each system for 1 ns under PTgrads to allow them to develop, then ran each system for an additional 2 ns in segments of 0.5 ns in order to calculate statistics of the calculated values.
264    
265     \subsection{Measuring the Width of the Interface}
266 gezelter 3918 In order to characterize the ice/water interface, the local
267     tetrahedral order parameter as described by Kumar\cite{Kumar09} and
268     Errington\cite{Errington01} was used. The local tetrahedral order
269     parameter, $q$, is given by
270 gezelter 3897 \begin{equation}
271     q_{k} \equiv 1 -\frac{3}{8}\sum_{i=1}^{3} \sum_{j=i+1}^{4} \Bigg[\cos\psi_{ikj}+\frac{1}{3}\Bigg]^2
272     \end{equation}
273 plouden 3909 where $\psi_{ikj}$ is the angle formed by the oxygen sites on molecule $k$, and the oxygen site on its two closest neighbors, molecules $i$ and $j$. The local tetrahedral order parameter function has a range of (0,1), where the larger the value $q$ has the more tetrahedral the ordering of the local environment is. A $q$ value of one describes a perfectly tetrahedral environment relative to it and its four nearest neighbors, and the parameter's value decreases as the local ordering becomes less tetrahedral.
274    
275     %If the central water molecule has a perfect tetrahedral geometry with its four nearest neighbors, the parameter goes to one, and decreases to zero as the geometry deviates from the ideal configuration.
276    
277 gezelter 3897 The system was divided into 100 bins along the $z$-axis, and a $q$ value was determined for each snapshot of the system for each bin. The $q$ values for each bin were then averaged to give an average tetrahedrally profile of the system about the $z$- axis. The profile was then fit with a hyperbolic tangent function given by
278     \begin{equation}
279     q_{z}=q_{liq}+\frac{q_{ice}-q_{liq}}{2}(\tanh(\alpha(z-I_{L,m}))-\tanh(\alpha(z-I_{R,m})))
280     \end{equation}
281     where $q_{liq}$ and $q_{ice}$ are fitting parameters for the local tetrahedral order parameter for the liquid and ice, $\alpha$ is proportional to the inverse of the width of the interface, and $I_{L,m}$ and $I_{R,m}$ are the midpoints of the left and right interface. During the simulations where a kinetic energy flux was imposed, there was found to be a thermal influence in the liquid phase region of the tetrahedrally profile due to the thermal gradient developed in the system. To maximize the fit of the interface, another term was added to the hyperbolic tangent fitting function,
282     \begin{equation}
283     q_{z}=q_{liq}+\frac{q_{ice}-q_{liq}}{2}(\tanh(\alpha(z-I_{L,m}))-\tanh(\alpha(z-I_{R,m})))+\beta|(z-z_{mid})|
284     \end{equation}
285     where $\beta$ is a fitting parameter and $z_{mid}$ is the midpoint of the z dimension of the simulation box.
286    
287    
288     \section{Results and discussion}
289 plouden 3898
290     %Images to include: 3-long comic strip style of <Vx>, T, q_z as a function of z for the basal and prismatic faces. q_z by z with fit for basal and prismatic. interface width as a function of deltaVx (shear rate) with basal and prismatic on the same plot, error bars in the x and y. <Vx> by flux with basal and prismatic on same graph, back out slope from xmgr and error in slope to get lambda, friction coefficient of interface.
291    
292 plouden 3909 In Figures \ref{fig:bComic} and \ref{fig:pComic} we see the $z$-dimensional profiles for several parameters for the basal and prismatic systems respectively. In panel (a) of the figures we see the tetrahedrality profile of the systems (black circles). In the liquid region of the system, the local tetrahedral order parameter is approximately 0.75. In the solid region, the parameter is approximately 0.94, indicating a more tetrahedral structure of the water molecules. The hyperbolic tangent function used to fit the tetrahedrality profiles can be found in red and the verticle dotted lines denote the midpoint of the interfaces. The weak thermal gradient applied to the systems in order to keep the interface at a stable temperature, 225$\pm$5K, can be seen in panel (b). Lastly, the velocity gradient across the systems can be seen in panel (c). From panel (c), we can see liquid phase water molecules 5 to 12 \AA\ from the midpoint of the basal and prismatic interfaces are being dragged along with the ice block. This indicates that the shearing of ice water is in the stick boundary condition.
293 plouden 3904
294 gezelter 3914 \begin{figure}
295     \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{bComicStrip}
296     \caption{\label{fig:bComic} The basal system: (a) The local tetrahedral order parameter,$q$, (black circles) fit by a hyperbolic tangent (red line), (b) the thermal gradient imposed on the system to maintain a stable interfacial temperature, and (c) the velocity gradient imposed on the system. The verticle dotted lines indicate the midpoint of the interfaces.}
297     \end{figure}
298 plouden 3904
299 gezelter 3914 %(a) The local tetrahedral order parameter across the z-dimension of the system (black circles) fit by a hyperbolic tangent (red line). (b) The thermal gradient imposed on the system to maintain a stable interfacial temperature. (c) The velocity gradient imposed on the system. The verticle dotted lines indicate the midpoint of the interfaces.
300    
301     \begin{figure}
302     \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{pComicStrip}
303     \caption{\label{fig:pComic} The prismatic system: (a) The local tetrahedral order parameter,$q$, (black circles) fit by a hyperbolic tangent (red line), (b) the thermal gradient imposed on the system to maintain a stable interfacial temperature, and (c) the velocity gradient imposed on the system.The verticle dotted lines indicate the midpoint of the interfaces.}
304     \end{figure}
305    
306    
307 gezelter 3897 \subsection{Interfacial Width}
308 plouden 3909 %For the basal and prismatic systems, the ice blocks were sheared through the water at varying rates while an imposed thermal gradient kept the interface at the stable temperature range as described by Byrk and Haymet.
309     We found the interfacial width for the basal and prismatic systems to be 3.2$\pm$0.4 \AA\ and 3.6$\pm$0.2 \AA\ with no applied momentum flux. Over the range of shear rates investigated, 0.6$\pm$0.3 ms\textsuperscript{-1} to 5.3$\pm$0.5 ms\textsuperscript{-1} for the basal system and 0.9$\pm$0.2 ms\textsuperscript{-1} to 4.5$\pm$0.1 ms\textsuperscript{-1}, there was no appreciable change in the interface width found. The calculated values for the interfacial width over all shear rates investigated contained the control values within their error bars.
310 gezelter 3897
311     \subsection{Coefficient of Friction of the Interface}
312 gezelter 3915 As the ice is sheared through the liquid, there will be a friction between the ice and the interface. Balasubramanian has shown how to calculate the coefficient of friction for a solid-liquid interface. \cite{Balasubramanian99}
313 gezelter 3897 \begin{equation}
314     %<F_{x}^{w}>_{NE}(t)=-S\lambda_{wall}v_{x}(y_{wall})
315     \langle F_{x}^{w}\rangle(t)=-S\lambda_{wall}v_{x}(y_{wall})
316     \end{equation}
317     In this equation, $F_{x}^{w}$ is the total force of all the atoms acting on the fluid, $S$ is the surface area the force is being applied upon, and $\lambda_{wall}$ is the coefficient of friction of the interface. Since the imposed momentum flux, $J_{z}(p_{x})$, is known in the VSS-RNEMD simulations, and the $wall$ is the ice block in our simulations, the above equation can be rewritten as
318     \begin{equation}
319     J_{z}(p_{x})=-\lambda_{ice}v_{x}(y_{ice}).
320     \end{equation}
321    
322 plouden 3909 In Figure \ref{fig:CoeffFric}, the average velocity of the ice is plotted against the imposed momentum flux for the basal (black circles) and prismatic (red circles) systems. From the equation above, the slope of the linear fit of the data is $\lambda_{wall}$. The coefficient of friction of the interface for the basal face was calculated to be 11.0 $\pm$ 0.4 \AA\textsuperscript{-2}fs\textsuperscript{-1}, and the $\lambda_{wall}$ for the prismatic face was determined to be 19.9, $\pm$ 0.5 \AA\textsuperscript{-2}fs\textsuperscript{-1}.
323 gezelter 3897
324 plouden 3904 %Ask dan about truncating versus rounding the values for lambda.
325 plouden 3907 %The coefficient of friction of the interface for the basal face was calculated to be 11.02808 $\pm$ 0.4489844 \AA^{-2}fs^{-1}, and the $\lambda_{wall}$ for the prismatic face was determined to be 19.95948, $\pm$ 0.5370894 \AA^{-2}fs^{-1}.
326 gezelter 3914 \begin{figure}
327     \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{CoeffFric}
328     \caption{\label{fig:CoeffFric} The average velocity of the ice for the basal (black circles) and prismatic (red circles) systems as a function off applied momentum flux. The slope of the fit line }
329     \end{figure}
330 plouden 3904
331 gezelter 3897 \section{Conclusion}
332 plouden 3909 Here we have simulated the basal and prismatic facets of an SPC/E model of the ice Ih / water interface. Using VSS-RNEMD, the ice was sheared relative to the liquid while imposed thermal gradients kept the interface at a stable temperature. Caculation of the local tetrahedrality order parameter has shown an appearant independence of the shear rate on the interfacial width. The coefficient of friction of the interface was also calculated for each of the facets. The $\lambda_{wall}$ for the basal face was calculated to be 11.0 $\pm$ 0.4 \AA\textsuperscript{-2}fs\textsuperscript{-1}, and 19.9, $\pm$ 0.5 \AA\textsuperscript{-2}fs\textsuperscript{-1} for the prismatic facet. For both facets, the shearing ice water was found to be in the no-slip boundary condition.
333 gezelter 3897
334 plouden 3909
335 gezelter 3914 \begin{acknowledgement}
336     Support for this project was provided by the National Science
337     Foundation under grant CHE-0848243. Computational time was provided
338     by the Center for Research Computing (CRC) at the University of
339     Notre Dame.
340     \end{acknowledgement}
341 gezelter 3897
342 gezelter 3914 \newpage
343     \bibstyle{achemso}
344 plouden 3909 \bibliography{iceWater}
345 gezelter 3897
346 gezelter 3914 \begin{tocentry}
347     \begin{wrapfigure}{l}{0.5\textwidth}
348     \begin{center}
349     \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{SystemImage.png}
350     \end{center}
351     \end{wrapfigure}
352     An image of our system.
353     \end{tocentry}
354 gezelter 3897
355 gezelter 3914 \end{document}
356 gezelter 3897
357 plouden 3904 % basal: slope=11.02808, error in slope = 0.4489844
358     %prismatic: slope = 19.95948, error in slope = 0.5370894