ViewVC Help
View File | Revision Log | Show Annotations | View Changeset | Root Listing
root/group/trunk/iceWater2/iceWater3.tex
(Generate patch)

Comparing trunk/iceWater2/iceWater3.tex (file contents):
Revision 4246 by plouden, Thu Dec 11 01:24:49 2014 UTC vs.
Revision 4247 by gezelter, Thu Dec 11 21:01:29 2014 UTC

# Line 13 | Line 13
13   \usepackage[version=3]{mhchem}
14   \usepackage[round,numbers,sort&compress]{natbib}
15   \usepackage{fixltx2e}
16 + \usepackage{booktabs}
17 + \usepackage{multirow}
18   \bibpunct{(}{)}{,}{n}{,}{,}
19   \bibliographystyle{pnas2011}
20  
# Line 177 | Line 179 | zero-dipole crystal of ice-I$_\mathrm{h}$ with exposed
179   \subsection{Construction of the Ice / Water Interfaces}
180   To construct the four interfacial ice/water systems, a proton-ordered,
181   zero-dipole crystal of ice-I$_\mathrm{h}$ with exposed strips of
182 < H-atoms and lone pairs was constructed using Structure 6 of Hirsch and
183 < Ojam\"{a}e's set of orthorhombic representations for
184 < ice-I$_{h}$.\cite{Hirsch04} This crystal structure was cleaved along
185 < the four different facets being studied.  The exposed face was
186 < reoriented normal to the $z$-axis of the simulation cell, and the
187 < structures were and extended to form large exposed facets in
188 < rectangular box geometries.  Liquid water boxes were created with
189 < identical dimensions (in $x$ and $y$) as the ice, and a $z$ dimension
190 < of three times that of the ice block, and a density corresponding to
191 < $\sim$ 1 g / cm$^3$.  Each of the ice slabs and water boxes were
192 < independently equilibrated, and the resulting systems were merged by
193 < carving out any liquid water molecules within 3 \AA\ of any atoms in
194 < the ice slabs.  Each of the combined ice/water systems were then
195 < equilibrated at 225K, which is the liquid-ice coexistence temperature
196 < for SPC/E water.\cite{Bryk02} Ref. \citealp{Louden13} contains a more
197 < detailed explanation of the construction of ice/water interfaces. The
198 < resulting dimensions, number of ice, and liquid water molecules
199 < contained in each of these systems can be seen in Table
182 > H-atoms was created using Structure 6 of Hirsch and Ojam\"{a}e's set
183 > of orthorhombic representations for ice-I$_{h}$~\cite{Hirsch04}. This
184 > crystal structure was cleaved along the four different facets.  The
185 > exposed face was reoriented normal to the $z$-axis of the simulation
186 > cell, and the structures were and extended to form large exposed
187 > facets in rectangular box geometries.  Liquid water boxes were created
188 > with identical dimensions (in $x$ and $y$) as the ice, with a $z$
189 > dimension of three times that of the ice block, and a density
190 > corresponding to 1 g / cm$^3$.  Each of the ice slabs and water boxes
191 > were independently equilibrated at a pressure of 1 atm, and the
192 > resulting systems were merged by carving out any liquid water
193 > molecules within 3 \AA\ of any atoms in the ice slabs.  Each of the
194 > combined ice/water systems were then equilibrated at 225K, which is
195 > the liquid-ice coexistence temperature for SPC/E
196 > water~\cite{Bryk02}. Ref. \citealp{Louden13} contains a more detailed
197 > explanation of the construction of similar ice/water interfaces. The
198 > resulting dimensions as well as the number of ice and liquid water
199 > molecules contained in each of these systems are shown in Table
200   \ref{tab:method}.
201  
202 < Mostly avoids spurious crystalline morphologies like ice-i and ice-B.  
201 <
202 < The SPC/E water model\cite{Berendsen87} has been extensively
202 > The SPC/E water model~\cite{Berendsen87} has been extensively
203   characterized over a wide range of liquid
204 < conditions,\cite{Arbuckle02, Kuang12} and its phase diagram has been well studied.\cite{Baez95,Bryk04b,Sanz04b}  
205 < The free energies \cite{Baez95} and melting points
206 < \cite{Baez95,Arbuckle02,Gay02,Bryk02,Bryk04b,Sanz04b,Fernandez06,Abascal07,Vrbka07}
207 < of various crystal structures have also been calculated.
208 < Haymet et al. have studied the quiescent Ice-I$_\mathrm{h}$/water
209 < interface using the SPC/E water model, and has seen good agreement for
210 < structural and dynamic measurements of the interfacial width when compared with more
211 < expensive water models. For these reasons, the SPC/E water
212 < model was used in this study.
213 <
214 < \subsection{Shearing simulations (interfaces in bulk water)}
215 < % Should we mention number of runs, sim times, etc. ?
216 < To perform the shearing simulations, the velocity shearing and scaling
217 < varient of reverse nonequilibrium molecular dynamics (VSS-RNEMD) was
218 < conducted. This method performs a series of simultaneous velocity
219 < exchanges between two regions of the simulation cell, to
220 < simultaneously create a velocity and temperature gradient. The thermal
221 < gradient is necessary when performing shearing simulations as to
222 < prevent frictional heating from the shear from melting the
223 < interface. For more details on the VSS-RNEMD method please refer to a
224 < pervious paper\cite{Louden13}.
225 <
226 < The computational details performed here were equivalent to those reported
227 < in a previous publication\cite{Louden13}, with the following changes.
228 < VSS-RNEMD moves were attempted every 2 fs instead of every 50 fs. This was done to minimize
229 < the magnitude of each individual VSS-RNEMD perturbation to the system.
230 < All pyramidal simulations were performed under the canonical (NVT) ensamble
231 < except those during which configurations were accumulated for the orientational correlation
232 < function, which were performed under the microcanonical (NVE) ensamble. All
233 < secondary prismatic simulations were performed under the NVE ensamble.
204 > conditions,\cite{Arbuckle02,Kuang12} and its phase diagram has been
205 > well studied.\cite{Baez95,Bryk04b,Sanz04b,Fennell:2005fk} With longer
206 > cutoff radii and careful treatment of electrostatics, SPC/E mostly
207 > avoids metastable crystalline morphologies like
208 > ice-\textit{i}~\cite{Fennell:2005fk} and ice-B~\cite{Baez95}.  The
209 > free energies and melting points
210 > \cite{Baez95,Arbuckle02,Gay02,Bryk02,Bryk04b,Sanz04b,Fennell:2005fk,Fernandez06,Abascal07,Vrbka07}
211 > of various other crystalline polymorphs have also been calculated.
212 > Haymet \textit{et al.} have studied quiescent Ice-I$_\mathrm{h}$/water
213 > interfaces using the SPC/E water model, and have seen structural and
214 > dynamic measurements of the interfacial width that agree well with
215 > more expensive water models, although the coexistence temperature for
216 > SPC/E is still well below the experimental melting point of real
217 > water~\cite{Bryk02}. Given the extensive data and speed of this model,
218 > it is a reasonable choice even though the temperatures required are
219 > somewhat lower than real ice / water interfaces.
220  
221 < \subsection{Droplet simulations}
222 < Ice interfaces with a thickness of $\sim 20 \AA$ were created as
221 > \subsection{Droplet Simulations}
222 > Ice interfaces with a thickness of $\sim$~20~\AA\ were created as
223   described above, but were not solvated in a liquid box. The crystals
224   were then replicated along the $x$ and $y$ axes (parallel to the
225 < surface) until a large surface had been created.  The sizes and
226 < numbers of molecules in each of the surfaces is given in Table
227 < \ref{tab:ice_sheets}.  Weak translational restraining potentials with
228 < spring constants of 1.5 to 4.0 UNITS were applied to the center of mass of each
229 < molecule in order to prevent surface melting, although the molecules
230 < were allowed to reorient freely. A water doplet containing 2048 SPC/E
231 < molecules was created separately. Droplets of this size can produce
232 < agreement with the Young contact angle extrapolated to an infinite
233 < drop size\cite{Daub10}. The surfaces and droplet were independently
234 < equilibrated to 225 K, at which time the droplet was placed 3-5 \AA\
235 < above the surface.  Five statistically independent simulations were
236 < carried out for each facet, and the droplet was placed at unique $x$
237 < and $y$ locations for each of these simulations.  Each simulation was
238 < 5 ns in length and conducted in the microcanonical (NVE) ensemble.
225 > surface) until a large surface ($>$ 126 nm\textsuperscript{2}) had
226 > been created.  The sizes and numbers of molecules in each of the
227 > surfaces is given in Table \ref{tab:method}.  Weak translational
228 > restraining potentials with spring constants of 1.5-4.0~$\mathrm{kcal\
229 >  mol}^{-1}\mathrm{~\AA}^{-2}$ were applied to the centers of mass of
230 > each molecule in order to prevent surface melting, although the
231 > molecules were allowed to reorient freely. A water doplet containing
232 > 2048 SPC/E molecules was created separately. Droplets of this size can
233 > produce agreement with the Young contact angle extrapolated to an
234 > infinite drop size~\cite{Daub10}. The surfaces and droplet were
235 > independently equilibrated to 225 K, at which time the droplet was
236 > placed 3-5~\AA\ above the surface.  Five statistically independent
237 > simulations were carried out for each facet, and the droplet was
238 > placed at unique $x$ and $y$ locations for each of these simulations.
239 > Each simulation was 5~ns in length and was conducted in the
240 > microcanonical (NVE) ensemble.  Representative configurations for the
241 > droplet on the prismatic facet are shown in figure \ref{fig:Droplet}.
242  
243 < \section{Results and discussion}
244 < \subsection{Dynamic water contact angle}
243 >
244 > \subsection{Shearing Simulations (Interfaces in Bulk Water)}
245 >
246 > To perform the shearing simulations, the velocity shearing and scaling
247 > variant of reverse non-equilibrium molecular dynamics (VSS-RNEMD) was
248 > employed \cite{Kuang12}. This method performs a series of simultaneous
249 > non-equilibrium exchanges of linear momentum and kinetic energy
250 > between two physically-separated regions of the simulation cell.  The
251 > system responds to this unphysical flux with velocity and temperature
252 > gradients.  When VSS-RNEMD is applied to bulk liquids, transport
253 > properties like the thermal conductivity and the shear viscosity are
254 > easily extracted assuming a linear response between the flux and the
255 > gradient.  At the interfaces between dissimilar materials, the same
256 > method can be used to extract \textit{interfacial} transport
257 > properties (e.g. the interfacial thermal conductance and the
258 > hydrodynamic slip length).
259 >
260 > The kinetic energy flux (producing a thermal gradient) is necessary
261 > when performing shearing simulations at the ice-water interface in
262 > order to prevent the frictional heating due to the shear from melting
263 > the interface. Reference \citealp{Louden13} provides more details on
264 > the VSS-RNEMD method as applied to ice-water interfaces.  A
265 > representative configuration of the solvated prismatic facet being
266 > sheared through liquid water is shown in figure \ref{fig:Shearing}.
267 >
268 > In the results discussed below, the exchanges between the two regions
269 > were carried out every 2 fs (e.g. every time step). This was done to
270 > minimize the magnitude of each individual momentum exchange.  Because
271 > individual VSS-RNEMD exchanges conserve both total energy and linear
272 > momentum, the method can be ``bolted-on'' to simulations in any
273 > ensemble.  The simulations of the pyramidal interface were performed
274 > under the canonical (NVT) ensemble.  When time correlation functions
275 > were computed (see section \ref{sec:orient}), these simulations were
276 > done in the microcanonical (NVE) ensemble.  All simulations of the
277 > other interfaces were done in the microcanonical ensemble.  
278 >
279 > \section{Results}
280 > \subsection{Ice - Water Contact Angles}
281  
282   To determine the extent of wetting for each of the four crystal
283 < facets, water contact angle simuations were performed. Contact angles
284 < were obtained from these simulations by two methods. In the first
285 < method, the contact angle was obtained from the $z$-center of mass
286 < ($z_{c.m.}$) of the water droplet as described by Hautman and Klein\cite{Hautman91}
287 < and utilized by Hirvi and Pakkanen in their investigation of water
288 < droplets on polyethylene and poly(vinyl chloride)
289 < surface\cite{Hirvi06}. At each snapshot of the simulation, the contact
290 < angle, $\theta$, was found by
283 > facets, contact angles for liquid droplets on the ice surfaces were
284 > computed using two methods.  In the first method, the droplet is
285 > assumed to form a spherical cap, and the contact angle is estimated
286 > from the $z$-axis location of the droplet's center of mass
287 > ($z_\mathrm{cm}$).  This procedure was first described by Hautman and
288 > Klein~\cite{Hautman91}, and was utilized by Hirvi and Pakkanen in
289 > their investigation of water droplets on polyethylene and poly(vinyl
290 > chloride) surfaces~\cite{Hirvi06}. For each stored configuration, the
291 > contact angle, $\theta$, was found by inverting the expression for the
292 > location of the droplet center of mass,
293   \begin{equation}\label{contact_1}
294 < \langle z_{c.m.}\rangle = 2^{-4/3}R_{0}\bigg(\frac{1-cos\theta}{2+cos\theta}\bigg)^{1/3}\frac{3+cos\theta}{2+cos\theta} ,
294 > \langle z_\mathrm{cm}\rangle = 2^{-4/3}R_{0}\bigg(\frac{1-cos\theta}{2+cos\theta}\bigg)^{1/3}\frac{3+cos\theta}{2+cos\theta} ,
295   \end{equation}
296 < where $R_{0}$ is the radius of the free water droplet. In the second
270 < method, the contact angle was obtained from fitting the droplet's
271 < $z$-profile after radial averaging to a
272 < circle as described by Ruijter, Blake, and
273 < Coninck\cite{Ruijter99}. At each snapshot of the simulation the water droplet was
274 < broken into bins, and the location of bin containing half-bulk density was
275 < stored. Due to fluctuations close to the ice, all bins located within
276 < 2.0 \AA\ of the ice were discarded. The remaining stored bins were
277 < then fit by a circle, whose tangential intersection with the ice plane could
278 < be used to calculate the water
279 < contact angle. These results proved noisey and unreliable when
280 < compared with the first method, for these purposes we omit the data
281 < from the second method.
296 > where $R_{0}$ is the radius of the free water droplet.
297  
298 < The resulting water contact angle profiles generated by the first method
299 < had an initial value of 180$^{o}$, and decayed over time. Each of
300 < these profiles were fit to a biexponential decay, with a short time
301 < piece to account for the water droplet initially adhering to the
302 < surface, a long time piece describing the spreading of the droplet
303 < over the surface, and an added constant to capture the infinite
304 < decay of the contact angle. We have found that the rate of the water
305 < droplet spreading across all four crystal facets to be $\approx$ 0.7
306 < ns$^{-1}$. However, the basal and pyramidal facets
307 < had an infinite decay value for $\theta$ of $\approx$ 35$^{o}$, while
308 < prismatic and secondary prismatic had values for $\theta$ near
309 < 43$^{o}$ as seen in Table \ref{tab:kappa}. These results indicate that the
310 < basal and pyramidal facets are more hydrophilic than the prismatic and
311 < secondary prismatic, and surprisingly, that the differential hydrophilicities of
312 < the crystal facets is not reflected in the spreading rate of the droplet.
298 > The second method for obtaining the contact angle was described by
299 > Ruijter, Blake, and Coninck~\cite{Ruijter99}.  This method uses a
300 > cylindrical averaging of the droplet's density profile.  A threshold
301 > density of 0.5 g cm\textsuperscript{-3} is used to estimate the
302 > location of the edge of the droplet.  The $r$ and $z$-dependence of
303 > the droplet's edge is then fit to a circle, and the contact angle is
304 > computed from the intersection of the fit circle with the $z$-axis
305 > location of the solid surface.  Again, for each stored configuration,
306 > the density profile in a set of annular shells was computed. Due to
307 > large density fluctuations close to the ice, all shells located within
308 > 2 \AA\ of the ice surface were left out of the circular fits.  The
309 > height of the solid surface ($z_\mathrm{suface}$) along with the best
310 > fitting central height ($z_\mathrm{center}$) and radius
311 > ($r_\mathrm{droplet}$) of the droplet can then be used to compute the
312 > contact angle,
313 > \begin{equation}
314 > \theta =  90 + \frac{180}{\pi} \sin^{-1}\left(\frac{z_\mathrm{center} -
315 >  z_\mathrm{surface}}{r_\mathrm{droplet}} \right).
316 > \end{equation}
317 > Both methods provided similar estimates of the dynamic contact angle,
318 > although the first method is significantly less prone to noise, and
319 > is the method used to report contact angles below.
320 >
321 > Because the initial droplet was placed above the surface, the initial
322 > value of 180$^{\circ}$ decayed over time.  See fig.  XXXX.  Each of
323 > these profiles were fit to a biexponential decay, with a short-time
324 > contribution that describes the initial contact with the surface, a
325 > long time contribution that describes the spread of the droplet over
326 > the surface, and a constant to capture the infinite-time estimate of
327 > the equilibrium contact angle,
328 > \begin{equation}
329 > \theta(t) = \theta_\infty +  (180-\theta_\infty) \left[ a e^{-k_\mathrm{contact} t} +
330 >  (1-a) e^{-k_\mathrm{spread} t}  \right]
331 > \end{equation}
332 >
333 > We have found that the rate of the water droplet spreading across all
334 > four crystal facets to be $k_\mathrm{spread} \approx$ 0.7
335 > ns$^{-1}$. However, the basal and pyramidal facets had estimated
336 > equilibrium contact angles of $\theta_\infty \approx$ 35$^{o}$, while
337 > prismatic and secondary prismatic had values for $\theta_\infty$ near
338 > 43$^{o}$ as seen in Table \ref{tab:kappa}.
339 >
340 > These results indicate that the basal and pyramidal facets are
341 > somewhat more hydrophilic than the prismatic and secondary prism
342 > facets, and surprisingly, that the differential hydrophilicities of
343 > the crystal facets is not reflected in the spreading rate of the
344 > droplet.
345 >
346   % This is in good agreement with our calculations of friction
347   % coefficients, in which the basal
348   % and pyramidal had a higher coefficient of kinetic friction than the
# Line 434 | Line 482 | by the movement of water over the ice.
482   by the movement of water over the ice.
483  
484  
485 < \subsection{Orientational dynamics}
485 > \subsection{Orientational dynamics \label{sec:orient}}
486   %Should we include the math here?
487   The orientational time correlation function,
488   \begin{equation}\label{C(t)1}
# Line 721 | Line 769 | hydrophilicities.
769  
770  
771   \end{article}
772 +
773 + \begin{figure}
774 + \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{Droplet}
775 + \caption{\label{fig:Droplet} Computational model of a droplet of
776 +  liquid water spreading over the prismatic $\{1~0~\bar{1}~0\}$ facet
777 +  of ice, before (left) and 5 ns after (right) being introduced to the
778 +  surface.  The contact angle ($\theta$) shrinks as the simulation
779 +  proceeds, and the long-time behavior of this angle is used to
780 +  estimate the hydrophilicity of the facet.}
781 + \end{figure}
782  
783   \begin{figure}
784 + \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{ }
785 + \caption{\label{fig:Shearing} Computational model of a slab of ice
786 +  being sheared through liquid water (above and below).  In this
787 +  figure, the ice is presenting the prismatic $\{1~0~\bar{1}~0\}$
788 +  facet towards the liquid phase.}
789 + \end{figure}
790 +
791 +
792 + \begin{figure}
793   \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{Pyr_comic_strip}
794   \caption{\label{fig:pyrComic} The pyramidal interface with a shear
795   rate of 3.8 ms\textsuperscript{-1}. Lower panel: the local tetrahedral order
# Line 765 | Line 832 | prismatic face. Panel descriptions match those in \ref
832  
833   \begin{table}[h]
834   \centering
835 < \caption{Droplet and Shearing simulation parameters}
836 < \label{tab:method}
837 < \begin{tabular}{|cccc|ccc|} \hline
838 < & \multicolumn{3}{c}{Droplet} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{Shearing}\\
839 < Interface & $N_{ice}$ & $N_{droplet}$ & Lx, Ly (\AA) &
840 < $N_{ice}$ & $N_{liquid}$ & Lx, Ly, Lz (\AA) \\ \hline
841 < Basal & 12960& 2048 & (134.70, 140.04) & 900 & 1846 & (23.87, 35.83, 98.64)\\
842 < Prismatic & 9900& 2048 & (110.04, 115.00) & 3000 & 5464 &
843 < (35.95, 35.65, 205.77)\\
844 < Pyramidal & 11136 & 2048& (143.75, 121.41) & 1216 & 2203 &
845 < (143.75, 121.41)\\
846 < Secondary Prismatic & 11520 & 2048 & (146.72, 124.48) & 3840 &
780 < 8176 & (71.87, 31.66, 161.55)\\
781 < \hline
835 > \caption{Sizes of the droplet and shearing simulations.  Cell
836 >  dimensions are measured in \AA. \label{tab:method}}
837 > \begin{tabular}{r|cccc|ccccc}
838 > \toprule
839 > \multirow{2}{*}{Interface} & \multicolumn{4}{c|}{Droplet} & \multicolumn{5}{c}{Shearing} \\
840 >  & $N_\mathrm{ice}$ & $N_\mathrm{droplet}$ & $L_x$ & $L_y$ & $N_\mathrm{ice}$ & $N_\mathrm{liquid}$ & $L_x$ & $L_y$ & $L_z$  \\
841 > \midrule
842 > Basal  $\{0001\}$                    & 12960 & 2048 & 134.70 & 140.04 & 900 & 1846  & 23.87 & 35.83 & 98.64  \\
843 > Pyramidal  $\{2~0~\bar{2}~1\}$       & 11136 & 2048 & 143.75 & 121.41 & 1216 & 2203 & 37.47 & 29.50 & 93.02  \\
844 > Prismatic  $\{1~0~\bar{1}~0\}$       &  9900 & 2048 & 110.04 & 115.00 & 3000 & 5464 & 35.95 & 35.65 & 205.77 \\
845 > Secondary Prism  $\{1~1~\bar{2}~0\}$ & 11520 & 2048 & 146.72 & 124.48 & 3840 & 8176 & 71.87 & 31.66 & 161.55 \\
846 > \bottomrule
847   \end{tabular}
848   \end{table}
849  
850  
851   \begin{table}[h]
852   \centering
853 < \caption{Phyiscal properties of the basal, prismatic, pyramidal, and secondary prismatic facets of Ice-I$_\mathrm{h}$}
854 < \label{tab:kappa}
855 < \begin{tabular}{|ccc|cccc|}  \hline
856 < & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Droplet} & \multicolumn{4}{c|}{Shearing}\\
857 < Interface & $\theta^{\circ}_{\infty}$  & $K_{spread} (ns^{-1})$  &
858 < $\kappa_{x}$  & $\kappa_{y}$ & d$_{q_{z}}$ (\AA) &  d$_{\tau}$ (\AA)  \\ \hline
859 < Basal & $34.1 \pm 0.9$ &$0.60 \pm 0.07$ & $5.9 \pm 0.3$&$6.5 \pm 0.8$
860 < & $3.2 \pm 0.4$ & $2.9$  \\
861 < Pyramidal & $35 \pm 3$ &  $0.7 \pm 0.1$ & $5.8 \pm 0.4$ & $6.1 \pm
862 < 0.5$ & $3.2 \pm 0.2$ & $2.7$ \\
863 < Prismatic & $45 \pm 3$ & $0.75 \pm 0.09$ & $3.0 \pm 0.2$ & $3.0 \pm
864 < 0.1$ & $3.6 \pm 0.2$ & $3.5$ \\
865 < Secondary Prismatic & $42 \pm 2$ & $0.69 \pm 0.03$ & $3.5 \pm 0.1$ &
866 < $3.3 \pm 0.2$ & $3.2 \pm 0.2$ & $3$ \\ \hline
853 > \caption{Structural and dynamic properties of the interfaces of Ice-I$_\mathrm{h}$
854 >  with water.  Liquid-solid friction coefficients ($\kappa_x$ and $\kappa_y$) are expressed in 10\textsuperscript{-4} amu
855 >  \AA\textsuperscript{-2} fs\textsuperscript{-1}. \label{tab:kappa}}
856 > \begin{tabular}{r|cc|cccc}  
857 > \toprule
858 > \multirow{2}{*}{Interface} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{Droplet} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{Shearing}\\
859 >  & $\theta_{\infty}$ ($^\circ$)  & $k_\mathrm{spread}$  (ns\textsuperscript{-1}) &
860 > $\kappa_{x}$  & $\kappa_{y}$ & $d_{q_{z}}$ (\AA) &  $d_{\tau}$ (\AA) \\
861 > \midrule
862 > Basal  $\{0001\}$                    & $34.1 \pm 0.9$ &$0.60 \pm 0.07$ & $5.9 \pm 0.3$ & $6.5 \pm 0.8$ & $3.2 \pm 0.4$ & $2.9$  \\
863 > Pyramidal  $\{2~0~\bar{2}~1\}$       & $35 \pm 3$ &  $0.7 \pm 0.1$ & $5.8 \pm 0.4$ & $6.1 \pm 0.5$ & $3.2 \pm 0.2$ & $2.7$ \\
864 > Prismatic  $\{1~0~\bar{1}~0\}$       & $45 \pm 3$ & $0.75 \pm 0.09$ & $3.0 \pm 0.2$ & $3.0 \pm 0.1$ & $3.6 \pm 0.2$ & $3.5$ \\
865 > Secondary Prism  $\{1~1~\bar{2}~0\}$ & $42 \pm 2$ & $0.69 \pm 0.03$ & $3.5 \pm 0.1$ & $3.3 \pm 0.2$ & $3.2 \pm 0.2$ & $3$ \\
866 > \bottomrule
867   \end{tabular}
868   \end{table}
869  

Diff Legend

Removed lines
+ Added lines
< Changed lines
> Changed lines