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

Comparing trunk/nanoglass/experimental.tex (file contents):
Revision 3213 by chuckv, Thu Sep 6 13:58:45 2007 UTC vs.
Revision 3256 by chuckv, Thu Oct 11 18:53:11 2007 UTC

# Line 1 | Line 1
1 < \input{header.tex}
2 < \section{Simulation Method} \label{sec:details} Several different potential models have been developed that reasonably describe interactions in transition metals. In particular, the Embedded Atom Model ({\sc eam})~\cite{PhysRevB.33.7983} and Sutton-Chen ({\sc sc})~\cite{Chen90} potential have been used to study a wide range of phenomena in both bulk materials and nanoparticles.\cite{Vardeman-II:2001jn,ShibataT._ja026764r} Both potentials are based on a model of a metal which treats the nuclei and core electrons as pseudo-atoms embedded in the electron density due to the valence electrons on all of the other atoms in the system. The {\sc sc} potential has a simple form that closely resembles that of the ubiquitous Lennard Jones potential,
1 > %!TEX root = /Users/charles/Desktop/nanoglass/nanoglass.tex
2 >
3 > \section{Computational Methodology}
4 > \label{sec:details}
5 >
6 > \subsection{Initial Geometries and Heating}
7 >
8 > Cu-core / Ag-shell and random alloy structures were constructed on an
9 > underlying FCC lattice (4.09 {\AA}) at the bulk eutectic composition
10 > $\mathrm{Ag}_6\mathrm{Cu}_4$.  Both initial geometries were considered
11 > although experimental results suggest that the random structure is the
12 > most likely structure to be found following
13 > synthesis.\cite{Jiang:2005lr,gonzalo:5163} Three different sizes of
14 > nanoparticles corresponding to a 20 \AA radius (1961 atoms), 30 {\AA}
15 > radius (6603 atoms) and 40 {\AA} radius (15683 atoms) were
16 > constructed.  These initial structures were relaxed to their
17 > equilibrium structures at 20 K for 20 ps and again at 300 K for 100 ps
18 > sampling from a Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution at each temperature. All simulations were conducted using the {\sc OOPSE} molecular dynamics package.\cite{Meineke:2004uq}
19 >
20 > To mimic the effects of the heating due to laser irradiation, the
21 > particles were allowed to melt by sampling velocities from the Maxwell
22 > Boltzmann distribution at a temperature of 900 K.  The particles were
23 > run under microcanonical simulation conditions for 1 ns of simualtion
24 > time prior to studying the effects of heat transfer to the solvent.
25 > In all cases, center of mass translational and rotational motion of
26 > the particles were set to zero before any data collection was
27 > undertaken.  Structural features (pair distribution functions) were
28 > used to verify that the particles were indeed liquid droplets before
29 > cooling simulations took place.
30 >
31 > \subsection{Modeling random alloy and core shell particles in solution
32 > phase environments}
33 >
34 > To approximate the effects of rapid heat transfer to the solvent
35 > following a heating at the plasmon resonance, we utilized a
36 > methodology in which atoms contained in the outer $4$ {\AA} radius of
37 > the nanoparticle evolved under Langevin Dynamics,
38   \begin{equation}
39 <        \label{eq:SCP1} U_{tot}=\sum _{i}\left[ \frac{1}{2}\sum _{j\neq i}D_{ij}V^{pair}_{ij}(r_{ij})-c_{i}D_{ii}\sqrt{\rho_{i}}\right] ,
39 > m \frac{\partial^2 \vec{x}}{\partial t^2} = F_\textrm{sys}(\vec{x}(t))
40 > - 6 \pi a \eta \vec{v}(t)  + F_\textrm{ran}
41 > \label{eq:langevin}
42   \end{equation}
43 < where $V^{pair}_{ij}$ and $\rho_{i}$ are given by
43 > with a solvent friction ($\eta$) approximating the contribution from
44 > the solvent and capping agent.  Atoms located in the interior of the
45 > nanoparticle evolved under Newtonian dynamics.  The set-up of our
46 > simulations is nearly identical with the ``stochastic boundary
47 > molecular dynamics'' ({\sc sbmd}) method that has seen wide use in the
48 > protein simulation
49 > community.\cite{BROOKS:1985kx,BROOKS:1983uq,BRUNGER:1984fj} A sketch
50 > of this setup can be found in Fig. \ref{fig:langevinSketch}.  In
51 > equation \ref{eq:langevin} the frictional forces of a spherical atom
52 > of radius $a$ depend on the solvent viscosity.  The random forces are
53 > usually taken as gaussian random variables with zero mean and a
54 > variance tied to the solvent viscosity and temperature,
55   \begin{equation}
56 <        \label{eq:SCP2} V^{pair}_{ij}(r)=\left( \frac{\alpha_{ij}}{r_{ij}}\right)^{n_{ij}}, \rho_{i}=\sum_{j\neq i}\left( \frac{\alpha_{ij}}{r_{ij}}\right) ^{m_{ij}}.
56 > \langle F_\textrm{ran}(t) \cdot F_\textrm{ran} (t')
57 > \rangle = 2 k_B T (6 \pi \eta a) \delta(t - t')
58 > \label{eq:stochastic}
59   \end{equation}
60 < $V^{pair}_{ij}$ is a repulsive pairwise potential that accounts for interactions of the pseudo-atom cores. The $\sqrt{\rho_i}$ term in Eq. (\ref{eq:SCP1}) is an attractive many-body potential that models the interactions between the valence electrons and the cores of the pseudo-atoms. $D_{ij}$, $D_{ii}$ set the appropriate overall energy scale, $c_i$ scales the attractive portion of the potential relative to the repulsive interaction and $\alpha_{ij}$ is a length parameter that assures a dimensionless form for V and $\rho$. These parameters are tuned to various experimental properties such as density, cohesive energy, elastic moduli for FCC transition metals. The quantum Sutton-Chen ({\sc q-sc}) formulation matches these properties while including zero-point quantum corrections for different transition metals.\cite{PhysRevB.59.3527} This particular parametarization has been shown to reproduce the experimentally available heat of mixing data for both FCC solid solutions of Ag-Cu and the high-temperature liquid.\cite{sheng:184203} Alternatively, the {\sc eam} potential does not reproduce the experimentally observed heat of mixing for the liquid alloy.\cite{MURRAY:1984lr} Combination rules for the alloy were taken to be the arithmatic average of the atomic parameters with the exception of $c_i$ since its values is only dependent on the identity of the atom where the density is evaluated. Cutoff distances are defined by this potential to be $2\alpha_{ij}$ and include up to the sixth coordination shell in FCC metals.
60 > Due to the presence of the capping agent and the lack of details about
61 > the atomic-scale interactions between the metallic atoms and the
62 > solvent, the effective viscosity is a essentially a free parameter
63 > that must be tuned to give experimentally relevant simulations.
64 > \begin{figure}[htbp]
65 > \centering
66 > \includegraphics[width=5in]{images/stochbound.pdf}
67 > \caption{Methodology used to mimic the experimental cooling conditions
68 > of a hot nanoparticle surrounded by a solvent.  Atoms in the core of
69 > the particle evolved under Newtonian dynamics, while atoms that were
70 > in the outer skin of the particle evolved under Langevin dynamics.
71 > The radius of the spherical region operating under Newtonian dynamics,
72 > $r_\textrm{Newton}$ was set to be 4 {\AA} smaller than the original
73 > radius ($R$) of the liquid droplet.}
74 > \label{fig:langevinSketch}
75 > \end{figure}
76  
77 < Cooling rates for the various sized nanoparticles were calculated from the heat transfer equations for a spherical particle embedded in a ambient medium that allows for diffusive heat transport. These equate to a set of coupled differential equations in the Laplace domain and are given by
77 > The viscosity ($\eta$) can be tuned by comparing the cooling rate that
78 > a set of nanoparticles experience with the known cooling rates for
79 > similar particles obtained via the laser heating experiments.
80 > Essentially, we tune the solvent viscosity until the thermal decay
81 > profile matches a heat-transfer model using reasonable values for the
82 > interfacial conductance and the thermal conductivity of the solvent.
83 >
84 > Cooling rates for the experimentally-observed nanoparticles were
85 > calculated from the heat transfer equations for a spherical particle
86 > embedded in a ambient medium that allows for diffusive heat transport.
87 > Following Plech {\it et al.},\cite{plech:195423} we use a heat
88 > transfer model that consists of two coupled differential equations
89 > in the Laplace domain,
90   \begin{eqnarray}
91 <        Mc_{P}\cdot(s\cdot T_{p}(s)-T_{0})+4\pi R^{2} G\cdot(T_{p}(s)-T_{f}(r=R,s)=0\\
92 <        \left(\frac{
93 <        \partial}{
94 <        \partial r} T_{f}(r,s)\right)_{r=R} + \frac{G}{K}(T_{p}(s)-T_{f}(r,s) = 0 \label{eq:heateqn}
91 > Mc_{P}\cdot(s\cdot T_{p}(s)-T_{0})+4\pi R^{2} G\cdot(T_{p}(s)-T_{f}(r=R,s)=0\\
92 > \left(\frac{\partial}{\partial r} T_{f}(r,s)\right)_{r=R} +
93 > \frac{G}{K}(T_{p}(s)-T_{f}(r,s) = 0
94 > \label{eq:heateqn}
95   \end{eqnarray}
96 < where s is the time-conjugated variable in Laplace space. The variables in these equations describe a nanoparticle of radius $R$, mass $M$, and specific heat $c_{p}$ at an initial temperature $T_0$. The surrounding solvent at a temperature $T_f(r,t)$ has a thermal conductivity $K$, density $\rho$, and specific heat $c$. $G$ is the interface conductance between the nanoparticle and the surrounding solvent. The temperature of the nanoparticle as a function of time is then obtained by the inverse Laplace transformation
96 > where $s$ is the time-conjugate variable in Laplace space. The
97 > variables in these equations describe a nanoparticle of radius $R$,
98 > mass $M$, and specific heat $c_{p}$ at an initial temperature
99 > $T_0$. The surrounding solvent has a thermal profile $T_f(r,t)$,
100 > thermal conductivity $K$, density $\rho$, and specific heat $c$. $G$
101 > is the interfacial conductance between the nanoparticle and the
102 > surrounding solvent, and contains information about heat transfer to
103 > the capping agent as well as the direct metal-to-solvent heat loss.
104 > The temperature of the nanoparticle as a function of time can then
105 > obtained by the inverse Laplace transform,
106   \begin{equation}
107 <        T_{p}(t)=\frac{2 k R^2 g^2 T_0}{\pi}\int_{0}^{\infty}\frac{\exp(-\kappa u^2 t/R^2)u^2}{(u^2(1+Rg)-kRg)^2+(u^3-kRgu)^2}\mathrm{d}u.
107 > T_{p}(t)=\frac{2 k R^2 g^2
108 > T_0}{\pi}\int_{0}^{\infty}\frac{\exp(-\kappa u^2
109 > t/R^2)u^2}{(u^2(1 + R g) - k R g)^2+(u^3 - k R g u)^2}\mathrm{d}u.
110 > \label{eq:laplacetransform}
111   \end{equation}
112 < For clarity, we introduce the diffusivity $\kappa = K/(pc)$, and define $k=4\pi R^3 pc /(Mc_p)$ and $g = G/K$. This equation is solved numerically for the Ag-Cu system using the mole-fraction weighted values for $c_p$ and $\rho$ of 0.295 $(\mathrm{J g^{-1} K^{-1}})$ and $9.826\times 10^6$ $(\mathrm{g m^{-3}})$ respectively. Parameters used for the fluid are $K$ of $0.6$ $(\mathrm{Wm^{-1}K^{-1}})$, $\rho$ of $1.0\times10^6$ $(\mathrm{g m^{-3}})$ and $c$ of $4.184$ $(\mathrm{J g^{-1} K^{-1}})$. Interfacial conductance have been determined by experiment and range from a low $87.5\times 10^{6}$ $(\mathrm{Wm^{-2}K^{-1}})$ to $120\times 10^{6}$ $(\mathrm{Wm^{-2}K^{-1}})$ in the high end of the heat transfer regime. We have chosen to conduct simulations at both low and high values of G to present both the slowest and fastest heat transfer from the nanoparticle to the solvent consistent with experimental observation. For the slowest heat transfer, a value for G of $87.5\times 10^{6}$ $(\mathrm{Wm^{-2}K^{-1}})$ was used and for the fastest heat transfer, a value of $117\times 10^{6}$ $(\mathrm{Wm^{-2}K^{-1}})$ was used. We believe that the that the true G values are closer to the faster regime then the slower regime.
112 > For simplicity, we have introduced the thermal diffusivity $\kappa =
113 > K/(\rho c)$,  and defined $k=4\pi R^3 \rho c /(M c_p)$ and $g = G/K$ in
114 > Eq. \ref{eq:laplacetransform}.
115  
116 < To approximate laser heating-cooling experiments, we utilized a methodology in which atoms contained in the outer $4$ {\AA} radius of the nanoparticle evolve under Langevin Dynamics approximating the solvent-nanoparticle interaction and atoms outside of this region evolve under Newtonian Dynamics. For a spherical particle of radius $a$, the Langevin frictional force can be determined by Stokes' law
117 < \begin{equation}
118 < \mathbf{F}_{\mathrm{frictional}}=6\pi a \eta \mathbf{v}
119 < \end{equation}
120 < where $\eta$ is the viscosity of the solvent in which the particle is embedded. The rate of cooling for the nanoparticle can be tuned by changing the solvent viscosity until the nanoparticle cooling rate matches that of the cooling rate as described by the heat-transfer equations (\ref{eq:heateqn}). The effective solvent viscosity for a G of $87.5\times 10^{6}$ $(\mathrm{Wm^{-2}K^{-1}})$ is 0.17 for the 20 {\AA}, 0.20 for the 30 {\AA} and 0.22 for the 40 {\AA} particle. The effective solvent viscosity for a G of $117\times 10^{6}$ $(\mathrm{Wm^{-2}K^{-1}})$ is 0.23 for the 20 {\AA}, 0.29 for the 30 {\AA} and 0.30 for the 40 {\AA} particle. Cooling traces for each particle size are presented in Figure[\ref{fig:images_cooling_plot}]. It should be noted that the Langevin thermostat produces cooling that is consistent with Newtonian cooling in comparison with
116 > Eq. \ref{eq:laplacetransform} was solved numerically for the Ag-Cu
117 > system using mole-fraction weighted values for $c_p$ and $\rho_p$ of
118 > 0.295 $(\mathrm{J g^{-1} K^{-1}})$ and $9.826\times 10^6$ $(\mathrm{g
119 > m^{-3}})$ respectively. Since most of the laser excitation experiments
120 > have been done in aqueous solutions, parameters used for the fluid are
121 > $K$ of $0.6$ $(\mathrm{Wm^{-1}K^{-1}})$, $\rho$ of $1.0\times10^6$
122 > $(\mathrm{g m^{-3}})$ and $c$ of $4.184$ $(\mathrm{J g^{-1} K^{-1}})$.
123  
124 + Values for the interfacial conductance have been determined by a
125 + number of groups for similar nanoparticles and range from a low
126 + $87.5\times 10^{6}$ $(\mathrm{Wm^{-2}K^{-1}})$ to $120\times 10^{6}$
127 + $(\mathrm{Wm^{-2}K^{-1}})$.\cite{Wilson:2002uq} Similarly, Plech
128 + {\it et al.}  reported a value for the interfacial conductance of
129 + $G=105\pm 15$ $(\mathrm{Wm^{-2}K^{-1}})$ and $G=130\pm 15$
130 + $(\mathrm{Wm^{-2}K^{-1}})$ for Pt
131 + nanoparticles.\cite{plech:195423,PhysRevB.66.224301}
132 +
133 + We conducted our simulations at both ends of the range of
134 + experimentally-determined values for the interfacial conductance.
135 + This allows us to observe both the slowest and fastest heat transfers
136 + from the nanoparticle to the solvent that are consistent with
137 + experimental observations.  For the slowest heat transfer, a value for
138 + G of $87.5\times 10^{6}$ $(\mathrm{Wm^{-2}K^{-1}})$ was used and for
139 + the fastest heat transfer, a value of $117\times 10^{6}$
140 + $(\mathrm{Wm^{-2}K^{-1}})$ was used.  Based on calculations we have
141 + done using raw data from the Hartland group's thermal half-time
142 + experiments on Au nanospheres, the true G values are probably in the
143 + faster regime: $117\times 10^{6}$ $(\mathrm{Wm^{-2}K^{-1}})$.
144 +
145 + The rate of cooling for the nanoparticles in a molecular dynamics
146 + simulation can then be tuned by changing the effective solvent
147 + viscosity ($\eta$) until the nanoparticle cooling rate matches the
148 + cooling rate described by the heat-transfer equations
149 + (\ref{eq:heateqn}). The effective solvent viscosity (in Pa s) for a G
150 + of $87.5\times 10^{6}$ $(\mathrm{Wm^{-2}K^{-1}})$ is $4.2 \times
151 + 10^{-6}$, $5.0 \times 10^{-6}$, and
152 + $5.5 \times 10^{-6}$ for 20 {\AA}, 30 {\AA}, and 40 {\AA} particles, respectively. The
153 + effective solvent viscosity (again in Pa s) for an interfacial
154 + conductance of $117\times 10^{6}$ $(\mathrm{Wm^{-2}K^{-1}})$ is $5.7
155 + \times 10^{-6}$, $7.2 \times 10^{-6}$, and $7.5 \times 10^{-6}$
156 + for 20 {\AA}, 30 {\AA} and 40 {\AA} particles.  Cooling traces for
157 + each particle size are presented in
158 + Fig. \ref{fig:images_cooling_plot}. It should be noted that the
159 + Langevin thermostat produces cooling curves that are consistent with
160 + Newtonian (single-exponential) cooling, which cannot match the cooling
161 + profiles from Eq. \ref{eq:laplacetransform} exactly. Fitting the
162 + Langevin cooling profiles to a single-exponential produces
163 + $\tau=25.576$ ps, $\tau=43.786$ ps, and $\tau=56.621$ ps for the 20,
164 + 30 and 40 {\AA} nanoparticles and a G of $87.5\times 10^{6}$
165 + $(\mathrm{Wm^{-2}K^{-1}})$.  For comparison's sake, similar
166 + single-exponential fits with an interfacial conductance of G of
167 + $117\times 10^{6}$ $(\mathrm{Wm^{-2}K^{-1}})$ produced a $\tau=13.391$
168 + ps, $\tau=30.426$ ps, $\tau=43.857$ ps for the 20, 30 and 40 {\AA}
169 + nanoparticles.
170 +
171   \begin{figure}[htbp]
172 <        \centering
173 <                \includegraphics[height=3in]{images/cooling_plot.pdf}
174 <        \caption{}
175 <        \label{fig:images_cooling_plot}
172 > \centering
173 > \includegraphics[width=5in]{images/cooling_plot.pdf}
174 > \caption{Thermal cooling curves obtained from the inverse Laplace
175 > transform heat model in Eq. \ref{eq:laplacetransform} (solid line) as
176 > well as from molecular dynamics simulations (circles).  Effective
177 > solvent viscosities of 4.2-7.5 $\times 10^{-6}$ Pa s (depending on the
178 > radius of the particle) give the best fit to the experimental cooling
179 > curves.  This viscosity suggests that the nanoparticles in these
180 > experiments are surrounded by a vapor layer (which is a reasonable
181 > assumptions given the initial temperatures of the particles).  }
182 > \label{fig:images_cooling_plot}
183   \end{figure}
184  
185 + \subsection{Potentials for classical simulations of bimetallic
186 + nanoparticles}
187  
188 + Several different potential models have been developed that reasonably
189 + describe interactions in transition metals. In particular, the
190 + Embedded Atom Model ({\sc eam})~\cite{PhysRevB.33.7983} and
191 + Sutton-Chen ({\sc sc})~\cite{Chen90} potential have been used to study
192 + a wide range of phenomena in both bulk materials and
193 + nanoparticles.\cite{Vardeman-II:2001jn,ShibataT._ja026764r,Sankaranarayanan:2005lr,Chui:2003fk,Wang:2005qy,Medasani:2007uq} Both
194 + potentials are based on a model of a metal which treats the nuclei and
195 + core electrons as pseudo-atoms embedded in the electron density due to
196 + the valence electrons on all of the other atoms in the system. The
197 + {\sc sc} potential has a simple form that closely resembles that of
198 + the ubiquitous Lennard Jones potential,
199 + \begin{equation}
200 + \label{eq:SCP1}
201 + U_{tot}=\sum _{i}\left[ \frac{1}{2}\sum _{j\neq i}D_{ij}V^{pair}_{ij}(r_{ij})-c_{i}D_{ii}\sqrt{\rho_{i}}\right] ,
202 + \end{equation}
203 + where $V^{pair}_{ij}$ and $\rho_{i}$ are given by
204 + \begin{equation}
205 + \label{eq:SCP2}
206 + V^{pair}_{ij}(r)=\left( \frac{\alpha_{ij}}{r_{ij}}\right)^{n_{ij}}, \rho_{i}=\sum_{j\neq i}\left( \frac{\alpha_{ij}}{r_{ij}}\right) ^{m_{ij}}.
207 + \end{equation}
208 + $V^{pair}_{ij}$ is a repulsive pairwise potential that accounts for
209 + interactions between the pseudoatom cores. The $\sqrt{\rho_i}$ term in
210 + Eq. (\ref{eq:SCP1}) is an attractive many-body potential that models
211 + the interactions between the valence electrons and the cores of the
212 + pseudo-atoms. $D_{ij}$, $D_{ii}$ set the appropriate overall energy
213 + scale, $c_i$ scales the attractive portion of the potential relative
214 + to the repulsive interaction and $\alpha_{ij}$ is a length parameter
215 + that assures a dimensionless form for $\rho$. These parameters are
216 + tuned to various experimental properties such as the density, cohesive
217 + energy, and elastic moduli for FCC transition metals. The quantum
218 + Sutton-Chen ({\sc q-sc}) formulation matches these properties while
219 + including zero-point quantum corrections for different transition
220 + metals.\cite{PhysRevB.59.3527} This particular parametarization has
221 + been shown to reproduce the experimentally available heat of mixing
222 + data for both FCC solid solutions of Ag-Cu and the high-temperature
223 + liquid.\cite{sheng:184203} In contrast, the {\sc eam} potential does
224 + not reproduce the experimentally observed heat of mixing for the
225 + liquid alloy.\cite{MURRAY:1984lr} Combination rules for the alloy were
226 + taken to be the arithmatic average of the atomic parameters with the
227 + exception of $c_i$ since its values is only dependent on the identity
228 + of the atom where the density is evaluated.  For the {\sc q-sc}
229 + potential, cutoff distances are traditionally taken to be
230 + $2\alpha_{ij}$ and include up to the sixth coordination shell in FCC
231 + metals.
232  
233 < Core-shell (Cu core) and random initial structures were constructed on an underlying FCC lattice (4.09 {\AA}) at the bulk eutectic composition $\mathrm{Ag}_6\mathrm{Cu}_4$. Three different sizes corresponding to 20 \AA (1961 atoms), 30 {\AA} (6603 atoms) and 40 {\AA} (1683 atoms) in radius. Only the random initial structure was studied for the 40 {\AA} nanoparticle. These initial structures were relaxed to their equilibrium structures at 20 K for 20 ps and again at 300 K for 100 ps sampling from a Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution at each temperature.
233 > %\subsection{Sampling single-temperature configurations from a cooling
234 > %trajectory}
235  
236 + To better understand the structural changes occurring in the
237 + nanoparticles throughout the cooling trajectory, configurations were
238 + sampled at regular intervals during the cooling trajectory. These
239 + configurations were then allowed to evolve under NVE dynamics to
240 + sample from the proper distribution in phase space. Figure
241 + \ref{fig:images_cooling_time_traces} illustrates this sampling.
242  
243 < \input{footer.tex}
243 >
244 > \begin{figure}[htbp]
245 >        \centering
246 >                \includegraphics[height=3in]{images/cooling_time_traces.pdf}
247 >        \caption{Illustrative cooling profile for the 40 {\AA}
248 > nanoparticle evolving under stochastic boundary conditions
249 > corresponding to $G=$$87.5\times 10^{6}$
250 > $(\mathrm{Wm^{-2}K^{-1}})$. At temperatures along the cooling
251 > trajectory, configurations were sampled and allowed to evolve in the
252 > NVE ensemble. These subsequent trajectories were analyzed for
253 > structural features associated with bulk glass formation.}
254 >        \label{fig:images_cooling_time_traces}
255 > \end{figure}
256 >
257 >
258 > \begin{figure}[htbp]
259 > \centering
260 > \includegraphics[width=5in]{images/cross_section_array.jpg}
261 > \caption{Cutaway views of 30 \AA\ Ag-Cu nanoparticle structures for
262 > random alloy (top) and Cu (core) / Ag (shell) initial conditions
263 > (bottom).  Shown from left to right are the crystalline, liquid
264 > droplet, and final glassy bead configurations.}
265 > \label{fig:cross_sections}
266 > \end{figure}

Diff Legend

Removed lines
+ Added lines
< Changed lines
> Changed lines