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

Comparing trunk/nivsRnemd/nivsRnemd.tex (file contents):
Revision 3579 by skuang, Tue Mar 23 22:46:17 2010 UTC vs.
Revision 3580 by skuang, Wed Apr 7 16:14:20 2010 UTC

# Line 375 | Line 375 | liquid water (Extended Simple Point Charge model) and
375   Another series of our simulation is the calculation of interfacial
376   thermal conductivity of a Au/H$_2$O system. Respective calculations of
377   liquid water (Extended Simple Point Charge model) and crystal gold
378 < (Quantum Sutton-Chen potential) thermal conductivity were performed
379 < and compared with current results to ensure the validity of
380 < NIVS-RNEMD. After that, a mixture system was simulated.
378 > thermal conductivity were performed and compared with current results
379 > to ensure the validity of NIVS-RNEMD. After that, a mixture system was
380 > simulated.
381  
382   For thermal conductivity calculation of bulk water, a simulation box
383   consisting of 1000 molecules were first equilibrated under ambient
# Line 389 | Line 389 | protocol. The face-centered cubic crystal simulation b
389   process was similar to Lennard-Jones fluid system.
390  
391   Thermal conductivity calculation of bulk crystal gold used a similar
392 < protocol. The face-centered cubic crystal simulation box consists of
392 > protocol. Two types of force field parameters, Embedded Atom Method
393 > (EAM) and Quantum Sutten-Chen (QSC) force field were used
394 > respectively. The face-centered cubic crystal simulation box consists of
395   2880 Au atoms. The lattice was first allowed volume change to relax
396   under ambient temperature and pressure. Equilibrations in canonical and
397   microcanonical ensemble were followed in order. With the simulation
# Line 568 | Line 570 | Our results of gold thermal conductivity using QSC for
570   \end{table*}
571  
572   \subsubsection{Crystal Gold}
573 < Our results of gold thermal conductivity using QSC force field are
574 < shown in Table \ref{AuThermal}. Although our calculation is smaller
575 < than experimental value by an order of more than 100, this difference
576 < is mainly attributed to the lack of electron interaction
577 < representation in our force field parameters. Richardson {\it et
578 <  al.}\cite{ISI:A1992HX37800010} using similar force field parameters
579 < in their metal thermal conductivity calculations. The EMD method they
580 < employed in their simulations produced comparable results to
581 < ours. Therefore, it is confident to conclude that NIVS-RNEMD is
582 < applicable to metal force field system.
573 > Our results of gold thermal conductivity using two force fields are
574 > shown separately in Table \ref{qscThermal} and \ref{eamThermal}. In
575 > these calculations,the end and middle slabs were excluded in thermal
576 > gradient regession and only used as heat source and drain in the
577 > systems. Our yielded values using EAM force field are slightly larger
578 > than those using QSC force field. However, both series are
579 > significantly smaller than experimental value by an order of more than
580 > 100. It has been verified that this difference is mainly attributed to
581 > the lack of electron interaction representation in these force field
582 > parameters. Richardson {\it et al.}\cite{ISI:A1992HX37800010} used EAM
583 > force field parameters in their metal thermal conductivity
584 > calculations. The Non-Equilibrium MD method they employed in their
585 > simulations produced comparable results to ours. As Zhang {\it et
586 >  al.}\cite{ISI:000231042800044} stated, thermal conductivity values
587 > are influenced mainly by force field. Therefore, it is confident to
588 > conclude that NIVS-RNEMD is applicable to metal force field system.
589  
590   \begin{figure}
591   \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{AuGrad}
592 < \caption{Temperature gradients for crystal gold thermal conductivity.}
592 > \caption{Temperature gradients for thermal conductivity calculation of
593 >  crystal gold using QSC force field.}
594   \label{AuGrad}
595   \end{figure}
596  
# Line 590 | Line 599 | applicable to metal force field system.
599   \begin{center}
600  
601   \caption{Calculation results for thermal conductivity of crystal gold
602 <  at ${\langle T\rangle}$ = 300K at various thermal exchange rates. Errors of
603 <  calculations in parentheses. }
602 >  using QSC force field at ${\langle T\rangle}$ = 300K at various
603 >  thermal exchange rates. Errors of calculations in parentheses. }
604  
605   \begin{tabular}{cc}
606   \hline
# Line 602 | Line 611 | $\langle dT/dz\rangle$(K/\AA) & $\lambda$(W/m/K)\\
611   5.14 & 1.15(0.01)\\
612   \hline
613   \end{tabular}
614 < \label{AuThermal}
614 > \label{qscThermal}
615   \end{center}
616   \end{minipage}
617   \end{table*}
618  
619 + \begin{figure}
620 + \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{eamGrad}
621 + \caption{Temperature gradients for thermal conductivity calculation of
622 +  crystal gold using EAM force field.}
623 + \label{eamGrad}
624 + \end{figure}
625 +
626 + \begin{table*}
627 + \begin{minipage}{\linewidth}
628 + \begin{center}
629 +
630 + \caption{Calculation results for thermal conductivity of crystal gold
631 +  using EAM force field at ${\langle T\rangle}$ = 300K at various
632 +  thermal exchange rates. Errors of calculations in parentheses. }
633 +
634 + \begin{tabular}{cc}
635 + \hline
636 + $\langle dT/dz\rangle$(K/\AA) & $\lambda$(W/m/K)\\
637 + \hline
638 + 1.24 & 1.24(0.06)\\
639 + 2.06 & 1.37(0.04)\\
640 + 2.55 & 1.41(0.03)\\
641 + \hline
642 + \end{tabular}
643 + \label{eamThermal}
644 + \end{center}
645 + \end{minipage}
646 + \end{table*}
647 +
648 +
649   \subsection{Interfaciel Thermal Conductivity}
650   After valid simulations of homogeneous water and gold systems using
651   NIVS-RNEMD method, calculation of gold/water interfacial thermal
652   conductivity was followed. It is found out that the interfacial
653   conductance is low due to a hydrophobic surface in our system. Figure
654   \ref{interfaceDensity} demonstrates this observance. Consequently, our
655 < reported results (Table \ref{interfaceRes}) are of two orders of
656 < magnitude smaller than our calculations on homogeneous systems.
655 > approximation in $G$ calculation (Eq. \ref{interfaceCalc}) maintains
656 > valid. Reported results (Table \ref{interfaceRes}) are of two orders of
657 > magnitude smaller than our calculations on homogeneous systems, and
658 > thus have larger relative errors than our calculation results on
659 > homogeneous systems.
660  
661   \begin{figure}
662   \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{interfaceDensity}

Diff Legend

Removed lines
+ Added lines
< Changed lines
> Changed lines