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 3574 by skuang, Fri Mar 12 21:36:16 2010 UTC vs.
Revision 3594 by gezelter, Mon Apr 19 16:36:45 2010 UTC

# Line 38 | Line 38 | Notre Dame, Indiana 46556}
38   \begin{doublespace}
39  
40   \begin{abstract}
41 <
41 >  We present a new method for introducing stable non-equilibrium
42 >  velocity and temperature distributions in molecular dynamics
43 >  simulations of heterogeneous systems.  This method extends some
44 >  earlier Reverse Non-Equilibrium Molecular Dynamics (RNEMD) methods
45 >  which use momentum exchange swapping moves that can create
46 >  non-thermal velocity distributions (and which are difficult to use
47 >  for interfacial calculations).  By using non-isotropic velocity
48 >  scaling (NIVS) on the molecules in specific regions of a system, it
49 >  is possible to impose momentum or thermal flux between regions of a
50 >  simulation and stable thermal and momentum gradients can then be
51 >  established.  The scaling method we have developed conserves the
52 >  total linear momentum and total energy of the system.  To test the
53 >  methods, we have computed the thermal conductivity of model liquid
54 >  and solid systems as well as the interfacial thermal conductivity of
55 >  a metal-water interface.  We find that the NIVS-RNEMD improves the
56 >  problematic velocity distributions that develop in other RNEMD
57 >  methods.
58   \end{abstract}
59  
60   \newpage
# Line 49 | Line 65 | Notre Dame, Indiana 46556}
65   %                          BODY OF TEXT
66   %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
67  
52
53
68   \section{Introduction}
69   The original formulation of Reverse Non-equilibrium Molecular Dynamics
70   (RNEMD) obtains transport coefficients (thermal conductivity and shear
71   viscosity) in a fluid by imposing an artificial momentum flux between
72   two thin parallel slabs of material that are spatially separated in
73   the simulation cell.\cite{MullerPlathe:1997xw,ISI:000080382700030} The
74 < artificial flux is typically created by periodically ``swapping'' either
75 < the entire momentum vector $\vec{p}$ or single components of this
76 < vector ($p_x$) between molecules in each of the two slabs.  If the two
77 < slabs are separated along the z coordinate, the imposed flux is either
78 < directional ($j_z(p_x)$) or isotropic ($J_z$), and the response of a
79 < simulated system to the imposed momentum flux will typically be a
80 < velocity or thermal gradient.  The transport coefficients (shear
81 < viscosity and thermal conductivity) are easily obtained by assuming
82 < linear response of the system,
74 > artificial flux is typically created by periodically ``swapping''
75 > either the entire momentum vector $\vec{p}$ or single components of
76 > this vector ($p_x$) between molecules in each of the two slabs.  If
77 > the two slabs are separated along the $z$ coordinate, the imposed flux
78 > is either directional ($j_z(p_x)$) or isotropic ($J_z$), and the
79 > response of a simulated system to the imposed momentum flux will
80 > typically be a velocity or thermal gradient (Fig. \ref{thermalDemo}).
81 > The shear viscosity ($\eta$) and thermal conductivity ($\lambda$) are
82 > easily obtained by assuming linear response of the system,
83   \begin{eqnarray}
84   j_z(p_x) & = & -\eta \frac{\partial v_x}{\partial z}\\
85 < J & = & \lambda \frac{\partial T}{\partial z}
85 > J_z & = & \lambda \frac{\partial T}{\partial z}
86   \end{eqnarray}
87   RNEMD has been widely used to provide computational estimates of thermal
88   conductivities and shear viscosities in a wide range of materials,
89   from liquid copper to monatomic liquids to molecular fluids
90 < (e.g. ionic liquids).\cite{ISI:000246190100032}
90 > (e.g. ionic liquids).\cite{Bedrov:2000-1,Bedrov:2000,Muller-Plathe:2002,ISI:000184808400018,ISI:000231042800044,Maginn:2007,Muller-Plathe:2008,ISI:000258460400020,ISI:000258840700015,ISI:000261835100054}
91  
92   \begin{figure}
93   \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{thermalDemo}
94 < \caption{Demostration of thermal gradient estalished by RNEMD method.}
94 > \caption{RNEMD methods impose an unphysical transfer of momentum or
95 >  kinetic energy between a ``hot'' slab and a ``cold'' slab in the
96 >  simulation box.  The molecular system responds to this imposed flux
97 >  by generating a momentum or temperature gradient.  The slope of the
98 >  gradient can then be used to compute transport properties (e.g.
99 >  shear viscosity and thermal conductivity).}
100   \label{thermalDemo}
101   \end{figure}
102  
103 < RNEMD is preferable in many ways to the forward NEMD methods because
104 < it imposes what is typically difficult to measure (a flux or stress)
105 < and it is typically much easier to compute momentum gradients or
106 < strains (the response).  For similar reasons, RNEMD is also preferable
107 < to slowly-converging equilibrium methods for measuring thermal
108 < conductivity and shear viscosity (using Green-Kubo relations or the
109 < Helfand moment approach of Viscardy {\it et
103 > RNEMD is preferable in many ways to the forward NEMD
104 > methods\cite{ISI:A1988Q205300014,hess:209,Vasquez:2004fk,backer:154503,ISI:000266247600008}
105 > because it imposes what is typically difficult to measure (a flux or
106 > stress) and it is typically much easier to compute momentum gradients
107 > or strains (the response).  For similar reasons, RNEMD is also
108 > preferable to slowly-converging equilibrium methods for measuring
109 > thermal conductivity and shear viscosity (using Green-Kubo
110 > relations\cite{daivis:541,mondello:9327} or the Helfand moment
111 > approach of Viscardy {\it et
112    al.}\cite{Viscardy:2007bh,Viscardy:2007lq}) because these rely on
113   computing difficult to measure quantities.
114  
# Line 97 | Line 118 | Recently, Tenney and Maginn\cite{ISI:000273472300004}
118   typically samples from the same manifold of states in the
119   microcanonical ensemble.
120  
121 < Recently, Tenney and Maginn\cite{ISI:000273472300004} have discovered
121 > Recently, Tenney and Maginn\cite{Maginn:2010} have discovered
122   some problems with the original RNEMD swap technique.  Notably, large
123   momentum fluxes (equivalent to frequent momentum swaps between the
124 < slabs) can result in ``notched'', ``peaked'' and generally non-thermal momentum
125 < distributions in the two slabs, as well as non-linear thermal and
126 < velocity distributions along the direction of the imposed flux ($z$).
127 < Tenney and Maginn obtained reasonable limits on imposed flux and
128 < self-adjusting metrics for retaining the usability of the method.
124 > slabs) can result in ``notched'', ``peaked'' and generally non-thermal
125 > momentum distributions in the two slabs, as well as non-linear thermal
126 > and velocity distributions along the direction of the imposed flux
127 > ($z$). Tenney and Maginn obtained reasonable limits on imposed flux
128 > and self-adjusting metrics for retaining the usability of the method.
129  
130   In this paper, we develop and test a method for non-isotropic velocity
131   scaling (NIVS-RNEMD) which retains the desirable features of RNEMD
132   (conservation of linear momentum and total energy, compatibility with
133   periodic boundary conditions) while establishing true thermal
134   distributions in each of the two slabs.  In the next section, we
135 < develop the method for determining the scaling constraints.  We then
135 > present the method for determining the scaling constraints.  We then
136   test the method on both single component, multi-component, and
137   non-isotropic mixtures and show that it is capable of providing
138   reasonable estimates of the thermal conductivity and shear viscosity
139   in these cases.
140  
141   \section{Methodology}
142 < We retain the basic idea of Muller-Plathe's RNEMD method; the periodic
143 < system is partitioned into a series of thin slabs along a particular
142 > We retain the basic idea of M\"{u}ller-Plathe's RNEMD method; the
143 > periodic system is partitioned into a series of thin slabs along one
144   axis ($z$).  One of the slabs at the end of the periodic box is
145   designated the ``hot'' slab, while the slab in the center of the box
146   is designated the ``cold'' slab.  The artificial momentum flux will be
# Line 127 | Line 148 | moves.  For molecules $\{i\}$ located within the cold
148   hot slab.
149  
150   Rather than using momentum swaps, we use a series of velocity scaling
151 < moves.  For molecules $\{i\}$ located within the cold slab,
151 > moves.  For molecules $\{i\}$  located within the cold slab,
152   \begin{equation}
153   \vec{v}_i \leftarrow \left( \begin{array}{ccc}
154   x & 0 & 0 \\
# Line 147 | Line 168 | Conservation of linear momentum in each of the three d
168   \end{equation}
169  
170   Conservation of linear momentum in each of the three directions
171 < ($\alpha = x,y,z$) ties the values of the hot and cold bin scaling
171 > ($\alpha = x,y,z$) ties the values of the hot and cold scaling
172   parameters together:
173   \begin{equation}
174   P_h^\alpha + P_c^\alpha = \alpha^\prime P_h^\alpha + \alpha P_c^\alpha
# Line 176 | Line 197 | where the kinetic energies, $K_h^\alpha$ and $K_c^\alp
197   \sum_{\alpha = x,y,z} K_h^\alpha + K_c^\alpha = \sum_{\alpha = x,y,z}
198   \left(\alpha^\prime\right)^2 K_h^\alpha + \alpha^2 K_c^\alpha
199   \end{equation}
200 < where the kinetic energies, $K_h^\alpha$ and $K_c^\alpha$, are computed
201 < for each of the three directions in a similar manner to the linear momenta
202 < (Eq. \ref{eq:momentumdef}).  Substituting in the expressions for the
203 < hot scaling parameters ($\alpha^\prime$) from Eq. (\ref{eq:hotcoldscaling}),
204 < we obtain the {\it constraint ellipsoid equation}:
200 > where the translational kinetic energies, $K_h^\alpha$ and
201 > $K_c^\alpha$, are computed for each of the three directions in a
202 > similar manner to the linear momenta (Eq. \ref{eq:momentumdef}).
203 > Substituting in the expressions for the hot scaling parameters
204 > ($\alpha^\prime$) from Eq. (\ref{eq:hotcoldscaling}), we obtain the
205 > {\it constraint ellipsoid}:
206   \begin{equation}
207   \sum_{\alpha = x,y,z} a_\alpha \alpha^2 + b_\alpha \alpha + c_\alpha = 0
208   \label{eq:constraintEllipsoid}
# Line 194 | Line 216 | This ellipsoid equation defines the set of cold slab s
216   c_\alpha & = & K_h^\alpha p_\alpha^2 + 2 K_h^\alpha p_\alpha - K_c^\alpha
217   \label{eq:constraintEllipsoidConsts}
218   \end{eqnarray}
219 < This ellipsoid equation defines the set of cold slab scaling
220 < parameters which can be applied while preserving both linear momentum
221 < in all three directions as well as kinetic energy.
219 > This ellipsoid (Eq. \ref{eq:constraintEllipsoid}) defines the set of
220 > cold slab scaling parameters which can be applied while preserving
221 > both linear momentum in all three directions as well as total kinetic
222 > energy.
223  
224   The goal of using velocity scaling variables is to transfer linear
225   momentum or kinetic energy from the cold slab to the hot slab.  If the
# Line 211 | Line 234 | The spatial extent of the {\it flux ellipsoid equation
234   x^2 K_c^x + y^2 K_c^y + z^2 K_c^z = K_c^x + K_c^y + K_c^z - J_z\Delta t
235   \label{eq:fluxEllipsoid}
236   \end{equation}
237 < The spatial extent of the {\it flux ellipsoid equation} is governed
238 < both by a targetted value, $J_z$ as well as the instantaneous values of the
239 < kinetic energy components in the cold bin.
237 > The spatial extent of the {\it thermal flux ellipsoid} is governed
238 > both by a targetted value, $J_z$ as well as the instantaneous values
239 > of the kinetic energy components in the cold bin.
240  
241   To satisfy an energetic flux as well as the conservation constraints,
242 < it is sufficient to determine the points ${x,y,z}$ which lie on both
243 < the constraint ellipsoid (Eq. \ref{eq:constraintEllipsoid}) and the
244 < flux ellipsoid (Eq. \ref{eq:fluxEllipsoid}), i.e. the intersection of
245 < the two ellipsoids in 3-dimensional space.
242 > we must determine the points ${x,y,z}$ which lie on both the
243 > constraint ellipsoid (Eq. \ref{eq:constraintEllipsoid}) and the flux
244 > ellipsoid (Eq. \ref{eq:fluxEllipsoid}), i.e. the intersection of the
245 > two ellipsoids in 3-dimensional space.
246  
247   \begin{figure}
248   \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{ellipsoids}
249 < \caption{Scaling points which maintain both constant energy and
250 <  constant linear momentum of the system lie on the surface of the
251 <  {\it constraint ellipsoid} while points which generate the target
252 <  momentum flux lie on the surface of the {\it flux ellipsoid}.  The
253 <  velocity distributions in the hot bin are scaled by only those
254 <  points which lie on both ellipsoids.}
249 > \caption{Illustration from the perspective of a space having cold
250 >  slab scaling coefficients as its coordinates. Scaling points which
251 >  maintain both constant energy and constant linear momentum of the
252 >  system lie on the surface of the {\it constraint ellipsoid} while
253 >  points which generate the target momentum flux lie on the surface of
254 >  the {\it flux ellipsoid}. The velocity distributions in the cold bin
255 >  are scaled by only those points which lie on both ellipsoids.}
256   \label{ellipsoids}
257   \end{figure}
258  
259 < One may also define momentum flux (say along the x-direction) as:
259 > One may also define {\it momentum} flux (say along the $x$-direction) as:
260   \begin{equation}
261   (1-x) P_c^x = j_z(p_x)\Delta t
262   \label{eq:fluxPlane}
263   \end{equation}
264 < The above {\it flux equation} is essentially a plane which is
265 < perpendicular to the x-axis, with its position governed both by a
266 < targetted value, $j_z(p_x)$ as well as the instantaneous value of the
243 < momentum along the x-direction.
264 > The above {\it momentum flux plane} is perpendicular to the $x$-axis,
265 > with its position governed both by a target value, $j_z(p_x)$ as well
266 > as the instantaneous value of the momentum along the $x$-direction.
267  
268 < Similarly, to satisfy a momentum flux as well as the conservation
269 < constraints, it is sufficient to determine the points ${x,y,z}$ which
270 < lie on both the constraint ellipsoid (Eq. \ref{eq:constraintEllipsoid})
271 < and the flux plane (Eq. \ref{eq:fluxPlane}), i.e. the intersection of
272 < an ellipsoid and a plane in 3-dimensional space.
268 > In order to satisfy a momentum flux as well as the conservation
269 > constraints, we must determine the points ${x,y,z}$ which lie on both
270 > the constraint ellipsoid (Eq. \ref{eq:constraintEllipsoid}) and the
271 > flux plane (Eq. \ref{eq:fluxPlane}), i.e. the intersection of an
272 > ellipsoid and a plane in 3-dimensional space.  
273  
274 < To summarize, by solving respective equation sets, one can determine
275 < possible sets of scaling variables for cold slab. And corresponding
276 < sets of scaling variables for hot slab can be determine as well.
274 > In both the momentum and energy flux scenarios, valid scaling
275 > parameters are arrived at by solving geometric intersection problems
276 > in $x, y, z$ space in order to obtain cold slab scaling parameters.
277 > Once the scaling variables for the cold slab are known, the hot slab
278 > scaling has also been determined.
279  
280 +
281   The following problem will be choosing an optimal set of scaling
282   variables among the possible sets. Although this method is inherently
283   non-isotropic, the goal is still to maintain the system as isotropic
# Line 259 | Line 285 | large perturbation to the system. Therefore, one appro
285   energies in different directions could become as close as each other
286   after each scaling. Simultaneously, one would also like each scaling
287   as gentle as possible, i.e. ${x,y,z \rightarrow 1}$, in order to avoid
288 < large perturbation to the system. Therefore, one approach to obtain the
289 < scaling variables would be constructing an criteria function, with
288 > large perturbation to the system. Therefore, one approach to obtain
289 > the scaling variables would be constructing an criteria function, with
290   constraints as above equation sets, and solving the function's minimum
291   by method like Lagrange multipliers.
292  
# Line 286 | Line 312 | Our simulation consists of a series of systems. All of
312   an approach similar to the above would be sufficient for this as well.
313  
314   \section{Computational Details}
315 + \subsection{Lennard-Jones Fluid}
316   Our simulation consists of a series of systems. All of these
317   simulations were run with the OpenMD simulation software
318 < package\cite{Meineke:2005gd} integrated with RNEMD methods.
318 > package\cite{Meineke:2005gd} integrated with RNEMD codes.
319  
320   A Lennard-Jones fluid system was built and tested first. In order to
321   compare our method with swapping RNEMD, a series of simulations were
# Line 309 | Line 336 | to Tenney {\it et al.}\cite{ISI:000273472300004}, a se
336   periodic boundary condition, and devided into ${N = 20}$ slabs. In each swap,
337   the top slab ${(n = 1)}$ exchange the most negative $x$ momentum with the
338   most positive $x$ momentum in the center slab ${(n = N/2 + 1)}$. Referred
339 < to Tenney {\it et al.}\cite{ISI:000273472300004}, a series of swapping
339 > to Tenney {\it et al.}\cite{Maginn:2010}, a series of swapping
340   frequency were chosen. According to each result from swapping
341   RNEMD, scaling RNEMD simulations were run with the target momentum
342 < flux set to produce a similar momentum flux and shear
342 > flux set to produce a similar momentum flux, and consequently shear
343   rate. Furthermore, various scaling frequencies can be tested for one
344 < single swapping rate. To compare the performance between swapping and
345 < scaling method, temperatures of different dimensions in all the slabs
346 < were observed. Most of the simulations include $10^5$ steps of
347 < equilibration without imposing momentum flux, $10^5$ steps of
348 < stablization with imposing momentum transfer, and $10^6$ steps of data
349 < collection under RNEMD. For relatively high momentum flux simulations,
350 < ${5\times10^5}$ step data collection is sufficient. For some low momentum
351 < flux simulations, ${2\times10^6}$ steps were necessary.
344 > single swapping rate. To test the temperature homogeneity in our
345 > system of swapping and scaling methods, temperatures of different
346 > dimensions in all the slabs were observed. Most of the simulations
347 > include $10^5$ steps of equilibration without imposing momentum flux,
348 > $10^5$ steps of stablization with imposing unphysical momentum
349 > transfer, and $10^6$ steps of data collection under RNEMD. For
350 > relatively high momentum flux simulations, ${5\times10^5}$ step data
351 > collection is sufficient. For some low momentum flux simulations,
352 > ${2\times10^6}$ steps were necessary.
353  
354   After each simulation, the shear viscosity was calculated in reduced
355   unit. The momentum flux was calculated with total unphysical
# Line 329 | Line 357 | And the velocity gradient ${\langle \partial v_x /\par
357   \begin{equation}
358   j_z(p_x) = \frac{P_x}{2 t L_x L_y}
359   \end{equation}
360 < And the velocity gradient ${\langle \partial v_x /\partial z \rangle}$
361 < can be obtained by a linear regression of the velocity profile. From
362 < the shear viscosity $\eta$ calculated with the above parameters, one
363 < can further convert it into reduced unit ${\eta^* = \eta \sigma^2
364 <  (\varepsilon  m)^{-1/2}}$.
360 > where $L_x$ and $L_y$ denotes $x$ and $y$ lengths of the simulation
361 > box, and physical momentum transfer occurs in two ways due to our
362 > periodic boundary condition settings. And the velocity gradient
363 > ${\langle \partial v_x /\partial z \rangle}$ can be obtained by a
364 > linear regression of the velocity profile. From the shear viscosity
365 > $\eta$ calculated with the above parameters, one can further convert
366 > it into reduced unit ${\eta^* = \eta \sigma^2 (\varepsilon m)^{-1/2}}$.
367  
368 < For thermal conductivity calculation, simulations were first run under
369 < reduced temperature ${T^* = 0.72}$ in NVE ensemble. Muller-Plathe's
370 < algorithm was adopted in the swapping method. Under identical
371 < simulation box parameters, in each swap, the top slab exchange the
372 < molecule with least kinetic energy with the molecule in the center
373 < slab with most kinetic energy, unless this ``coldest'' molecule in the
374 < ``hot'' slab is still ``hotter'' than the ``hottest'' molecule in the ``cold''
375 < slab. According to swapping RNEMD results, target energy flux for
376 < scaling RNEMD simulations can be set. Also, various scaling
368 > For thermal conductivity calculations, simulations were first run under
369 > reduced temperature ${\langle T^*\rangle = 0.72}$ in NVE
370 > ensemble. Muller-Plathe's algorithm was adopted in the swapping
371 > method. Under identical simulation box parameters with our shear
372 > viscosity calculations, in each swap, the top slab exchanges all three
373 > translational momentum components of the molecule with least kinetic
374 > energy with the same components of the molecule in the center slab
375 > with most kinetic energy, unless this ``coldest'' molecule in the
376 > ``hot'' slab is still ``hotter'' than the ``hottest'' molecule in the
377 > ``cold'' slab. According to swapping RNEMD results, target energy flux
378 > for scaling RNEMD simulations can be set. Also, various scaling
379   frequencies can be tested for one target energy flux. To compare the
380   performance between swapping and scaling method, distributions of
381   velocity and speed in different slabs were observed.
# Line 361 | Line 393 | Another series of our simulation is to calculate the i
393   further convert it into reduced unit ${\lambda^*=\lambda \sigma^2
394    m^{1/2} k_B^{-1}\varepsilon^{-1/2}}$.
395  
396 < Another series of our simulation is to calculate the interfacial
396 > \subsection{ Water / Metal Thermal Conductivity}
397 > Another series of our simulation is the calculation of interfacial
398   thermal conductivity of a Au/H$_2$O system. Respective calculations of
399 < water (SPC/E) and gold (QSC) thermal conductivity were performed and
400 < compared with current results to ensure the validity of
401 < NIVS-RNEMD. After that, a mixture system was simulated.
399 > liquid water (Extended Simple Point Charge model) and crystal gold
400 > thermal conductivity were performed and compared with current results
401 > to ensure the validity of NIVS-RNEMD. After that, a mixture system was
402 > simulated.
403  
404   For thermal conductivity calculation of bulk water, a simulation box
405   consisting of 1000 molecules were first equilibrated under ambient
406 < pressure and temperature conditions (NPT), followed by equilibration
407 < in fixed volume (NVT). The system was then equilibrated in
408 < microcanonical ensemble (NVE). Also in NVE ensemble, establishing
406 > pressure and temperature conditions using NPT ensemble, followed by
407 > equilibration in fixed volume (NVT). The system was then equilibrated in
408 > microcanonical ensemble (NVE). Also in NVE ensemble, establishing a
409   stable thermal gradient was followed. The simulation box was under
410   periodic boundary condition and devided into 10 slabs. Data collection
411 < process was similar to Lennard-Jones fluid system. Thermal
378 < conductivity calculation of bulk crystal gold used a similar
379 < protocol. And the face centered cubic crystal simulation box consists
380 < of 2880 Au atoms.
411 > process was similar to Lennard-Jones fluid system.
412  
413 + Thermal conductivity calculation of bulk crystal gold used a similar
414 + protocol. Two types of force field parameters, Embedded Atom Method
415 + (EAM) and Quantum Sutten-Chen (QSC) force field were used
416 + respectively. The face-centered cubic crystal simulation box consists of
417 + 2880 Au atoms. The lattice was first allowed volume change to relax
418 + under ambient temperature and pressure. Equilibrations in canonical and
419 + microcanonical ensemble were followed in order. With the simulation
420 + lattice devided evenly into 10 slabs, different thermal gradients were
421 + established by applying a set of target thermal transfer flux. Data of
422 + the series of thermal gradients was collected for calculation.
423 +
424   After simulations of bulk water and crystal gold, a mixture system was
425   constructed, consisting of 1188 Au atoms and 1862 H$_2$O
426   molecules. Spohr potential was adopted in depicting the interaction
427   between metal atom and water molecule.\cite{ISI:000167766600035} A
428 < similar protocol of equilibration was followed. A thermal gradient was
429 < built. It was found out that compared to homogeneous systems, the two
430 < phases could have large temperature difference under a relatively low
431 < thermal flux. Therefore, under our low flux condition, it is assumed
428 > similar protocol of equilibration was followed. Several thermal
429 > gradients was built under different target thermal flux. It was found
430 > out that compared to our previous simulation systems, the two phases
431 > could have large temperature difference even under a relatively low
432 > thermal flux. Therefore, under our low flux conditions, it is assumed
433   that the metal and water phases have respectively homogeneous
434 < temperature. In calculating the interfacial thermal conductivity $G$,
435 < this assumptioin was applied and thus our formula becomes:
434 > temperature, excluding the surface regions. In calculating the
435 > interfacial thermal conductivity $G$, this assumptioin was applied and
436 > thus our formula becomes:
437  
438   \begin{equation}
439   G = \frac{E_{total}}{2 t L_x L_y \left( \langle T_{gold}\rangle -
# Line 400 | Line 444 | average observed temperature of gold and water phases
444   and ${\langle T_{gold}\rangle}$ and ${\langle T_{water}\rangle}$ are the
445   average observed temperature of gold and water phases respectively.
446  
447 < \section{Results And Discussion}
404 < \subsection{Shear Viscosity}
405 < Our calculations (Table \ref{shearRate}) shows that scale RNEMD method
406 < produced comparable shear viscosity to swap RNEMD method. In Table
407 < \ref{shearRate}, the names of the calculated samples are devided into
408 < two parts. The first number refers to total slabs in one simulation
409 < box. The second number refers to the swapping interval in swap method, or
410 < in scale method the equilvalent swapping interval that the same
411 < momentum flux would theoretically result in swap method. All the scale
412 < method results were from simulations that had a scaling interval of 10
413 < time steps. The average molecular momentum gradients of these samples
414 < are shown in Figure \ref{shearGrad}.
415 <
416 < \begin{table*}
417 < \begin{minipage}{\linewidth}
418 < \begin{center}
419 <
420 < \caption{Calculation results for shear viscosity of Lennard-Jones
421 <  fluid at ${T^* = 0.72}$ and ${\rho^* = 0.85}$, with swap and scale
422 <  methods at various momentum exchange rates. Results in reduced
423 <  unit. Errors of calculations in parentheses. }
424 <
425 < \begin{tabular}{ccc}
426 < \hline
427 < Series & $\eta^*_{swap}$ & $\eta^*_{scale}$\\
428 < \hline
429 < 20-500 & 3.64(0.05) & 3.76(0.09)\\
430 < 20-1000 & 3.52(0.16) & 3.66(0.06)\\
431 < 20-2000 & 3.72(0.05) & 3.32(0.18)\\
432 < 20-2500 & 3.42(0.06) & 3.43(0.08)\\
433 < \hline
434 < \end{tabular}
435 < \label{shearRate}
436 < \end{center}
437 < \end{minipage}
438 < \end{table*}
439 <
440 < \begin{figure}
441 < \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{shearGrad}
442 < \caption{Average momentum gradients of shear viscosity simulations}
443 < \label{shearGrad}
444 < \end{figure}
445 <
446 < \begin{figure}
447 < \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{shearTempScale}
448 < \caption{Temperature profile for scaling RNEMD simulation.}
449 < \label{shearTempScale}
450 < \end{figure}
451 < However, observations of temperatures along three dimensions show that
452 < inhomogeneity occurs in scaling RNEMD simulations, particularly in the
453 < two slabs which were scaled. Figure \ref{shearTempScale} indicate that with
454 < relatively large imposed momentum flux, the temperature difference among $x$
455 < and the other two dimensions was significant. This would result from the
456 < algorithm of scaling method. From Eq. \ref{eq:fluxPlane}, after
457 < momentum gradient is set up, $P_c^x$ would be roughly stable
458 < ($<0$). Consequently, scaling factor $x$ would most probably larger
459 < than 1. Therefore, the kinetic energy in $x$-dimension $K_c^x$ would
460 < keep increase after most scaling steps. And if there is not enough time
461 < for the kinetic energy to exchange among different dimensions and
462 < different slabs, the system would finally build up temperature
463 < (kinetic energy) difference among the three dimensions. Also, between
464 < $y$ and $z$ dimensions in the scaled slabs, temperatures of $z$-axis
465 < are closer to neighbor slabs. This is due to momentum transfer along
466 < $z$ dimension between slabs.
467 <
468 < Although results between scaling and swapping methods are comparable,
469 < the inherent temperature inhomogeneity even in relatively low imposed
470 < exchange momentum flux simulations makes scaling RNEMD method less
471 < attractive than swapping RNEMD in shear viscosity calculation.
472 <
447 > \section{Results And Discussions}
448   \subsection{Thermal Conductivity}
449   \subsubsection{Lennard-Jones Fluid}
450 < Our thermal conductivity calculations also show that scaling method results
451 < agree with swapping method. Table \ref{thermal} lists our simulation
452 < results with similar manner we used in shear viscosity
453 < calculation. All the data reported from scaling method were obtained
454 < by simulations of 10-step exchange frequency, and the target exchange
455 < kinetic energy were set to produce equivalent kinetic energy flux as
456 < in swapping method. Figure \ref{thermalGrad} exhibits similar thermal
482 < gradients of respective similar kinetic energy flux.
450 > Our thermal conductivity calculations show that scaling method results
451 > agree with swapping method. Four different exchange intervals were
452 > tested (Table \ref{thermalLJRes}) using swapping method. With a fixed
453 > 10fs exchange interval, target exchange kinetic energy was set to
454 > produce equivalent kinetic energy flux as in swapping method. And
455 > similar thermal gradients were observed with similar thermal flux in
456 > two simulation methods (Figure \ref{thermalGrad}).
457  
458   \begin{table*}
459   \begin{minipage}{\linewidth}
# Line 492 | Line 466 | Series & $\lambda^*_{swap}$ & $\lambda^*_{scale}$\\
466  
467   \begin{tabular}{ccc}
468   \hline
469 < Series & $\lambda^*_{swap}$ & $\lambda^*_{scale}$\\
469 > (Equilvalent) Exchange Interval (fs) & $\lambda^*_{swap}$ &
470 > $\lambda^*_{scale}$\\
471   \hline
472 < 20-250  & 7.03(0.34) & 7.30(0.10)\\
473 < 20-500  & 7.03(0.14) & 6.95(0.09)\\
474 < 20-1000 & 6.91(0.42) & 7.19(0.07)\\
475 < 20-2000 & 7.52(0.15) & 7.19(0.28)\\
472 > 250  & 7.03(0.34) & 7.30(0.10)\\
473 > 500  & 7.03(0.14) & 6.95(0.09)\\
474 > 1000 & 6.91(0.42) & 7.19(0.07)\\
475 > 2000 & 7.52(0.15) & 7.19(0.28)\\
476   \hline
477   \end{tabular}
478 < \label{thermal}
478 > \label{thermalLJRes}
479   \end{center}
480   \end{minipage}
481   \end{table*}
482  
483   \begin{figure}
484   \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{thermalGrad}
485 < \caption{Temperature gradients of thermal conductivity simulations}
485 > \caption{NIVS-RNEMD method introduced similar temperature gradients
486 >  compared to ``swapping'' method under various kinetic energy flux in
487 >  thermal conductivity simulations.}
488   \label{thermalGrad}
489   \end{figure}
490  
491   During these simulations, molecule velocities were recorded in 1000 of
492 < all the snapshots. These velocity data were used to produce histograms
493 < of velocity and speed distribution in different slabs. From these
494 < histograms, it is observed that with increasing unphysical kinetic
495 < energy flux, speed and velocity distribution of molecules in slabs
496 < where swapping occured could deviate from Maxwell-Boltzmann
497 < distribution. Figure \ref{histSwap} indicates how these distributions
498 < deviate from ideal condition. In high temperature slabs, probability
499 < density in low speed is confidently smaller than ideal distribution;
500 < in low temperature slabs, probability density in high speed is smaller
501 < than ideal. This phenomenon is observable even in our relatively low
502 < swapping rate simulations. And this deviation could also leads to
503 < deviation of distribution of velocity in various dimensions. One
504 < feature of these deviated distribution is that in high temperature
505 < slab, the ideal Gaussian peak was changed into a relatively flat
506 < plateau; while in low temperature slab, that peak appears sharper.
492 > all the snapshots of one single data collection process. These
493 > velocity data were used to produce histograms of velocity and speed
494 > distribution in different slabs. From these histograms, it is observed
495 > that under relatively high unphysical kinetic energy flux, speed and
496 > velocity distribution of molecules in slabs where swapping occured
497 > could deviate from Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution. Figure
498 > \ref{thermalHist} a) illustrates how these distributions deviate from an
499 > ideal distribution. In high temperature slab, probability density in
500 > low speed is confidently smaller than ideal curve fit; in low
501 > temperature slab, probability density in high speed is smaller than
502 > ideal, while larger than ideal in low speed. This phenomenon is more
503 > obvious in our high swapping rate simulations. And this deviation
504 > could also leads to deviation of distribution of velocity in various
505 > dimensions. One feature of these deviated distribution is that in high
506 > temperature slab, the ideal Gaussian peak was changed into a
507 > relatively flat plateau; while in low temperature slab, that peak
508 > appears sharper. This problem is rooted in the mechanism of the
509 > swapping method. Continually depleting low (high) speed particles in
510 > the high (low) temperature slab could not be complemented by
511 > diffusions of low (high) speed particles from neighbor slabs, unless
512 > in suffciently low swapping rate. Simutaneously, surplus low speed
513 > particles in the low temperature slab do not have sufficient time to
514 > diffuse to neighbor slabs. However, thermal exchange rate should reach
515 > a minimum level to produce an observable thermal gradient under noise
516 > interference. Consequently, swapping RNEMD has a relatively narrow
517 > choice of swapping rate to satisfy these above restrictions.
518  
519 < \begin{figure}
520 < \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{histSwap}
521 < \caption{Speed distribution for thermal conductivity using swapping RNEMD.}
522 < \label{histSwap}
523 < \end{figure}
519 > Comparatively, NIVS-RNEMD has a speed distribution closer to the ideal
520 > curve fit (Figure \ref{thermalHist} b). Essentially, after scaling, a
521 > Gaussian distribution function would remain Gaussian. Although a
522 > single scaling is non-isotropic in all three dimensions, our scaling
523 > coefficient criteria could help maintian the scaling region as
524 > isotropic as possible. On the other hand, scaling coefficients are
525 > preferred to be as close to 1 as possible, which also helps minimize
526 > the difference among different dimensions. This is possible if scaling
527 > interval and one-time thermal transfer energy are well
528 > chosen. Consequently, NIVS-RNEMD is able to impose an unphysical
529 > thermal flux as the previous RNEMD method without large perturbation
530 > to the distribution of velocity and speed in the exchange regions.
531  
532   \begin{figure}
533 < \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{histScale}
534 < \caption{Speed distribution for thermal conductivity using scaling RNEMD.}
535 < \label{histScale}
533 > \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{thermalHist}
534 > \caption{Speed distribution for thermal conductivity using a)
535 >  ``swapping'' and b) NIVS- RNEMD methods. Shown is from the
536 >  simulations with an exchange or equilvalent exchange interval of 250
537 >  fs. In circled areas, distributions from ``swapping'' RNEMD
538 >  simulation have deviation from ideal Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution
539 >  (curves fit for each distribution).}
540 > \label{thermalHist}
541   \end{figure}
542  
543   \subsubsection{SPC/E Water}
544   Our results of SPC/E water thermal conductivity are comparable to
545 < Bedrov {\it et al.}\cite{ISI:000090151400044}, which employed the
546 < previous swapping RNEMD method for their calculation. Our simulations
547 < were able to produce a similar temperature gradient to their
548 < system. However, the average temperature of our system is 300K, while
549 < theirs is 318K, which would be attributed for part of the difference
550 < between the two series of results. Both methods yields values in
551 < agreement with experiment. And this shows the applicability of our
552 < method to multi-atom molecular system.
545 > Bedrov {\it et al.}\cite{Bedrov:2000}, which employed the
546 > previous swapping RNEMD method for their calculation. Bedrov {\it et
547 >  al.}\cite{Bedrov:2000} argued that exchange of the molecule
548 > center-of-mass velocities instead of single atom velocities in a
549 > molecule conserves the total kinetic energy and linear momentum. This
550 > principle is adopted in our simulations. Scaling is applied to the
551 > velocities of the rigid bodies of SPC/E model water molecules, instead
552 > of each hydrogen and oxygen atoms in relevant water molecules. As
553 > shown in Figure \ref{spceGrad}, temperature gradients were established
554 > similar to their system. However, the average temperature of our
555 > system is 300K, while theirs is 318K, which would be attributed for
556 > part of the difference between the final calculation results (Table
557 > \ref{spceThermal}). Both methods yields values in agreement with
558 > experiment. And this shows the applicability of our method to
559 > multi-atom molecular system.
560  
561   \begin{figure}
562   \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{spceGrad}
563 < \caption{Temperature gradients for SPC/E water thermal conductivity.}
563 > \caption{Temperature gradients in SPC/E water thermal conductivity
564 >  simulations.}
565   \label{spceGrad}
566   \end{figure}
567  
# Line 568 | Line 576 | $\langle dT/dz\rangle$(K/\AA) & & $\lambda$(W/m/K) & \
576   \begin{tabular}{cccc}
577   \hline
578   $\langle dT/dz\rangle$(K/\AA) & & $\lambda$(W/m/K) & \\
579 < & This work & Previous simulations\cite{ISI:000090151400044} &
579 > & This work & Previous simulations\cite{Bedrov:2000} &
580   Experiment$^a$\\
581   \hline
582   0.38 & 0.816(0.044) & & 0.64\\
# Line 582 | Line 590 | Our results of gold thermal conductivity used QSC forc
590   \end{table*}
591  
592   \subsubsection{Crystal Gold}
593 < Our results of gold thermal conductivity used QSC force field are
594 < shown in Table \ref{AuThermal}. Although our calculation is smaller
595 < than experimental value by an order of more than 100, this difference
596 < is mainly attributed to the lack of electron interaction
597 < representation in our force field parameters. Richardson {\it et
598 <  al.}\cite{ISI:A1992HX37800010} used similar force field parameters
599 < in their metal thermal conductivity calculations. The EMD method they
600 < employed in their simulations produced comparable results to
601 < ours. Therefore, it is confident to conclude that NIVS-RNEMD is
602 < applicable to metal force field system.
593 > Our results of gold thermal conductivity using two force fields are
594 > shown separately in Table \ref{qscThermal} and \ref{eamThermal}. In
595 > these calculations,the end and middle slabs were excluded in thermal
596 > gradient regession and only used as heat source and drain in the
597 > systems. Our yielded values using EAM force field are slightly larger
598 > than those using QSC force field. However, both series are
599 > significantly smaller than experimental value by an order of more than
600 > 100. It has been verified that this difference is mainly attributed to
601 > the lack of electron interaction representation in these force field
602 > parameters. Richardson {\it et al.}\cite{Clancy:1992} used EAM
603 > force field parameters in their metal thermal conductivity
604 > calculations. The Non-Equilibrium MD method they employed in their
605 > simulations produced comparable results to ours. As Zhang {\it et
606 >  al.}\cite{ISI:000231042800044} stated, thermal conductivity values
607 > are influenced mainly by force field. Therefore, it is confident to
608 > conclude that NIVS-RNEMD is applicable to metal force field system.
609  
610   \begin{figure}
611   \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{AuGrad}
612 < \caption{Temperature gradients for crystal gold thermal conductivity.}
612 > \caption{Temperature gradients for thermal conductivity calculation of
613 >  crystal gold using QSC force field.}
614   \label{AuGrad}
615   \end{figure}
616  
# Line 604 | Line 619 | applicable to metal force field system.
619   \begin{center}
620  
621   \caption{Calculation results for thermal conductivity of crystal gold
622 <  at ${\langle T\rangle}$ = 300K at various thermal exchange rates. Errors of
623 <  calculations in parentheses. }
622 >  using QSC force field at ${\langle T\rangle}$ = 300K at various
623 >  thermal exchange rates. Errors of calculations in parentheses. }
624  
625 < \begin{tabular}{ccc}
625 > \begin{tabular}{cc}
626   \hline
627   $\langle dT/dz\rangle$(K/\AA) & $\lambda$(W/m/K)\\
613 & This work & Previous simulations\cite{ISI:A1992HX37800010} \\
628   \hline
629 < 1.44 & 1.10(0.01) & \\
630 < 2.86 & 1.08(0.02) & \\
631 < 5.14 & 1.15(0.01) & \\
629 > 1.44 & 1.10(0.01)\\
630 > 2.86 & 1.08(0.02)\\
631 > 5.14 & 1.15(0.01)\\
632   \hline
633   \end{tabular}
634 < \label{AuThermal}
634 > \label{qscThermal}
635   \end{center}
636   \end{minipage}
637   \end{table*}
638  
639 + \begin{figure}
640 + \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{eamGrad}
641 + \caption{Temperature gradients for thermal conductivity calculation of
642 +  crystal gold using EAM force field.}
643 + \label{eamGrad}
644 + \end{figure}
645 +
646 + \begin{table*}
647 + \begin{minipage}{\linewidth}
648 + \begin{center}
649 +
650 + \caption{Calculation results for thermal conductivity of crystal gold
651 +  using EAM force field at ${\langle T\rangle}$ = 300K at various
652 +  thermal exchange rates. Errors of calculations in parentheses. }
653 +
654 + \begin{tabular}{cc}
655 + \hline
656 + $\langle dT/dz\rangle$(K/\AA) & $\lambda$(W/m/K)\\
657 + \hline
658 + 1.24 & 1.24(0.06)\\
659 + 2.06 & 1.37(0.04)\\
660 + 2.55 & 1.41(0.03)\\
661 + \hline
662 + \end{tabular}
663 + \label{eamThermal}
664 + \end{center}
665 + \end{minipage}
666 + \end{table*}
667 +
668 +
669   \subsection{Interfaciel Thermal Conductivity}
670 < After valid simulations of homogeneous water and gold systems using
671 < NIVS-RNEMD method, calculation of gold/water interfacial thermal
672 < conductivity was followed. It is found out that the interfacial
673 < conductance is low due to a hydrophobic surface in our system. Figure
674 < \ref{interfaceDensity} demonstrates this observance. Consequently, our
675 < reported results (Table \ref{interfaceRes}) are of two orders of
676 < magnitude smaller than our calculations on homogeneous systems.
670 > After simulations of homogeneous water and gold systems using
671 > NIVS-RNEMD method were proved valid, calculation of gold/water
672 > interfacial thermal conductivity was followed. It is found out that
673 > the low interfacial conductance is probably due to the hydrophobic
674 > surface in our system. Figure \ref{interfaceDensity} demonstrates mass
675 > density change along $z$-axis, which is perpendicular to the
676 > gold/water interface. It is observed that water density significantly
677 > decreases when approaching the surface. Under this low thermal
678 > conductance, both gold and water phase have sufficient time to
679 > eliminate temperature difference inside respectively (Figure
680 > \ref{interfaceGrad}). With indistinguishable temperature difference
681 > within respective phase, it is valid to assume that the temperature
682 > difference between gold and water on surface would be approximately
683 > the same as the difference between the gold and water phase. This
684 > assumption enables convenient calculation of $G$ using
685 > Eq. \ref{interfaceCalc} instead of measuring temperatures of thin
686 > layer of water and gold close enough to surface, which would have
687 > greater fluctuation and lower accuracy. Reported results (Table
688 > \ref{interfaceRes}) are of two orders of magnitude smaller than our
689 > calculations on homogeneous systems, and thus have larger relative
690 > errors than our calculation results on homogeneous systems.
691  
692   \begin{figure}
693   \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{interfaceDensity}
694   \caption{Density profile for interfacial thermal conductivity
695 <  simulation box.}
695 >  simulation box. Significant water density decrease is observed on
696 >  gold surface.}
697   \label{interfaceDensity}
698   \end{figure}
699  
700   \begin{figure}
701   \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{interfaceGrad}
702   \caption{Temperature profiles for interfacial thermal conductivity
703 <  simulation box.}
703 >  simulation box. Temperatures of different slabs in the same phase
704 >  show no significant difference.}
705   \label{interfaceGrad}
706   \end{figure}
707  
# Line 668 | Line 728 | $J_z$(MW/m$^2$) & $T_{gold}$ & $T_{water}$ & $G$(MW/m$
728   \end{minipage}
729   \end{table*}
730  
731 + \subsection{Shear Viscosity}
732 + Our calculations (Table \ref{shearRate}) shows that scale RNEMD method
733 + produced comparable shear viscosity to swap RNEMD method. In Table
734 + \ref{shearRate}, the names of the calculated samples are devided into
735 + two parts. The first number refers to total slabs in one simulation
736 + box. The second number refers to the swapping interval in swap method, or
737 + in scale method the equilvalent swapping interval that the same
738 + momentum flux would theoretically result in swap method. All the scale
739 + method results were from simulations that had a scaling interval of 10
740 + time steps. The average molecular momentum gradients of these samples
741 + are shown in Figure \ref{shear} (a) and (b).
742 +
743 + \begin{table*}
744 + \begin{minipage}{\linewidth}
745 + \begin{center}
746 +
747 + \caption{Calculation results for shear viscosity of Lennard-Jones
748 +  fluid at ${T^* = 0.72}$ and ${\rho^* = 0.85}$, with swap and scale
749 +  methods at various momentum exchange rates. Results in reduced
750 +  unit. Errors of calculations in parentheses. }
751 +
752 + \begin{tabular}{ccc}
753 + \hline
754 + Series & $\eta^*_{swap}$ & $\eta^*_{scale}$\\
755 + \hline
756 + 20-500 & 3.64(0.05) & 3.76(0.09)\\
757 + 20-1000 & 3.52(0.16) & 3.66(0.06)\\
758 + 20-2000 & 3.72(0.05) & 3.32(0.18)\\
759 + 20-2500 & 3.42(0.06) & 3.43(0.08)\\
760 + \hline
761 + \end{tabular}
762 + \label{shearRate}
763 + \end{center}
764 + \end{minipage}
765 + \end{table*}
766 +
767 + \begin{figure}
768 + \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{shear}
769 + \caption{Average momentum gradients in shear viscosity simulations,
770 +  using (a) ``swapping'' method and (b) NIVS-RNEMD method
771 +  respectively. (c) Temperature difference among x and y, z dimensions
772 +  observed when using NIVS-RNEMD with equivalent exchange interval of
773 +  500 fs.}
774 + \label{shear}
775 + \end{figure}
776 +
777 + However, observations of temperatures along three dimensions show that
778 + inhomogeneity occurs in scaling RNEMD simulations, particularly in the
779 + two slabs which were scaled. Figure \ref{shear} (c) indicate that with
780 + relatively large imposed momentum flux, the temperature difference among $x$
781 + and the other two dimensions was significant. This would result from the
782 + algorithm of scaling method. From Eq. \ref{eq:fluxPlane}, after
783 + momentum gradient is set up, $P_c^x$ would be roughly stable
784 + ($<0$). Consequently, scaling factor $x$ would most probably larger
785 + than 1. Therefore, the kinetic energy in $x$-dimension $K_c^x$ would
786 + keep increase after most scaling steps. And if there is not enough time
787 + for the kinetic energy to exchange among different dimensions and
788 + different slabs, the system would finally build up temperature
789 + (kinetic energy) difference among the three dimensions. Also, between
790 + $y$ and $z$ dimensions in the scaled slabs, temperatures of $z$-axis
791 + are closer to neighbor slabs. This is due to momentum transfer along
792 + $z$ dimension between slabs.
793 +
794 + Although results between scaling and swapping methods are comparable,
795 + the inherent temperature inhomogeneity even in relatively low imposed
796 + exchange momentum flux simulations makes scaling RNEMD method less
797 + attractive than swapping RNEMD in shear viscosity calculation.
798 +
799   \section{Conclusions}
800   NIVS-RNEMD simulation method is developed and tested on various
801 < systems. Simulation results demonstrate its validity of thermal
802 < conductivity calculations. NIVS-RNEMD improves non-Boltzmann-Maxwell
803 < distributions existing in previous RNEMD methods, and extends its
804 < applicability to interfacial systems. NIVS-RNEMD has also limited
805 < application on shear viscosity calculations, but under high momentum
806 < flux, it  could cause temperature difference among different
807 < dimensions. Modification is necessary to extend the applicability of
808 < NIVS-RNEMD in shear viscosity calculations.
801 > systems. Simulation results demonstrate its validity in thermal
802 > conductivity calculations, from Lennard-Jones fluid to multi-atom
803 > molecule like water and metal crystals. NIVS-RNEMD improves
804 > non-Boltzmann-Maxwell distributions, which exist in previous RNEMD
805 > methods. Furthermore, it develops a valid means for unphysical thermal
806 > transfer between different species of molecules, and thus extends its
807 > applicability to interfacial systems. Our calculation of gold/water
808 > interfacial thermal conductivity demonstrates this advantage over
809 > previous RNEMD methods. NIVS-RNEMD has also limited application on
810 > shear viscosity calculations, but could cause temperature difference
811 > among different dimensions under high momentum flux. Modification is
812 > necessary to extend the applicability of NIVS-RNEMD in shear viscosity
813 > calculations.
814  
815   \section{Acknowledgments}
816   Support for this project was provided by the National Science
# Line 685 | Line 818 | Dame.  \newpage
818   the Center for Research Computing (CRC) at the University of Notre
819   Dame.  \newpage
820  
821 < \bibliographystyle{jcp2}
821 > \bibliographystyle{aip}
822   \bibliography{nivsRnemd}
823 +
824   \end{doublespace}
825   \end{document}
826  

Diff Legend

Removed lines
+ Added lines
< Changed lines
> Changed lines