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 3582 by skuang, Thu Apr 8 21:23:55 2010 UTC vs.
Revision 3615 by skuang, Mon Jul 19 19:59:11 2010 UTC

# Line 6 | Line 6
6   \usepackage{caption}
7   %\usepackage{tabularx}
8   \usepackage{graphicx}
9 + \usepackage{multirow}
10   %\usepackage{booktabs}
11   %\usepackage{bibentry}
12   %\usepackage{mathrsfs}
# Line 38 | Line 39 | A molecular simulation method is developed based on th
39   \begin{doublespace}
40  
41   \begin{abstract}
42 < A molecular simulation method is developed based on the previous RNEMD
43 < algorithm. With scaling the velocities of molecules in specific
44 < regions of a system, unphysical thermal transfer can be achieved and
45 < thermal / momentum gradient can be established, as well as
46 < conservation of linear momentum and translational kinetic
47 < energy. Thermal conductivity calculations of Lennard-Jones fluid water
48 < (SPC/E model) and crystal gold (QSC and EAM model) are performed and
49 < demostrate the validity of the method. Furthermore, NIVS-RNEMD
50 < improves the non-Maxwell-Boltzmann velocity distributions in previous
51 < RNEMD methods, where unphysical momentum transfer occurs. NIVS-RNEMD
52 < also extends its application to interfacial thermal conductivity
53 < calculations, thanks to its novel means in kinetic energy transfer.
42 >  We present a new method for introducing stable non-equilibrium
43 >  velocity and temperature distributions in molecular dynamics
44 >  simulations of heterogeneous systems.  This method extends earlier
45 >  Reverse Non-Equilibrium Molecular Dynamics (RNEMD) methods which use
46 >  momentum exchange swapping moves that can create non-thermal
47 >  velocity distributions and are difficult to use for interfacial
48 >  calculations.  By using non-isotropic velocity scaling (NIVS) on the
49 >  molecules in specific regions of a system, it is possible to impose
50 >  momentum or thermal flux between regions of a simulation and stable
51 >  thermal and momentum gradients can then be established.  The scaling
52 >  method we have developed conserves the total linear momentum and
53 >  total energy of the system.  To test the methods, we have computed
54 >  the thermal conductivity of model liquid and solid systems as well
55 >  as the interfacial thermal conductivity of a metal-water interface.
56 >  We find that the NIVS-RNEMD improves the problematic velocity
57 >  distributions that develop in other RNEMD methods.
58   \end{abstract}
59  
60   \newpage
# Line 60 | Line 65 | calculations, thanks to its novel means in kinetic ene
65   %                          BODY OF TEXT
66   %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
67  
63
64
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 (Fig. \ref{thermalDemo}).  The transport
81 < coefficients (shear viscosity and thermal conductivity) are easily
82 < obtained by assuming 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_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}
87 > RNEMD has been widely used to provide computational estimates of
88 > thermal conductivities and shear viscosities in a wide range of
89 > materials, from liquid copper to both monatomic and molecular fluids
90 > (e.g.  ionic
91 > 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}
92  
93   \begin{figure}
94   \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{thermalDemo}
95 < \caption{Demostration of thermal gradient estalished by RNEMD
96 <  method. Physical thermal flow directs from high temperature region
97 <  to low temperature region. Unphysical thermal transfer counteracts
98 <  it and maintains a steady thermal gradient.}
95 > \caption{RNEMD methods impose an unphysical transfer of momentum or
96 >  kinetic energy between a ``hot'' slab and a ``cold'' slab in the
97 >  simulation box.  The molecular system responds to this imposed flux
98 >  by generating a momentum or temperature gradient.  The slope of the
99 >  gradient can then be used to compute transport properties (e.g.
100 >  shear viscosity and thermal conductivity).}
101   \label{thermalDemo}
102   \end{figure}
103  
104 < RNEMD is preferable in many ways to the forward NEMD methods because
105 < it imposes what is typically difficult to measure (a flux or stress)
106 < and it is typically much easier to compute momentum gradients or
107 < strains (the response).  For similar reasons, RNEMD is also preferable
108 < to slowly-converging equilibrium methods for measuring thermal
109 < conductivity and shear viscosity (using Green-Kubo relations or the
110 < Helfand moment approach of Viscardy {\it et
104 > RNEMD is preferable in many ways to the forward NEMD
105 > methods\cite{ISI:A1988Q205300014,hess:209,Vasquez:2004fk,backer:154503,ISI:000266247600008}
106 > because it imposes what is typically difficult to measure (a flux or
107 > stress) and it is typically much easier to compute the response
108 > (momentum gradients or strains).  For similar reasons, RNEMD is also
109 > preferable to slowly-converging equilibrium methods for measuring
110 > thermal conductivity and shear viscosity (using Green-Kubo
111 > relations\cite{daivis:541,mondello:9327} or the Helfand moment
112 > approach of Viscardy {\it et
113    al.}\cite{Viscardy:2007bh,Viscardy:2007lq}) because these rely on
114   computing difficult to measure quantities.
115  
# Line 111 | Line 119 | Recently, Tenney and Maginn\cite{ISI:000273472300004}
119   typically samples from the same manifold of states in the
120   microcanonical ensemble.
121  
122 < Recently, Tenney and Maginn\cite{ISI:000273472300004} have discovered
122 > Recently, Tenney and Maginn\cite{Maginn:2010} have discovered
123   some problems with the original RNEMD swap technique.  Notably, large
124   momentum fluxes (equivalent to frequent momentum swaps between the
125   slabs) can result in ``notched'', ``peaked'' and generally non-thermal
# Line 121 | Line 129 | scaling (NIVS-RNEMD) which retains the desirable featu
129   and self-adjusting metrics for retaining the usability of the method.
130  
131   In this paper, we develop and test a method for non-isotropic velocity
132 < scaling (NIVS-RNEMD) which retains the desirable features of RNEMD
132 > scaling (NIVS) which retains the desirable features of RNEMD
133   (conservation of linear momentum and total energy, compatibility with
134   periodic boundary conditions) while establishing true thermal
135 < distributions in each of the two slabs.  In the next section, we
136 < develop the method for determining the scaling constraints.  We then
137 < test the method on both single component, multi-component, and
138 < non-isotropic mixtures and show that it is capable of providing
135 > distributions in each of the two slabs. In the next section, we
136 > present the method for determining the scaling constraints.  We then
137 > test the method on both liquids and solids as well as a non-isotropic
138 > liquid-solid interface and show that it is capable of providing
139   reasonable estimates of the thermal conductivity and shear viscosity
140 < in these cases.
140 > in all of these cases.
141  
142   \section{Methodology}
143 < We retain the basic idea of Muller-Plathe's RNEMD method; the periodic
144 < system is partitioned into a series of thin slabs along a particular
143 > We retain the basic idea of M\"{u}ller-Plathe's RNEMD method; the
144 > periodic system is partitioned into a series of thin slabs along one
145   axis ($z$).  One of the slabs at the end of the periodic box is
146   designated the ``hot'' slab, while the slab in the center of the box
147   is designated the ``cold'' slab.  The artificial momentum flux will be
# Line 141 | Line 149 | moves.  For molecules $\{i\}$ located within the cold
149   hot slab.
150  
151   Rather than using momentum swaps, we use a series of velocity scaling
152 < moves.  For molecules $\{i\}$ located within the cold slab,
152 > moves.  For molecules $\{i\}$  located within the cold slab,
153   \begin{equation}
154   \vec{v}_i \leftarrow \left( \begin{array}{ccc}
155   x & 0 & 0 \\
# Line 149 | Line 157 | where ${x, y, z}$ are a set of 3 scaling variables for
157   0 & 0 & z \\
158   \end{array} \right) \cdot \vec{v}_i
159   \end{equation}
160 < where ${x, y, z}$ are a set of 3 scaling variables for each of the
161 < three directions in the system.  Likewise, the molecules $\{j\}$
162 < located in the hot slab will see a concomitant scaling of velocities,
160 > where ${x, y, z}$ are a set of 3 velocity-scaling variables for each
161 > of the three directions in the system.  Likewise, the molecules
162 > $\{j\}$ located in the hot slab will see a concomitant scaling of
163 > velocities,
164   \begin{equation}
165   \vec{v}_j \leftarrow \left( \begin{array}{ccc}
166   x^\prime & 0 & 0 \\
# Line 161 | Line 170 | Conservation of linear momentum in each of the three d
170   \end{equation}
171  
172   Conservation of linear momentum in each of the three directions
173 < ($\alpha = x,y,z$) ties the values of the hot and cold bin scaling
173 > ($\alpha = x,y,z$) ties the values of the hot and cold scaling
174   parameters together:
175   \begin{equation}
176   P_h^\alpha + P_c^\alpha = \alpha^\prime P_h^\alpha + \alpha P_c^\alpha
# Line 195 | Line 204 | Substituting in the expressions for the hot scaling pa
204   similar manner to the linear momenta (Eq. \ref{eq:momentumdef}).
205   Substituting in the expressions for the hot scaling parameters
206   ($\alpha^\prime$) from Eq. (\ref{eq:hotcoldscaling}), we obtain the
207 < {\it constraint ellipsoid equation}:
207 > {\it constraint ellipsoid}:
208   \begin{equation}
209 < \sum_{\alpha = x,y,z} a_\alpha \alpha^2 + b_\alpha \alpha + c_\alpha = 0
209 > \sum_{\alpha = x,y,z} \left( a_\alpha \alpha^2 + b_\alpha \alpha +
210 >  c_\alpha \right) = 0
211   \label{eq:constraintEllipsoid}
212   \end{equation}
213   where the constants are obtained from the instantaneous values of the
# Line 209 | Line 219 | This ellipsoid equation defines the set of cold slab s
219   c_\alpha & = & K_h^\alpha p_\alpha^2 + 2 K_h^\alpha p_\alpha - K_c^\alpha
220   \label{eq:constraintEllipsoidConsts}
221   \end{eqnarray}
222 < This ellipsoid equation defines the set of cold slab scaling
223 < parameters which can be applied while preserving both linear momentum
224 < in all three directions as well as kinetic energy.
222 > This ellipsoid (Eq. \ref{eq:constraintEllipsoid}) defines the set of
223 > cold slab scaling parameters which, when applied, preserve the linear
224 > momentum of the system in all three directions as well as total
225 > kinetic energy.
226  
227 < The goal of using velocity scaling variables is to transfer linear
228 < momentum or kinetic energy from the cold slab to the hot slab.  If the
229 < hot and cold slabs are separated along the z-axis, the energy flux is
230 < given simply by the decrease in kinetic energy of the cold bin:
227 > The goal of using these velocity scaling variables is to transfer
228 > kinetic energy from the cold slab to the hot slab.  If the hot and
229 > cold slabs are separated along the z-axis, the energy flux is given
230 > simply by the decrease in kinetic energy of the cold bin:
231   \begin{equation}
232   (1-x^2) K_c^x  + (1-y^2) K_c^y + (1-z^2) K_c^z = J_z\Delta t
233   \end{equation}
234   The expression for the energy flux can be re-written as another
235   ellipsoid centered on $(x,y,z) = 0$:
236   \begin{equation}
237 < 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
237 > \sum_{\alpha = x,y,z} K_c^\alpha \alpha^2 = \sum_{\alpha = x,y,z}
238 > K_c^\alpha -J_z \Delta t
239   \label{eq:fluxEllipsoid}
240   \end{equation}
241 < The spatial extent of the {\it thermal flux ellipsoid equation} is
242 < governed both by a targetted value, $J_z$ as well as the instantaneous
243 < values of the kinetic energy components in the cold bin.
241 > The spatial extent of the {\it thermal flux ellipsoid} is governed
242 > both by the target flux, $J_z$ as well as the instantaneous values of
243 > the kinetic energy components in the cold bin.
244  
245   To satisfy an energetic flux as well as the conservation constraints,
246 < it is sufficient to determine the points ${x,y,z}$ which lie on both
247 < the constraint ellipsoid (Eq. \ref{eq:constraintEllipsoid}) and the
248 < flux ellipsoid (Eq. \ref{eq:fluxEllipsoid}), i.e. the intersection of
249 < the two ellipsoids in 3-dimensional space.
246 > we must determine the points ${x,y,z}$ that lie on both the constraint
247 > ellipsoid (Eq. \ref{eq:constraintEllipsoid}) and the flux ellipsoid
248 > (Eq. \ref{eq:fluxEllipsoid}), i.e. the intersection of the two
249 > ellipsoids in 3-dimensional space.
250  
251   \begin{figure}
252   \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{ellipsoids}
253 < \caption{Scaling points which maintain both constant energy and
254 <  constant linear momentum of the system lie on the surface of the
255 <  {\it constraint ellipsoid} while points which generate the target
256 <  momentum flux lie on the surface of the {\it flux ellipsoid}.  The
257 <  velocity distributions in the cold bin are scaled by only those
253 > \caption{Velocity scaling coefficients which maintain both constant
254 >  energy and constant linear momentum of the system lie on the surface
255 >  of the {\it constraint ellipsoid} while points which generate the
256 >  target momentum flux lie on the surface of the {\it flux ellipsoid}.
257 >  The velocity distributions in the cold bin are scaled by only those
258    points which lie on both ellipsoids.}
259   \label{ellipsoids}
260   \end{figure}
261  
262 < One may also define momentum flux (say along the $x$-direction) as:
262 > Since ellipsoids can be expressed as polynomials up to second order in
263 > each of the three coordinates, finding the the intersection points of
264 > two ellipsoids is isomorphic to finding the roots a polynomial of
265 > degree 16.  There are a number of polynomial root-finding methods in
266 > the literature,\cite{Hoffman:2001sf,384119} but numerically finding
267 > the roots of high-degree polynomials is generally an ill-conditioned
268 > problem.\cite{Hoffman:2001sf}[P157] One simplification is to maintain velocity
269 > scalings that are {\it as isotropic as possible}.  To do this, we
270 > impose $x=y$, and to treat both the constraint and flux ellipsoids as
271 > 2-dimensional ellipses.  In reduced dimensionality, the
272 > intersecting-ellipse problem reduces to finding the roots of
273 > polynomials of degree 4.
274 >
275 > Depending on the target flux and current velocity distributions, the
276 > ellipsoids can have between 0 and 4 intersection points.  If there are
277 > no intersection points, it is not possible to satisfy the constraints
278 > while performing a non-equilibrium scaling move, and no change is made
279 > to the dynamics.  
280 >
281 > With multiple intersection points, any of the scaling points will
282 > conserve the linear momentum and kinetic energy of the system and will
283 > generate the correct target flux.  Although this method is inherently
284 > non-isotropic, the goal is still to maintain the system as close to an
285 > isotropic fluid as possible.  With this in mind, we would like the
286 > kinetic energies in the three different directions could become as
287 > close as each other as possible after each scaling.  Simultaneously,
288 > one would also like each scaling as gentle as possible, i.e. ${x,y,z
289 >  \rightarrow 1}$, in order to avoid large perturbation to the system.
290 > To do this, we pick the intersection point which maintains the three
291 > scaling variables ${x, y, z}$ as well as the ratio of kinetic energies
292 > ${K_c^z/K_c^x, K_c^z/K_c^y}$ as close as possible to 1.
293 >
294 > After the valid scaling parameters are arrived at by solving geometric
295 > intersection problems in $x, y, z$ space in order to obtain cold slab
296 > scaling parameters, Eq. (\ref{eq:hotcoldscaling}) is used to
297 > determine the conjugate hot slab scaling variables.
298 >
299 > \subsection{Introducing shear stress via velocity scaling}
300 > It is also possible to use this method to magnify the random
301 > fluctuations of the average momentum in each of the bins to induce a
302 > momentum flux.  Doing this repeatedly will create a shear stress on
303 > the system which will respond with an easily-measured strain.  The
304 > momentum flux (say along the $x$-direction) may be defined as:
305   \begin{equation}
306   (1-x) P_c^x = j_z(p_x)\Delta t
307   \label{eq:fluxPlane}
308   \end{equation}
309 < The above {\it momentum flux equation} is essentially a plane which is
310 < perpendicular to the $x$-axis, with its position governed both by a
311 < target value, $j_z(p_x)$ as well as the instantaneous value of the
258 < momentum along the $x$-direction.
309 > This {\it momentum flux plane} is perpendicular to the $x$-axis, with
310 > its position governed both by a target value, $j_z(p_x)$ as well as
311 > the instantaneous value of the momentum along the $x$-direction.
312  
313 < Similarly, to satisfy a momentum flux as well as the conservation
314 < constraints, it is sufficient to determine the points ${x,y,z}$ which
315 < lie on both the constraint ellipsoid (Eq. \ref{eq:constraintEllipsoid})
316 < and the flux plane (Eq. \ref{eq:fluxPlane}), i.e. the intersection of
317 < an ellipsoid and a plane in 3-dimensional space.
313 > In order to satisfy a momentum flux as well as the conservation
314 > constraints, we must determine the points ${x,y,z}$ which lie on both
315 > the constraint ellipsoid (Eq. \ref{eq:constraintEllipsoid}) and the
316 > flux plane (Eq. \ref{eq:fluxPlane}), i.e. the intersection of an
317 > ellipsoid and a plane in 3-dimensional space.
318  
319 < To summarize, by solving respective equation sets, one can determine
320 < possible sets of scaling variables for cold slab. And corresponding
321 < sets of scaling variables for hot slab can be determine as well.
319 > In the case of momentum flux transfer, we also impose another
320 > constraint to set the kinetic energy transfer as zero. In other
321 > words, we apply Eq. \ref{eq:fluxEllipsoid} and let ${J_z = 0}$.  With
322 > one variable fixed by Eq. \ref{eq:fluxPlane}, one now have a similar
323 > set of quartic equations to the above kinetic energy transfer problem.
324  
325 < The following problem will be choosing an optimal set of scaling
271 < variables among the possible sets. Although this method is inherently
272 < non-isotropic, the goal is still to maintain the system as isotropic
273 < as possible. Under this consideration, one would like the kinetic
274 < energies in different directions could become as close as each other
275 < after each scaling. Simultaneously, one would also like each scaling
276 < as gentle as possible, i.e. ${x,y,z \rightarrow 1}$, in order to avoid
277 < large perturbation to the system. Therefore, one approach to obtain the
278 < scaling variables would be constructing an criteria function, with
279 < constraints as above equation sets, and solving the function's minimum
280 < by method like Lagrange multipliers.
325 > \section{Computational Details}
326  
327 < In order to save computation time, we have a different approach to a
328 < relatively good set of scaling variables with much less calculation
329 < than above. Here is the detail of our simplification of the problem.
327 > We have implemented this methodology in our molecular dynamics code,
328 > OpenMD,\cite{Meineke:2005gd,openmd} performing the NIVS scaling moves
329 > after an MD step with a variable frequency.  We have tested the method
330 > in a variety of different systems, including homogeneous fluids
331 > (Lennard-Jones and SPC/E water), crystalline solids ({\sc
332 >  eam})~\cite{PhysRevB.33.7983} and quantum Sutton-Chen ({\sc
333 >  q-sc})~\cite{PhysRevB.59.3527} models for Gold), and heterogeneous
334 > interfaces ({\sc q-sc} gold - SPC/E water). The last of these systems would
335 > have been difficult to study using previous RNEMD methods, but using
336 > velocity scaling moves, we can even obtain estimates of the
337 > interfacial thermal conductivities ($G$).
338  
339 < In the case of kinetic energy transfer, we impose another constraint
287 < ${x = y}$, into the equation sets. Consequently, there are two
288 < variables left. And now one only needs to solve a set of two {\it
289 <  ellipses equations}. This problem would be transformed into solving
290 < one quartic equation for one of the two variables. There are known
291 < generic methods that solve real roots of quartic equations. Then one
292 < can determine the other variable and obtain sets of scaling
293 < variables. Among these sets, one can apply the above criteria to
294 < choose the best set, while much faster with only a few sets to choose.
339 > \subsection{Simulation Cells}
340  
341 < In the case of momentum flux transfer, we impose another constraint to
342 < set the kinetic energy transfer as zero. In another word, we apply
343 < Eq. \ref{eq:fluxEllipsoid} and let ${J_z = 0}$. After that, with one
344 < variable fixed by Eq. \ref{eq:fluxPlane}, one now have a similar set
345 < of equations on the above kinetic energy transfer problem. Therefore,
346 < an approach similar to the above would be sufficient for this as well.
341 > In each of the systems studied, the dynamics was carried out in a
342 > rectangular simulation cell using periodic boundary conditions in all
343 > three dimensions.  The cells were longer along the $z$ axis and the
344 > space was divided into $N$ slabs along this axis (typically $N=20$).
345 > The top slab ($n=1$) was designated the ``hot'' slab, while the
346 > central slab ($n= N/2 + 1$) was designated the ``cold'' slab. In all
347 > cases, simulations were first thermalized in canonical ensemble (NVT)
348 > using a Nos\'{e}-Hoover thermostat.\cite{Hoover85} then equilibrated in
349 > microcanonical ensemble (NVE) before introducing any non-equilibrium
350 > method.
351  
352 < \section{Computational Details}
304 < \subsection{Lennard-Jones Fluid}
305 < Our simulation consists of a series of systems. All of these
306 < simulations were run with the OpenMD simulation software
307 < package\cite{Meineke:2005gd} integrated with RNEMD codes.
352 > \subsection{RNEMD with M\"{u}ller-Plathe swaps}
353  
354 < A Lennard-Jones fluid system was built and tested first. In order to
355 < compare our method with swapping RNEMD, a series of simulations were
356 < performed to calculate the shear viscosity and thermal conductivity of
312 < argon. 2592 atoms were in a orthorhombic cell, which was ${10.06\sigma
313 <  \times 10.06\sigma \times 30.18\sigma}$ by size. The reduced density
314 < ${\rho^* = \rho\sigma^3}$ was thus 0.85, which enabled direct
315 < comparison between our results and others. These simulations used
316 < velocity Verlet algorithm with reduced timestep ${\tau^* =
317 <  4.6\times10^{-4}}$.
354 > In order to compare our new methodology with the original
355 > M\"{u}ller-Plathe swapping algorithm,\cite{ISI:000080382700030} we
356 > first performed simulations using the original technique.
357  
358 < For shear viscosity calculation, the reduced temperature was ${T^* =
320 <  k_B T/\varepsilon = 0.72}$. Simulations were first equilibrated in canonical
321 < ensemble (NVT), then equilibrated in microcanonical ensemble
322 < (NVE). Establishing and stablizing momentum gradient were followed
323 < also in NVE ensemble. For the swapping part, Muller-Plathe's algorithm was
324 < adopted.\cite{ISI:000080382700030} The simulation box was under
325 < periodic boundary condition, and devided into ${N = 20}$ slabs. In each swap,
326 < the top slab ${(n = 1)}$ exchange the most negative $x$ momentum with the
327 < most positive $x$ momentum in the center slab ${(n = N/2 + 1)}$. Referred
328 < to Tenney {\it et al.}\cite{ISI:000273472300004}, a series of swapping
329 < frequency were chosen. According to each result from swapping
330 < RNEMD, scaling RNEMD simulations were run with the target momentum
331 < flux set to produce a similar momentum flux, and consequently shear
332 < rate. Furthermore, various scaling frequencies can be tested for one
333 < single swapping rate. To test the temperature homogeneity in our
334 < system of swapping and scaling methods, temperatures of different
335 < dimensions in all the slabs were observed. Most of the simulations
336 < include $10^5$ steps of equilibration without imposing momentum flux,
337 < $10^5$ steps of stablization with imposing unphysical momentum
338 < transfer, and $10^6$ steps of data collection under RNEMD. For
339 < relatively high momentum flux simulations, ${5\times10^5}$ step data
340 < collection is sufficient. For some low momentum flux simulations,
341 < ${2\times10^6}$ steps were necessary.
358 > \subsection{RNEMD with NIVS scaling}
359  
360 < After each simulation, the shear viscosity was calculated in reduced
361 < unit. The momentum flux was calculated with total unphysical
362 < transferred momentum ${P_x}$ and data collection time $t$:
360 > For each simulation utilizing the swapping method, a corresponding
361 > NIVS-RNEMD simulation was carried out using a target momentum flux set
362 > to produce a the same momentum or energy flux exhibited in the
363 > swapping simulation.
364 >
365 > To test the temperature homogeneity (and to compute transport
366 > coefficients), directional momentum and temperature distributions were
367 > accumulated for molecules in each of the slabs.
368 >
369 > \subsection{Shear viscosities}
370 >
371 > The momentum flux was calculated using the total non-physical momentum
372 > transferred (${P_x}$) and the data collection time ($t$):
373   \begin{equation}
374   j_z(p_x) = \frac{P_x}{2 t L_x L_y}
375   \end{equation}
376 < where $L_x$ and $L_y$ denotes $x$ and $y$ lengths of the simulation
377 < box, and physical momentum transfer occurs in two ways due to our
378 < periodic boundary condition settings. And the velocity gradient
379 < ${\langle \partial v_x /\partial z \rangle}$ can be obtained by a
380 < linear regression of the velocity profile. From the shear viscosity
381 < $\eta$ calculated with the above parameters, one can further convert
382 < it into reduced unit ${\eta^* = \eta \sigma^2 (\varepsilon m)^{-1/2}}$.
376 > where $L_x$ and $L_y$ denote the $x$ and $y$ lengths of the simulation
377 > box.  The factor of two in the denominator is present because physical
378 > momentum transfer occurs in two directions due to our periodic
379 > boundary conditions.  The velocity gradient ${\langle \partial v_x
380 >  /\partial z \rangle}$ was obtained using linear regression of the
381 > velocity profiles in the bins.  For Lennard-Jones simulations, shear
382 > viscosities are reporte in reduced units (${\eta^* = \eta \sigma^2
383 >  (\varepsilon m)^{-1/2}}$).
384  
385 < For thermal conductivity calculations, simulations were first run under
358 < reduced temperature ${\langle T^*\rangle = 0.72}$ in NVE
359 < ensemble. Muller-Plathe's algorithm was adopted in the swapping
360 < method. Under identical simulation box parameters with our shear
361 < viscosity calculations, in each swap, the top slab exchanges all three
362 < translational momentum components of the molecule with least kinetic
363 < energy with the same components of the molecule in the center slab
364 < with most kinetic energy, unless this ``coldest'' molecule in the
365 < ``hot'' slab is still ``hotter'' than the ``hottest'' molecule in the
366 < ``cold'' slab. According to swapping RNEMD results, target energy flux
367 < for scaling RNEMD simulations can be set. Also, various scaling
368 < frequencies can be tested for one target energy flux. To compare the
369 < performance between swapping and scaling method, distributions of
370 < velocity and speed in different slabs were observed.
385 > \subsection{Thermal Conductivities}
386  
387 < For each swapping rate, thermal conductivity was calculated in reduced
388 < unit. The energy flux was calculated similarly to the momentum flux,
389 < with total unphysical transferred energy ${E_{total}}$ and data collection
375 < time $t$:
387 > The energy flux was calculated similarly to the momentum flux, using
388 > the total non-physical energy transferred (${E_{total}}$) and the data
389 > collection time $t$:
390   \begin{equation}
391   J_z = \frac{E_{total}}{2 t L_x L_y}
392   \end{equation}
393 < And the temperature gradient ${\langle\partial T/\partial z\rangle}$
394 < can be obtained by a linear regression of the temperature
395 < profile. From the thermal conductivity $\lambda$ calculated, one can
396 < further convert it into reduced unit ${\lambda^*=\lambda \sigma^2
397 <  m^{1/2} k_B^{-1}\varepsilon^{-1/2}}$.
393 > The temperature gradient ${\langle\partial T/\partial z\rangle}$ was
394 > obtained by a linear regression of the temperature profile. For
395 > Lennard-Jones simulations, thermal conductivities are reported in
396 > reduced units (${\lambda^*=\lambda \sigma^2 m^{1/2}
397 >  k_B^{-1}\varepsilon^{-1/2}}$).
398  
399 < \subsection{ Water / Metal Thermal Conductivity}
386 < Another series of our simulation is the calculation of interfacial
387 < thermal conductivity of a Au/H$_2$O system. Respective calculations of
388 < liquid water (Extended Simple Point Charge model) and crystal gold
389 < thermal conductivity were performed and compared with current results
390 < to ensure the validity of NIVS-RNEMD. After that, a mixture system was
391 < simulated.
399 > \subsection{Interfacial Thermal Conductivities}
400  
401 < For thermal conductivity calculation of bulk water, a simulation box
402 < consisting of 1000 molecules were first equilibrated under ambient
403 < pressure and temperature conditions using NPT ensemble, followed by
404 < equilibration in fixed volume (NVT). The system was then equilibrated in
405 < microcanonical ensemble (NVE). Also in NVE ensemble, establishing a
406 < stable thermal gradient was followed. The simulation box was under
399 < periodic boundary condition and devided into 10 slabs. Data collection
400 < process was similar to Lennard-Jones fluid system.
401 > For materials with a relatively low interfacial conductance, and in
402 > cases where the flux between the materials is small, the bulk regions
403 > on either side of an interface rapidly come to a state in which the
404 > two phases have relatively homogeneous (but distinct) temperatures.
405 > In calculating the interfacial thermal conductivity $G$, this
406 > assumption was made, and the conductance can be approximated as:
407  
402 Thermal conductivity calculation of bulk crystal gold used a similar
403 protocol. Two types of force field parameters, Embedded Atom Method
404 (EAM) and Quantum Sutten-Chen (QSC) force field were used
405 respectively. The face-centered cubic crystal simulation box consists of
406 2880 Au atoms. The lattice was first allowed volume change to relax
407 under ambient temperature and pressure. Equilibrations in canonical and
408 microcanonical ensemble were followed in order. With the simulation
409 lattice devided evenly into 10 slabs, different thermal gradients were
410 established by applying a set of target thermal transfer flux. Data of
411 the series of thermal gradients was collected for calculation.
412
413 After simulations of bulk water and crystal gold, a mixture system was
414 constructed, consisting of 1188 Au atoms and 1862 H$_2$O
415 molecules. Spohr potential was adopted in depicting the interaction
416 between metal atom and water molecule.\cite{ISI:000167766600035} A
417 similar protocol of equilibration was followed. Several thermal
418 gradients was built under different target thermal flux. It was found
419 out that compared to our previous simulation systems, the two phases
420 could have large temperature difference even under a relatively low
421 thermal flux. Therefore, under our low flux conditions, it is assumed
422 that the metal and water phases have respectively homogeneous
423 temperature, excluding the surface regions. In calculating the
424 interfacial thermal conductivity $G$, this assumptioin was applied and
425 thus our formula becomes:
426
408   \begin{equation}
409   G = \frac{E_{total}}{2 t L_x L_y \left( \langle T_{gold}\rangle -
410      \langle T_{water}\rangle \right)}
411   \label{interfaceCalc}
412   \end{equation}
413 < where ${E_{total}}$ is the imposed unphysical kinetic energy transfer
414 < and ${\langle T_{gold}\rangle}$ and ${\langle T_{water}\rangle}$ are the
415 < average observed temperature of gold and water phases respectively.
413 > where ${E_{total}}$ is the imposed non-physical kinetic energy
414 > transfer and ${\langle T_{gold}\rangle}$ and ${\langle
415 >  T_{water}\rangle}$ are the average observed temperature of gold and
416 > water phases respectively.
417  
418 < \section{Results And Discussions}
437 < \subsection{Thermal Conductivity}
438 < \subsubsection{Lennard-Jones Fluid}
439 < Our thermal conductivity calculations show that scaling method results
440 < agree with swapping method. Four different exchange intervals were
441 < tested (Table \ref{thermalLJRes}) using swapping method. With a fixed
442 < 10fs exchange interval, target exchange kinetic energy was set to
443 < produce equivalent kinetic energy flux as in swapping method. And
444 < similar thermal gradients were observed with similar thermal flux in
445 < two simulation methods (Figure \ref{thermalGrad}).
418 > \section{Results}
419  
420 < \begin{table*}
421 < \begin{minipage}{\linewidth}
422 < \begin{center}
420 > \subsection{Lennard-Jones Fluid}
421 > 2592 Lennard-Jones atoms were placed in an orthorhombic cell
422 > ${10.06\sigma \times 10.06\sigma \times 30.18\sigma}$ on a side.  The
423 > reduced density ${\rho^* = \rho\sigma^3}$ was thus 0.85, which enabled
424 > direct comparison between our results and previous methods.  These
425 > simulations were carried out with a reduced timestep ${\tau^* =
426 >  4.6\times10^{-4}}$.  For the shear viscosity calculations, the mean
427 > temperature was ${T^* = k_B T/\varepsilon = 0.72}$.  For thermal
428 > conductivity calculations, simulations were first run under reduced
429 > temperature ${\langle T^*\rangle = 0.72}$ in the microcanonical
430 > ensemble, but other temperatures ([XXX, YYY, and ZZZ]) were also
431 > sampled.  The simulations included $10^5$ steps of equilibration
432 > without any momentum flux, $10^5$ steps of stablization with an
433 > imposed momentum transfer to create a gradient, and $10^6$ steps of
434 > data collection under RNEMD.
435  
436 < \caption{Calculation results for thermal conductivity of Lennard-Jones
452 <  fluid at ${\langle T^* \rangle = 0.72}$ and ${\rho^* = 0.85}$, with
453 <  swap and scale methods at various kinetic energy exchange rates. Results
454 <  in reduced unit. Errors of calculations in parentheses.}
436 > \subsubsection*{Thermal Conductivity}
437  
438 < \begin{tabular}{ccc}
439 < \hline
440 < (Equilvalent) Exchange Interval (fs) & $\lambda^*_{swap}$ &
441 < $\lambda^*_{scale}$\\
442 < \hline
443 < 250  & 7.03(0.34) & 7.30(0.10)\\
444 < 500  & 7.03(0.14) & 6.95(0.09)\\
463 < 1000 & 6.91(0.42) & 7.19(0.07)\\
464 < 2000 & 7.52(0.15) & 7.19(0.28)\\
465 < \hline
466 < \end{tabular}
467 < \label{thermalLJRes}
468 < \end{center}
469 < \end{minipage}
470 < \end{table*}
438 > Our thermal conductivity calculations show that the NIVS method agrees
439 > well with the swapping method. Four different swap intervals were
440 > tested (Table \ref{LJ}). With a fixed scaling interval of 10 time steps,
441 > the target exchange kinetic energy produced equivalent kinetic energy
442 > flux as in the swapping method. Similar thermal gradients were
443 > observed with similar thermal flux under the two different methods
444 > (Figure \ref{thermalGrad}).
445  
446 < \begin{figure}
447 < \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{thermalGrad}
448 < \caption{Temperature gradients under various kinetic energy flux of
475 <  thermal conductivity simulations}
476 < \label{thermalGrad}
477 < \end{figure}
446 > \begin{table*}
447 >  \begin{minipage}{\linewidth}
448 >    \begin{center}
449  
450 < During these simulations, molecule velocities were recorded in 1000 of
451 < all the snapshots of one single data collection process. These
452 < velocity data were used to produce histograms of velocity and speed
453 < distribution in different slabs. From these histograms, it is observed
454 < that under relatively high unphysical kinetic energy flux, speed and
455 < velocity distribution of molecules in slabs where swapping occured
456 < could deviate from Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution. Figure
457 < \ref{histSwap} illustrates how these distributions deviate from an
458 < ideal distribution. In high temperature slab, probability density in
459 < low speed is confidently smaller than ideal curve fit; in low
460 < temperature slab, probability density in high speed is smaller than
461 < ideal, while larger than ideal in low speed. This phenomenon is more
462 < obvious in our high swapping rate simulations. And this deviation
463 < could also leads to deviation of distribution of velocity in various
493 < dimensions. One feature of these deviated distribution is that in high
494 < temperature slab, the ideal Gaussian peak was changed into a
495 < relatively flat plateau; while in low temperature slab, that peak
496 < appears sharper. This problem is rooted in the mechanism of the
497 < swapping method. Continually depleting low (high) speed particles in
498 < the high (low) temperature slab could not be complemented by
499 < diffusions of low (high) speed particles from neighbor slabs, unless
500 < in suffciently low swapping rate. Simutaneously, surplus low speed
501 < particles in the low temperature slab do not have sufficient time to
502 < diffuse to neighbor slabs. However, thermal exchange rate should reach
503 < a minimum level to produce an observable thermal gradient under noise
504 < interference. Consequently, swapping RNEMD has a relatively narrow
505 < choice of swapping rate to satisfy these above restrictions.
450 >      \caption{Thermal conductivity ($\lambda^*$) and shear viscosity
451 >        ($\eta^*$) (in reduced units) of a Lennard-Jones fluid at
452 >        ${\langle T^* \rangle = 0.72}$ and ${\rho^* = 0.85}$ computed
453 >        at various momentum fluxes.  The original swapping method and
454 >        the velocity scaling method give similar results.
455 >        Uncertainties are indicated in parentheses.}
456 >      
457 >      \begin{tabular}{|cc|cc|cc|}
458 >        \hline
459 >        \multicolumn{2}{|c}{Momentum Exchange} &
460 >        \multicolumn{2}{|c}{Swapping RNEMD} &
461 >        \multicolumn{2}{|c|}{NIVS-RNEMD} \\
462 >        \hline
463 >        \multirow{2}{*}{Swap Interval (fs)} & Equivalent $J_z^*$ or &
464  
465 < \begin{figure}
466 < \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{histSwap}
467 < \caption{Speed distribution for thermal conductivity using swapping
468 <  RNEMD. Shown is from the simulation with 250 fs exchange interval.}
469 < \label{histSwap}
470 < \end{figure}
471 <
472 < Comparatively, NIVS-RNEMD has a speed distribution closer to the ideal
473 < curve fit (Figure \ref{histScale}). Essentially, after scaling, a
474 < Gaussian distribution function would remain Gaussian. Although a
475 < single scaling is non-isotropic in all three dimensions, our scaling
476 < coefficient criteria could help maintian the scaling region as
477 < isotropic as possible. On the other hand, scaling coefficients are
478 < preferred to be as close to 1 as possible, which also helps minimize
479 < the difference among different dimensions. This is possible if scaling
480 < interval and one-time thermal transfer energy are well
481 < chosen. Consequently, NIVS-RNEMD is able to impose an unphysical
524 < thermal flux as the previous RNEMD method without large perturbation
525 < to the distribution of velocity and speed in the exchange regions.
465 >        \multirow{2}{*}{$\lambda^*_{swap}$} &
466 >        \multirow{2}{*}{$\eta^*_{swap}$}  &
467 >        \multirow{2}{*}{$\lambda^*_{scale}$} &
468 >        \multirow{2}{*}{$\eta^*_{scale}$} \\
469 >        & $j_p^*(v_x)$ (reduced units) & & & & \\
470 >        \hline
471 >        250  & 0.16  & 7.03(0.34) &            & 7.30(0.10) & \\
472 >        500  & 0.09  & 7.03(0.14) & 3.64(0.05) & 6.95(0.09) & 3.76(0.09)\\
473 >        1000 & 0.047 & 6.91(0.42) & 3.52(0.16) & 7.19(0.07) & 3.66(0.06)\\
474 >        2000 & 0.024 & 7.52(0.15) & 3.72(0.05) & 7.19(0.28) & 3.32(0.18)\\
475 >        2500 & 0.019 &            & 3.42(0.06) &            & 3.43(0.08)\\
476 >        \hline
477 >      \end{tabular}
478 >      \label{LJ}
479 >    \end{center}
480 >  \end{minipage}
481 > \end{table*}
482  
483   \begin{figure}
484 < \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{histScale}
485 < \caption{Speed distribution for thermal conductivity using scaling
486 <  RNEMD. Shown is from the simulation with an equilvalent thermal flux
487 <  as an 250 fs exchange interval swapping simulation.}
488 < \label{histScale}
484 >  \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{thermalGrad}
485 >  \caption{NIVS-RNEMD method creates similar temperature gradients
486 >    compared with the swapping method under a variety of imposed kinetic
487 >    energy flux values.}
488 >  \label{thermalGrad}
489   \end{figure}
490  
491 < \subsubsection{SPC/E Water}
536 < Our results of SPC/E water thermal conductivity are comparable to
537 < Bedrov {\it et al.}\cite{ISI:000090151400044}, which employed the
538 < previous swapping RNEMD method for their calculation. Bedrov {\it et
539 <  al.}\cite{ISI:000090151400044} argued that exchange of the molecule
540 < center-of-mass velocities instead of single atom velocities in a
541 < molecule conserves the total kinetic energy and linear momentum. This
542 < principle is adopted in our simulations. Scaling is applied to the
543 < velocities of the rigid bodies of SPC/E model water molecules, instead
544 < of each hydrogen and oxygen atoms in relevant water molecules. As
545 < shown in Figure \ref{spceGrad}, temperature gradients were established
546 < similar to their system. However, the average temperature of our
547 < system is 300K, while theirs is 318K, which would be attributed for
548 < part of the difference between the final calculation results (Table
549 < \ref{spceThermal}). Both methods yields values in agreement with
550 < experiment. And this shows the applicability of our method to
551 < multi-atom molecular system.
491 > \subsubsection*{Velocity Distributions}
492  
493 < \begin{figure}
494 < \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{spceGrad}
495 < \caption{Temperature gradients for SPC/E water thermal conductivity.}
496 < \label{spceGrad}
497 < \end{figure}
493 > During these simulations, velocities were recorded every 1000 steps
494 > and was used to produce distributions of both velocity and speed in
495 > each of the slabs. From these distributions, we observed that under
496 > relatively high non-physical kinetic energy flux, the speed of
497 > molecules in slabs where swapping occured could deviate from the
498 > Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution. This behavior was also noted by Tenney
499 > and Maginn.\cite{Maginn:2010} Figure \ref{thermalHist} shows how these
500 > distributions deviate from an ideal distribution. In the ``hot'' slab,
501 > the probability density is notched at low speeds and has a substantial
502 > shoulder at higher speeds relative to the ideal MB distribution.  In
503 > the cold slab, the opposite notching and shouldering occurs.  This
504 > phenomenon is more obvious at higher swapping rates.  
505  
506 < \begin{table*}
507 < \begin{minipage}{\linewidth}
508 < \begin{center}
506 > In the velocity distributions, the ideal Gaussian peak is
507 > substantially flattened in the hot slab, and is overly sharp (with
508 > truncated wings) in the cold slab. This problem is rooted in the
509 > mechanism of the swapping method. Continually depleting low (high)
510 > speed particles in the high (low) temperature slab is not complemented
511 > by diffusions of low (high) speed particles from neighboring slabs,
512 > unless the swapping rate is sufficiently small. Simutaneously, surplus
513 > low speed particles in the low temperature slab do not have sufficient
514 > time to diffuse to neighboring slabs.  Since the thermal exchange rate
515 > must reach a minimum level to produce an observable thermal gradient,
516 > the swapping-method RNEMD has a relatively narrow choice of exchange
517 > times that can be utilized.
518  
519 < \caption{Calculation results for thermal conductivity of SPC/E water
520 <  at ${\langle T\rangle}$ = 300K at various thermal exchange rates. Errors of
521 <  calculations in parentheses. }
519 > For comparison, NIVS-RNEMD produces a speed distribution closer to the
520 > Maxwell-Boltzmann curve (Figure \ref{thermalHist}).  The reason for
521 > this is simple; upon velocity scaling, a Gaussian distribution remains
522 > Gaussian.  Although a single scaling move is non-isotropic in three
523 > dimensions, our criteria for choosing a set of scaling coefficients
524 > helps maintain the distributions as close to isotropic as possible.
525 > Consequently, NIVS-RNEMD is able to impose an unphysical thermal flux
526 > as the previous RNEMD methods but without large perturbations to the
527 > velocity distributions in the two slabs.
528  
529 < \begin{tabular}{cccc}
530 < \hline
531 < $\langle dT/dz\rangle$(K/\AA) & & $\lambda$(W/m/K) & \\
532 < & This work & Previous simulations\cite{ISI:000090151400044} &
533 < Experiment$^a$\\
534 < \hline
535 < 0.38 & 0.816(0.044) & & 0.64\\
536 < 0.81 & 0.770(0.008) & 0.784\\
537 < 1.54 & 0.813(0.007) & 0.730\\
538 < \hline
577 < \end{tabular}
578 < \label{spceThermal}
579 < \end{center}
580 < \end{minipage}
581 < \end{table*}
529 > \begin{figure}
530 > \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{thermalHist}
531 > \caption{Speed distribution for thermal conductivity using a)
532 >  ``swapping'' and b) NIVS- RNEMD methods. Shown is from the
533 >  simulations with an exchange or equilvalent exchange interval of 250
534 >  fs. In circled areas, distributions from ``swapping'' RNEMD
535 >  simulation have deviation from ideal Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution
536 >  (curves fit for each distribution).}
537 > \label{thermalHist}
538 > \end{figure}
539  
583 \subsubsection{Crystal Gold}
584 Our results of gold thermal conductivity using two force fields are
585 shown separately in Table \ref{qscThermal} and \ref{eamThermal}. In
586 these calculations,the end and middle slabs were excluded in thermal
587 gradient regession and only used as heat source and drain in the
588 systems. Our yielded values using EAM force field are slightly larger
589 than those using QSC force field. However, both series are
590 significantly smaller than experimental value by an order of more than
591 100. It has been verified that this difference is mainly attributed to
592 the lack of electron interaction representation in these force field
593 parameters. Richardson {\it et al.}\cite{Clancy:1992} used EAM
594 force field parameters in their metal thermal conductivity
595 calculations. The Non-Equilibrium MD method they employed in their
596 simulations produced comparable results to ours. As Zhang {\it et
597  al.}\cite{ISI:000231042800044} stated, thermal conductivity values
598 are influenced mainly by force field. Therefore, it is confident to
599 conclude that NIVS-RNEMD is applicable to metal force field system.
540  
541 + \subsubsection*{Shear Viscosity}
542 + Our calculations (Table \ref{LJ}) show that velocity-scaling
543 + RNEMD predicted comparable shear viscosities to swap RNEMD method.  All
544 + the scale method results were from simulations that had a scaling
545 + interval of 10 time steps. The average molecular momentum gradients of
546 + these samples are shown in Figure \ref{shear} (a) and (b).
547 +
548   \begin{figure}
549 < \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{AuGrad}
550 < \caption{Temperature gradients for thermal conductivity calculation of
551 <  crystal gold using QSC force field.}
552 < \label{AuGrad}
549 >  \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{shear}
550 >  \caption{Average momentum gradients in shear viscosity simulations,
551 >    using (a) ``swapping'' method and (b) NIVS-RNEMD method
552 >    respectively. (c) Temperature difference among x and y, z dimensions
553 >    observed when using NIVS-RNEMD with equivalent exchange interval of
554 >    500 fs.}
555 >  \label{shear}
556   \end{figure}
557  
558 < \begin{table*}
559 < \begin{minipage}{\linewidth}
560 < \begin{center}
558 > However, observations of temperatures along three dimensions show that
559 > inhomogeneity occurs in scaling RNEMD simulations, particularly in the
560 > two slabs which were scaled. Figure \ref{shear} (c) indicate that with
561 > relatively large imposed momentum flux, the temperature difference among $x$
562 > and the other two dimensions was significant. This would result from the
563 > algorithm of scaling method. From Eq. \ref{eq:fluxPlane}, after
564 > momentum gradient is set up, $P_c^x$ would be roughly stable
565 > ($<0$). Consequently, scaling factor $x$ would most probably larger
566 > than 1. Therefore, the kinetic energy in $x$-dimension $K_c^x$ would
567 > keep increase after most scaling steps. And if there is not enough time
568 > for the kinetic energy to exchange among different dimensions and
569 > different slabs, the system would finally build up temperature
570 > (kinetic energy) difference among the three dimensions. Also, between
571 > $y$ and $z$ dimensions in the scaled slabs, temperatures of $z$-axis
572 > are closer to neighbor slabs. This is due to momentum transfer along
573 > $z$ dimension between slabs.
574  
575 < \caption{Calculation results for thermal conductivity of crystal gold
576 <  using QSC force field at ${\langle T\rangle}$ = 300K at various
577 <  thermal exchange rates. Errors of calculations in parentheses. }
575 > Although results between scaling and swapping methods are comparable,
576 > the inherent temperature inhomogeneity even in relatively low imposed
577 > exchange momentum flux simulations makes scaling RNEMD method less
578 > attractive than swapping RNEMD in shear viscosity calculation.
579  
616 \begin{tabular}{cc}
617 \hline
618 $\langle dT/dz\rangle$(K/\AA) & $\lambda$(W/m/K)\\
619 \hline
620 1.44 & 1.10(0.01)\\
621 2.86 & 1.08(0.02)\\
622 5.14 & 1.15(0.01)\\
623 \hline
624 \end{tabular}
625 \label{qscThermal}
626 \end{center}
627 \end{minipage}
628 \end{table*}
580  
581 + \subsection{Bulk SPC/E water}
582 +
583 + We compared the thermal conductivity of SPC/E water using NIVS-RNEMD
584 + to the work of Bedrov {\it et al.}\cite{Bedrov:2000}, which employed
585 + the original swapping RNEMD method.  Bedrov {\it et
586 +  al.}\cite{Bedrov:2000} argued that exchange of the molecule
587 + center-of-mass velocities instead of single atom velocities in a
588 + molecule conserves the total kinetic energy and linear momentum.  This
589 + principle is also adopted in our simulations. Scaling was applied to
590 + the center-of-mass velocities of the rigid bodies of SPC/E model water
591 + molecules.
592 +
593 + To construct the simulations, a simulation box consisting of 1000
594 + molecules were first equilibrated under ambient pressure and
595 + temperature conditions using the isobaric-isothermal (NPT)
596 + ensemble.\cite{melchionna93} A fixed volume was chosen to match the
597 + average volume observed in the NPT simulations, and this was followed
598 + by equilibration, first in the canonical (NVT) ensemble, followed by a
599 + 100ps period under constant-NVE conditions without any momentum
600 + flux. 100ps was allowed to stabilize the system with an imposed
601 + momentum transfer to create a gradient, and 1ns was alotted for
602 + data collection under RNEMD.
603 +
604 + As shown in Figure \ref{spceGrad}, temperature gradients were
605 + established similar to the previous work. Our simulation results under
606 + 318K are in well agreement with those from Bedrov {\it et al.} (Table
607 + \ref{spceThermal}). And both methods yield values in reasonable
608 + agreement with experimental value. A larger difference between
609 + simulation result and experiment is found under 300K. This could
610 + result from the force field that is used in simulation.
611 +
612   \begin{figure}
613 < \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{eamGrad}
614 < \caption{Temperature gradients for thermal conductivity calculation of
615 <  crystal gold using EAM force field.}
616 < \label{eamGrad}
613 >  \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{spceGrad}
614 >  \caption{Temperature gradients in SPC/E water thermal conductivity
615 >    simulations.}
616 >  \label{spceGrad}
617   \end{figure}
618  
619   \begin{table*}
620 < \begin{minipage}{\linewidth}
621 < \begin{center}
620 >  \begin{minipage}{\linewidth}
621 >    \begin{center}
622 >      
623 >      \caption{Thermal conductivity of SPC/E water under various
624 >        imposed thermal gradients. Uncertainties are indicated in
625 >        parentheses.}
626 >      
627 >      \begin{tabular}{|c|c|ccc|}
628 >        \hline
629 >        \multirow{2}{*}{$\langle T\rangle$(K)} &
630 >        \multirow{2}{*}{$\langle dT/dz\rangle$(K/\AA)} &
631 >        \multicolumn{3}{|c|}{$\lambda (\mathrm{W m}^{-1}
632 >          \mathrm{K}^{-1})$} \\
633 >        & & This work & Previous simulations\cite{Bedrov:2000} &
634 >        Experiment\cite{WagnerKruse}\\
635 >        \hline
636 >        \multirow{3}{*}{300} & 0.38 & 0.816(0.044) & &
637 >        \multirow{3}{*}{0.61}\\
638 >        & 0.81 & 0.770(0.008) & & \\
639 >        & 1.54 & 0.813(0.007) & & \\
640 >        \hline
641 >        \multirow{2}{*}{318} & 0.75 & 0.750(0.032) & 0.784 &
642 >        \multirow{2}{*}{0.64}\\
643 >        & 1.59 & 0.778(0.019) & 0.730 & \\
644 >        \hline
645 >      \end{tabular}
646 >      \label{spceThermal}
647 >    \end{center}
648 >  \end{minipage}
649 > \end{table*}
650  
651 < \caption{Calculation results for thermal conductivity of crystal gold
642 <  using EAM force field at ${\langle T\rangle}$ = 300K at various
643 <  thermal exchange rates. Errors of calculations in parentheses. }
651 > \subsection{Crystalline Gold}
652  
653 < \begin{tabular}{cc}
654 < \hline
655 < $\langle dT/dz\rangle$(K/\AA) & $\lambda$(W/m/K)\\
656 < \hline
657 < 1.24 & 1.24(0.06)\\
658 < 2.06 & 1.37(0.04)\\
659 < 2.55 & 1.41(0.03)\\
660 < \hline
661 < \end{tabular}
662 < \label{eamThermal}
663 < \end{center}
664 < \end{minipage}
653 > To see how the method performed in a solid, we calculated thermal
654 > conductivities using two atomistic models for gold.  Several different
655 > potential models have been developed that reasonably describe
656 > interactions in transition metals. In particular, the Embedded Atom
657 > Model ({\sc eam})~\cite{PhysRevB.33.7983} and Sutton-Chen ({\sc
658 >  sc})~\cite{Chen90} potential have been used to study a wide range of
659 > phenomena in both bulk materials and
660 > nanoparticles.\cite{ISI:000207079300006,Clancy:1992,Vardeman:2008fk,Vardeman-II:2001jn,ShibataT._ja026764r,Sankaranarayanan:2005lr,Chui:2003fk,Wang:2005qy,Medasani:2007uq}
661 > Both potentials are based on a model of a metal which treats the
662 > nuclei and core electrons as pseudo-atoms embedded in the electron
663 > density due to the valence electrons on all of the other atoms in the
664 > system. The {\sc sc} potential has a simple form that closely
665 > resembles the Lennard Jones potential,
666 > \begin{equation}
667 > \label{eq:SCP1}
668 > 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] ,
669 > \end{equation}
670 > where $V^{pair}_{ij}$ and $\rho_{i}$ are given by
671 > \begin{equation}
672 > \label{eq:SCP2}
673 > 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}}.
674 > \end{equation}
675 > $V^{pair}_{ij}$ is a repulsive pairwise potential that accounts for
676 > interactions between the pseudoatom cores. The $\sqrt{\rho_i}$ term in
677 > Eq. (\ref{eq:SCP1}) is an attractive many-body potential that models
678 > the interactions between the valence electrons and the cores of the
679 > pseudo-atoms. $D_{ij}$, $D_{ii}$ set the appropriate overall energy
680 > scale, $c_i$ scales the attractive portion of the potential relative
681 > to the repulsive interaction and $\alpha_{ij}$ is a length parameter
682 > that assures a dimensionless form for $\rho$. These parameters are
683 > tuned to various experimental properties such as the density, cohesive
684 > energy, and elastic moduli for FCC transition metals. The quantum
685 > Sutton-Chen ({\sc q-sc}) formulation matches these properties while
686 > including zero-point quantum corrections for different transition
687 > metals.\cite{PhysRevB.59.3527}  The {\sc eam} functional forms differ
688 > slightly from {\sc sc} but the overall method is very similar.
689 >
690 > In this work, we have utilized both the {\sc eam} and the {\sc q-sc}
691 > potentials to test the behavior of scaling RNEMD.
692 >
693 > A face-centered-cubic (FCC) lattice was prepared containing 2880 Au
694 > atoms (i.e. ${6\times 6\times 20}$ unit cells). Simulations were run
695 > both with and without isobaric-isothermal (NPT)~\cite{melchionna93}
696 > pre-equilibration at a target pressure of 1 atm. When equilibrated
697 > under NPT conditions, our simulation box expanded by approximately 1\%
698 > in volume. Following adjustment of the box volume, equilibrations in
699 > both the canonical and microcanonical ensembles were carried out. With
700 > the simulation cell divided evenly into 10 slabs, different thermal
701 > gradients were established by applying a set of target thermal
702 > transfer fluxes.
703 >
704 > The results for the thermal conductivity of gold are shown in Table
705 > \ref{AuThermal}.  In these calculations, the end and middle slabs were
706 > excluded in thermal gradient linear regession. {\sc eam} predicts
707 > slightly larger thermal conductivities than {\sc q-sc}.  However, both
708 > values are smaller than experimental value by a factor of more than
709 > 200. This behavior has been observed previously by Richardson and
710 > Clancy, and has been attributed to the lack of electronic contribution
711 > in these force fields.\cite{Clancy:1992} The non-equilibrium MD method
712 > employed in their simulations gave an thermal conductance estimation
713 > of {\sc eam} gold as 1.74$\mathrm{W m}^{-1}\mathrm{K}^{-1}$. As stated
714 > in their work, this was a rough estimation in the temperature range
715 > 300K-800K. Therefore, our results could be more accurate. It should be
716 > noted that the density of the metal being simulated also affects the
717 > thermal conductivity significantly. With an expanded lattice, lower
718 > thermal conductance is expected (and observed). We also observed a
719 > decrease in thermal conductance at higher temperatures, a trend that
720 > agrees with experimental measurements [PAGE NUMBERS?].\cite{AshcroftMermin}
721 >
722 > \begin{table*}
723 >  \begin{minipage}{\linewidth}
724 >    \begin{center}
725 >      
726 >      \caption{Calculated thermal conductivity of crystalline gold
727 >        using two related force fields. Calculations were done at both
728 >        experimental and equilibrated densities and at a range of
729 >        temperatures and thermal flux rates.  Uncertainties are
730 >        indicated in parentheses. [SWAPPING COMPARISON?]}
731 >      
732 >      \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|cc|}
733 >        \hline
734 >        Force Field & $\rho$ (g/cm$^3$) & ${\langle T\rangle}$ (K) &
735 >        $\langle dT/dz\rangle$ (K/\AA) & $\lambda (\mathrm{W m}^{-1} \mathrm{K}^{-1})$\\
736 >        \hline
737 >        \multirow{7}{*}{\sc q-sc} & \multirow{3}{*}{19.188} & \multirow{3}{*}{300} & 1.44 & 1.10(0.06)\\
738 >        &        &     & 2.86 & 1.08(0.05)\\
739 >        &        &     & 5.14 & 1.15(0.07)\\\cline{2-5}
740 >        & \multirow{4}{*}{19.263} & \multirow{2}{*}{300} & 2.31 & 1.25(0.06)\\
741 >        &        &     & 3.02 & 1.26(0.05)\\\cline{3-5}
742 >        &        & \multirow{2}{*}{575} & 3.02 & 1.02(0.07)\\
743 >        &        &     & 4.84 & 0.92(0.05)\\
744 >        \hline
745 >        \multirow{8}{*}{\sc eam} & \multirow{3}{*}{19.045} & \multirow{3}{*}{300} & 1.24 & 1.24(0.16)\\
746 >        &        &     & 2.06 & 1.37(0.04)\\
747 >        &        &     & 2.55 & 1.41(0.07)\\\cline{2-5}
748 >        & \multirow{5}{*}{19.263} & \multirow{3}{*}{300} & 1.06 & 1.45(0.13)\\
749 >        &        &     & 2.04 & 1.41(0.07)\\
750 >        &        &     & 2.41 & 1.53(0.10)\\\cline{3-5}
751 >        &        & \multirow{2}{*}{575} & 2.82 & 1.08(0.03)\\
752 >        &        &     & 4.14 & 1.08(0.05)\\
753 >        \hline
754 >      \end{tabular}
755 >      \label{AuThermal}
756 >    \end{center}
757 >  \end{minipage}
758   \end{table*}
759  
760 + \subsection{Thermal Conductance at the Au/H$_2$O interface}
761 + The most attractive aspect of the scaling approach for RNEMD is the
762 + ability to use the method in non-homogeneous systems, where molecules
763 + of different identities are segregated in different slabs.  To test
764 + this application, we simulated a Gold (111) / water interface.  To
765 + construct the interface, a box containing a lattice of 1188 Au atoms
766 + (with the 111 surface in the +z and -z directions) was allowed to
767 + relax under ambient temperature and pressure.  A separate (but
768 + identically sized) box of SPC/E water was also equilibrated at ambient
769 + conditions.  The two boxes were combined by removing all water
770 + molecules within 3 \AA radius of any gold atom.  The final
771 + configuration contained 1862 SPC/E water molecules.
772  
773 < \subsection{Interfaciel Thermal Conductivity}
773 > After simulations of bulk water and crystal gold, a mixture system was
774 > constructed, consisting of 1188 Au atoms and 1862 H$_2$O
775 > molecules. Spohr potential was adopted in depicting the interaction
776 > between metal atom and water molecule.\cite{ISI:000167766600035} A
777 > similar protocol of equilibration was followed. Several thermal
778 > gradients was built under different target thermal flux. It was found
779 > out that compared to our previous simulation systems, the two phases
780 > could have large temperature difference even under a relatively low
781 > thermal flux.
782 >
783 >
784   After simulations of homogeneous water and gold systems using
785   NIVS-RNEMD method were proved valid, calculation of gold/water
786   interfacial thermal conductivity was followed. It is found out that
787   the low interfacial conductance is probably due to the hydrophobic
788 < surface in our system. Figure \ref{interfaceDensity} demonstrates mass
788 > surface in our system. Figure \ref{interface} (a) demonstrates mass
789   density change along $z$-axis, which is perpendicular to the
790   gold/water interface. It is observed that water density significantly
791   decreases when approaching the surface. Under this low thermal
792   conductance, both gold and water phase have sufficient time to
793   eliminate temperature difference inside respectively (Figure
794 < \ref{interfaceGrad}). With indistinguishable temperature difference
794 > \ref{interface} b). With indistinguishable temperature difference
795   within respective phase, it is valid to assume that the temperature
796   difference between gold and water on surface would be approximately
797   the same as the difference between the gold and water phase. This
# Line 681 | Line 804 | errors than our calculation results on homogeneous sys
804   errors than our calculation results on homogeneous systems.
805  
806   \begin{figure}
807 < \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{interfaceDensity}
808 < \caption{Density profile for interfacial thermal conductivity
809 <  simulation box. Significant water density decrease is observed on
810 <  gold surface.}
811 < \label{interfaceDensity}
807 > \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{interface}
808 > \caption{Simulation results for Gold/Water interfacial thermal
809 >  conductivity: (a) Significant water density decrease is observed on
810 >  crystalline gold surface, which indicates low surface contact and
811 >  leads to low thermal conductance. (b) Temperature profiles for a
812 >  series of simulations. Temperatures of different slabs in the same
813 >  phase show no significant differences.}
814 > \label{interface}
815   \end{figure}
816  
691 \begin{figure}
692 \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{interfaceGrad}
693 \caption{Temperature profiles for interfacial thermal conductivity
694  simulation box. Temperatures of different slabs in the same phase
695  show no significant difference.}
696 \label{interfaceGrad}
697 \end{figure}
698
817   \begin{table*}
818 < \begin{minipage}{\linewidth}
819 < \begin{center}
820 <
821 < \caption{Calculation results for interfacial thermal conductivity
822 <  at ${\langle T\rangle \sim}$ 300K at various thermal exchange
823 <  rates. Errors of calculations in parentheses. }
824 <
825 < \begin{tabular}{cccc}
826 < \hline
827 < $J_z$(MW/m$^2$) & $T_{gold}$ & $T_{water}$ & $G$(MW/m$^2$/K)\\
828 < \hline
829 < 98.0 & 355.2 & 295.8 & 1.65(0.21) \\
830 < 78.8 & 343.8 & 298.0 & 1.72(0.32) \\
831 < 73.6 & 344.3 & 298.0 & 1.59(0.24) \\
832 < 49.2 & 330.1 & 300.4 & 1.65(0.35) \\
833 < \hline
834 < \end{tabular}
835 < \label{interfaceRes}
836 < \end{center}
837 < \end{minipage}
818 >  \begin{minipage}{\linewidth}
819 >    \begin{center}
820 >      
821 >      \caption{Computed interfacial thermal conductivity ($G$) values
822 >        for the Au(111) / water interface at ${\langle T\rangle \sim}$
823 >        300K using a range of energy fluxes. Uncertainties are
824 >        indicated in parentheses. }
825 >      
826 >      \begin{tabular}{|cccc|}
827 >        \hline
828 >        $J_z$ (MW/m$^2$) & $\langle T_{gold} \rangle$ (K) & $\langle
829 >        T_{water} \rangle$ (K) & $G$
830 >        (MW/m$^2$/K)\\
831 >        \hline
832 >        98.0 & 355.2 & 295.8 & 1.65(0.21) \\
833 >        78.8 & 343.8 & 298.0 & 1.72(0.32) \\
834 >        73.6 & 344.3 & 298.0 & 1.59(0.24) \\
835 >        49.2 & 330.1 & 300.4 & 1.65(0.35) \\
836 >        \hline
837 >      \end{tabular}
838 >      \label{interfaceRes}
839 >    \end{center}
840 >  \end{minipage}
841   \end{table*}
842  
722 \subsection{Shear Viscosity}
723 Our calculations (Table \ref{shearRate}) shows that scale RNEMD method
724 produced comparable shear viscosity to swap RNEMD method. In Table
725 \ref{shearRate}, the names of the calculated samples are devided into
726 two parts. The first number refers to total slabs in one simulation
727 box. The second number refers to the swapping interval in swap method, or
728 in scale method the equilvalent swapping interval that the same
729 momentum flux would theoretically result in swap method. All the scale
730 method results were from simulations that had a scaling interval of 10
731 time steps. The average molecular momentum gradients of these samples
732 are shown in Figure \ref{shearGrad}.
843  
734 \begin{table*}
735 \begin{minipage}{\linewidth}
736 \begin{center}
737
738 \caption{Calculation results for shear viscosity of Lennard-Jones
739  fluid at ${T^* = 0.72}$ and ${\rho^* = 0.85}$, with swap and scale
740  methods at various momentum exchange rates. Results in reduced
741  unit. Errors of calculations in parentheses. }
742
743 \begin{tabular}{ccc}
744 \hline
745 Series & $\eta^*_{swap}$ & $\eta^*_{scale}$\\
746 \hline
747 20-500 & 3.64(0.05) & 3.76(0.09)\\
748 20-1000 & 3.52(0.16) & 3.66(0.06)\\
749 20-2000 & 3.72(0.05) & 3.32(0.18)\\
750 20-2500 & 3.42(0.06) & 3.43(0.08)\\
751 \hline
752 \end{tabular}
753 \label{shearRate}
754 \end{center}
755 \end{minipage}
756 \end{table*}
757
758 \begin{figure}
759 \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{shearGrad}
760 \caption{Average momentum gradients of shear viscosity simulations}
761 \label{shearGrad}
762 \end{figure}
763
764 \begin{figure}
765 \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{shearTempScale}
766 \caption{Temperature profile for scaling RNEMD simulation.}
767 \label{shearTempScale}
768 \end{figure}
769 However, observations of temperatures along three dimensions show that
770 inhomogeneity occurs in scaling RNEMD simulations, particularly in the
771 two slabs which were scaled. Figure \ref{shearTempScale} indicate that with
772 relatively large imposed momentum flux, the temperature difference among $x$
773 and the other two dimensions was significant. This would result from the
774 algorithm of scaling method. From Eq. \ref{eq:fluxPlane}, after
775 momentum gradient is set up, $P_c^x$ would be roughly stable
776 ($<0$). Consequently, scaling factor $x$ would most probably larger
777 than 1. Therefore, the kinetic energy in $x$-dimension $K_c^x$ would
778 keep increase after most scaling steps. And if there is not enough time
779 for the kinetic energy to exchange among different dimensions and
780 different slabs, the system would finally build up temperature
781 (kinetic energy) difference among the three dimensions. Also, between
782 $y$ and $z$ dimensions in the scaled slabs, temperatures of $z$-axis
783 are closer to neighbor slabs. This is due to momentum transfer along
784 $z$ dimension between slabs.
785
786 Although results between scaling and swapping methods are comparable,
787 the inherent temperature inhomogeneity even in relatively low imposed
788 exchange momentum flux simulations makes scaling RNEMD method less
789 attractive than swapping RNEMD in shear viscosity calculation.
790
844   \section{Conclusions}
845   NIVS-RNEMD simulation method is developed and tested on various
846   systems. Simulation results demonstrate its validity in thermal
# Line 810 | Line 863 | Dame.  \newpage
863   the Center for Research Computing (CRC) at the University of Notre
864   Dame.  \newpage
865  
866 < \bibliographystyle{jcp2}
866 > \bibliographystyle{aip}
867   \bibliography{nivsRnemd}
868 +
869   \end{doublespace}
870   \end{document}
871  

Diff Legend

Removed lines
+ Added lines
< Changed lines
> Changed lines