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

Comparing trunk/nonperiodicVSS/nonperiodicVSS.tex (file contents):
Revision 3931 by kstocke1, Mon Aug 5 21:31:30 2013 UTC vs.
Revision 3977 by gezelter, Fri Nov 22 22:27:38 2013 UTC

# Line 2 | Line 2
2   \setkeys{acs}{usetitle = true}
3  
4   \usepackage{caption}
5 < \usepackage{float}
5 > \usepackage{endfloat}
6   \usepackage{geometry}
7   \usepackage{natbib}
8   \usepackage{setspace}
# Line 79 | Line 79 | We have adapted the Velocity Shearing and Scaling Reve
79   %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
80   \section{Introduction}
81  
82 + Non-equilibrium Molecular Dynamics (NEMD) methods impose a temperature
83 + or velocity {\it gradient} on a
84 + system,\cite{ASHURST:1975tg,Evans:1982zk,ERPENBECK:1984sp,MAGINN:1993hc,Berthier:2002ij,Evans:2002ai,Schelling:2002dp,PhysRevA.34.1449,JiangHao_jp802942v}
85 + and use linear response theory to connect the resulting thermal or
86 + momentum flux to transport coefficients of bulk materials.  However,
87 + for heterogeneous systems, such as phase boundaries or interfaces, it
88 + is often unclear what shape of gradient should be imposed at the
89 + boundary between materials.
90  
91 + \begin{figure}
92 + \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{VSS2}
93 + \caption{Schematics of periodic (left) and non-periodic (right)
94 +  Velocity Shearing and Scaling RNEMD. A kinetic energy or momentum
95 +  flux is applied from region B to region A. Thermal gradients are
96 +  depicted by a color gradient. Linear or angular velocity gradients
97 +  are shown as arrows.}
98 + \label{fig:VSS}
99 + \end{figure}
100 +
101 + Reverse Non-Equilibrium Molecular Dynamics (RNEMD) methods impose an
102 + unphysical {\it flux} between different regions or ``slabs'' of the
103 + simulation
104 + box.\cite{MullerPlathe:1997xw,ISI:000080382700030,Kuang:2010uq} The
105 + system responds by developing a temperature or velocity {\it gradient}
106 + between the two regions.  The gradients which develop in response to
107 + the applied flux are then related (via linear response theory) to the
108 + transport coefficient of interest. Since the amount of the applied
109 + flux is known exactly, and measurement of a gradient is generally less
110 + complicated, imposed-flux methods typically take shorter simulation
111 + times to obtain converged results. At interfaces, the observed
112 + gradients often exhibit near-discontinuities at the boundaries between
113 + dissimilar materials.  RNEMD methods do not need many trajectories to
114 + provide information about transport properties, and they have become
115 + widely used to compute thermal and mechanical transport in both
116 + homogeneous liquids and
117 + solids~\cite{MullerPlathe:1997xw,ISI:000080382700030,Maginn:2010} as
118 + well as heterogeneous
119 + interfaces.\cite{garde:nl2005,garde:PhysRevLett2009,kuang:AuThl}
120 +
121 +
122   %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
123   % **METHODOLOGY**
124   %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
125 < \section{Methodology}
125 > \section{Velocity Shearing and Scaling (VSS) for non-periodic systems}
126 > The VSS-RNEMD approach uses a series of simultaneous velocity shearing
127 > and scaling exchanges between the two slabs.\cite{2012MolPh.110..691K}
128 > This method imposes energy and momentum conservation constraints while
129 > simultaneously creating a desired flux between the two slabs.  These
130 > constraints ensure that all configurations are sampled from the same
131 > microcanonical (NVE) ensemble.
132  
133 < %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
134 < % FORCE FIELD PARAMETERS
135 < %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
136 < \subsection{Force field parameters}
133 > We have extended the VSS method for use in {\it non-periodic}
134 > simulations, in which the ``slabs'' have been generalized to two
135 > separated regions of space.  These regions could be defined as
136 > concentric spheres (as in figure \ref{fig:VSS}), or one of the regions
137 > can be defined in terms of a dynamically changing ``hull'' comprising
138 > the surface atoms of the cluster.  This latter definition is identical
139 > to the hull used in the Langevin Hull algorithm.
140  
141 < We have chosen the SPC/E water model for these simulations. There are many values for physical properties from previous simulations available for direct comparison.
141 > We present here a new set of constraints that are more general than
142 > the VSS constraints.  For the non-periodic variant, the constraints
143 > fix both the total energy and total {\it angular} momentum of the
144 > system while simultaneously imposing a thermal and angular momentum
145 > flux between the two regions.
146  
147 < Gold-gold interactions are described by the quantum Sutton-Chen (QSC) model. The QSC parameters are tuned to experimental properties such as density, cohesive energy, and elastic moduli and include zero-point quantum corrections.
147 > After each $\Delta t$ time interval, the particle velocities
148 > ($\mathbf{v}_i$ and $\mathbf{v}_j$) in the two shells ($A$ and $B$)
149 > are modified by a velocity scaling coefficient ($a$ and $b$) and by a
150 > rotational shearing term ($\mathbf{c}_a$ and $\mathbf{c}_b$).
151 > \begin{displaymath}
152 > \begin{array}{rclcl}
153 > & \underline{~~~~~~~~\mathrm{scaling}~~~~~~~~} & &
154 > \underline{\mathrm{rotational~shearing}} \\  \\
155 > \mathbf{v}_i $~~~$\leftarrow &
156 >  a \left(\mathbf{v}_i - \langle \omega_a
157 >  \rangle \times \mathbf{r}_i\right) & + & \mathbf{c}_a \times \mathbf{r}_i \\
158 > \mathbf{v}_j $~~~$\leftarrow &
159 >  b  \left(\mathbf{v}_j - \langle \omega_b
160 >  \rangle \times \mathbf{r}_j\right) & + & \mathbf{c}_b \times \mathbf{r}_j
161 > \end{array}
162 > \end{displaymath}
163 > Here $\langle\mathbf{\omega}_a\rangle$ and
164 > $\langle\mathbf{\omega}_b\rangle$ are the instantaneous angular
165 > velocities of each shell, and $\mathbf{r}_i$ is the position of
166 > particle $i$ relative to a fixed point in space (usually the center of
167 > mass of the cluster).  Particles in the shells also receive an
168 > additive ``angular shear'' to their velocities.  The amount of shear
169 > is governed by the imposed angular momentum flux,
170 > $\mathbf{j}_r(\mathbf{L})$,
171 > \begin{eqnarray}
172 > \mathbf{c}_a & = & - \mathbf{j}_r(\mathbf{L}) \cdot
173 > \overleftrightarrow{I_a}^{-1} \Delta t   + \langle \omega_a \rangle \label{eq:bc}\\
174 > \mathbf{c}_b & = & + \mathbf{j}_r(\mathbf{L}) \cdot
175 > \overleftrightarrow{I_b}^{-1}  \Delta t  + \langle \omega_b \rangle \label{eq:bh}
176 > \end{eqnarray}
177 > where $\overleftrightarrow{I}_{\{a,b\}}$ is the moment of inertia tensor for
178 > each of the two shells.
179  
180 < Hexane molecules are described by the TraPPE united atom model. This model provides good computational efficiency and reasonable accuracy for bulk thermal conductivity values.
180 > To simultaneously impose a thermal flux ($J_r$) between the shells we
181 > use energy conservation constraints,
182 > \begin{eqnarray}
183 > K_a - J_r \Delta t & = & a^2 \left(K_a - \frac{1}{2}\langle
184 > \omega_a \rangle \cdot \overleftrightarrow{I_a} \cdot \langle \omega_a
185 > \rangle \right) + \frac{1}{2} \mathbf{c}_a \cdot \overleftrightarrow{I_a}
186 > \cdot \mathbf{c}_a \label{eq:Kc}\\
187 > K_b + J_r \Delta t & = & b^2 \left(K_b - \frac{1}{2}\langle
188 > \omega_b \rangle \cdot \overleftrightarrow{I_b} \cdot \langle \omega_b
189 > \rangle \right) + \frac{1}{2} \mathbf{c}_b \cdot \overleftrightarrow{I_b} \cdot \mathbf{c}_b \label{eq:Kh}
190 > \end{eqnarray}
191 > Simultaneous solution of these quadratic formulae for the scaling
192 > coefficients, $a$ and $b$, will ensure that the simulation samples
193 > from the original microcanonical (NVE) ensemble.  Here $K_{\{a,b\}}$
194 > is the instantaneous translational kinetic energy of each shell.  At
195 > each time interval, we solve for $a$, $b$, $\mathbf{c}_a$, and
196 > $\mathbf{c}_b$, subject to the imposed angular momentum flux,
197 > $j_r(\mathbf{L})$, and thermal flux, $J_r$ values.  The new particle
198 > velocities are computed, and the simulation continues. System
199 > configurations after the transformations have exactly the same energy
200 > ({\it and} angular momentum) as before the moves.
201  
202 < Metal-nonmetal interactions are governed by parameters derived from Luedtke and Landman.
202 > As the simulation progresses, the velocity transformations can be
203 > performed on a regular basis, and the system will develop a
204 > temperature and/or angular velocity gradient in response to the
205 > applied flux.  Using the slope of the radial temperature or velocity
206 > gradients, it is quite simple to obtain both the thermal conductivity
207 > ($\lambda$) and shear viscosity ($\eta$),
208 > \begin{equation}
209 >  J_r = -\lambda \frac{\partial T}{\partial
210 >    r} \hspace{2in} j_r(\mathbf{L}_z) = -\eta \frac{\partial
211 >    \omega_z}{\partial r}
212 > \end{equation}
213 > of a liquid cluster.
214  
101
215   %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
216   % NON-PERIODIC DYNAMICS
217   %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
218   \subsection{Dynamics for non-periodic systems}
219  
220 < We have run all tests using the Langevin Hull nonperiodic simulation methodology. The Langevin Hull uses a Delaunay tesselation to create a dynamic convex hull composed of triangular facets with vertices at atomic sites. Atomic sites included in the hull are coupled to an external bath defined by a temperature, pressure and viscosity. Atoms not included in the hull are subject to standard Newtonian dynamics. Thermal coupling to the bath was turned off to avoid interference with any imposed kinetic flux. Systems containing liquids were run under moderate pressure ($\sim$ 5 atm) to avoid the formation of a substantial vapor phase, which would have a hull created out of a relatively small number of molecules.
220 > We have run all tests using the Langevin Hull nonperiodic simulation methodology.\cite{Vardeman2011} The Langevin Hull is especially useful for simulating heterogeneous mixtures of materials with different compressibilities, which are typically problematic for traditional affine transform methods. We have had success applying this method to
221 > several different systems including bare metal nanoparticles, liquid water clusters, and explicitly solvated nanoparticles. Calculated physical properties such as the isothermal compressibility of water and the bulk modulus of gold nanoparticles are in good agreement with previous theoretical and experimental results. The Langevin Hull uses a Delaunay tesselation to create a dynamic convex hull composed of triangular facets with vertices at atomic sites. Atomic sites included in the hull are coupled to an external bath defined by a temperature, pressure and viscosity. Atoms not included in the hull are subject to standard Newtonian dynamics. For these tests, thermal coupling to the bath was turned off to avoid interference with any imposed kinetic flux. Systems containing liquids were run under moderate pressure ($\sim$ 5 atm) to avoid the formation of a substantial vapor phase.
222  
223   %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
224   % NON-PERIODIC RNEMD
225   %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
226   \subsection{VSS-RNEMD for non-periodic systems}
227  
228 < The adaptation of VSS-RNEMD for non-periodic systems is relatively
228 > The most useful RNEMD approach developed so far utilizes a series of
229 > simultaneous velocity shearing and scaling (VSS) exchanges between the two
230 > regions.\cite{Kuang2012} This method provides a set of conservation constraints
231 > while simultaneously creating a desired flux between the two regions. Satisfying
232 > the constraint equations ensures that the new configurations are sampled from the
233 > same NVE ensemble.
234 >
235 > We have implemented this new method in OpenMD, our group molecular dynamics code.\cite{openmd} The adaptation of VSS-RNEMD for non-periodic systems is relatively
236   straightforward. The major modifications to the method are the addition of a rotational shearing term and the use of more versatile hot / cold regions instead
237   of rectangular slabs. A temperature profile along the $r$ coordinate is created by recording the average temperature of concentric spherical shells.
238  
239 + \begin{figure}
240 +        \center{\includegraphics[width=7in]{figures/VSS}}
241 +        \caption{Schematics of periodic (left) and nonperiodic (right) Velocity Shearing and Scaling RNEMD. A kinetic energy or momentum flux is applied from region B to region A. Thermal gradients are depicted by a color gradient. Linear or angular velocity gradients are shown as arrows.}
242 +        \label{fig:VSS}
243 + \end{figure}
244 +
245   At each time interval, the particle velocities ($\mathbf{v}_i$ and
246   $\mathbf{v}_j$) in the cold and hot shells ($C$ and $H$) are modified by a
247   velocity scaling coefficient ($c$ and $h$), an additive linear velocity shearing
# Line 122 | Line 249 | average linear and angular velocities for each shell.
249   shearing term ($\mathbf{b}_c$ and $\mathbf{b}_h$). Here, $\langle
250   \mathbf{v}_{i,j} \rangle$ and $\langle \mathbf{\omega}_{i,j} \rangle$ are the
251   average linear and angular velocities for each shell.
125
252   \begin{displaymath}
253   \begin{array}{rclcl}
254   & \underline{~~~~~~~~~~\mathrm{scaling}~~~~~~~~~~} & &
# Line 142 | Line 268 | The total energy is constrained via two quadratic form
268   \end{eqnarray}
269  
270   The total energy is constrained via two quadratic formulae,
145
271   \begin{eqnarray}
272   K_c - J_r \; \Delta \, t & = & c^2 \, (K_c - \frac{1}{2}\langle \omega_c \rangle \cdot I_c\langle \omega_c \rangle) + \frac{1}{2} \mathbf{b}_c \cdot I_c \, \mathbf{b}_c \label{eq:Kc}\\
273   K_h + J_r \; \Delta \, t & = & h^2 \, (K_h - \frac{1}{2}\langle \omega_h \rangle \cdot I_h\langle \omega_h \rangle) + \frac{1}{2} \mathbf{b}_h \cdot I_h \, \mathbf{b}_h \label{eq:Kh}
# Line 155 | Line 280 | the velocity scaling ($c$ and $h$) and shearing ($\mat
280   the velocity scaling ($c$ and $h$) and shearing ($\mathbf{b}_c,\,$ and $\mathbf{b}_h$) at each time interval.
281  
282   %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
283 + % **COMPUTATIONAL DETAILS**
284 + %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
285 + \section{Computational Details}
286 +
287 + %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
288 + % SIMULATION PROTOCOL
289 + %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
290 + \subsection{Simulation protocol}
291 +
292 +
293 + %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
294 + % FORCE FIELD PARAMETERS
295 + %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
296 + \subsection{Force field parameters}
297 +
298 + We have chosen the SPC/E water model for these simulations, which is particularly useful for method validation as there are many values for physical properties from previous simulations available for direct comparison.\cite{Bedrov:2000, Kuang2010}
299 +
300 + Gold -- gold interactions are described by the quantum Sutton-Chen (QSC) model.\cite{PhysRevB.59.3527} The QSC parameters are tuned to experimental properties such as density, cohesive energy, and elastic moduli and include zero-point quantum corrections.
301 +
302 + Hexane molecules are described by the TraPPE united atom model,\cite{TraPPE-UA.alkanes} which provides good computational efficiency and reasonable accuracy for bulk thermal conductivity values. In this model,
303 + sites are located at the carbon centers for alkyl groups. Bonding
304 + interactions, including bond stretches and bends and torsions, were
305 + used for intra-molecular sites closer than 3 bonds. For non-bonded
306 + interactions, Lennard-Jones potentials were used.  We have previously
307 + utilized both united atom (UA) and all-atom (AA) force fields for
308 + thermal conductivity,\cite{kuang:AuThl,Kuang2012} and since the united
309 + atom force fields cannot populate the high-frequency modes that are
310 + present in AA force fields, they appear to work better for modeling
311 + thermal conductivity.
312 +
313 + Gold -- hexane nonbonded interactions are governed by pairwise Lennard-Jones parameters derived from Vlugt \emph{et al}.\cite{vlugt:cpc2007154} They fitted parameters for the interaction between Au and CH$_{\emph x}$ pseudo-atoms based on the effective potential of Hautman and Klein for the Au(111) surface.\cite{hautman:4994}
314 +
315 + %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
316 + % THERMAL CONDUCTIVITIES
317 + %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
318 + \subsection{Thermal conductivities}
319 +
320 + The thermal conductivity, $\lambda$, can be calculated using the imposed kinetic energy flux, $J_r$, and thermal gradient, $\frac{\partial T}{\partial r}$ measured from the resulting temperature profile
321 +
322 + \begin{equation}
323 +        J_r = -\lambda \frac{\partial T}{\partial r}
324 + \end{equation}
325 +
326 + %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
327 + % INTERFACIAL THERMAL CONDUCTANCE
328 + %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
329 + \subsection{Interfacial thermal conductance}
330 +
331 + A thermal flux is created using VSS-RNEMD moves, and the resulting temperature
332 + profiles are analyzed to yield information about the interfacial thermal
333 + conductance. As the simulation progresses, the VSS moves are performed on a regular basis, and
334 + the system develops a thermal or velocity gradient in response to the applied
335 + flux. A definition of the interfacial conductance in terms of a temperature difference ($\Delta T$) measured at $r_0$,
336 + \begin{equation}
337 +        G = \frac{J_r}{\Delta T_{r_0}}, \label{eq:G}
338 + \end{equation}
339 + is useful once the RNEMD approach has generated a
340 + stable temperature gap across the interface.
341 +
342 + %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
343 + % INTERFACIAL FRICTION
344 + %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
345 + \subsection{Interfacial friction}
346 +
347 + The slip length, $\delta$, is defined as the ratio of the interfacial friction coefficient, $\kappa$, and dynamic solvent viscosity, $\eta$
348 +
349 + \begin{equation}
350 +        \delta = \frac{\eta}{\kappa}
351 + \end{equation}
352 +
353 + and is measured from a radial angular momentum profile generated from a nonperiodic VSS-RNEMD simulation.
354 +
355 + Analytical solutions for the rotational friction coefficients for a solvated spherical body of radius $r$ under ``stick'' boundary conditions can be estimated using Stokes' law
356 +
357 + \begin{equation}
358 +        \Xi = 8 \pi \eta r^3 \label{eq:Xi}.
359 + \end{equation}
360 +
361 + where $\eta$ is the dynamic viscosity of the surrounding solvent and was determined for TraPPE-UA hexane under these condition by applying a traditional VSS-RNEMD linear momentum flux to a periodic box of solvent.
362 +
363 + For general ellipsoids with semiaxes $a$, $b$, and $c$, Perrin's extension of Stokes' law provides exact solutions for symmetric prolate $(a \geq b = c)$ and oblate $(a < b = c)$ ellipsoids. For simplicity, we define a Perrin Factor, $S$,
364 +
365 + \begin{equation}
366 +        S = \frac{2}{\sqrt{a^2 - b^2}} ln \left[ \frac{a + \sqrt{a^2 - b^2}}{b} \right]. \label{eq:S}
367 + \end{equation}
368 +
369 + For a prolate ellipsoidal rod, demonstrated here, the rotational resistance tensor $\Xi$ is a $3 \times 3$ diagonal matrix with elements
370 + \begin{equation}
371 +        \Xi^{rr}_a = \frac{32 \pi}{2} \eta \frac{ \left( a^2 - b^2 \right) b^2}{2a - b^2 S}
372 + \label{eq:Xia}
373 + \end{equation}
374 + \begin{equation}
375 +        \Xi^{rr}_{b,c} = \frac{32 \pi}{2} \eta \frac{ \left( a^4 - b^4 \right)}{ \left( 2a^2 - b^2 \right)S - 2a}.                                      \label{eq:Xibc}
376 + \end{equation}
377 +
378 + % However, the friction between hexane solvent and gold more likely falls within ``slip'' boundary conditions. Hu and Zwanzig\cite{Zwanzig} investigated the rotational friction coefficients for spheroids under slip boundary conditions and obtained numerial results for a scaling factor as a function of $\tau$, the ratio of the shorter semiaxes and the longer semiaxis of the spheroid. For the sphere and prolate ellipsoid shown here, the values of $\tau$ are $1$ and $0.3939$, respectively. According to the values tabulated by Hu and Zwanzig, the sphere friction coefficient approaches $0$, while the ellipsoidal friction coefficient must be scaled by a factor of $0.880$ to account for the reduced interfacial friction under ``slip'' boundary conditions.
379 +
380 + Another useful quantity is the friction factor $f$, or the friction coefficient of a non-spherical shape divided by the friction coefficient of a sphere of equivalent volume. The nanoparticle and ellipsoidal nanorod dimensions used here were specifically chosen to create structures with equal volumes.
381 +
382 + %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
383   % **TESTS AND APPLICATIONS**
384   %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
385   \section{Tests and Applications}
# Line 164 | Line 389 | Gold Nanoparticle:\\
389   %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
390   \subsection{Thermal conductivities}
391  
392 < Gold Nanoparticle:\\
168 < Measured linear slope $\left( \langle dT / dr \rangle \right)$ is linearly dependent on applied kinetic energy flux. Calculated thermal conductivity compares well with previous bulk QSC values. Still $\sim$100 times lower than experiment (limitations of potential -- neglects electronic contributions to heat conduction). Increase relative to bulk may be due to slight increase in gold density. Curvature of nanoparticle introduces higher surface tension and increases density of gold.\\
392 > Calculated values for the thermal conductivity of a 40 \AA$~$ radius gold nanoparticle (15707 atoms) at different kinetic energy flux values are shown in Table \ref{table:goldconductivity}. For these calculations, the hot and cold slabs were excluded from the linear regression of the thermal gradient. The measured linear slope $\langle dT / dr \rangle$ is linearly dependent on the applied kinetic energy flux $J_r$. Calculated thermal conductivity values compare well with previous bulk QSC values of 1.08 -- 1.26 W m$^{-1}$ K$^{-1}$\cite{Kuang2010}, though still significantly lower than the experimental value of 320 W m$^{-1}$ K$^{-1}$, as the QSC force field neglects significant electronic contributions to heat conduction. The small increase relative to previous simulated bulk values is due to a slight increase in gold density -- as expected, an increase in density results in higher thermal conductivity values. The increased density is a result of nanoparticle curvature relative to an infinite bulk slab, which introduces surface tension that increases ambient density.
393  
394 < \begin{longtable}{p{2.7cm} p{2.5cm} p{2.5cm}}
395 <        \caption{Calculated thermal conductivity of a crystalline gold nanoparticle of radius 40 \AA. Calculations were performed at 300 K and ambient density. Gold-gold interactions are described by the Quantum Sutton-Chen potential.}
172 <        \\ \hline \hline
173 <                \centering {$J_r$} & \centering\arraybackslash {$\langle dT / dr \rangle$} & \centering\arraybackslash {$\boldsymbol \lambda$}\\
174 <        \centering {\small(kcal fs$^{-1}$ \AA$^{-2}$)} & \centering\arraybackslash {\small(K \AA$^{-1}$)} & \centering\arraybackslash {\small(W m$^{-1}$ K$^{-1}$)}\\ \hline
175 < \endhead
176 < \hline
177 < % \endfoot
178 < \centering3.25$\times 10^{-6}$ & \centering\arraybackslash 0.11435 & \centering\arraybackslash 1.9753 \\
179 < \centering6.50$\times 10^{-6}$ & \centering\arraybackslash 0.2324 & \centering\arraybackslash 1.9438 \\
180 < \centering1.30$\times 10^{-5}$ & \centering\arraybackslash 0.44922 & \centering\arraybackslash 2.0113 \\
181 < \centering3.25$\times 10^{-5}$ & \centering\arraybackslash 1.1802 & \centering\arraybackslash 1.9139 \\
182 < \centering6.50$\times 10^{-5}$ & \centering\arraybackslash 2.339 & \centering\arraybackslash 1.9314
394 > \begin{longtable}{ccc}
395 > \caption{Calculated thermal conductivity of a crystalline gold nanoparticle of radius 40 \AA. Calculations were performed at 300 K and ambient density. Gold-gold interactions are described by the Quantum Sutton-Chen potential.}
396   \\ \hline \hline
397 + {$J_r$} & {$\langle dT / dr \rangle$} & {$\boldsymbol \lambda$}\\
398 + {\small(kcal fs$^{-1}$ \AA$^{-2}$)} & {\small(K \AA$^{-1}$)} & {\small(W m$^{-1}$ K$^{-1}$)}\\ \hline
399 + 3.25$\times 10^{-6}$ & 0.11435 & 1.9753 \\
400 + 6.50$\times 10^{-6}$ & 0.2324 & 1.9438 \\
401 + 1.30$\times 10^{-5}$ & 0.44922 & 2.0113 \\
402 + 3.25$\times 10^{-5}$ & 1.1802 & 1.9139 \\
403 + 6.50$\times 10^{-5}$ & 2.339 & 1.9314
404 + \\ \hline \hline
405   \label{table:goldconductivity}
406   \end{longtable}
186        
187 SPC/E Water Cluster:
407  
408 < \begin{longtable}{p{2.7cm} p{2.5cm} p{2.5cm}}
190 <        \caption{Calculated thermal conductivity of a cluster of 6912 SPC/E water molecules. Calculations were performed at 300 K and ambient density.}
191 <        \\ \hline \hline
192 <                \centering {$J_r$} & \centering\arraybackslash {$\langle dT / dr \rangle$} & \centering\arraybackslash {$\boldsymbol \lambda$}\\
193 <        \centering {\small(kcal fs$^{-1}$ \AA$^{-2}$)} & \centering\arraybackslash {\small(K \AA$^{-1}$)} & \centering\arraybackslash {\small(W m$^{-1}$ K$^{-1}$)}\\ \hline
194 < \endhead
195 < \hline
196 < % \endfoot
408 > Calculated values for the thermal conductivity of a cluster of 6912 SPC/E water molecules are shown in Table \ref{table:waterconductivity}.
409  
410 + \begin{longtable}{ccc}
411 + \caption{Calculated thermal conductivity of a cluster of 6912 SPC/E water molecules. Calculations were performed at 300 K and ambient density.}
412   \\ \hline \hline
413 + {$J_r$} & {$\langle dT / dr \rangle$} & {$\boldsymbol \lambda$}\\
414 + {\small(kcal fs$^{-1}$ \AA$^{-2}$)} & {\small(K \AA$^{-1}$)} & {\small(W m$^{-1}$ K$^{-1}$)}\\ \hline
415 + 1.00$\times 10^{-5}$ & 0.38683 & 1.79665486\\
416 + 3.00$\times 10^{-5}$ & 1.1643 & 1.79077557\\
417 + 6.00$\times 10^{-5}$ & 2.2262 & 1.87314707\\
418 + \hline \hline
419   \label{table:waterconductivity}
420   \end{longtable}
421  
422   %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
203 % SHEAR VISCOSITY
204 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
205 \subsection{Shear viscosity}
206
207 SPC/E Water Cluster:
208
209 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
423   % INTERFACIAL THERMAL CONDUCTANCE
424   %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
425   \subsection{Interfacial thermal conductance}
426  
427 < Gold Nanoparticle in Hexane:
427 > \begin{longtable}{ccc}
428 > \caption{Caption.}
429 > \\ \hline \hline
430 > {Nanoparticle Radius} & {$\boldsymbol \lambda$}\\
431 > {\small(\AA)} & {\small(W m$^{-1}$ K$^{-1}$)}\\ \hline
432 > 20 & 59.66\\
433 > 30 & 57.88\\
434 > 40 & \\
435 > $\infty$ & \\
436 > \hline \hline
437 > \label{table:waterconductivity}
438 > \end{longtable}
439  
440   %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
441   % INTERFACIAL FRICTION
442   %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
443   \subsection{Interfacial friction}
444  
445 < Gold Nanoparticle and Ellipsoid in Hexane:
446 <
447 < \begin{longtable}{p{2.5cm} p{3cm} p{2.5cm} p{2.5cm} p{2.5cm}}
448 <        \caption{Calculated interfacial friction coefficients ($\kappa$) and slip length ($\delta$) of gold nanostructures solvated in TraPPE-UA hexane. The ellipsoid is oriented with the long axis along the $z$ direction.}
225 <        \\ \hline \hline
226 <                {Structure} & \centering{Axis of rotation} & \centering\arraybackslash {$\kappa$} & \centering\arraybackslash {$\delta$} & \centering\arraybackslash Stokes' Law $F$\\
227 <        \centering {} & {} & \centering\arraybackslash {\small($10^4$ Pa s m$^{-1}$)} & \centering\arraybackslash {\small(nm)} & \centering\arraybackslash{\small()}\\ \hline
228 < \endhead
229 < \hline
230 < % \endfoot
231 < Nanoparticle & \centering$x = y = z$ & & & \\
232 < Ellipsoidal rod & \centering$x = y$ & & & \\
233 < Ellipsoidal rod & \centering$z$ & & &
445 > Table \ref{table:interfacialfrictionstick} shows the calculated interfacial friction coefficients $\kappa$ for spherical gold nanoparticles and a prolate ellipsoidal gold nanorod in TraPPE-UA hexane. An angular momentum flux was applied between the A and B regions defined as the gold structure and hexane molecules beyond a certain radius, respectively. The resulting angular velocity gradient resulted in the gold structure rotating about the prescribed axis within the solvent.
446 >        
447 > \begin{longtable}{lccccc}
448 > \caption{Calculated ``stick'' interfacial friction coefficients ($\kappa$) and friction factors ($f$) of gold nanostructures solvated in TraPPE-UA hexane at 230 K. The ellipsoid is oriented with the long axis along the $z$ direction.}
449   \\ \hline \hline
450 < \label{table:interfacialfriction}
450 > {Structure} & {Axis of Rotation} & {$\kappa_{VSS}$} & {$\kappa_{calc}$} & {$f_{VSS}$} & {$f_{calc}$}\\
451 > {} & {} & {\small($10^{-29}$ Pa s m$^{3}$)} & {\small($10^{-29}$ Pa s m$^{3}$)} & {} & {}\\  \hline
452 > {Sphere (r = 20 \AA)} & {$x = y = z$} & {} & {6.13239} & {1} & {1}\\
453 > {Sphere (r = 30 \AA)} & {$x = y = z$} & {} & {20.6968} & {1} & {1}\\
454 > {Sphere (r = 40 \AA)} & {$x = y = z$} & {} & {49.0591} & {1} & {1}\\
455 > {Prolate Ellipsoid} & {$x = y$} & {} & {8.22846} & {} & {1.92477}\\
456 > {Prolate Ellipsoid} & {$z$} & {} & {3.28634} & {} & {0.768726}\\
457 >  \hline \hline
458 > \label{table:interfacialfrictionstick}
459   \end{longtable}
460  
461 + % \begin{longtable}{lccc}
462 + % \caption{Calculated ``slip'' interfacial friction coefficients ($\kappa$) and friction factors ($f$) of gold nanostructures solvated in TraPPE-UA hexane. The ellipsoid is oriented with the long axis along the $z$ direction.}
463 + % \\ \hline \hline
464 + % {Structure} & {Axis of rotation} & {$\kappa_{VSS}$} & {$\kappa_{calc}$}\\
465 + % {} & {} & {\small($10^{-29}$ Pa s m$^{3}$)} & {\small($10^{-29}$ Pa s m$^{3}$)}\\  \hline
466 + % {Sphere} & {$x = y = z$} & {} & {0}\\
467 + % {Prolate Ellipsoid} & {$x = y$} & {} & {0}\\
468 + % {Prolate Ellipsoid} & {$z$} & {} & {7.9295392}\\  \hline \hline
469 + % \label{table:interfacialfrictionslip}
470 + % \end{longtable}
471  
472   %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
473   % **DISCUSSION**
# Line 257 | Line 490 | Computing (CRC) at the University of Notre Dame.
490   \bibliography{nonperiodicVSS}
491  
492   \end{doublespace}
493 < \end{document}
493 > \end{document}

Diff Legend

Removed lines
+ Added lines
< Changed lines
> Changed lines