| 86 |
|
\section{Methodology} |
| 87 |
|
|
| 88 |
|
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
| 89 |
– |
% FORCE FIELD PARAMETERS |
| 90 |
– |
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
| 91 |
– |
\subsection{Force field parameters} |
| 92 |
– |
|
| 93 |
– |
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. |
| 94 |
– |
|
| 95 |
– |
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. |
| 96 |
– |
|
| 97 |
– |
Hexane molecules are described by the TraPPE united atom model. This model provides good computational efficiency and reasonable accuracy for bulk thermal conductivity values. |
| 98 |
– |
|
| 99 |
– |
Metal-nonmetal interactions are governed by parameters derived from Luedtke and Landman. |
| 100 |
– |
|
| 101 |
– |
|
| 102 |
– |
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
| 89 |
|
% NON-PERIODIC DYNAMICS |
| 90 |
|
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
| 91 |
|
\subsection{Dynamics for non-periodic systems} |
| 92 |
|
|
| 93 |
< |
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. |
| 93 |
> |
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 |
| 94 |
> |
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. |
| 95 |
|
|
| 96 |
|
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
| 97 |
|
% NON-PERIODIC RNEMD |
| 98 |
|
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
| 99 |
|
\subsection{VSS-RNEMD for non-periodic systems} |
| 100 |
|
|
| 101 |
< |
The adaptation of VSS-RNEMD for non-periodic systems is relatively |
| 101 |
> |
The most useful RNEMD approach developed so far utilizes a series of |
| 102 |
> |
simultaneous velocity shearing and scaling (VSS) exchanges between the two |
| 103 |
> |
regions.\cite{Kuang2012} This method provides a set of conservation constraints |
| 104 |
> |
while simultaneously creating a desired flux between the two regions. Satisfying |
| 105 |
> |
the constraint equations ensures that the new configurations are sampled from the |
| 106 |
> |
same NVE ensemble. |
| 107 |
> |
|
| 108 |
> |
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 |
| 109 |
|
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 |
| 110 |
|
of rectangular slabs. A temperature profile along the $r$ coordinate is created by recording the average temperature of concentric spherical shells. |
| 111 |
|
|
| 122 |
|
shearing term ($\mathbf{b}_c$ and $\mathbf{b}_h$). Here, $\langle |
| 123 |
|
\mathbf{v}_{i,j} \rangle$ and $\langle \mathbf{\omega}_{i,j} \rangle$ are the |
| 124 |
|
average linear and angular velocities for each shell. |
| 131 |
– |
|
| 125 |
|
\begin{displaymath} |
| 126 |
|
\begin{array}{rclcl} |
| 127 |
|
& \underline{~~~~~~~~~~\mathrm{scaling}~~~~~~~~~~} & & |
| 141 |
|
\end{eqnarray} |
| 142 |
|
|
| 143 |
|
The total energy is constrained via two quadratic formulae, |
| 151 |
– |
|
| 144 |
|
\begin{eqnarray} |
| 145 |
|
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}\\ |
| 146 |
|
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} |
| 151 |
|
imposed angular momentum flux, $\mathbf{j}_{r} \left( \mathbf{L} \right)$, and/or |
| 152 |
|
thermal flux, $J_r$, equations \ref{eq:bc} - \ref{eq:Kh} are sufficient to obtain |
| 153 |
|
the velocity scaling ($c$ and $h$) and shearing ($\mathbf{b}_c,\,$ and $\mathbf{b}_h$) at each time interval. |
| 154 |
+ |
|
| 155 |
+ |
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
| 156 |
+ |
% **COMPUTATIONAL DETAILS** |
| 157 |
+ |
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
| 158 |
+ |
\section{Computational Details} |
| 159 |
+ |
|
| 160 |
+ |
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
| 161 |
+ |
% SIMULATION PROTOCOL |
| 162 |
+ |
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
| 163 |
+ |
\subsection{Simulation protocol} |
| 164 |
+ |
|
| 165 |
+ |
|
| 166 |
+ |
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
| 167 |
+ |
% FORCE FIELD PARAMETERS |
| 168 |
+ |
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
| 169 |
+ |
\subsection{Force field parameters} |
| 170 |
+ |
|
| 171 |
+ |
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} |
| 172 |
+ |
|
| 173 |
+ |
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. |
| 174 |
+ |
|
| 175 |
+ |
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, |
| 176 |
+ |
sites are located at the carbon centers for alkyl groups. Bonding |
| 177 |
+ |
interactions, including bond stretches and bends and torsions, were |
| 178 |
+ |
used for intra-molecular sites closer than 3 bonds. For non-bonded |
| 179 |
+ |
interactions, Lennard-Jones potentials were used. We have previously |
| 180 |
+ |
utilized both united atom (UA) and all-atom (AA) force fields for |
| 181 |
+ |
thermal conductivity,\cite{kuang:AuThl,Kuang2012} and since the united |
| 182 |
+ |
atom force fields cannot populate the high-frequency modes that are |
| 183 |
+ |
present in AA force fields, they appear to work better for modeling |
| 184 |
+ |
thermal conductivity. |
| 185 |
+ |
|
| 186 |
+ |
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} |
| 187 |
+ |
|
| 188 |
+ |
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
| 189 |
+ |
% THERMAL CONDUCTIVITIES |
| 190 |
+ |
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
| 191 |
+ |
\subsection{Thermal conductivities} |
| 192 |
+ |
|
| 193 |
+ |
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 |
| 194 |
+ |
|
| 195 |
+ |
\begin{equation} |
| 196 |
+ |
J_r = -\lambda \frac{\partial T}{\partial r} |
| 197 |
+ |
\end{equation} |
| 198 |
+ |
|
| 199 |
+ |
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
| 200 |
+ |
% INTERFACIAL THERMAL CONDUCTANCE |
| 201 |
+ |
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
| 202 |
+ |
\subsection{Interfacial thermal conductance} |
| 203 |
+ |
|
| 204 |
+ |
A thermal flux is created using VSS-RNEMD moves, and the resulting temperature |
| 205 |
+ |
profiles are analyzed to yield information about the interfacial thermal |
| 206 |
+ |
conductance. As the simulation progresses, the VSS moves are performed on a regular basis, and |
| 207 |
+ |
the system develops a thermal or velocity gradient in response to the applied |
| 208 |
+ |
flux. A definition of the interfacial conductance in terms of a temperature difference ($\Delta T$) measured at $r_0$, |
| 209 |
+ |
\begin{equation} |
| 210 |
+ |
G = \frac{J_r}{\Delta T_{r_0}}, \label{eq:G} |
| 211 |
+ |
\end{equation} |
| 212 |
+ |
is useful once the RNEMD approach has generated a |
| 213 |
+ |
stable temperature gap across the interface. |
| 214 |
+ |
|
| 215 |
+ |
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
| 216 |
+ |
% INTERFACIAL FRICTION |
| 217 |
+ |
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
| 218 |
+ |
\subsection{Interfacial friction} |
| 219 |
+ |
|
| 220 |
+ |
The slip length, $\delta$, is defined as the ratio of the interfacial friction coefficient, $\kappa$, and dynamic solvent viscosity, $\eta$ |
| 221 |
+ |
|
| 222 |
+ |
\begin{equation} |
| 223 |
+ |
\delta = \frac{\eta}{\kappa} |
| 224 |
+ |
\end{equation} |
| 225 |
|
|
| 226 |
+ |
and is measured from a radial angular momentum profile generated from a nonperiodic VSS-RNEMD simulation. |
| 227 |
+ |
|
| 228 |
+ |
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 |
| 229 |
+ |
|
| 230 |
+ |
\begin{equation} |
| 231 |
+ |
\Xi = 8 \pi \eta r^3 \label{eq:Xi}. |
| 232 |
+ |
\end{equation} |
| 233 |
+ |
|
| 234 |
+ |
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. |
| 235 |
+ |
|
| 236 |
+ |
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, $S$, |
| 237 |
+ |
|
| 238 |
+ |
\begin{equation} |
| 239 |
+ |
S = \frac{2}{\sqrt{a^2 - b^2}} ln \left[ \frac{a + \sqrt{a^2 - b^2}}{b} \right]. \label{eq:S} |
| 240 |
+ |
\end{equation} |
| 241 |
+ |
|
| 242 |
+ |
For a prolate ellipsoidal rod, demonstrated here, the rotational resistance tensor $\Xi$ is a $3 \times 3$ diagonal matrix with elements |
| 243 |
+ |
\begin{equation} |
| 244 |
+ |
\Xi^{rr}_a = \frac{32 \pi}{2} \eta \frac{ \left( a^2 - b^2 \right) b^2}{2a - b^2 S} |
| 245 |
+ |
\label{eq:Xia} |
| 246 |
+ |
\end{equation} |
| 247 |
+ |
\begin{equation} |
| 248 |
+ |
\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} |
| 249 |
+ |
\end{equation} |
| 250 |
+ |
|
| 251 |
+ |
% 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. |
| 252 |
+ |
|
| 253 |
+ |
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. |
| 254 |
+ |
|
| 255 |
|
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
| 256 |
|
% **TESTS AND APPLICATIONS** |
| 257 |
|
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
| 262 |
|
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
| 263 |
|
\subsection{Thermal conductivities} |
| 264 |
|
|
| 265 |
< |
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 NIVS paper], 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. |
| 265 |
> |
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. |
| 266 |
|
|
| 267 |
|
\begin{longtable}{ccc} |
| 268 |
|
\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.} |
| 277 |
|
\\ \hline \hline |
| 278 |
|
\label{table:goldconductivity} |
| 279 |
|
\end{longtable} |
| 188 |
– |
|
| 189 |
– |
SPC/E Water Cluster: |
| 280 |
|
|
| 281 |
+ |
Calculated values for the thermal conductivity of a cluster of 6912 SPC/E water molecules are shown in Table \ref{table:waterconductivity}. |
| 282 |
+ |
|
| 283 |
|
\begin{longtable}{ccc} |
| 284 |
|
\caption{Calculated thermal conductivity of a cluster of 6912 SPC/E water molecules. Calculations were performed at 300 K and ambient density.} |
| 285 |
|
\\ \hline \hline |
| 290 |
|
\end{longtable} |
| 291 |
|
|
| 292 |
|
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
| 201 |
– |
% SHEAR VISCOSITY |
| 202 |
– |
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
| 203 |
– |
\subsection{Shear viscosity} |
| 204 |
– |
|
| 205 |
– |
SPC/E Water Cluster: |
| 206 |
– |
|
| 207 |
– |
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
| 293 |
|
% INTERFACIAL THERMAL CONDUCTANCE |
| 294 |
|
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
| 295 |
|
\subsection{Interfacial thermal conductance} |
| 296 |
|
|
| 212 |
– |
The interfacial thermal conductance, $G$, is calculated by defining a temperature difference $\Delta T$ across a given interface. |
| 213 |
– |
|
| 297 |
|
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
| 298 |
|
% INTERFACIAL FRICTION |
| 299 |
|
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
| 300 |
|
\subsection{Interfacial friction} |
| 301 |
|
|
| 302 |
< |
The interfacial friction coefficient, $\kappa$, can be calculated from the solvent dynamic viscosity, $\eta$, and the slip length, $\delta$. The slip length is measured from a radial angular momentum profile generated from a nonperiodic VSS-RNEMD simulation, as shown in Figure X. |
| 220 |
< |
|
| 221 |
< |
Table \ref{table:interfacialfriction} shows the calculated interfacial friction coefficients $\kappa$ for a spherical gold nanoparticle and 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 included in the convex hull, respectively. The resulting angular velocity gradient resulted in the gold structure rotating about the prescribed axis within the solvent. |
| 222 |
< |
|
| 223 |
< |
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 |
| 224 |
< |
|
| 225 |
< |
\begin{equation} |
| 226 |
< |
\Xi = 8 \pi \eta r^3 \label{eq:Xi}. |
| 227 |
< |
\end{equation} |
| 228 |
< |
|
| 229 |
< |
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. |
| 230 |
< |
|
| 231 |
< |
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, $S$, |
| 232 |
< |
|
| 233 |
< |
\begin{equation} |
| 234 |
< |
S = \frac{2}{\sqrt{a^2 - b^2}} ln \left[ \frac{a + \sqrt{a^2 - b^2}}{b} \right]. \label{eq:S} |
| 235 |
< |
\end{equation} |
| 236 |
< |
|
| 237 |
< |
For a prolate ellipsoidal rod, demonstrated here, the rotational resistance tensor $\Xi$ is a $3 \times 3$ diagonal matrix with elements |
| 238 |
< |
|
| 239 |
< |
\begin{eqnarray} |
| 240 |
< |
\Xi^{rr}_a = \frac{32 \pi}{2} \eta \frac{ \left( a^2 - b^2 \right) b^2}{2a - b^2 S} \label{eq:Xia}\\ |
| 241 |
< |
\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} |
| 242 |
< |
\end{eqnarray} |
| 243 |
< |
|
| 244 |
< |
However, the friction between hexane solvent and gold more likely falls within ``slip'' boundary conditions. Hu and 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. |
| 245 |
< |
|
| 246 |
< |
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. |
| 302 |
> |
Table \ref{table:interfacialfrictionstick} shows the calculated interfacial friction coefficients $\kappa$ for a spherical gold nanoparticle and 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. |
| 303 |
|
|
| 304 |
|
\begin{longtable}{lccccc} |
| 305 |
|
\caption{Calculated ``stick'' 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.} |
| 309 |
|
{Sphere} & {$x = y = z$} & {} & {5.37237} & {1} & {1}\\ |
| 310 |
|
{Prolate Ellipsoid} & {$x = y$} & {} & {3.59881} & {} & {0.768726}\\ |
| 311 |
|
{Prolate Ellipsoid} & {$z$} & {} & {9.01084} & {} & {1.92477}\\ \hline \hline |
| 312 |
< |
\label{table:interfacialfriction} |
| 312 |
> |
\label{table:interfacialfrictionstick} |
| 313 |
|
\end{longtable} |
| 314 |
|
|
| 315 |
< |
\begin{longtable}{lccc} |
| 316 |
< |
\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.} |
| 317 |
< |
\\ \hline \hline |
| 318 |
< |
{Structure} & {Axis of rotation} & {$\kappa_{VSS}$} & {$\kappa_{calc}$}\\ |
| 319 |
< |
{} & {} & {\small($10^{-29}$ Pa s m$^{3}$)} & {\small($10^{-29}$ Pa s m$^{3}$)}\\ \hline |
| 320 |
< |
{Sphere} & {$x = y = z$} & {} & {0}\\ |
| 321 |
< |
{Prolate Ellipsoid} & {$x = y$} & {} & {0}\\ |
| 322 |
< |
{Prolate Ellipsoid} & {$z$} & {} & {7.9295392}\\ \hline \hline |
| 323 |
< |
\label{table:interfacialfriction} |
| 324 |
< |
\end{longtable} |
| 315 |
> |
% \begin{longtable}{lccc} |
| 316 |
> |
% \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.} |
| 317 |
> |
% \\ \hline \hline |
| 318 |
> |
% {Structure} & {Axis of rotation} & {$\kappa_{VSS}$} & {$\kappa_{calc}$}\\ |
| 319 |
> |
% {} & {} & {\small($10^{-29}$ Pa s m$^{3}$)} & {\small($10^{-29}$ Pa s m$^{3}$)}\\ \hline |
| 320 |
> |
% {Sphere} & {$x = y = z$} & {} & {0}\\ |
| 321 |
> |
% {Prolate Ellipsoid} & {$x = y$} & {} & {0}\\ |
| 322 |
> |
% {Prolate Ellipsoid} & {$z$} & {} & {7.9295392}\\ \hline \hline |
| 323 |
> |
% \label{table:interfacialfrictionslip} |
| 324 |
> |
% \end{longtable} |
| 325 |
|
|
| 326 |
|
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
| 327 |
|
% **DISCUSSION** |
