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

Comparing trunk/ssdePaper/nptSSD.tex (file contents):
Revision 1017 by chrisfen, Wed Feb 4 18:51:43 2004 UTC vs.
Revision 1022 by chrisfen, Wed Feb 4 22:13:36 2004 UTC

# Line 209 | Line 209 | cubic switching function at a cutoff radius.  Under th
209  
210   Long-range dipole-dipole interactions were accounted for in this study
211   by using either the reaction field method or by resorting to a simple
212 < cubic switching function at a cutoff radius.  Under the first method,
213 < the magnitude of the reaction field acting on dipole $i$ is
212 > cubic switching function at a cutoff radius.  The reaction field
213 > method was actually first used in Monte Carlo simulations of liquid
214 > water.\cite{Barker73} Under this method, the magnitude of the reaction
215 > field acting on dipole $i$ is
216   \begin{equation}
217   \mathcal{E}_{i} = \frac{2(\varepsilon_{s} - 1)}{2\varepsilon_{s} + 1}
218   \frac{1}{r_{c}^{3}} \sum_{j\in{\mathcal{R}}} {\bf \mu}_{j} f(r_{ij})\  ,
# Line 233 | Line 235 | at the cutoff radius) and as a result we have two repa
235  
236   We have also performed a companion set of simulations {\it without} a
237   surrounding dielectric (i.e. using a simple cubic switching function
238 < at the cutoff radius) and as a result we have two reparamaterizations
239 < of SSD which could be used either with or without the Reaction Field
238 > at the cutoff radius), and as a result we have two reparamaterizations
239 > of SSD which could be used either with or without the reaction field
240   turned on.
241  
242   Simulations to obtain the preferred density were performed in the
# Line 252 | Line 254 | traditional quaternion integration.\cite{Evans77,Evans
254   symplectic splitting method proposed by Dullweber {\it et
255   al.}\cite{Dullweber1997} Our reason for selecting this integrator
256   centers on poor energy conservation of rigid body dynamics using
257 < traditional quaternion integration.\cite{Evans77,Evans77b} While quaternions
258 < may work well for orientational motion under NVT or NPT integrators,
259 < our limits on energy drift in the microcanonical ensemble were quite
260 < strict, and the drift under quaternions was substantially greater than
261 < in the symplectic splitting method.  This steady drift in the total
260 < energy has also been observed by Kol {\it et al.}\cite{Laird97}
257 > traditional quaternion integration.\cite{Evans77,Evans77b} In typical
258 > microcanonical ensemble simulations, the energy drift when using
259 > quaternions was substantially greater than when using the symplectic
260 > splitting method (fig. \ref{timestep}).  This steady drift in the
261 > total energy has also been observed by Kol {\it et al.}\cite{Laird97}
262  
263   The key difference in the integration method proposed by Dullweber
264   \emph{et al.} is that the entire rotation matrix is propagated from
# Line 447 | Line 448 | results.\cite{Gillen72,Mills73,Clancy94,Jorgensen01}
448   mean-square displacement as a function of time. The averaged results
449   from five sets of NVE simulations are displayed in figure
450   \ref{diffuse}, alongside experimental, SPC/E, and TIP5P
451 < results.\cite{Gillen72,Mills73,Clancy94,Jorgensen01}
451 > results.\cite{Gillen72,Holz00,Clancy94,Jorgensen01}
452  
453   \begin{figure}
454   \begin{center}
# Line 455 | Line 456 | and Experimental data [Refs. \citen{Gillen72} and \cit
456   \epsfbox{betterDiffuse.epsi}
457   \caption{Average self-diffusion constant as a function of temperature for
458   SSD, SPC/E [Ref. \citen{Clancy94}], TIP5P [Ref. \citen{Jorgensen01}],
459 < and Experimental data [Refs. \citen{Gillen72} and \citen{Mills73}]. Of
459 > and Experimental data [Refs. \citen{Gillen72} and \citen{Holz00}]. Of
460   the three water models shown, SSD has the least deviation from the
461   experimental values. The rapidly increasing diffusion constants for
462   TIP5P and SSD correspond to significant decrease in density at the
# Line 891 | Line 892 | respectively.
892   radial location of the minima following the first solvation shell
893   peak, and g$(r)$ is either g$_\text{OO}(r)$ or g$_\text{OH}(r)$ for
894   calculation of the coordination number or hydrogen bonds per particle
895 < respectively.
895 > respectively. The number of hydrogen bonds stays relatively constant
896 > across all of the models, but the coordination numbers of SSD/E and
897 > SSD/RF show an improvement over SSD1. This improvement is primarily
898 > due to the widening of the first solvation shell peak, allowing the
899 > first minima to push outward. Comparing the coordination number with
900 > the number of hydrogen bonds can lead to more insight into the
901 > structural character of the liquid.  Because of the near identical
902 > values for SSD1, it appears to be a little too exclusive, in that all
903 > molecules in the first solvation shell are involved in forming ideal
904 > hydrogen bonds.  The differing numbers for the newly parameterized
905 > models indicate the allowance of more fluid configurations in addition
906 > to the formation of an acceptable number of ideal hydrogen bonds.
907  
908   The time constants for the self orientational autocorrelation function
909   are also displayed in Table \ref{liquidproperties}. The dipolar
# Line 906 | Line 918 | performed at the STP density for each of the respectiv
918   vector can be calculated from an exponential fit in the long-time
919   regime ($t > \tau_l^\mu$).\cite{Rothschild84} Calculation of these
920   time constants were averaged from five detailed NVE simulations
921 < performed at the STP density for each of the respective models.
921 > performed at the STP density for each of the respective models. It
922 > should be noted that the commonly cited value for $\tau_2$ of 1.9 ps
923 > was determined from the NMR data in reference \citen{Krynicki66} at a
924 > temperature near 34$^\circ$C.\cite{Rahman73} Because of the strong
925 > temperature dependence of $\tau_2$, it is necessary to recalculate it
926 > at 298 K to make proper comparisons. The value shown in Table
927 > \ref{liquidproperties} was calculated from the same NMR data in the
928 > fashion described in reference \citen{Krynicki66}. Again, SSD/E and
929 > SSD/RF show improved behavior over SSD1, both with and without an
930 > active reaction field. Turning on the reaction field leads to much
931 > improved time constants for SSD1; however, these results also include
932 > a corresponding decrease in system density. Numbers published from the
933 > original SSD dynamics studies appear closer to the experimental
934 > values, and this difference can be attributed to the use of the Ewald
935 > sum technique versus a reaction field.\cite{Ichiye99}
936  
937   \subsection{Additional Observations}
938  

Diff Legend

Removed lines
+ Added lines
< Changed lines
> Changed lines