ViewVC Help
View File | Revision Log | Show Annotations | View Changeset | Root Listing
root/group/trunk/nanoglass/experimental.tex
Revision: 3221
Committed: Thu Sep 6 20:44:02 2007 UTC (17 years, 10 months ago) by gezelter
Content type: application/x-tex
File size: 10515 byte(s)
Log Message:
more writing

File Contents

# Content
1 \section{Computational Methodology}
2 \label{sec:details}
3
4 \subsection{Initial Geometries and Heating}
5
6 Cu-core / Ag-shell and random alloy structures were constructed on an
7 underlying FCC lattice (4.09 {\AA}) at the bulk eutectic composition
8 $\mathrm{Ag}_6\mathrm{Cu}_4$. Three different sizes of nanoparticles
9 corresponding to a 20 \AA radius (1961 atoms), 30 {\AA} radius (6603
10 atoms) and 40 {\AA} radius (15683 atoms) were constructed. These
11 initial structures were relaxed to their equilibrium structures at 20
12 K for 20 ps and again at 300 K for 100 ps sampling from a
13 Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution at each temperature.
14
15 To mimic the effects of the heating due to laser irradiation, the
16 particles were allowed to melt by sampling velocities from the Maxwell
17 Boltzmann distribution at a temperature of 900 K. The particles were
18 run under microcanonical simulation conditions for 1 ns of simualtion
19 time prior to studying the effects of heat transfer to the solvent.
20 In all cases, center of mass translational and rotational motion of
21 the particles were set to zero before any data collection was
22 undertaken. Structural features (pair distribution functions) were
23 used to verify that the particles were indeed liquid droplets before
24 cooling simulations took place.
25
26 \subsection{Modeling random alloy and core shell particles in solution
27 phase environments}
28
29 To approximate the effects of rapid heat transfer to the solvent
30 following a heating at the plasmon resonance, we utilized a
31 methodology in which atoms contained in the outer $4$ {\AA} radius of
32 the nanoparticle evolved under Langevin Dynamics with a solvent
33 friction approximating the contribution from the solvent and capping
34 agent. Atoms located in the interior of the nanoparticle evolved
35 under Newtonian dynamics. The set-up of our simulations is nearly
36 identical with the ``stochastic boundary molecular dynamics'' ({\sc
37 sbmd}) method that has seen wide use in the protein simulation
38 community.\cite{BROOKS:1985kx,BROOKS:1983uq,BRUNGER:1984fj} A sketch
39 of this setup can be found in Fig. \ref{fig:langevinSketch}. For a
40 spherical atom of radius $a$, the Langevin frictional forces can be
41 determined by Stokes' law
42 \begin{equation}
43 \mathbf{F}_{\mathrm{frictional}}=6\pi a \eta \mathbf{v}
44 \end{equation}
45 where $\eta$ is the effective viscosity of the solvent in which the
46 particle is embedded. Due to the presence of the capping agent and
47 the lack of details about the atomic-scale interactions between the
48 metallic atoms and the solvent, the effective viscosity is a
49 essentially a free parameter that must be tuned to give experimentally
50 relevant simulations.
51
52 The viscosity ($\eta$) can be tuned by comparing the cooling rate that
53 a set of nanoparticles experience with the known cooling rates for
54 those particles obtained via the laser heating experiments.
55 Essentially, we tune the solvent viscosity until the thermal decay
56 profile matches a heat-transfer model using reasonable values for the
57 interfacial conductance and the thermal conductivity of the solvent.
58
59 Cooling rates for the experimentally-observed nanoparticles were
60 calculated from the heat transfer equations for a spherical particle
61 embedded in a ambient medium that allows for diffusive heat
62 transport. The heat transfer model is a set of two coupled
63 differential equations in the Laplace domain,
64 \begin{eqnarray}
65 Mc_{P}\cdot(s\cdot T_{p}(s)-T_{0})+4\pi R^{2} G\cdot(T_{p}(s)-T_{f}(r=R,s)=0\\
66 \left(\frac{\partial}{\partial r} T_{f}(r,s)\right)_{r=R} +
67 \frac{G}{K}(T_{p}(s)-T_{f}(r,s) = 0
68 \label{eq:heateqn}
69 \end{eqnarray}
70 where $s$ is the time-conjugate variable in Laplace space. The
71 variables in these equations describe a nanoparticle of radius $R$,
72 mass $M$, and specific heat $c_{p}$ at an initial temperature
73 $T_0$. The surrounding solvent has a thermal profile $T_f(r,t)$,
74 thermal conductivity $K$, density $\rho$, and specific heat $c$. $G$
75 is the interfacial conductance between the nanoparticle and the
76 surrounding solvent, and contains information about heat transfer to
77 the capping agent as well as the direct metal-to-solvent heat loss.
78 The temperature of the nanoparticle as a function of time can then
79 obtained by the inverse Laplace transform,
80 \begin{equation}
81 T_{p}(t)=\frac{2 k R^2 g^2
82 T_0}{\pi}\int_{0}^{\infty}\frac{\exp(-\kappa u^2
83 t/R^2)u^2}{(u^2(1 + R g) - k R g)^2+(u^3 - k R g u)^2}\mathrm{d}u.
84 \label{eq:laplacetransform}
85 \end{equation}
86 For simplicity, we have introduced the thermal diffusivity $\kappa =
87 K/(\rho c)$, and defined $k=4\pi R^3 \rho c /(M c_p)$ and $g = G/K$ in
88 Eq. \ref{eq:laplacetransform}.
89
90 Eq. \ref{eq:laplacetransform} was solved numerically for the Ag-Cu
91 system using mole-fraction weighted values for $c_p$ and $\rho_p$ of
92 0.295 $(\mathrm{J g^{-1} K^{-1}})$ and $9.826\times 10^6$ $(\mathrm{g
93 m^{-3}})$ respectively. Since most of the laser excitation experiments
94 have been done in aqueous solutions, parameters used for the fluid are
95 $K$ of $0.6$ $(\mathrm{Wm^{-1}K^{-1}})$, $\rho$ of $1.0\times10^6$ $(\mathrm{g
96 m^{-3}})$ and $c$ of $4.184$ $(\mathrm{J g^{-1} K^{-1}})$.
97
98 Values for the interfacial conductance have been determined by a
99 number of groups for similar nanoparticles and range from a low
100 $87.5\times 10^{6}$ $(\mathrm{Wm^{-2}K^{-1}})$ to $120\times 10^{6}$
101 $(\mathrm{Wm^{-2}K^{-1}})$.\cite{XXX}
102
103 We conducted our simulations at both ends of the range of
104 experimentally-determined values for the interfacial conductance.
105 This allows us to observe both the slowest and fastest heat transfers
106 from the nanoparticle to the solvent that are consistent with
107 experimental observations. For the slowest heat transfer, a value for
108 G of $87.5\times 10^{6}$ $(\mathrm{Wm^{-2}K^{-1}})$ was used and for
109 the fastest heat transfer, a value of $117\times 10^{6}$
110 $(\mathrm{Wm^{-2}K^{-1}})$ was used. Based on calculations we have
111 done using raw data from the Hartland group's thermal half-time
112 experiments on Au nanospheres, we believe that the true G values are
113 closer to the faster regime: $117\times 10^{6}$
114 $(\mathrm{Wm^{-2}K^{-1}})$.
115
116 The rate of cooling for the nanoparticles in a molecular dynamics
117 simulation can then be tuned by changing the effective solvent
118 viscosity ($\eta$) until the nanoparticle cooling rate matches the
119 cooling rate described by the heat-transfer equations
120 (\ref{eq:heateqn}). The effective solvent viscosity (in poise) for a G
121 of $87.5\times 10^{6}$ $(\mathrm{Wm^{-2}K^{-1}})$ is 0.17, 0.20, and
122 0.22 for 20 {\AA}, 30 {\AA}, and 40 {\AA} particles, respectively. The
123 effective solvent viscosity (again in poise) for an interfacial
124 conductance of $117\times 10^{6}$ $(\mathrm{Wm^{-2}K^{-1}})$ is 0.23,
125 0.29, and 0.30 for 20 {\AA}, 30 {\AA} and 40 {\AA} particles. Cooling
126 traces for each particle size are presented in
127 Fig. \ref{fig:images_cooling_plot}. It should be noted that the
128 Langevin thermostat produces cooling curves that are consistent with
129 Newtonian (single-exponential) cooling, which cannot match the cooling
130 profiles from Eq. \ref{eq:laplacetransform} exactly.
131
132 \begin{figure}[htbp]
133 \centering
134 \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{images/cooling_plot.pdf}
135 \caption{Thermal cooling curves obtained from the inverse Laplace
136 transform heat model in Eq. \ref{eq:laplacetransform} (solid line) as
137 well as from molecular dynamics simulations (circles). Effective
138 solvent viscosities of 0.23-0.30 poise (depending on the radius of the
139 particle) give the best fit to the experimental cooling curves. Since
140 this viscosity is substantially in excess of the viscosity of liquid
141 water, much of the thermal transfer to the surroundings is probably
142 due to the capping agent.}
143 \label{fig:images_cooling_plot}
144 \end{figure}
145
146 \subsection{Potentials for classical simulations of bimetallic
147 nanoparticles}
148
149 Several different potential models have been developed that reasonably
150 describe interactions in transition metals. In particular, the
151 Embedded Atom Model ({\sc eam})~\cite{PhysRevB.33.7983} and
152 Sutton-Chen ({\sc sc})~\cite{Chen90} potential have been used to study
153 a wide range of phenomena in both bulk materials and
154 nanoparticles.\cite{Vardeman-II:2001jn,ShibataT._ja026764r} Both
155 potentials are based on a model of a metal which treats the nuclei and
156 core electrons as pseudo-atoms embedded in the electron density due to
157 the valence electrons on all of the other atoms in the system. The
158 {\sc sc} potential has a simple form that closely resembles that of
159 the ubiquitous Lennard Jones potential,
160 \begin{equation}
161 \label{eq:SCP1}
162 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] ,
163 \end{equation}
164 where $V^{pair}_{ij}$ and $\rho_{i}$ are given by
165 \begin{equation}
166 \label{eq:SCP2}
167 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}}.
168 \end{equation}
169 $V^{pair}_{ij}$ is a repulsive pairwise potential that accounts for
170 interactions between the pseudoatom cores. The $\sqrt{\rho_i}$ term in
171 Eq. (\ref{eq:SCP1}) is an attractive many-body potential that models
172 the interactions between the valence electrons and the cores of the
173 pseudo-atoms. $D_{ij}$, $D_{ii}$ set the appropriate overall energy
174 scale, $c_i$ scales the attractive portion of the potential relative
175 to the repulsive interaction and $\alpha_{ij}$ is a length parameter
176 that assures a dimensionless form for $\rho$. These parameters are
177 tuned to various experimental properties such as the density, cohesive
178 energy, and elastic moduli for FCC transition metals. The quantum
179 Sutton-Chen ({\sc q-sc}) formulation matches these properties while
180 including zero-point quantum corrections for different transition
181 metals.\cite{PhysRevB.59.3527} This particular parametarization has
182 been shown to reproduce the experimentally available heat of mixing
183 data for both FCC solid solutions of Ag-Cu and the high-temperature
184 liquid.\cite{sheng:184203} In contrast, the {\sc eam} potential does
185 not reproduce the experimentally observed heat of mixing for the
186 liquid alloy.\cite{MURRAY:1984lr} Combination rules for the alloy were
187 taken to be the arithmatic average of the atomic parameters with the
188 exception of $c_i$ since its values is only dependent on the identity
189 of the atom where the density is evaluated. For the {\sc q-sc}
190 potential, cutoff distances are traditionally taken to be
191 $2\alpha_{ij}$ and include up to the sixth coordination shell in FCC
192 metals.
193
194 \subsection{Sampling single-temperature configurations from a cooling
195 trajectory}
196
197 ffdsafjdksalfdsa