4.5 Article

Hard spheres: crystallization and glass formation

出版社

ROYAL SOC
DOI: 10.1098/rsta.2009.0181

关键词

hard spheres; crystallization; glass formation; polydispersity; molecular dynamics; colloid

资金

  1. eDIKT initiative
  2. UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EP/E030173]
  3. European Union [MRTN-CT-2003-504712]
  4. SoftComp Network of Excellence [NMP3-CT-2004-502235]
  5. EPSRC Senior Fellowship [EP/D071070]
  6. Royal Society Research Professorship
  7. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EP/E030173/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  8. EPSRC [EP/E030173/1] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Motivated by old experiments on colloidal suspensions, we report molecular dynamics simulations of assemblies of hard spheres, addressing crystallization and glass formation. The simulations cover wide ranges of polydispersity s (standard deviation of the particle size distribution divided by its mean) and particle concentration. No crystallization is observed for s > 0.07. For 0.02 < s < 0.07, we find that increasing the polydispersity at a given concentration slows down crystal nucleation. The main effect here is that polydispersity reduces the supersaturation since it tends to stabilize the fluid but to destabilize the crystal. At a given polydispersity (< 0.07), we find three regimes of nucleation: standard nucleation and growth at concentrations in and slightly above the coexistence region; 'spinodal nucleation', where the free-energy barrier to nucleation appears to be negligible, at intermediate concentrations; and, at the highest concentrations, a new mechanism, still to be fully understood, which only requires small rearrangement of the particle positions. The cross-over between the second and third regimes occurs at a concentration, approximately 58 per cent by volume, where the colloid experiments show a marked change in the nature of the crystals formed and the particle dynamics indicate an 'ideal' glass transition.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据