4.7 Article

Dynamics of solutes with hydrodynamic interactions: Comparison between Brownian dynamics and stochastic rotation dynamics simulations

期刊

PHYSICAL REVIEW E
卷 88, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevE.88.043304

关键词

-

资金

  1. French National Agency for Research [ANR-09-JCJC-0082-01]
  2. Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR) [ANR-09-JCJC-0082] Funding Source: Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The dynamics of particles in solution or suspension is influenced by thermal fluctuations and hydrodynamic interactions. Several mesoscale methods exist to account for these solvent-induced effects such as Brownian dynamics with hydrodynamic interactions and hybrid molecular dynamics-stochastic rotation dynamics methods. Here we compare two ways of coupling solutes to the solvent with stochastic rotation dynamics (SRD) to Brownian dynamics with and without explicit hydrodynamic interactions. In the first SRD scheme [SRD with collisional coupling (CC)] the solutes participate in the collisional step with the solvent and in the second scheme [SRD with central force coupling (CFC)] the solutes interact through direct forces with the solvent, generating slip boundary conditions. We compare the transport coefficients of neutral and charged solutes in a model system obtained by these simulation schemes. Brownian dynamics without hydrodynamic interactions is used as a reference to quantify the influence of hydrodynamics on the transport coefficients as modeled by the different methods. We show that, in the dilute range, the SRD CFC method provides results similar to those of Brownian dynamics with hydrodynamic interactions for the diffusion coefficients and for the electrical conductivity. The SRD CC scheme predicts diffusion coefficients close to those obtained by Brownian dynamic simulations without hydrodynamic interactions, but accounts for part of the influence of hydrodynamics on the electrical conductivity.

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

4.7
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