4.7 Article

Simple molecular model for ferroelectric nematic liquid crystals exhibited by small rodlike mesogens

期刊

PHYSICAL REVIEW E
卷 104, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevE.104.014704

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Nematic liquid crystals, a liquid medium with apolar orientational order, have been found to exhibit a ferroelectric nematic phase in compounds with certain molecular structures as temperature decreases. A simple model involving cylindrical rods with surface charge density waves is proposed to explain why certain compounds show the ferroelectric nematic phase. The weakly first-order nature of the transition from NLC to FN is suggested to arise from a coupling of the polar order and medium density.
Nematic liquid crystals (NLCs) are the prime example of a liquid medium with an apolar orientational order. In the past couple of years, the ferroelectric nematic (FN) phase has been discovered in some compounds with small rodlike molecules with large longitudinal dipole moments and very restricted chemical structures, as the temperature is lowered from the NLC. We propose a simple model in which the molecules are idealized as cylindrical rods with longitudinal surface charge density waves. The usually strong electrostatic inter-rod interactions favoring antiparallel structures are shown to be subdued in magnitude, and those of parallel structures enhanced, by reducing the amplitudes of the half-waves at both ends of the rods. By introducing an additional increased amplitude of one interior wave, the energy per rod of a cluster of molecules with a pseudohexagonal order is shown to favor the ferroelectric order compared to the antiparallel order, below some value of the inter-rod separation. The model broadly accounts for the restriction in molecular structures for a compound to exhibit the FN phase. It is suggested that the weakly first-order nature of the NLC to FN transition arises from a coupling of the polar order and the density of the medium.

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