4.7 Article

How much time is needed to form a kinetically stable glass? AC calorimetric study of vapor-deposited glasses of ethylcyclohexane

期刊

JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL PHYSICS
卷 142, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

AMER INST PHYSICS
DOI: 10.1063/1.4906806

关键词

-

资金

  1. government of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Germany
  2. National Science Foundation [CHE-1265737]
  3. Division Of Chemistry
  4. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien [1265737] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Glasses of ethylcyclohexane produced by physical vapor deposition have been characterized by in situ alternating current chip nanocalorimetry. Consistent with previous work on other organic molecules, we observe that glasses of high kinetic stability are formed at substrate temperatures around 0.85 T-g, where T-g is the conventional glass transition temperature. Ethylcyclohexane is the least fragile organic glass-former for which stable glass formation has been established. The isothermal transformation of the vapor-deposited glasses into the supercooled liquid state was also measured. At seven substrate temperatures, the transformation time was measured for glasses prepared with deposition rates across a range of four orders of magnitude. At low substrate temperatures, the transformation time is strongly dependent upon deposition rate, while the dependence weakens as T-g is approached from below. These data provide an estimate for the surface equilibration time required to maximize kinetic stability at each substrate temperature. This surface equilibration time is much smaller than the bulk alpha-relaxation time and within two orders of magnitude of the beta-relaxation time of the ordinary glass. Kinetically stable glasses are formed even for substrate temperatures below the Vogel and the Kauzmann temperatures. Surprisingly, glasses formed in the limit of slow deposition at the lowest substrate temperatures are not as kinetically stable as those formed near 0.85 T-g. (C) 2015 AIP Publishing LLC.

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