Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-qxdb6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T15:13:00.523Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Simulation Study of Confinement Effects on the Melting Transition in Hexane and Decane Monolayers Between Two Graphite Slabs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 February 2011

Cary Pint  and
Michael Roth
Cary Pint
Affiliation:
cpint@uni.edu, University of Northern Iowa, Physics, 205 Physics Building, Cedar Falls, IA, 50614, United States, 319-290-3262
Michael Roth
Affiliation:
michael.roth@uni.edu, University of Northern Iowa, Physics, United States
Get access

Abstract

The melting transition in hexane and decane monolayers are studied through use of a canonical ensemble molecular dynamics (MD) simulation method, where the monolayer is physisorbed onto a single, infinite graphite slab, with another confining graphite slab some varying vertical distance from the monolayer. Using a simple united-atom model to depict the alkanes, simulations suggest that the monolayer melting transition is largely dependent upon the average density of the physisorbed monolayer in addition to the spacing between the two graphite slabs. In particular, hexane is studied at two distinct coverages: (i) a fully commensurate (FC) monolayer, and (ii) a uniaxially incommensurate (UI) monolayer with an average density 0.9 times that of the FC monolayer. In the case of no confinement, both the FC hexane and decane monolayers exhibit a power law relation between the melting temperature of the monolayer and the graphite slab separation. In contrast, the UI hexane monolayer deviates from this behavior, suggesting that the power law behavior is an effect of the in-plane space, and how the monolayer melting transition depends upon this in-plane space. Finally, the role of the top (confining) layer corrugation in the power-law relationship, and the importance of this study toward future applications are briefly discussed.

Keywords

simulationphase transformationlubricant
Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 899: Symposium N – Dynamics in Small Confining Systems VIII , 2005 , 0899-N07-21
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Arnold, T., Thomas, R.K., Castro, M.A., Clarke, S.M., Messe, L., and Inaba, A., Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 4, 345 (2002).Google Scholar
2. Arnold, T., Dong, C.C., Thomas, R.K., Castro, M.A., Perdigon, A., Clarke, S.M., and Inaba, A., Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 4, 3430 (2002).Google Scholar
3. Newton, J.C., Ph.Dissertation, D., University of Missouri-Columbia (1989).Google Scholar
4. Peters, G.H. and Tildesley, D.J., Langmuir 12, 1557 (1996).Google Scholar
5. Krishnan, M., Balasubramanian, S., and Clarke, S., J. Chem. Phys. 118, 5082 (2003).Google Scholar
6. Roth, M.W., Pint, C.L., and Wexler, C., Phys. Rev. B 71, 155427 (2005); Pint, C.L., Roth, M.W., and Wexler, C., Phys. Rev. B (submitted).Google Scholar
7. Pint, C.L., Surf. Sci. (in press), available via www.arxiv.org: cond-mat/0506473.Google Scholar
8. Hansen, F.Y. and Taub, H., Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 652 (1991).Google Scholar
9. Martin, M.G. and Siepmann, J.I., J. Phys. Chem. B 102, 2569 (1998).Google Scholar
10. Steele, W.A., Surf. Sci. 36, 317 (1973).Google Scholar
11. Bader, K. and Roth, M.W., Surf. Sci. 538, 30 (2003).Google Scholar