1887
banner image
No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
Controlling crystal self-assembly using a real-time feedback scheme
Rent:
Rent this article for
USD
10.1063/1.4793527
/content/aip/journal/jcp/138/9/10.1063/1.4793527
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aip/journal/jcp/138/9/10.1063/1.4793527
View: Figures

Figures

Image of FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.

Operation of the feedback loop on short time scales for three “With-feed” simulations with different initial bond strengths . (Top) Time-dependence of the bond strength ɛb. Measurement and relaxation stages are indicated for the run with . The shaded region indicates where “No-feed” simulations found appreciable crystallisation. The inset shows the time-dependence of the perturbation strength for the run with . (Bottom) Average number of bonds per particle, .

Image of FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.

Configurations from “No-feed” (left) and “With-feed” (right) simulations at t = 104τ0, and averaged measures of crystallinity at this time. In the snapshots, particles in fcc/hcp environments are coloured orange/purple. Particles in other environments are rendered at half their actual diameter for visual clarity. The data in the table are averaged either over 8 independent simulations (“No-feed”) or over the M = 8 systems associated with single “With-feed” simulations (see the Appendix). For , we show the standard errors on these averages as an indicator of the numerical uncertainty. For n x and n 142, these errors are small: no larger than 0.02 and 0.2, respectively. The uncertainties on are significant but it is clear that “With-feed” simulations form “higher-quality” crystals with larger close-packed domains.

Image of FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.

Behaviour of the correlation and response functions for a “With-feed” simulation with . (Other data for the same run were shown in Fig. 1 ). We show and for the first three iterations of the feedback loop. The responses are quite small when compared to , indicating that irreversible bonding is taking place, and the system is vulnerable to kinetic trapping. As a result, the feedback loop acts to reduce the bond strength ɛb (see Fig. 1 ).

Image of FIG. 4.
FIG. 4.

Behaviour of bond strength ɛb at long times, for the “With-feed” simulations of Fig. 1 . The symbols and colors indicate the values of , which are the same as those in Fig. 1 . The dashed line shows the “No-feed” protocol that gave the best yield.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/aip/journal/jcp/138/9/10.1063/1.4793527
2013-03-05
2014-04-19
Loading

Full text loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
Scitation: Controlling crystal self-assembly using a real-time feedback scheme
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aip/journal/jcp/138/9/10.1063/1.4793527
10.1063/1.4793527
SEARCH_EXPAND_ITEM