Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
The structural validity of various thermodynamical models of supercooled water
Show others and affiliations
2016 (English)In: Journal of Chemical Physics, ISSN 0021-9606, E-ISSN 1089-7690, Vol. 145, no 13, 134507Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The thermodynamic response functions of water exhibit an anomalous increase upon cooling that becomes strongly amplified in the deeply supercooled regime due to structural fluctuations between disordered and tetrahedral local structures. Here, we compare structural data from recent x-ray laser scattering measurements of water at 1 bar and temperatures down to 227 K with structural properties computed for several different water models using molecular dynamics simulations. Based on this comparison, we critically evaluate four different thermodynamic scenarios that have been invoked to explain the unusual behavior of water. The critical point-free model predicts small variations in the tetrahedrality with decreasing temperature, followed by a stepwise change at the liquid-liquid transition around 228 K at ambient pressure. This scenario is not consistent with the experimental data that instead show a smooth and accelerated variation in structure from 320 to 227 K. Both the singularity-free model and ice coarsening hypothesis give trends that indirectly indicate an increase in tetrahedral structure with temperature that is too weak to be consistent with experiment. A model that includes an apparent divergent point (ADP) at high positive pressure, however, predicts structural development consistent with our experimental measurements. The terminology ADP, instead of the commonly used liquid-liquid critical point, is more general in that it focuses on the growing fluctuations, whether or not they result in true criticality. Extrapolating this model beyond the experimental data, we estimate that an ADP in real water may lie around 1500 ± 250 bars and 190 ± 6 K.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
American Institute of Physics (AIP), 2016. Vol. 145, no 13, 134507
Keyword [en]
Liquids, Molecular dynamics, Supercooling, X ray lasers, Liquid-liquid critical point, Liquid-liquid transition, Molecular dynamics simulations, Structural development, Structural fluctuations, Tetrahedral structures, Thermodynamic response functions, Thermodynamical model, Temperature
National Category
Physical Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-195253DOI: 10.1063/1.4963913ISI: 000386156200030Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-84990960907OAI: oai:DiVA.org:kth-195253DiVA: diva2:1047106
Note

QC 20161116

Available from: 2016-11-16 Created: 2016-11-02 Last updated: 2016-11-29Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Sellberg, Jonas A.
By organisation
Biomedical and X-ray Physics
In the same journal
Journal of Chemical Physics
Physical Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

Altmetric score

Total: 24 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf