Osmotic pressure and polymer size in semidilute polymer solutions under good-solvent conditions

Journal of Chemical Physics

Volumn 129, Issue 4, 2008, Pages

  Pelissetto, Andrea ^a  

^a SAPIENZA UNIVERSITY OF ROME   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CONCENTRATION (PROCESS); OSMOSIS; POLYMER SOLUTIONS; SOLUTIONS; SOLVENTS;

CHAIN LENGTHS; OSMOTIC PRESSURE; OVERLAP CONCENTRATION; RENORMALIZATION GROUPS; SELF-AVOIDING WALK MODEL; SELF-AVOIDING WALKS; SEMIDILUTE; SEMIDILUTE REGIME; SOLVENT CONDITIONS; UNIVERSAL PROPERTIES; UNIVERSAL SCALING FUNCTIONS;

POLYMERS;

EID: 49149090721     PISSN: 00219606     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1063/1.2955732     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. P. G. de Gennes, Scaling Concepts in Polymer Physics (Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY, 1979).
2. P. G. de Gennes, Phys. Lett. 38A, 339 (1972). 0031-9163
3. K. F. Freed, Renormalization Group Theory of Macromolecules (Wiley, New York, 1987).
4. L. Schäfer, Excluded Volume Effects in Polymer Solutions (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1999).
5. P. Belohorec and B. G. Nickel, " Accurate universal and two-parameter model results from a Monte-Carlo renormalization group study.," Guelph University Report, 1997 (unpublished).
6. S. Caracciolo, B. M. Mognetti, and A. Pelissetto, J. Chem. Phys. 0021-9606 10.1063/1.2338913 125, 094903 (2006).
7. At present the most accurate estimates of are =0.587 58±0.000 07 (Ref.), =0.5874±0.0002 [T. Prellberg, J. Phys. A 0305-4470 10.1088/0305-4470/34/43/102 34, L599 (2001)]; =0.58765±0.00020 [H. -P. Hsu, W. Nadler, and P. Grassberger, Macromolecules 0024-9297 10.1021/ma0355958 37, 4658 (2004)]; =0.5876±0.0002 [A. Pelissetto and E. Vicari, J. Phys. A 0305-4470 10.1088/1751-8113/40/26/F05 40, F539 (2007)]; =0.5876±0.0002 [N. Clisby, R. Liang, and G. Slade, J. Phys. A 0305-4470 10.1088/1751-8113/40/ 36/003 40, 10973 (2007)] (assuming 0.50θ0.53); For an extensive list of older results, see A. Pelissetto and E. Vicari, Phys. Rep. 368, 549 (2002).
8. S. Caracciolo, B. M. Mognetti, and A. Pelissetto, J. Chem. Phys. 0021-9606 10.1063/1.2339015 125, 094904 (2006); S. Caracciolo, B. M. Mognetti, and A. Pelissetto, J. Chem. Phys. 0021-9606 10.1063/1.2722753 126, 169901 (2007) (erratum).
9. S. Caracciolo, B. M. Mognetti, and A. Pelissetto, J. Chem. Phys. 0021-9606 10.1063/1.2826378 128, 065104 (2008).
10. B. Li, N. Madras, and A. D. Sokal, J. Stat. Phys. 0022-4715 10.1007/BF02178552 80, 661 (1995).
11. C. Domb and G. S. Joyce, J. Phys. C 0022-3719 10.1088/0022-3719/5/9/009 5, 956 (1972).
12. A. Pelissetto and J. -P. Hansen, J. Chem. Phys. 0021-9606 10.1063/1.1864933 122, 134904 (2005).
13. R. Dickman, J. Chem. Phys. 0021-9606 10.1063/1.453152 87, 2246 (1987).
14. C. I. Addison, A. A. Louis, and J. P. Hansen, J. Chem. Phys. 0021-9606 10.1063/1.1756571 121, 612 (2004).
15. C. I. Addison, J. P. Hansen, and A. A. Louis, ChemPhysChem 1439-4235 10.1002/cphc.200400524 6, 1760 (2005).
16. J. -P. Hansen and I. R. McDonald, Theory of Simple Liquids, 3rd ed. (Academic, New York, 2006).
17. The residual error on K can be estimated by assuming Kest (M) =K+a/ M4. It follows Δ Kest (M) - Kest (2M) =15a/ (2M) 4, so that Kest (2M) -K=Δ/15. In the two cases we show, the expected systematic error on the value corresponding to M=128 is therefore much smaller than the statistical error.
18. G. Merkle, W. Burchard, P. Lutz, K. F. Freed, and J. Gao, Macromolecules 0024-9297 10.1021/ma00063a016 26, 2736 (1993).
19. The results of Ref. are expressed in terms of a variable X such that fZ (X) =1+X+O (X2) for X→0. The variable X is related to by X=1.313 [see Eq.].
20. Equation (17.52) of Ref. gives the following expression for Z: Z=1+1.314 (H1 / H2) 0.309, H1 =1+2.15+1.00 2, and H2 =1+0.51. The variable s used in Ref. is related to by =1.169 s (see Sec. 13.3.2). For →∞ it predicts Z≈1.618 1.309.
21. I. Noda, N. Kato, T. Kitano, and M. Nasagawa, Macromolecules 0024-9297 10.1021/ma50004a042 14, 668 (1981).
22. T. Ohta and A. Nakanishi, J. Phys. A 0305-4470 10.1088/0305-4470/16/17/ 030 16, 4155 (1983).
23. K. F. Freed, J. Chem. Phys. 0021-9606 10.1063/1.445744 79, 6357 (1983).
24. L. Schäfer, Macromolecules 0024-9297 10.1021/ma00137a012 17, 1357 (1984).
25. M. Lal, Mol. Phys. 0026-8976 10.1080/00268976900100781 17, 57 (1969).
26. B. MacDonald, N. Jan, D. L. Hunter, and M. O. Steinitz, J. Phys. A 0305-4470 10.1088/0305-4470/18/13/037 18, 2627 (1985).
27. N. Madras and A. D. Sokal, J. Stat. Phys. 0022-4715 10.1007/BF01022990 50, 109 (1988).
28. A. D. Sokal, in Monte Carlo and Molecular Dynamics Simulations in Polymer Science, edited by, K. Binder, (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1995).
29. M. S. Causo, J. Stat. Phys. 0022-4715 10.1023/A:1015447704106 108, 247 (2002).
30. M. S. Causo and S. G. Whittington, J. Phys. A 0305-4470 10.1088/0305-4470/36/13/103 36, L189 (2003).
31. S. Caracciolo, B. M. Mognetti, and A. Pelissetto, Macromol. Theory Simul. 1022-1344 10.1002/mats.200800001 17, 67 (2008).
32. N. Madras, A. Orlitsky, and L. A. Shepp, J. Stat. Phys. 0022-4715 10.1007/BF01020290 58, 159 (1990).
33. S. Caracciolo, A. Pelissetto, and A. D. Sokal, J. Stat. Phys. 0022-4715 10.1007/BF01013668 60, 1 (1990).
34. This is true if the determination of the number of walks going through a given lattice point takes a time of order 1. This can be obtained by using, e.g., a hash table. A practical implementation is discussed in D. E. Knuth, The Art of Computer Programming (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1973), Vol. 3, see Algorithm C, p. 514, and Exercise 23 in Sec. 6.4.