Communication: Bulkiness versus anisotropy: The optimal shape of polarizable Brownian nanoparticles for alignment in electric fields

Journal of Chemical Physics

Volumn 136, Issue 13, 2012, Pages

  Kwaadgras, Bas W ^a   Dijkstra, Marjolein ^a   Van Roij, René ^b  

^a UTRECHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^b UTRECHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANISOTROPIC COLLOIDAL PARTICLES; COUPLED DIPOLE METHOD; DIELECTRIC NANOPARTICLES; EXTERNAL ELECTRIC FIELD; OPTIMAL SHAPE; POLARIZABILITIES; SIZE PARAMETERS;

ALIGNMENT; ELECTRIC FIELDS; NANOPARTICLES; OPTIMIZATION; POLARIZATION;

ANISOTROPY;

EID: 84861691305     PISSN: 00219606     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1063/1.3701615     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. S. C. Glotzer and M. J. Solomon, Nature Mater. 6, 557 (2007).
2. S.-M. Yang, S.-H. Kim, J.-M. Lima, and G.-R. Yi, J. Mater. Chem. 18, 2177 (2008).
3. L. Rossi, S. Sacanna, and K. P. Velikov, Soft Matter 7, 64 (2011).
4. M. Marechal, R. J. Kortschot, A. F. Demirörs, A. Imhof, and M. Dijkstra, Nano Lett. 10, 1907 (2010).
5. I. D. Hosein and C. M. Liddell, Langmuir 23, 8810 (2007).
6. X. D. Wang, E. Graugnard, J. S. King, Z. L. Wang, and C. J. Summers, Nano Lett. 4, 2223 (2004).
7. C. I. Zoldesi, C. A. van Walree, and A. Imhof, Langmuir 22, 4343 (2006).
8. D. Nagao, C. M. van Kats, K. Hayasaka, M. Sugimoto, M. Konno, A. Imhof, and A. van Blaaderen, Langmuir 26, 5208 (2010).
9. M. Grzelczak, J. Vermant, E. M. Furst, and L. M. Liz-Marzán, ACS Nano 4, 3591 (2010).
10. M. J. Solomon, Curr. Opin. Colloid Interface & Sci 16, 158 (2011).
11. S. C. Glotzer, M. A. Horsch, C. R. Iacovella, Z. Zhang, E. R. Chan, and X. Zhang, Curr. Opin. Colloid Interface & Sci. 10, 287 (2005).
12. B. Nikoobakht, Z. L. Wang, and M. A. El-Sayed, J. Phys. Chem. B 104, 8635 (2000).
13. D. Fava, Z. Nie, M. A. Winnik, and E. Kumacheva, Adv. Mater. 20, 4318 (2008).
14. E. L. Thomas, Science 286, 1307 (1999).
15. D. J. Kraft, W. S. Vlug, C. M. van Kats, A. van Blaaderen, A. Imhof, and W. K. Kegel, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 131, 1182 (2008).
16. I. D. Hosein, S. H. Lee, and C. M. Liddell, Adv. Funct. Mater. 20, 3085 (2010).
17. D. V. Talapin, E. V. Shevchenko, C. B. Murray, A. Kornowski, S. Förster, and H. Weller, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 126, 12984 (2004).
18. S. Ahmed and K. M. Ryan, Nano Lett. 7, 2480 (2007).
19. B. Sun and H. Sirringhaus, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 128, 16231 (2006).
20. D. van der Beek, A. V. Petukhov, P. Davidson, J. Ferré, J. P. Jamet, H. H. Wensink, G. J. Vroege, W. Bras, and H. N. Lekkerkerker, Phys. Rev. E 73, 041402 (2006).
21. K. Bubke, H. Gnewuch, M. Hempstead, J. Hammer, and M. L. H. Green, Appl. Phys. Lett. 71, 1906 (1997).
22. A. F. Demirörs, P. M. Johnson, C. M. van Kats, A. van Blaaderen, and A. Imhof, Langmuir 26, 14466 (2010).
23. P. A. Smith, C. D. Nordquist, T. N. Jackson, T. S. Mayer, B. R. Martin, J. Mbindyo, and T. E. Mallouk, Appl. Phys. Lett. 77, 1399 (2000).
24. K. M. Ryan, A. Mastroianni, K. A. Stancil, H. Liu, and A. P. Alivisatos, Nano Lett. 6, 1479 (2006).
25. M. J. Renne and B. R. A. Nijboer, Chem. Phys. Lett. 1, 317 (1967).
26. B. R. A. Nijboer and M. J. Renne, Chem. Phys. Lett. 2, 35 (1968).
27. H.-Y. Kim, J. O. Sofo, D. Velegol, M. W. Cole, and G. Mukhopadhyay, Phys. Rev. A 72, 053201 (2005).
28. S. M. Gatica, M. W. Cole, and D. Velegol, Nano Lett. 5, 169 (2005).
29. H.-Y. Kim, J. O. Sofo, D. Velegol, M. W. Cole, and A. A. Lucas, J. Chem. Phys. 124, 074504 (2006).
30. H.-Y. Kim, J. O. Sofo, D. Velegol, M.W. Cole, and A. A. Lucas, Langmuir 23, 1735 (2007).
31. M. W. Cole and D. Velegol, Mol. Phys. 106, 1587 (2008).
32. B.W. Kwaadgras, M. Verdult, M. Dijkstra, and R. van Roij, J. Chem. Phys. 135, 134105 (2011).
33. J. D. Jackson, Classical Electrodynamics, 3rd ed. (Wiley, 1999).
34. C. Kittel, Introduction to Solid State Physics, 7th ed. (Wiley, 1996).
35. A. Sihvola, J. Nanomater. 2007, 45090 (2007).
36. A. Sihvola, P. Yla-Oijala, S. Jarvenpaa, and J. Avelin, IEEE Trans. Antennas. Propag. 52, 2226 (2004).
37. H. Kettunen, H. Wallen, and A. Sihvola, J. Appl. Phys. 102, 044105 (2007).
38. M. Pitkonen, J. Appl. Phys. 103, 104910 (2008).
39. M. Pitkonen, J. Math. Phys. 47, 102901 (2006).
40. Other choices for the definition of size parameter are possible, with the condition that it, together with the shape parameter, fixes the dimensions of the particle. For example, a possibility would be to define the size parameter as the diameter of the particle's circumscribed sphere. Qualitatively, this new definition does not cause any change to our results; quantitatively, we observe that the minima for rods shift to l/L ∼ 0.47 and those for platelets to L/l ∼ 0.32, while there is no change for bowls and dumbbells (since the size parameter remains s and s + L, respectively).
41. The reason why a lower lattice constant lowers L or lis two-fold: a lower lattice constant means that atoms interact more and hence will have a higher of; at the same time it also means that the atom density is higher and thus smaller dimensions are needed to achieve a certain number of atoms.