Letter | Published:

The relationship between fragility, configurational entropy and the potential energy landscape of glass-forming liquids

Nature volume 409, pages 164167 (11 January 2001) | Download Citation

Subjects

Abstract

Glass is a microscopically disordered, solid form of matter that results when a fluid is cooled or compressed in such a manner that it does not crystallize. Almost all types of materials are capable of glass formation, including polymers, metal alloys and molten salts. Given such diversity, general principles by which different glass-forming materials can be systematically classified are invaluable. One such principle is the classification of glass-formers according to their fragility1. Fragility measures the rapidity with which a liquid's properties (such as viscosity) change as the glassy state is approached. Although the relationship between the fragility, configurational entropy and features of the energy landscape (the complicated dependence of energy on configuration) of a glass-former have been analysed previously2, a detailed understanding of the origins of fragility is lacking. Here I use simulations to analyse the relationship between fragility and quantitative measures of the energy landscape for a model liquid whose fragility depends on its bulk density. The results reveal that fragility depends on changes in the vibrational properties of individual energy minima in addition to their total number and spread in energy. A thermodynamic expression for fragility is derived, which is in quantitative agreement with kinetic fragilities obtained from the liquid's diffusivity.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

References

  1. 1.

    Relaxation in liquids, polymers and plastic crystals—Strong/fragile patterns and problems. J. Non-Cryst. Solids 131–133 , 13–31 (1991).

  2. 2.

    Relations between a liquid and its glasses. J. Phys. Chem. B 103, 4060–4065 (1999).

  3. 3.

    & Viscous flow in simple organic liquids. J. Phys. Chem. 76, 2317–2325 (1972).

  4. 4.

    & On the temperature dependence of cooperative relaxation properties in glass-forming liquids. J. Chem. Phys. 43, 139–146 (1965).

  5. 5.

    Entropy and fragility in supercooled liquids. J. Res. NIST 102, 171–185 (1997).

  6. 6.

    & Testing mode-coupling theory for a supercooled binary Lennard–Jones mixture: The van Hove correlation function. Phys. Rev. E 51, 4626– 2641 (1995).

  7. 7.

    , & Signatures of distinct dynamical regimes in the energy landscape of a glass-forming liquid. Nature 393, 554–557 (1998).

  8. 8.

    , & Inherent structure entropy of supercooled liquids. Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 3214–3217 (1999).

  9. 9.

    , & Lennard–Jones binary mixture: a thermodynamical approach to glass transition. J. Chem. Phys. 112, 2933–2944 (2000).

  10. 10.

    Liquid limits: The glass transition and liquid–gas spinodal boundaries of metastable liquids. Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 590–5593 (2000).

  11. 11.

    , & Thermodynamic determination of fragility in liquids and a fragile-to-strong liquid transition in water. Nature 398, 492–495 (1999).

  12. 12.

    & Fragilities of liquids predicted from the random first order transition theory of glasses. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 97, 2990–2994 (2000).

  13. 13.

    & Packing structures and transitions in liquids and solids. Science 225, 983–989 (1984).

  14. 14.

    A topographic view of supercooled liquids and glass formation. Science 267, 1935–1939 ( 1995).

  15. 15.

    & The potential energy landscape of a model glass former: thermodynamics, anharmonicities, and finite size effects. Phys. Rev. E 60, 6507– 6518 (1999).

  16. 16.

    The hard sphere glass transition. Mol. Phys. 95, 169–178 (1998).

  17. 17.

    , , , & Configurational entropy and diffusivity of supercooled water. Nature 406, 166– 169 (2000).

  18. 18.

    Evaluation of configurational entropy of a model liquid from computer simulations. Proceedings of Unifying Concepts in Glass Physics, Triest, 1999. J. Phys. Cond. Mat. 12, 6515–6524 (1996).

  19. 19.

    & The distribution of tetravalent network glasses. Mol. Phys. 88, 1293– 1316 (1996).

  20. 20.

    Viscous liquids and the glass transition. V. Sources of the excess specific heat of the liquid. J. Chem. Phys. 64, 4767 –4774 (1976).

  21. 21.

    & Configurational excitations in condensed matter and the bond lattice model for the liquid-glass transition. J. Chem. Phys. 57, 470–481 (1972).

  22. 22.

    Ten questions on glassformers, and a real space “excitations” model with some answers on fragility and phase transitions. Proceedings of Unifying Concepts in Glass Physics, Trieste, 1999. J. Phys. Cond. Mat. 12, 6463–6476 ( 2000).

  23. 23.

    , , & Fragility in liquids and polymers: new, simple quantifications and interpretations. J. Phys. Chem. B 103, 3991–3996 (1999).

  24. 24.

    A resolution for the enigma of a liquid's configurational entropy–molecular kinetics relation. J. Chem. Phys. 112, 8958 –8969 (2000).

  25. 25.

    Contributions to the entropy of a glass and liquid, and the dielectric relaxation time. J. Chem. Phys. 112, 7518– 7523 (2000).

  26. 26.

    et al. Calorimetric study of glassy and liquid toluene and ethylbenzene: thermodynamic approach to spatial heterogeneity in glass-forming molecular liquids. J. Phys. Chem. B 102, 1605– 1609 (1998).

  27. 27.

    & Thermodynamic fragility and kinetic fragility in supercooled liquids: A missing link in molecular liquids. J. Chem. Phys. 111, 10403–10406 (1999).

  28. 28.

    & Extension of the fluctuation–dissipation theorem to the physical aging of a model glass-forming liquid. Phys. Rev. Lett. (in the press).

  29. 29.

    et al. Thermodynamic and structural aspects of the potential energy surface of simulated water. Preprint http://arXiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0007487.

  30. 30.

    & Why is the density of inherent structures of a Lennard-Jones type system gaussian? Proceedings of Unifying Concepts in Glass Physics, Trieste, 1999. J. Phys. Cond. Mat. 12, 6535–6543 (2000).

Download references

Acknowledgements

I thank C. A. Angell, G. P. Johari, K. J. Rao, F. Sciortino, R. Seshadri, R. J. Speedy and U. V. Waghmare for useful discussions and/or comments on the manuscript.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Jawaharlal Nehru Centre for Advanced Scientific Research, Jakkur Campus, Bangalore 560064, India

    • Srikanth Sastry

Authors

  1. Search for Srikanth Sastry in:

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Srikanth Sastry.

About this article

Publication history

Received

Accepted

Published

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1038/35051524

Further reading

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.