Crystal structure of C60 following compression under 31.1 GPa in diamond anvil cell at room temperature

Rhee, J. H.; Singh, D.; Li, Y.; Sharma, S. C.

doi:10.1016/s0038-1098(03)00430-7

Cited by 8 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Rhee et al [14] reported that solid fcc-C 60 is transformed into a polymer phase by compression at room temperature, although their ex-situ XRD measurement could not determine the transformation pressure. So, we have conducted the in-situ XRD measurement of fcc-C 60 up to 35.7 GPa at room temperature ( Fig.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pressure-polymerization of C60 molecules in a carbon nanotube

Kawasaki

Hara

Yokomae

et al. 2006

Chemical Physics Letters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Structural property of a C$_{60}$-peapod sample under high pressure up to 25 GPa was investigated by in-situ synchrotron X-ray diffraction measurements with a diamond anvil cell. It was observed that C$_{60}$-C$_{60}$ distance in a carbon nanotube decreases with pressure from 0.956 nm at 0.1 MPa down to 0.845 nm at 25 GPa. It was also found that the distance value on complete release of pressure after compression remained to be much smaller than the its initial value. These experimental results indicate the polymerization of C$_{60}$ molecules in a carbon nanotube. * The Manuscript Click here to download The Manuscript: kawasaki.tex also found that the distance value on complete release of pressure after compression remained to be much smaller than the its initial value. These experimental results indicate the polymerization of C 60 molecules in a carbon nanotube.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pressure-polymerization of C60 molecules in a carbon nanotube

Kawasaki

Hara

Yokomae

et al. 2006

Chemical Physics Letters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…1 -3 Recently, we published Raman scattering and x-ray diffraction data on molecular C 60 compressed in a DAC. 4,5 In this study, we observed significant and remarkable differences in the pressure dependences of the Raman spectra measured with and without the use of MEW. In particular, we observed that: (1) the wavenumber of the A g 2 band of molecular C 60 increases linearly with increasing uniaxial pressure between ambient and 40 kbar, (2) between 40 and 80 kbar, the wavenumbers deviate from linearity, exhibit a turnaround at about 73 kbar, and subsequently resume the linear pressure dependence up to about 311 kbar, and (3) when MEW is used as the pressure-transmitting medium, the pressure dependence of the wavenumbers, although qualitatively similar, exhibits significant differences between (a) the pressure at which non-linearity sets in and (b) the range of pressures over which the non-linearity persists.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 60%

Effect of pressure on the Raman spectra of methanol-ethanol-water mixture at room temperature

Singh

Sharma

2005

J. Raman Spectrosc.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We measured Raman spectra for liquid methanol, ethanol, water and their mixture under ambient conditions. We also measured these spectra for wavenumbers in the range 1400-1600 cm −1 for methanol-ethanol (4 : 1) and methanol-ethanol-water (16 : 3 : 1) mixtures as functions of pressure up to 62 kbar at room temperature. We present results for the wavenumber, linewidth and relative intensity of the prominent bands as functions of pressure. These results should be useful for understanding the pressure (hydrostatic) dependence of the Raman spectra of solids.

show abstract

“…Here, we have combined Raman shifts for the A g (2) band from our recent measurements [6] and from the measurements of the Raman spectra at selected pressures during the PL experiments. Our recently published Raman spectroscopy data on pristine C 60 compressed up to 31.1 GPa have revealed interesting new results [6,22]. These experiments showed the occurrence of several phase transitions with marked differences in the pressure dependence of the Raman shifts for hydrostatic vs. non-hydrostatic pressure conditions.…”

Section: Raman Spectroscopymentioning

confidence: 84%