2007
DOI: 10.1002/poc.1136
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The solid–liquid interface energy of organic crystals

Abstract: A simple thermodynamic model, originally developed for metals based on the Gibbs–Thomson equation and related considerations for homogeneous nucleation, has been extended to predict the solid–liquid interface energy γsl of organic crystals. The model predictions correspond to available experimental and other theoretical results for 38 organic crystals. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 43 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Moreover, other theoretical results of γ 1 calculated by Rai et al [46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53][54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61][62][63][64], γ 2 to γ 4 are also listed for comparison purpose. Note that in this case the units of H m and V are taken as J/mol and cm 3 /mol rather than J/g-atom and cm 3 /g-atom listed in Table 2 [69], and H m = nH m and V = nV g Table 2 Comparisons of γ sl0 (T m ) of 38 organic crystals among the model predictions γ sl0 by Eq. (2.13), experimental data γ exp [11,13,[40][41][42][43][44][45], and other theoretical results γ 1 [46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53][54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61][62][63], γ 2 and γ 3 are determined in terms of Eq.…”
Section: γ Sl0 (T M ) Of 38 Organic Crystalsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, other theoretical results of γ 1 calculated by Rai et al [46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53][54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61][62][63][64], γ 2 to γ 4 are also listed for comparison purpose. Note that in this case the units of H m and V are taken as J/mol and cm 3 /mol rather than J/g-atom and cm 3 /g-atom listed in Table 2 [69], and H m = nH m and V = nV g Table 2 Comparisons of γ sl0 (T m ) of 38 organic crystals among the model predictions γ sl0 by Eq. (2.13), experimental data γ exp [11,13,[40][41][42][43][44][45], and other theoretical results γ 1 [46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53][54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61][62][63], γ 2 and γ 3 are determined in terms of Eq.…”
Section: γ Sl0 (T M ) Of 38 Organic Crystalsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For cylindrical crystals, particular attention has to be paid to the expression of the interface energy as, while assuming the lateral surface of the cylinder chemically and physically equal to the two bases, the different curvature of the bases (infinite curvature) and the lateral surface (curvature = 1/ R s ) have to be considered. Indeed, it is well-known that surface energy depends on surface curvature according to the following equation: where γ and γ ∞ are the energy of a surface with curvature radius r and that of a flat surface (infinite curvature radius), respectively, while δ 0 is Tolman’s length whose order of magnitude should correspond to the actual diameter ( d m ) of the molecules constituting the bulk phase, and it is usually assumed to be d m /3 Equation predicts that surface energy tends toward zero for low values of r .…”
Section: Thermodynamic Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[101][102] According to Ref. 103, at the melting point, γ is reciprocal to the molar volume (to the power of 2/3, i.e., with the dimension of a surface) as an expression of size. This means bigger molecules will have a smaller γ and therefore, generally speaking, a lessened tendency to vitrify.…”
Section: Qualitative Aspects Of Glass Formationmentioning
confidence: 99%