Vitreous Water: Identification and Characterization

Angell, C. A.; Sare, E. J.

doi:10.1126/science.168.3928.280

Cited by 16 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 29 publications

(12 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The last term of Eq. 24 is to give the glass transition behavior of supercooled water at T G ŽGhormley, 1957;McMillan and Los, 1965;Angell and Sare, . 1970;Angell et al, 1973 . In fact, the spike behavior of the heat capacity curve at T is physically meaningless as pointed H Ž .…”

Section: Heat Capacity Difference Between Ice and Liquid Watermentioning

confidence: 99%

Generalized model for predicting phase behavior of clathrate hydrate

Yoon

Chun²,

Lee

2002

AIChE Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Heat Capacity Difference Between Ice and Liquid Watermentioning

confidence: 99%

Generalized model for predicting phase behavior of clathrate hydrate

Yoon

Chun²,

Lee

2002

AIChE Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The glass transition for water has a long and controversial history [92][93][94]. Although the early investigators of the vapor-deposited amorphous phase, including G. O. Jones, were accustomed to the phenomenology of glasses, and had reasonably sophisticated calorimetric equipment available for their study, they had been unable to detect any sign of the glass transition.…”

Section: -Water and Related Anomalous Liquidsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Glass-forming liquids, anomalous liquids, and polyamorphism in liquids and biopolymers

1994

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Glass formation in nature and materials science is reviewed and the recent recognition of polymorphism within the glassy state, polyamorphism, is discussed. The process by which the glassy state originates during the continuous cooling or viscous slowdown process, is examined and the three canonical characteristics of relaxing liquids are correlated through the fragility. The conversion of strong liquids to fragile liquids by pressure-induced coordination number increases is discussed, and then it is shown that for the same type of system it is possible to have the same conversion accomplished via a first-order transition within the liquid state. The systems in which this can happen are of the same type which exhibit polyamorphism, and the whole phenomenology can be accounted for by a recent simple modification of the van der Waals model for tetrahedrally bonded liquids. The concept of complex amorphous systems which can lose a significant number of degrees of freedom through weak first-order transitions is then used to discuss the relation between native and denatured hydrated proteins, since the latter have much in common with plasticized chain polymer systems. Finally, we close the circle by taking a short-time-scale phenomenon given much attention by protein physicists, v/z., the onset of an anomaly in the Debye-Waller factor with increasing temperature, and showing that for a wide variety of liquids, including computer-simulated strong and fragile ionic liquids, this phenomenon is closely correlated with the experimental glass transition temperature. This implies that the latter owes its origin to the onset of strong anharmonicity in certain components of the vibrational density of states (evidently related to the boson peak) which then permits the system to gain access to its configurational degrees of freedom. The more anharmonic these vibrational components, the closer to the Kauzmann temperature will commence the exploration of configuration space and, for a given configurational microstate degeneracy, the more fragile the liquid will be.

show abstract

“…The molar enthalpy difference between the ice and liquid water is given by Depending on the temperature range considered, the heat‐capacity difference between ice and liquid water, Δ C p is given by By the hyperquenching experiments, a new value for the glass transition temperature of supercooled water was found to be 165 K and was recently reported in the literature (Velikov et al, 2001). This temperature is about 30 K higher than the commonly accepted value over the past 50 years (Ghormley, 1957; McMillan and Los, 1965; Angell and Sare, 1970; Angell et al, 1973; Mishima and Stanley, 1998). On the basis of this revised value, we present here a new parameter set for the heat‐capacity difference between ice and liquid (or supercooled) water as follows: Δ C

_{italicp}^{0}

= −38.13, β = 0.141, C 1 = −1.05253 × 10 4 , C 2 = 8.45606 × 10 6 , C 3 = −2.26357 × 10 9 , C 4 = 2.02637 × 10 11 , D 1 = −1.78631 × 10 3 , D 2 = 26.6606, D 3 = −1.35114 × 10 −1 , D 4 = 2.37259 × 10 −4 , T H = 233 K, and T G = 165 K. For temperatures below T G , the value of Δ C p is assumed to be zero.…”

Section: Thermodynamic Model For Phase Equilibria Of Gas Hydratementioning

confidence: 57%