Ph.D. thesis (pdf) - dirac
Ph.D. thesis (pdf) - dirac
Ph.D. thesis (pdf) - dirac
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
80 Alpha Relaxation<br />
log10(τ α<br />
)<br />
2<br />
1<br />
0<br />
−1<br />
−2<br />
−3<br />
−4<br />
−5<br />
−6<br />
205.5 K<br />
219.3 K<br />
236.3 K<br />
253.9 K<br />
Patm<br />
234 MPa<br />
Sekula<br />
Paluch 295.5 K<br />
Cook 295.5 K<br />
e(ρ)<br />
2.5<br />
2<br />
ρ 2.5<br />
e(ρ)<br />
−7<br />
1.5<br />
−8<br />
1.1 1.2 1.3<br />
ρ [g/cm 3 ]<br />
−9<br />
4 5 6<br />
e(ρ)/T<br />
7 8<br />
x 10 −3<br />
Figure 5.7: The alpha-relaxation times shown in figure 5.5 plotted as a function of<br />
X = e(ρ)/T, with increasing dloge(ρ)/ dlogρ as ρ increases. The inset shows the<br />
density-dependent activation energy e(ρ) (dashed line) used in the scaling variable<br />
dlog e(ρ)<br />
X = e(ρ)/T for collapsing data in (a) (the associated x(ρ) =<br />
dlog ρ<br />
increases from<br />
1.5 to 3.5 in the density range under study). We also display the power law giving<br />
the best scaling, ρ 2.5 , at low density (full line).<br />
2004; Mandanici et al., 2005] and references therein.)<br />
In the inset of figure 5.9 we show the pressure-dependent relaxation time at 216.4 K.<br />
Extrapolating the data to τ α = 100 s leads to P g = 340 ± 10 MPa, corresponding to<br />
dT g /dP = 0.085 K.MPa −1 . This value is, as we also saw it in the case of DBP, about<br />
a factor 2 higher than the dT g /dP = 0.045 K.MPa −1 reported for the calorimetric<br />
glass transition by Alba-Simionesco et al. [1997]. This could suggest that this type<br />
of decoupling is common, however there are also examples where no such decoupling<br />
is found [Chauty-Cailliaux, 2003].<br />
In figure 5.9 we show the alpha-relaxation time as a function of density along the<br />
atmospheric pressure isobar (data from Mandanici et al. [2005]) and the 216.4 K<br />
isotherm (see appendix A regarding the determination of density). The data taken<br />
at atmospheric pressure and the data taken along the 216.4 K isotherm cover two<br />
different ranges in density. It is therefore not possible from this data to verify the<br />
validity of the scaling in X = e(ρ)/T. Moreover, it is seen in figure 5.9 that there<br />
is not complete agreement at ambient pressure between the two experiments. Our<br />
data actually correspond better to the results of Carpentier et al. [2004] than those<br />
of Mandanici et al. [2005]; it would be ideal to measure the high pressure and the