Friction barrier energy

Zawadzki and Hynes have very recently carried out a series of calculations based on the model of Eqs. (4.1) and (4.2) and in particular the result of Eq. (6.64) in order to estimate the solvent interaction effect on several unimolecular reactions. In these calculations the possibility of solvent shift of the barrier energy is disregarded. The friction kernel is taken in the form... 

In the nonadiabatic limit ( < 1) B = nVa/Vi sF, and at 1 the adiabatic result k = k a holds. As shown in section 5.2, the instanton velocity decreases as t] increases, and the transition tends to be more adiabatic, as in the classical case. This conclusion is far from obvious, because one might expect that, when the particle loses energy, it should increase its upside-down barrier velocity. Instead, the energy losses are saturated to a finite //-independent value, and friction slows the tunneling motion down. 

In a recent version of the Tobolsky and Eyring formulation, the rate of mechanochemical degradation was considered as a Thermally Activated Barrier to Scission (TABS) process. The elastic energy function f(v /) was explicitly considered in terms of the frictional hydrodynamic drag force acting over the entire macromolecule [100]. A more detailed account of this model will be presented in Sect. 5.1. 

It has been recognized that the behavior of atomic friction, such as stick-slip, creep, and velocity dependence, can be understood in terms of the energy structure of multistable states and noise activated motion. Noises like thermal activities may cause the atom to jump even before AUq becomes zero, but the time when the atom is activated depends on sliding velocity in such a way that for a given energy barrier, AI/q the probability of activation increases with decreasing velocity. It has been demonstrated [14] that the mechanism of noise activation leads to "the velocity... 

Studies based on the Frenkel-Kontorova model reveal that static friction depends on the strength of interactions and structural commensurability between the surfaces in contact. For surfaces in incommensurate contact, there is a critical strength, b, below which the depinning force becomes zero and static friction disappears, i.e., the chain starts to slide if an infinitely small force F is applied (cf. Section 3). This is understandable from the energetic point of view that the interfacial atoms in an incommensurate system can hardly settle in any potential minimum, or the energy barrier, which prevents the object from moving, can be almost zero. 

It has been proposed recently [28] that static friction may result from the molecules of a third medium, such as adsorbed monolayers or liquid lubricant confined between the surfaces. The confined molecules can easily adjust or rearrange themselves to form localized structures that are conformal to both adjacent surfaces, so that they stay at the energy minimum. A finite lateral force is required to initiate motion because the energy barrier created by the substrate-medium system has to be overcome, which gives rise to a static friction depending on the interfacial substances. The model is consistent with the results of computer simulations [29], meanwhile it successfully explains the sensitivity of friction to surface film or contamination. 

If friction plays a role in the crossing of the energy barrier, the reaction is slower than predicted by transition-state theory. According to Kramers theory [20] the preexponential factor must then be replaced by ... 

From the point of view of associative desorption, this reaction is an early barrier reaction. That is, the transition state resembles the reactants.46 Early barrier reactions are well known to channel large amounts of the reaction exoergicity into product vibration. For example, the famous chemical-laser reaction, F + H2 — HF(u) + H, is such a reaction producing a highly inverted HF vibrational distribution.47-50 Luntz and co-workers carried out classical trajectory calculation on the Born-Oppenheimer potential energy surface of Fig. 3(c) and found indeed that the properties of this early barrier reaction do include an inverted N2 vibrational distribution that peaks near v = 6 and extends to v = 11 (see Fig. 3(a)). In marked contrast to these theoretical predictions, the experimentally observed N2 vibrational distribution shown in Fig. 3(d) is skewed towards low values of v. The authors of Ref. 44 also employed the electronic friction theory of Tully and Head-Gordon35 in an attempt to model electronically nonadiabatic influences to the reaction. The results of these calculations are shown in... 

It may come as a surprise to some that two commensurate surfaces withstand finite shear forces even if they are separated by a fluid.31 But one has to keep in mind that breaking translational invariance automatically induces a potential of mean force T. From the symmetry breaking, commensurate walls can be pinned even by an ideal gas embedded between them.32 The reason is that T scales linearly with the area of contact. In the thermodynamic limit, the energy barrier for the slider to move by one lattice constant becomes infinitely high so that the motion cannot be thermally activated, and hence, static friction becomes finite. No such argument applies when the surfaces do not share a common period. 

The calculated energetics also allow one to estimate the normal load, thereby providing access to the friction coefficient once the friction force is known. This method, albeit crude, has been shown to yield good results when compared with experiments in cases such as graphite sheets sliding past one another.68 However, one should realize that approximations in the determination of the normal load, the assumption that friction only depends on energy barriers, and the lack of a consideration of dynamical aspects of system may lead to significant deviations from experimental results for many other systems. 

AF which is the energy needed to overcome friction (or generally speaking AF is the activation energy to cross a barrier). Combining this information leads to... 

Many questions in the analysis of solvent dynamics effects for isomer-izations in solution have arisen, such as (1) when is a frequency-dependent friction needed (2) when does a change of solvent, of pressure, or of temperature change the barrier height (i.e., the threshold energy), and (3) when is the vibrational assistance model needed, instead of one based on Eq. (1.1) or its extensions ... 

A few comments on (2.27), (2.29), and (1.12) are appropriate at this point. The activation energy in the Arrhenius region is independent of 17, since friction changes only the velocity at which a classical particle crosses the barrier and thus affects only the preexponential factor. However, friction reduces both kc and Tc and thereby widens the Arrhenius region. Dissipation has a noticeable effect on the temperature dependence of... 

---