Molecular Dynamics Study of The Lattice Thermal Conductivity of Kr/Ar Superlattice Nanowires
Molecular Dynamics Study of The Lattice Thermal Conductivity of Kr/Ar Superlattice Nanowires
Molecular Dynamics Study of The Lattice Thermal Conductivity of Kr/Ar Superlattice Nanowires
Department of Mechanical Engineering and China Education Council Key Laboratory of MEMS,
Southeast University, Nanjing, 210096, PR China
b
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA
c
Department of Mechanical Engineering and China Education Council Key Laboratory of MEMS,
Southeast University, Nanjing, 210096, PR China
d
Department of Mechanical Engineering and Applied Mechanics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104-6315, USA
e
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA
Received 4 December 2003; received in revised form 16 March 2004; accepted 17 March 2004
Abstract
The nonequilibrium molecular dynamics (NEMD) method has been used to calculate the lattice thermal
conductivities of Ar and Kr/Ar nanostructures in order to study the effects of interface scattering, boundary
scattering, and elastic strain on lattice thermal conductivity. Results show that interface scattering poses signicant
resistance to phonon transport in superlattices and superlattice nanowires. The thermal conductivity of the Kr/Ar
superlattice nanowire is only about 13 of that for pure Ar nanowires with the same cross-sectional area and total length
due to the additional interfacial thermal resistance. It is found that nanowire boundary scattering provides signicant
resistance to phonon transport. As the cross-sectional area increases, the nanowire boundary scattering decreases,
which leads to increased nanowire thermal conductivity. The ratio of the interfacial thermal resistance to the total
effective thermal resistance increases from 30% for the superlattice nanowire to 42% for the superlattice lm. Period
length is another important factor affecting the effective thermal conductivity of the nanostructures. Increasing the
period length will lead to increased acoustic mismatch between the adjacent layers, and hence increased interfacial
thermal resistance. However, if the total length of the superlattice nanowire is xed, reducing the period length will lead
to decreased effective thermal conductivity due to the increased number of interfaces. Finally, it is found that the
interfacial thermal resistance decreases as the reference temperature increases, which might be due to the inelastic
interface scattering.
r 2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
PACS: 63.20.e; 63.22.+m, 68.65.g
Keywords: Superlattice nanowire; Molecular dynamics simulation; Thermal conductivity; Interface scattering effect
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Y. Chen et al. / Physica B 349 (2004) 270280
1. Introduction
Semiconductor superlattices (SL) are of great
interest due to their potential applications in
thermoelectric and optoelectronic devices [1,2].
Superlattice structures provide the possibility of
decreasing materials thermal conductivity while
retaining their electrical conductivity, thus achieving a high thermoelectric gure-of-merit and
improving the performance of thermoelectric
devices. A large amount of experimental and
theoretical work [38] has been carried out to
study the effects of lattice period and interface on
the thermal conductivity of various kinds of
superlattice lms. Results showed that the superlattice may have a much lower thermal conductivity than the value for each of the two materials
composing the superlattice structure along both
the in-plane and the cross-plane directions. Different mechanisms have been proposed to explain
the reduction of the thermal conductivity, including interface phonon scattering due to acoustic
impedance mismatch, phonon scattering by crystal
imperfections at the interface, phonon spectrum
mismatch, and mini-band formation. However,
quantitative analysis of the relative importance of
these different mechanisms has not been completed yet and it is not clear which mechanism
contributes most to the reduction of the thermal
conductivity under different conditions. Experimental results [6,7] indicate that as the period of
the superlattice decreases, the thermal conductivity
along the cross-plane direction also decreases, and
for very short period superlattice, its thermal
conductivity could even fall below the alloy limit,
i.e. if the two materials mixed homogeneously into
an alloy. The in-plane thermal conductivity
follows a similar pattern but it jumps to higher
values for some very short period superlattice [8].
This phenomenon cannot be explained solely by
diffuse mismatch theory about phonon scattering
at the interface. Other mechanisms such as
acoustic impedance mismatch, mini-band formation or phonon spectrum mismatch have to be
taken into account.
Theoretically, lattice dynamics and particle
transport models are usually used to study the
thermal conductivity of superlattice structures.
271
ARTICLE IN PRESS
272
partially diffuse boundary scattering, some interesting results were obtained by Chen et al. [1417]
for superlattice thermal conductivity along both
in-plane and cross-plane directions. In his model
the reduction of the superlattice thermal conductivity was mainly attributed to diffuse scattering at
the interface.
Because some assumptions must be introduced
to get closed form solutions, the theoretical results
usually deviate signicantly from the experimental
data and sometimes the thermal conductivity
reduction mechanisms cannot be readily explained
from those theoretical studies. Classical Molecular
Dynamics (MD) simulation provides an alternative approach to investigate heat transport in
nanostructures. Given the interaction potential
between atoms, the force acting on each atom can
be calculated. Based on Newtons second law, the
motion of a large number of atoms can be
described. Without any further assumptions,
statistical physical properties can be derived from
the ensemble of atoms. In particular, if the size of
the nanostructure is smaller than the phonon mfp,
it is questionable to use the BTE to describe
phonon transport, while MD can be conveniently
used to analyze the effects of size connement on
lattice thermal conductivities. Volz et al. [18]
demonstrated by MD simulation that Si nanowire
thermal conductivity could be two orders of
magnitude smaller than the corresponding bulk
value and they further argued that by adjusting the
specularity parameter, results from the solution of
the BTE could t their MD simulation. Liang et al.
[19] applied MD simulation to investigate the
effects of atomic mass ratio in the alternating
layers of a superlattice on the lattice thermal
conductivity. Their results indicated that the
thermal conductivity has a minimum value for
some specic atomic mass ratio. Abramson et al.
[20] studied the effects of interface number and
elastic strain on the lattice thermal conductivity of
Kr/Ar superlattices with MD simulation. It was
argued that increase of the interface number per
unit length does not necessarily result in decreased
lattice thermal conductivity from their simulation
results. Daly et al. [21,22] reported MD simulation
of a classical face centered cubic (FCC) lattice
model to study the effects of interface roughness
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Y. Chen et al. / Physica B 349 (2004) 270280
Table 1
Simulation parameters
KrKr
Variables
Parameters
e1 (J)
s1 (m)
Lattice constant A1 (m)
Atom mass M1 (Kg)
2:25 1021
3:65 1010
5:69 1010
1:39 1025
e2 (J)
s2 (m)
Lattice constant A2 (m)
Atom mass M2 (Kg)
21
1:67 10
3:4 1010
5:3 1010
6:63 1026
e12 (J)
s12 (m)
p
e1 e2
s1 s2 =2
ArAr
KrAr
TH
Kr
Ar
Kr
Ar
z
y
o
Lp
x
L
273
J
;
ArT
TH TL
;
Lp N
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Y. Chen et al. / Physica B 349 (2004) 270280
274
Np
X
v2i =3Np kB ;
i1
DT
;
J=A
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Y. Chen et al. / Physica B 349 (2004) 270280
Keff
Lp
:
RA RB 2Rint Rint =N
0.45
Thermal conductivity (W/K.m)
275
0.40
Ar Nanowire
Ar/Kr superlattice nanowire
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
2
4
6
Period number
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Y. Chen et al. / Physica B 349 (2004) 270280
0.33
superlattice
SL nanowire
0.30
K (W/K.m)
0.27
0.24
0.21
0.18
0.15
6
12
15
18
Period length (UC)
21
0.33
0.22
Rint
0.20
Rint/R
0.30
0.27
0.18
0.24
0.16
0.21
0.14
0.18
0.12
0.15
0.10
24
Rint/R
Rint (K.m2/W)
276
12
15
18
Period length (UC)
21
24
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Y. Chen et al. / Physica B 349 (2004) 270280
N=3, Lp=4.4nm,A=5.19nm2
Dimensionless distance
N=2,Lp=13.2nm,A=5.19nm2
Kr
0.78
0.76
0.74
Ar
0.72
0
20
40
60
80
100
Atomic plane number along X Axis
;
l lphonon linterface lboundary
0.30
0.27
K(W/K.m)
0.82
0.80
277
0.24
SL nanowire
SL
0.21
0.18
0.15
4
10
12
14
16
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Y. Chen et al. / Physica B 349 (2004) 270280
0.23
0.42
0.35
0.34
0.41
SL
SL nanowire
0.40
0.33
0.32
0.39
0.31
0.38
K (W/K. m)
0.22
Rint/R for SL
K
R
0.20
0.21
0.18
R (K m2/W)
278
0.20
0.16
0.19
10
12
14
16
35
40
45
50
55
Temperature T(K)
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Y. Chen et al. / Physica B 349 (2004) 270280
the acoustic mismatch model, the thermal boundary resistance can be approximated as 14 Cvs a1 ;
where, C; vs ; and a are the specic heat, the Debye
phonon group velocity, and the averaged phonon
transmission probability. The Debye phonon
group velocity can be regarded as a constant.
The phonon transmission probability is typically
assumed in the literature to be independent of
temperature [32]. The above equation predicts that
the thermal boundary resistance is independent of
temperature. The decrease of the interfacial
thermal resistance cannot be derived from the
diffuse mismatch model either. One possible
reason might be that inelastic scattering occurs at
the interface [32]. At higher temperature, the highfrequency phonons might break into two or more
low-frequency phonons, which will be predominantly transmitted. This inelastic scattering process leads to higher phonon transmission
probabilities, thus the interfacial thermal resistance decreases.
279
Acknowledgements
4. Conclusion
In summary, the lattice thermal conductivity of
Ar nanowires and Kr/Ar nanowires were studied
by NEMD. The interfacial thermal resistance in
the Kr/Ar nanowires contributes signicantly to
the thermal resistance and results in a lattice
thermal conductivity that is only one-third of that
of pure Ar nanowires. Interfacial thermal resistance increases with the length of the superlattice
period for the Kr/Ar superlattice nanowires, which
is attributed to increased acoustic impedance
mismatch between adjacent layers for long period
nanowires. For short period nanowires, the
acoustic impedance in the alternating layers beside
the interface matches better due to elastic strain
throughout each layer. The phonons can pass
through the interface more easily, which results in
smaller interfacial thermal resistance. On the other
hand, for longer period superlattice nanowires, the
atoms located far away from the interface maintain their pure crystalline lattice positions so that
the strain is localized near the interface. It is more
difcult for phonons to pass through the interface
References
[1] X. Fan, G. Zeng, C. LaBounty, J. Bowers, E. Croke,
C. Ahn, S. Huxtable, A. Majumdar, A. Shakouri, Appl.
Phys. Lett. 78 (2001) 1580.
[2] M.R. Kitchin, M.J. Shaw, E. Corbin, J.P. Hagon,
M. Jaros, Phys. Rev. B 61 (2000) 8375.
[3] T. Yao, Appl. Phys. Lett. 51 (1987) 1798.
[4] G. Chen, C.L. Tien, X. Wu, J.S. Smith, J. Heat Trans. 116
(1994) 325.
[5] X.Y. Yu, G. Chen, A. Verma, J.S. Smith, Appl. Phys. Lett.
67 (1995) 3554.
[6] S.-M. Lee, D. Cahill, R. Venkatasubramanian, Appl. Phys.
Lett. 70 (1997) 2957.
[7] W.S. Capinski, H.J. Maris, Physica B 219 (1996) 699.
[8] S.T. Huxtable, A.R. Abramson, C.-L. Tien, Arun Majumdar, Appl. Phys. Lett. 80 (2002) 1737.
[9] P. Hyldgaad, G.D. Mahan, Phys. Rev. B 56 (1997) 10754.
[10] S. Tamura, Y. Tanaka, H.J. Maris, Phys. Rev. B 60 (1999)
2627.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
280