Roberto Guerra1, Itai Leven2, Andrea Vanossi3,4, Oded Hod2, Erio Tosatti3,4,5. 1. Center for Complexity and Biosystems, Department of Physics, University of Milan , 20133 Milan, Italy. 2. Department of Physical Chemistry, School of Chemistry, The Raymond and Beverly Sackler Faculty of Exact Sciences and The Sackler Center for Computational Molecular and Materials Science, Tel Aviv University , Tel Aviv 6997801, Israel. 3. International School for Advanced Studies (SISSA) , Via Bonomea 265, 34136 Trieste, Italy. 4. CNR-IOM Democritos National Simulation Center , Via Bonomea 265, 34136 Trieste, Italy. 5. The Abdus Salam International Centre for Theoretical Physics (ICTP) , Strada Costiera 11, 34151 Trieste, Italy.
Abstract
We identify a new material phenomenon, where minute mechanical manipulations induce pronounced global structural reconfigurations in faceted multiwalled nanotubes. This behavior has strong implications on the tribological properties of these systems and may be the key to understand the enhanced interwall friction recently measured for boron-nitride nanotubes with respect to their carbon counterparts. Notably, the fast rotation of helical facets in these systems upon coaxial sliding may serve as a nanoscale Archimedean screw for directional transport of physisorbed molecules.
We identify a new material phenomenon, where minute mechanical manipulations induce pronounced global structural reconfigurations in faceted multiwalled nanotubes. This behavior has strong implications on the tribological properties of these systems and may be the key to understand the enhanced interwall friction recently measured for boron-nitride nanotubes with respect to their carbon counterparts. Notably, the fast rotation of helical facets in these systems upon coaxial sliding may serve as a nanoscale Archimedean screw for directional transport of physisorbed molecules.
Nanotubes[1−5] form a paradigmatic family of quasi-one-dimensional
materials playing a central role in the design of many nanoelectromechanical
systems.[6−19] Traditionally, they are perceived as miniature cylinders of nanoscale
circular cross-sections. Nevertheless, if the chirality of neighboring
shells within a concentric multiwalled nanotube is correlated, extended
circumferential facets may form.[20−26] The resulting polygonal cross section induces geometric interwall
locking that can considerably enhance their mechanical rigidity.[15]Despite their remarkable structural similarity,
faceting is more
commonly observed in multiwalled boron-nitride nanotubes (MWBNNTs)[15,17,25,26] than in their carbon counterparts (MWCNTs).[21−24] This can be attributed to three
important factors: (i) stronger long-range dispersive attractive interactions
exhibited by the former[27−29] that provide higher interwall
adhesion thus favoring facet formation; (ii) softer ZA modes of h-BN[30] that allow for sharper
vertices thus promoting the formation of wider planar facet regions;
and (iii) higher interwall chiral angle correlation exhibited by MWBNNTs
over MWCNTs[26,31−43] that induces extended lattice registry patterns between adjacent
tube shells and dictates the nature of the facets.[20,44] The latter is mainly due to the additional interwall electrostatic
interactions between the partially charged ionic centers in the heteronuclear
BNNT network. While being relatively weak locally,[45,46] when summed over extended commensurate facet regions these Coulomb
interactions can foster energetic stabilization.Similar to
macroscopic objects, the strain developing within the
hexagonal lattice of nanotubes under small external mechanical manipulations
is proportional to the applied stress. Due to their exceptionally
high rigidity this usually leads to minor structural deformations.
In the present study, however, we discover a new material phenomenon,
occurring in faceted double-walled nanotubes (DWNTs), where minute
mechanical manipulations induce pronounced global superstructure reconfiguration.
For monochiral DWNTs that exhibit axially aligned facets[20] even the slightest interwall rotation induces
significant circumferential facet revolution, and minor interwall
telescoping can lead to complete unfaceting. Similar manipulations
applied to bichiral DWNTs result in global screw-like motion of their
elongated helical facets reminiscent of an Archimedean screw. Importantly,
these superstructure evolutions under coaxial sliding open new collective
energy dissipation channels that enhance interwall dynamic friction.
This, in turn, suggests that the relative abundance of faceting in
MWBNNTs plays a central role not only in their enhanced torsional
stiffness[15] but also in the significantly
higher interwall friction that they exhibit with respect to MWCNTs.[47]
Facet Superstructure Reconfiguration
To demonstrate
the phenomenon of superstructure reconfiguration we consider a set
of four representative double-walled BNNTs (DWBNNTs), including the
achiral armchair (104,104)@(109,109) and zigzag (180,0)@(188,0) DWBNNTs
that present axial facets; the bichiral (70,70)@(77,74) system, whose
small interwall chiral angle difference of ΔΘ = 0.657°
induces helical facets; and the achiral mixed (179,0)@(108,108) DWBNNT
(ΔΘ = 30°) that does not form circumferential facets.[20] Here, the notation (n1,m1)@(n2,m2) represents a (n1,m1) inner tube concentrically aligned
within an outer (n2,m2) tube, where n and m are the
corresponding tube indices.[48]Focusing
first on interwall rotations of the achiral systems, we perform a
set of constrained energy minimizations starting from a circular DWBNNT
configuration and relaxing the geometry at several fixed interwall
angular orientations ranging from 0° to 2°. Figure presents the corresponding
relaxed structures of the armchair (104,104)@(109,109) (first row)
and the zigzag (180,0)@(188,0) (third row) DWBNNTs. As is evident
from the figure, the angular orientation of the facets shows strong
dependence on the interwall rotation angle. In the armchair case,
which presents an optimal structure of pentagonal cross section, a
dramatic 41.8° revolution of the facet superstructure is obtained
for every nominal interwall rotation of 2°. Similarly, the octagonal
circumferential superstructure of the zigzag case revolves by as much
as 45° at a similar interwall rotation of 2°.
Figure 1
Achiral faceting.
Cross-sectional view of the achiral armchair
(top rows) and zigzag (bottom rows) DWBNNTs during a full coaxial
sliding cycle. Each row shows configurations at increasing relative
angular (θ) or axial (z) difference between
the outer and inner walls. Continued motion beyond the domain considered
herein results in periodic repetitions of the presented structures.
Ψ indicates the corresponding facet rotation angle. Intermediate
configurations during the adiabatic pull-out process appear in Supporting Information Movie 1. Red, white, and
blue colors indicate low, average, and high atomic interlayer energy,
respectively.
Achiral faceting.
Cross-sectional view of the achiral armchair
(top rows) and zigzag (bottom rows) DWBNNTs during a full coaxial
sliding cycle. Each row shows configurations at increasing relative
angular (θ) or axial (z) difference between
the outer and inner walls. Continued motion beyond the domain considered
herein results in periodic repetitions of the presented structures.
Ψ indicates the corresponding facet rotation angle. Intermediate
configurations during the adiabatic pull-out process appear in Supporting Information Movie 1. Red, white, and
blue colors indicate low, average, and high atomic interlayer energy,
respectively.All the more pronounced
structural variations arise in response
to interwall telescoping. For the armchair DWBNNTs considered (second
row of Figure ) the
number of facets doubles from 5 to 10, and their angular orientation
rotates by 18° upon interwall telescoping of 1.25 Å. Notably,
for the zigzag DWBNNT (lowest row of Figure ) almost complete unfaceting is observed
upon an axial shift of merely ≃1.7 Å. The entire structural
variation progression obtained during an adiabatic pull-out of 4.2
Å is reported in Supporting Information Movie
1.The most remarkable structural response is exhibited
by the bichiral
(70,70)@(77,74) DWBNNT. The chiral facets appearing in this system
couple the translational and rotational degrees of freedom. Hence,
interwall telescoping induces global rotation of the entire helical
superstructure reminiscent of an Archimedean screw (see Figure and Supporting Information Movie 3). This represents the smallest device exhibiting
unidirectional helical motion that may be utilized as a nanoscale
arterial thoroughfare for molecular transport.
Figure 2
Bichiral DWNT facet rotation.
Perspective view of the bichiral
(70,70)@(77,74) DWBNNT at two interwall configurations θ/z of 0.2°/2.4 Å (left) and 0.2°/3.2 Å
(right). These correspond to configurations close to maximum and minimum
potential energy, respectively (see top-right panel of Figure ). Blue and red atom false
coloring represents high and low interlayer energy, respectively.
Facet dynamics during a pull-out simulation at an interwall velocity
of 0.01 Å/ps is reported in Supporting Information Movie 3.
Bichiral DWNT facet rotation.
Perspective view of the bichiral
(70,70)@(77,74) DWBNNT at two interwall configurations θ/z of 0.2°/2.4 Å (left) and 0.2°/3.2 Å
(right). These correspond to configurations close to maximum and minimum
potential energy, respectively (see top-right panel of Figure ). Blue and red atom false
coloring represents high and low interlayer energy, respectively.
Facet dynamics during a pull-out simulation at an interwall velocity
of 0.01 Å/ps is reported in Supporting Information Movie 3.
Figure 3
PES maps. Potential energy surface maps of the
considered armchair
(left column), zigzag (center column), and bichiral (right column)
DWBNNTs for the relaxed (top panels) and cylindric (bottom panels)
configurations.
On the contrary, the
achiral mixed zigzag@armchair (179,0)@(108,108)
DWBNNT that possesses the maximal interwall chiral angle difference
of ΔΘ = 30° presents a featureless circular cross
section (not shown) regardless of the interwall position.
Potential Energy
Landscapes
The significant superstructure
variations described above are expected to have distinct manifestation
in the mechanical and tribological characteristics of faceted nanotube
structures. To evaluate these, we compare, in Figure , the potential energy surface (PES) for interwall rotation
and telescoping of the faceted DWBNNTs (for the carbon counterpart,
see Supporting Information Figure S1) considered
with those of their circular cross-section counterparts (see Structures and Methods section for technical details
regarding the calculation).PES maps. Potential energy surface maps of the
considered armchair
(left column), zigzag (center column), and bichiral (right column)
DWBNNTs for the relaxed (top panels) and cylindric (bottom panels)
configurations.Focusing first on the
armchair (104,104)@(109,109) DWBNNT (left
column in Figure ),
we find, as expected, that the potential energy corrugation for interwall
rotations of the circular configuration is very small (2.7 ×
10–4 meV/atom). This results from the interwall
curvature difference that induces circumferential incommensurability
between the hexagonal lattices of the two nanotube shells.[49] Interestingly, the faceted configuration maintains
a smooth interwall rotation energy landscape (corrugation of 3.0 ×
10–5 meV/atom) indicating in addition that pure
adiabatic facet reorientation is practically a barrierless process.
On the contrary, even for the circular configuration, interwall telescoping
is associated with potential energy variations that follow the mutual
hexagonal lattice periodicity, p, along the zigzag axial direction of the two nanotube walls
(p = l√3 ≃ 2.498 Å, where l = 1.442
Å is the equilibrium BN bond length). Notably, for the faceted
configuration the amplitude of these variations is an order of magnitude
larger (0.84 meV/atom) than that of the circular system (0.074 meV/atom),
as is also reflected by the energy landscapes of Figure . This is due to the unfaceting
and refaceting restructuring sequence occurring during the pull-out
process (see Supporting Information Movie 2). At the faceted configuration the average interwall distance reduces
from its circular cross-section value of 3.44 Å, a value geometrically
determined by the lattice indices of the two walls and by l, to an optimal interfacet separation of 3.27 Å, matching
the equilibrium h-BN bilayer interlayer distance
of our interatomic potential (see Structures and
Methods section). Hence, the overall interwall steric repulsion
increases with respect to the unfaceted configuration resulting in
higher telescoping PES barriers.The zigzag (180,0)@(188,0)
DWBNNT exhibits similar behavior with
smooth interwall rotation (1.4 × 10–4 and 6.1
× 10–5 meV/atom for the circular and faceted
configurations, respectively) and a corrugated telescoping PES (middle
column in Figure ).
The latter now follows the periodicity, p, of the armchair axial direction of the two nanotube
walls (p = 3l = 4.326 Å). Unlike the armchair DWBNNT case discussed
above, here the circular zigzag DWBNNT configuration presents considerably
higher corrugation (8.4 meV/atom) than the faceted one (1.4 meV/atom).
This results from the fact that the interwall distance in the frustrated
circular system, 3.18 Å, is smaller than the optimal value. Upon
facet formation, the interfacet distance now increases to a nearly
optimal value of 3.25 Å. This, in turn, results in lower barriers
along the unfaceting and refaceting sequence obtained throughout the
pull-out process.An overall lower PES corrugation is presented
by the circular bichiral
(70,70)@(77,74) DWBNNT (right columns of Figure ) with relatively smooth telescoping and
interwall rotation energy profiles (2.3 × 10–8 and 1.3 × 10–4 meV/atom, respectively). This
mainly results from the fact that the interwall distance at this configuration,
3.78 Å, is considerably larger than the equilibrium value. Similar
to the case of the armchair system described above, the appearance
of facets effectively reduces the interfacet distance toward the equilibrium
value resulting in an increase of the PES corrugation. Nevertheless,
while the translational and rotational degrees of freedom remain decoupled
in the achiral systems that present axial facets, here they are strongly
coupled by the helical facets as demonstrated by the tilted (rather
than vertical or horizontal) PES ridges.Interestingly, the
achiral mixed (179,0)@(108,108) DWBNNT has an
interwall distance of 3.21 Å, comparable to that of the zigzag
(180,0)@(188,0) DWBNNT and smaller than the equilibrium value. One
might therefore conclude that the two systems should present similar
PES corrugation. Nevertheless, the former presents a completely flat
translational–rotational PES for both the constrained circular
and the fully relaxed configurations (not shown). This may be attributed
to the incommensurability of the two hexagonal lattices in both the
axial and circumferential directions obtained at the maximal interwall
chiral angle misfit of 30°.
Interwall Static Friction
A 2-fold effect of circumferential
faceting on the interwall PES of DWBNNTs is thus found: (i) facet
restructuring during interwall displacements results in interwall
distance variations that may increase or decrease PES corrugation
depending on the corresponding distance within the unfaceted system;
(ii) helical facets, appearing in bichiral DWBNNTs, couple the translational
and rotational degrees of freedom. The immediate physical manifestation
of these effects is expected to appear in the static interwall friction
exhibited by the DWNT.The static friction force is defined
as the minimal force required to initiate relative motion between
the two nanotube walls that are initially interlocked in a (local)
free-energy minimum. Despite the general nonuniformity of real telescopic
sliding, also depending on the pulling mode, static friction may,
in the low temperature limit (T → 0 K), be
estimated from the interwall telescoping-rotation PES by evaluating
the energy barrier required to lift the interface out of the equilibrium
state. To this end, we plot the energy variations during adiabatic
axial interwall pull-out and rotation and fit them to a sinusoidal
curve of the form E(z) = (E/2) sin(2πz/Δz) (see Supporting Information
Figure S2). The static friction is then extracted from the
maximal derivative of the fitted curve given by F = πE/Δz. A summary of the obtained
PES corrugation and the corresponding static friction values appears
in Supporting Information Table S1.As may be expected, for the achiral armchair and zigzag systems,
the static friction force required to initiate interwall rotational
motion is negligible compared to that necessary to trigger telescopic
sliding for both the circular and the faceted configurations. The
pull-out static friction force of the armchair DWBNNT at the circular
geometry is 0.17 meV/Å per atom, much lower than the corresponding
value of the zigzag system (11.8 meV/Å). As discussed above,
in the relaxed configuration, the interfacet distance approaches the
equilibrium value in both systems resulting in similar friction forces
of 1.91 and 2.04 meV/Å per atom for the armchair and zigzag DWBNNTs,
respectively.The bichiral system in its circular geometry presents
a negligible
static friction force for axial shifts (3.8 × 10–8 meV/Å per atom), while a larger value, yet considerably smaller
than the characteristic forces exhibited by the achiral systems, is
obtained for interwall rotations (2.2 × 10–4 meV/Å per atom). At the faceted configuration the static friction
forces for both telescoping and rotation increase yielding values
of about 3.5 × 10–3 and 2.5 × 10–3 meV/Å per atom, respectively. It is clear from the upper right
panel of Figure that
a combined rotation and telescoping displacement path, which follows
the facet helicity, will result in a considerably lower static friction
force. For the mixed achiral DWBNNT, considering that, as mentioned
above, it exhibits completely flat rotation-telescoping PES maps for
both the circular and relaxed (unfaceted) geometries, we could not
extract any meaningful static friction force values.
Dynamic Friction
Not only do the superstructure reconfigurations
described above impact the static nanotube interwall friction, but
they provide a key to understanding the surprisingly high interwall
dynamic friction recently measured for MWBNNTs with respect to their
carbon counterparts.[47] The underlying mechanism
relates to the fact that the facet superstructural collective degrees
of freedom introduce auxiliary energy dissipation routes that enhance
dynamic friction. This is true for both translational and rotational
interwall motion even when the latter presents negligible PES corrugation
and static friction forces.To quantify these effects, we performed
fully atomistic molecular dynamics interwall sliding simulations (see Structures and Methods section for details) of the
DWBNNTs considered. When following the structural variations occurring
during the telescopic pull-out of the armchair and zigzag DWBNNTs’
inner shells at a relative velocity of 0.01 Å/ps, we observe
a full unfaceting and refaceting superstructure cycle, superposed
on asymmetric deformations induced by inertial effects (see Supporting Information Movie 2). For the bichiral
DWBNNT, we find that telescopic motion, at the same relative axial
velocity, induces circumferential rotation of the helical facets with
an angular velocity of about 0.24°/ps (evaluated from the simulated
time evolution in Supporting Information Movie 3). This corresponds to a linear superstructure surface velocity
of ∼0.2 Å/ps (assuming an average tube diameter of ∼10
nm), which is about 20 times faster than the applied axial velocity.Following Newton’s first law, we define the instantaneous
dynamic friction force as the force required to maintain a constant
velocity relative interwall sliding motion. To allow for comparison
between DWNTs of different diameters we extract the shear stress by
normalizing the calculated forces to the nominal surface contact area.
In Figure the temporal
shear stress traces obtained during constant velocity inner shell
pull-out (see Structures and Methods section)
are reported. We start by considering the achiral armchair (104,104)@(109,109)
and zigzag (180,0)@(188,0) DWBNNTs (blue lines in the upper left and
middle panels, respectively).
To evaluate the effect of facet reconfiguration on the dynamic friction
force, we perform reference calculations on narrow armchair (31,31)@(36,36)
and zigzag (55,0)@(63,0) DWBNNTs (green lines in the upper left and
middle panels, respectively) that are below the critical diameter
for facet formation.[15,20]
Figure 4
Dynamic friction. Instantaneous friction
force per unit area (shear
stress), calculated for interwall telescopic motion of armchair (left
panels), zigzag (center panels), and bichiral (right panels) DWBNNTs
(upper panels) and DWCNTs (lower panels) of diameter D at a pull-out velocity of 0.01 Å/ps. For the bichiral case,
the initial transient dynamics is also shown. The average steady-state
friction force values are reported in brackets in units of pN/nm2.
Dynamic friction. Instantaneous friction
force per unit area (shear
stress), calculated for interwall telescopic motion of armchair (left
panels), zigzag (center panels), and bichiral (right panels) DWBNNTs
(upper panels) and DWCNTs (lower panels) of diameter D at a pull-out velocity of 0.01 Å/ps. For the bichiral case,
the initial transient dynamics is also shown. The average steady-state
friction force values are reported in brackets in units of pN/nm2.Due to their axial interwall translational
symmetry, the achiral
DWNTs present periodic dynamic friction force variations with large
peak values reflecting increased interfacial commensurability. Interestingly,
the overall amplitude variations of the shear stress traces of the
faceted DWBNNTs are comparable to those of the narrower circular systems.
Nevertheless, while the circular systems present a nearly sinusoidal
smooth behavior, the faceted DWBNNTs show a complex pattern of rapid
force fluctuations with clear asymmetry between the positive and negative
shear stress regions. This is a clear manifestation of the effects
of superstructure reconfigurations occurring during the pull-out dynamics
in the presence of facets. As a consequence, the dynamic friction
force, evaluated as the time averaged shear stress over an integer
number of periods, is found to be 5–17 times larger in the
faceted achiral DWBNNTs than in the circular systems studied.We may therefore conclude that faceting, which, as discussed above,
is considerably more prevalent in MWBNNTs than in MWCNTs, may be responsible
for the enhanced friction measured for the former. To understand how
the interwall friction of the less abundant faceted MWCNTs compares
to that of their BNNT counterparts, we have repeated our calculations
for the corresponding achiral DWCNTs (see lower panels of Figure ). Similar to the
case of DWBNNTs, the circular achiral DWCNTs show a much smoother
and more symmetric shear stress trace (see light-gray lines in the
lower left and lower middle panels of Figure ) resulting in considerably smaller dynamic
friction forces than the faceted achiral systems (dark-gray lines).
Interestingly, even for the latter, the kinetic friction force extracted
is smaller by a factor of 3.4–3.8 than that of the corresponding
faceted DWBNNTs with the force-field parameters used herein (see Structures and Methods section). Importantly, this
is true also for the zigzag (180,0)@(188,0) DWNTs considered, where
the PES corrugation of the BN-based system was found to be comparable
to that of its carbon counterpart (Figures and S1).For the bichiral (70,70)@(77,74) DWBNNT considered, no periodic
kinetic friction force variations are observed (see upper right panel
of Figure ). Furthermore,
following some initial transient dynamics, smooth steady-state sliding
motion with nearly constant drag is obtained. This can be attributed
to the reduced interwall commensurability and PES corrugation in this
system (see right panels of Figure ). Consequently, the average dynamic friction force
recorded in this case (∼3.2 pN/nm2) is 20-fold times
smaller than that of the faceted achiral systems. Nevertheless, it
remains nearly an order of magnitude larger than the value measured
for the corresponding bichiral DWCNT (0.4 pN/nm2, see lower
right panel of Figure ) and a factor of 80–320 larger than the kinetic friction
measured for the achiral circular DWCNTs considered.Finally,
we study the velocity dependence of the interlayer sliding
friction of DWBNNTs and DWCNTs in the range of 0.2–1.0 m/s
(see Supporting Information Figure S5).
Our results show a nearly linear increase of the friction force with
the sliding velocity at the velocity range considered. For the axially
commensurate armchair DWNTs, the friction extrapolates to a finite
value at zero velocity. This can be attributed to the finite static
friction exhibited by these systems. For the incommensurate bichiral
DWNTs the friction extrapolates to zero at vanishing interwall sliding
velocity. This is in line with the experimental observation of viscous
interwall telescopic motion in multiwalled NTs, where sliding is expected
to occur at the weakest incommensurate interface. The calculated interwall
friction forces in both DWCNTs considered are found to be weakly dependent
on the sliding velocity and are consistently lower than those obtained
for the corresponding DWBNNTs. This further supports the experimental
observations of increased interwall friction in MWBNNTs over MWCNTs.[47]
Conclusions
The resulting screw-like
motion of the
faceted helical pattern establishes the smallest realization of an
Archimedean screw with the potential to achieve directional transport
of weakly adsorbed molecules along the surface of the tube.We note that the superstructure variations discussed above may be
viewed as the nanotube analogues of the soliton-like motion of moiré
patterns occurring in sliding incommensurate planar interfaces.[50] Nevertheless, due to geometric frustration in
the tubular configuration, the extended circumferential registry patterns
result in considerably larger structural deformations. The latter
exhibit much richer dynamic behavior with marked influence on the
mechanical, tribological, and electronic properties of the system.The motion of such collective degrees of freedom opens new dissipative
channels that enhance dynamic friction beyond the excitation of localized
phonon modes. Since faceting is more commonly observed in MWBNNTs
than in their carbon counterparts, this rationalizes recent experimental
findings showing that the former exhibit an order of magnitude larger
dynamic friction.[47] Furthermore, even when
compared to the less abundant case of faceted DWCNTs, the BN systems
exhibit 3–8 times larger dynamic friction forces. Hence, when
designing smooth nanoscale bearings, one should resort to unfaceted
MWCNTS,[49] whereas if torsional and axial
rigidities are desired, faceted MWBNNTs should be the material of
choice.[15,47]Finally, several other, more speculative
but highly intriguing,
consequences of the striking facet evolutions discussed herein can
be envisioned. First, we have shown that facet dynamics strongly depend
on the relative chirality of adjacent nanotube walls. Therefore, the
interwall pulling force trace should encode information about the
identity of the various tube shells. This, in turn, opens new opportunities
for novel material characterization techniques that may provide access
to the specific sequence of chiralities of successive nanotube walls.
Furthermore, electronic effects, not discussed herein, may also exhibit
unexpected behavior. Specifically, surface states that typically localize
at sharp edges, such as the circumferential vertices of the polygonal
cross-section, may also be pumped along the surface of nanotubes in
an Archimedean manner.
Structures and Methods
DWNTs can
have inner and outer
walls that are zigzag (ZZ), amrchair (AC), or chiral (Ch). In the
present study four types of carbon and boron nitride (BN) DWNTs have
been considered including the achiral AC@AC (104,104)@(109,109) and
ZZ@ZZ (180,0)@(188,0) systems; the mixed achiral ZZ@AC (179,0)@(108,108);
and the bichiral AC@Ch (70,70)@(77,74). Here, the notation (n1,m1)@(n2,m2) represents a (n1,m1) inner tube
concentrically aligned within an outer (n2,m2) tube, where n and m are the corresponding tube indices. Monochiral DWNTs that
have chiral walls with matching chiral angles present axial facets
like the achiral systems[20] and are therefore
not considered herein. A summary of the relevant geometric parameters
of the unrelaxed DWNTs appears in Table S2.The structural and frictional properties of all DWNTs considered
have been described using dedicated intra- and interlayer classical
force-fields as detailed below. For DWCNTs, the intralayer interactions
have been described using the Tersoff[51] potential adopting the parametrization of Lindsay and Broido.[52] The interlayer interactions of these systems
have been described by the registry-dependent Kolmogorov–Crespi
potential in its RDP1 form.[44] For the intralayer
interactions of DWBNNTs, we have used the Tersoff force-field as parametrized
by Sevik et al. for BN-based systems,[53] along with our recently developed h-BN interlayer
potential with fixed partial charges.[29,54] We note that
suppressing the Coulombic interactions between the partially charged
atomic centers in the DWBNNTs studied (qB = +0.47 e, qN = −0.47 e) results in a reduction of merely ∼3.5% in their
calculated PES corrugation (see Supporting Information Figure S3). Corrugation and adhesion energy profiles for rigid
planar bilayer of h-BN and graphene, as obtained
by the above set of interlayer potentials, are reported in Supporting Information Figure S4.Periodic
boundary conditions (PBC) along the tube axis have been
applied to all DWNTs considered, resulting in a very small (<0.1%)
stress in the case of the bichiral and mixed systems due to the different
lattice constants of the inner and outer tubes. In all cases, an initial
step of relaxation of the cell vectors has been performed in order
to minimize any PBC-related stress effects.In the pull-out/rotation
potential energy surface calculations
(Figure ) each point
has been obtained by placing the two unrelaxed cylindrical nanotube
walls at the corresponding relative axial and angular position followed
by geometry optimization using FIRE quenched dynamics,[55] while nullifying the center of mass (c.o.m.)
axial and angular velocity of each nanotube wall. All the constrained
relaxations were stopped after 5000 FIRE iterations, providing energy
evaluations that are converged to within 0.1% of the highest energy
obtained across the PES maps. The reported energy per atom has been
obtained by dividing the converged energy by the total number of atoms
in the DWNT. We note that this procedure corresponds to an adiabatic
relative motion of the tubes that can, in principle, be realized in
experiment by adhering the outer tube wall(s) to a fixed stage and
applying a slowly varying external force on the inner shells via the
manipulation of an external tip.[47,56−58] Although in typical experimental setups the external force is applied
at one edge of the inner shell, their extreme stiffness permits the
instantaneous propagation of the stress along the entire tube length.
Hence, the calculated PESs should reliably describe the corresponding
interwall energy variations measured in the experiment.Dynamic
friction calculations have been performed by numerically
propagating the Langevin equation of motion using the standard molecular
dynamics velocity–Verlet algorithm. The simulations have been
performed in the underdamped regime by applying viscous damping to
all degrees of freedom apart from the c.o.m. motion of both tubes.
The dynamic friction force is evaluated from the interwall shear force
required to keep the two nanotube walls at constant relative velocity
motion vext. To this end, we have fixed
the c.o.m. of the internal tube and applied a uniform force Fext to each of the N atoms
of the external tube so thatwhere v0 and v1 are the i-th
atom velocities
at times t0 and t1, respectively, Δt = t1 – t0 is the numerical
propagation time step, vcm0 is the c.o.m. velocity of the external
tube at t = t0, m the atomic mass, F is the total force on atom i due to the chosen set of interatomic potentials, and γ
= 0.1 ps–1 is the viscous damping coefficient used
in the simulation to avoid system overheating. Since the viscous damping
is not applied to the c.o.m. motion of the tubes, the computed friction
results weakly dependent on the adopted γ value, the latter
mainly determining the steady-state temperature of the sliding system.
In our typical simulations, which were run in the underdamped regime,
we measured steady-state temperatures below 1 K, suggesting a negligible
role of temperature on the measured friction.From eqs and 2 we
obtainwhereSince Fext is applied to all the
atoms
of the external tube, the instantaneous friction force of the entire
surface, Ffric, is simply expressed byFinally, the obtained dynamic friction force Ffric is normalized to the interwall contact area evaluated
from the average diameter of the unrelaxed-cylindrical configuration
(see Table S2), leading to the system-specific
shear stress value. This allows for a direct comparison among forces
calculated for DWNTs of different type and dimensions. The resulting
shear stress has been averaged over a time window of at least 1 ns
during the steady-state motion, after the initial transient dynamics
has decayed, covering an integer number of oscillations in the case
of periodic force traces.We note that by using this procedure
a direct quantitative comparison
with experimental data is hard to achieve, due to the large sliding
velocities, to which MD simulations are limited, compared to those
accessible in realistic experimental conditions. Despite this, our
dynamic simulations allow for a comparative study of the tribological
properties of faceted and unfaceted DWNTs of different chemical composition.