Abstract
Glass fragility is a byproduct of early attempts to apply law of corresponding states scaling to the temperature dependent thickening of glass forming liquids. Efforts to plot the logarithm of the viscosity vs. inverse temperature scaled to the glass transition point (Tg) fail to collapse data to a common, universal curve but instead display an informative pattern: at one extreme, many “strong” oxide glasses exhibit a single Arrhenius dependence, and at the other extreme, many “fragile” molecular liquids display a highly non-Arrhenius pattern in which the viscosity increases far more rapidly just in advance of Tg. In this regard, network-forming glasses composed of 3D networks of covalently bonded atoms are of interest as they undergo systematic changes in both Tg and fragility depending on the topology of the network and display variations of the fragility index spanning from strong (m ≈ 17) to fragile (m ≈ 90) depending on the level of network connectivity. Here we review the merits of a special, coarse-grained definition for the topological connectivity of network-forming glasses that differs from conventional constraint-counting approaches but which allows the fragility of over 150 different network-forming glasses (both oxides and chalcogenides) to be collapsed onto a single function of the average network connectivity. We also speculate on what role this coarse-grained connectivity might play in determining the glass transition temperature.
Introduction
Through the ages, glass manufacturing has profited from an appreciation for the delicate balance between glass composition and properties. Ease of glass formation from the melt is closely tied to the working “length” of the glass composition; essentially a measure of how gradually the viscosity of the melt changes with changes in temperature just above the glass transition point. A “long” glass suffers only minor changes in viscosity and so can be manipulated for a longer period of time before needing to be reheated. Early glass research naturally focused on how glass chemistry might function to control the viscosity of the melt across a wide variety of glass compositions. Although similar efforts predated it (Oldekop, ; Laughlin and Uhlmann, ; Nemilov, ), it was a seminal paper by Austen Angell () that really emphasized the deep pattern to how chemical structure of both traditional oxide glasses and simple glass-forming liquids might dictate viscous dynamics in the melt. His now famous plot (Angell, , ), reproduced here as Figure 1, is in many ways reminiscent of an attempt to apply the “law of corresponding states” (Stanley, ) to the viscosity of glass-forming melts by scaling the data to the glass transition temperature, Tg, defined as that temperature where the viscosity reaches 1012 Pas. However, unlike the law of corresponding states that governs the liquid-vapor transition near the critical point (Stanley, ), the viscosity of these glass-forming materials fail to collapse to a single universal scaling curve in this scaled representation. Instead, one finds a pattern that is largely bimodal and for which Angell categorized (Angell, ) as either “strong” or “fragile” on the basis of whether the viscosity is highly Arrhenius or highly non-Arrhenius, respectively. Oxide glasses, like SiO2, are highly Arrhenius over their entire temperature range. These strong glass-formers are composed of a network of relatively strong covalent bonds and typically require refractory-level temperatures to produce a melt. At the opposite extreme are several fragile glass-forming liquids that are held together by weaker, non-directional, van der Waals forces which often exhibit a Tg well below ambient room temperature. Alongside this pattern of non-Arrhenius viscosity, Angell () drew attention to an important correlation of the fragility with the magnitude of the change in specific heat that occurs upon crossing the glass transition point (see inset to Figure 1). In thermodynamics this specific heat is the (logarithmic) slope of the entropy with temperature and many have speculated (Adam and Gibbs, ; Debenedetti and Stillinger, ; Sidebottom, ) that the increase in viscosity with cooling is closely associated with how rapidly the entropy of the liquid decreases.
Figure 1
As can be seen from closer inspection of Figure 1, the pattern is not exactly bimodal but rather includes a number of intermediates such as ZnCl2 and sodium disilicate whose fragilities lie in between the extremes. The fragility index defined by the “steepness” of the limiting slope of the data in Figure 1 as:
has often been employed to characterize the specific level of fragility for any given glass-forming material and data in Figure 1, for example, range in fragility index from roughly m = 18 to m ≈ 85. With the exception of B2O3 whose fragility is intermediate (m ≈ 32), all of the other traditional network forming oxides (e.g., SiO2, GeO2, P2O5, As2O3) predicted by Zachariasen (
An important measure of this network topology would be the average number of bonds per atom, 〈r〉. In the case of SiO2 where one-third of the atoms are Si (with r = 4 bonds each) and two-thirds are O (with r = 2 bonds each), the bond density would be . In many topological theories (Phillips,
While this atomic-weighted bond density appears frequently in many topological studies of glass forming materials, including many concerning the mechanical properties of network-forming chalcogenide glasses (Halfpap and Lindsay,
In a series of previous publications (Sidebottom and Schnell,
Discussion
Alkali Phosphate Melts
Our story begins with efforts to measure the fragility of phosphorous pentoxide, P2O5, using dynamic light scattering techniques (Sidebottom and Changstrom,
where the fractions of PO4 with n = 2 BOs increases as f2 = x/(1 − x) while those with n = 3 BOs decrease as f3 = (1 − 2x)/(1 − x).
In the dynamic light scattering study (Sidebottom and Changstrom,
Figure 2

The structural relaxation time (tau) of various [Na2O]x[P2O5]1−x glass melts plotted against inverse temperature scaled to the glass transition temperature where tau = 100 s. Key shows values of x expressed as a mole % of Na2O. Inset shows how the fragility index of these melts depends on 〈n〉, the average BO per phosphate unit.
In addition to P2O5, Figure 2 includes the results of PCS measurements (Fabian and Sidebottom,
The variation of the glass transition temperature over this same range of sodium phosphate glasses is presented in Figure 3 and shows a rapid decrease with the initial addition of alkali oxide followed at higher concentrations by a more gradual increase on approach to the metaphosphate. Moreover, the glass transition temperature of the metaphosphate depends on the specific alkali species and some (Eisenberg et al.,
Figure 3

The glass transition temperature for [Na2O]x[P2O5]1−x glasses. Closed circles are values obtained from dynamic light scattering. Open symbols are literature values [(Eisenberg et al.,
At this junction it is worth stressing again that fragility and glass transition temperature are generally disconnected quantities. This is clearly the case for the alkali phosphates where the compositions (0.4 < x < 0.5) for which the greatest changes in fragility occur are those at which almost no change in glass transition temperature is occurring and, reversely, those compositions (0 < x < 0.2) were Tg is changing most dramatically are those for which the fragility is changing the least. This disconnect is not unexpected but is consistent with the law of corresponding states perspective raised earlier: there is no a priori reason for the scaled slope of the viscosity [Equation (1)] to be directly related to the temperature used in the scaling.
Chalcogenides
Chalcogenide glasses based, for example, on the crosslinking of Se or S chains (r = 2) by either Ge (r = 4) or As (r = 3) share a change in topology from 2d chains to 3d networks similar with that in the alkali phosphate discussed above (He and Thorpe,
Figure 4

The fragility index of alkali phosphate melts (closed circles) plotted as a function of the average number of bridging oxygen per PO4 tetrahedra alongside the fragility index of chalcogenide melts (Tatsumisago et al.,
The coincidence of these two data sets draws us again back to the notion of a law of corresponding states where hidden universalities often emerge when data are appropriately scaled. In determining the fragility, data were scaled by a glass transition temperature that is largely disconnected with the fragility itself. Akin to way the critical point temperature in a liquid-vapor phase transition is set largely by the interaction energy and so differs among different non-ideal gases, the glass transition temperature is an energy scale that differs among different glass compositions. But we see in Figure 4 the possibility that some additional scaling of the mean field connectivity of the network might expose a common pattern in the fragility of network-forming glasses. Only when the connectivity of the oxide network is defined through a coarse-graining over the RSUs of which it is constructed [i.e., 〈n〉] does this hidden universality seem appear. Fragility is a measure of viscous flow of the melt and this flow takes place through collective deformations under shear stress (in a zero-frequency limit). In the oxides, the persistence of SRO forces deformations and bond breaking to take place at the weakest linkages and this effectively renormalizes the network to one of rigid polyhedra hinged at vertices for which 〈n〉 becomes the more relevant mean field measure of connectivity.
Other Oxides
The fundamental problem with our idea that 〈n〉 is the relevant metric of connectivity for oxide networks is that it fails to produce a universal pattern for all the other major oxide glasses! This is evident in Figure 5 where the fragility of various commercially-relevant glass forming oxides including borates (Nemilov,
Figure 5

A compilation of fragility indices of various alkali oxide glasses including sodium phosphates (Fabian and Sidebottom,
Sharply at odds with the silicate and phosphate glasses, the fragility of both the alkali borate and alkali germanate glasses display an unanticipated increase with increasing network connectivity. They appear to become “floppier” despite the addition of more constraints. In both of these systems, the initial addition of alkali oxide does not produce non-bridging oxygens leading to depolymerization but rather produce increased network polymerization via the formation of polyhedra with higher coordination numbers. In the borate system (Griscom,
In the following section, we examine each of these other oxide glass systems to demonstrate how additional RSUs that appear in these materials beyond that of the short-range order alone can influence the mean field connectivity. Coarse-graining must be extended for these materials to include intermediate range order (IRO) structures when present and we emphasize how a consistent coarse-graining procedure places the fragility of these and other network-forming glasses onto a common master curve as a function of a generalized network connectivity.
Alkali Borates
In comparison with all the other primary oxide glasses whose fragility indices range between m ≈ 17 and 20, boron trioxide (B2O3) has an anomalously high value (m ≈ 32). Oddly, the fragility of B2O3 is far greater than that of arsenic trioxide, an otherwise chemically identical material that likewise favors trigonal (AsO3) units in its network structure (Galeener et al.,
Figure 6

The fraction of boron atoms in various structural units in potassium borate glasses. Values are derived from an NMR investigation (Youngman and Zwanziger,
In order to coarse-grain the connectivity, an accounting scheme is needed that can be faithfully applied whereby the connections in the network are properly enumerated on the same per network forming cation basis but with an accommodation made for the presence of these larger, IRO structures. The central ingredient is recognizing how the topological connectivity of a trigonal unit that participates in a ring (or other unit) is generally reduced when compared with a unit that is “free” of such IRO structures. In the case of the boroxol ring for example, the n = 3 connectivity of a trigonal unit is reduced to n = 2 since each such trigonal unit functions only to connect the external network to the ring itself. In other words, each trigonal unit employs two BO bonds to connect itself to the ring of which one is topologically redundant. Using this accounting scheme for B2O3 in which only fR = 65% of the trigonal units are in rings while the remaining fF = 35% are free, we obtain an adjusted connectivity 〈nIRO〉 = 0.65 × 2+0.35 × 3 = 2.35, that is reduced in comparison to the BO-only connectivity (〈n〉) and which relocates the fragility index of B2O3 onto the fragility pattern highlighted in Figure 4.
In the alkali-modified borates, addition of alkali oxide drives the production of 4-coordinated boron tetrahedra which, as seen in Figure 6, almost exclusively participate in either diborate or tetraborate structures illustrated in that figure. Using the same accounting scheme, we conclude that each of the borate units in a diborate structure (two BO3 units and two BO4 units) have a reduced connectivity of n = 2, while in a tetraborate structure, six of the eight borate units located on the periphery of the structure have connectivity of n = 2, while the other two units that are internal provide no connectivity with the external network (n = 0). Thus, the average connectivity of boron in a tetraborate structure is and we arrive at a formula for the coarse-grained connectivity in alkali borates:
where f4 is the fraction of free 4-coordinated boron, f3 the fraction of free 3-coordinated boron, fR the fraction of boron in boroxol rings, fD the fraction of boron in diborate units, and fT the fraction of boron in tetraborate units. Since these fractions are taken directly from the NMR results (Youngman and Zwanziger,
Figure 7

The fragility index of lithium and sodium borate glasses (Nemilov,
Alkali Germanates
Given the success in relocating the fragility index of alkali borates, we might anticipate that RSUs are also present in alkali germanates and similarly decrease the coarse-grained network connectivity despite the increasing formation of BO bonds. Here, evidence for such structures is gleaned from Raman spectroscopy (Henderson and Fleet,
Figure 8

A curve fitting analysis of the low energy Raman band (shown as inset) of sodium germanate glasses (Henderson and Fleet,
Given that a large fraction of rings might be present in these alkali-germanate glasses, coarse-graining efforts need to account for all the potential configurations that might appear in any substantial amounts. In addition to dividing the Ge units up by their coordination states where the fraction of four-coordinated units, f4 = (1−3x)/(1−x), and the fraction of five-coordinated units, f5 = 2x/(1−x), are established by requirements for charge neutrality, we also must divide these units with regards to the probability that a given unit will be participating in one or more ring structures. An added complication not seen in the case of boroxol rings is the possibility for a GeO4 (or GeO5) unit to participate in two rings simultaneously forming a “double ring” structure. Including this new possibility, one finds six possible configurations whose corresponding connectivities are summarized in Table 1.
Table 1
| (1−fR) | fR(1−fR) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| f4 | n = 4 | n = 3 | n = 0 |
| f5 | n = 5 | n = 4 | n = 2 |
Coarse-grained connectivity of six possible RSUs found in alkali germanate glasses as discussed in the text.
Each row and column combination represent a single RSU species whose likelihood is proportional to the product of the row by column headings and whose connectivity is given by the table entry. The parameters, fi = 4, 5, R, represent the fraction of germanium that are 4-, 5-coordinated or participants in 3-membered rings, respectively.
If fR is again defined as the fraction of Ge participating in 3-membered rings, then, regardless of coordination state, a fraction (1 − fR) of the Ge will be “free” in the sense that they do not participate in any ring structure. Such a free Ge will have a connectivity of n = 4 if 4-coordinated and n = 5 if 5-coordinated, respectively. Likewise, a fraction fR(1 − fR) of the Ge will participate in a single ring but not in two rings simultaneously. In accord with the rules established for boroxol rings, each such Ge will suffer a reduction in connectivity owing to a single redundant BO bond. Finally, some Ge will be found that participte in two rings simultaneously with the joint probability . When a GeO5 unit participates in two rings simultaneously it functions topologically as n = 2 since three of the four BOs being contributed to the rings are redundant. However, when a GeO4 unit participates in two rings simultaneously it functions analogously to the BO4 unit in the interior of a tetraborate structure and so provides no topological connection to the external network whatsoever.
The coarse-grained connectivity is then given by the weighted average:
To model the rapid increase in the fraction of Ge in rings at arbitrary alkali concentrations, an inverted exponential decay function of the form:
was chosen (Sidebottom et al.,
Figure 9

The fragility index of sodium, potassium, and rubidium germanate glasses (Nemilov,
Alkali Silicates
Like the alkali phosphates, addition of alkali oxide to the SiO2 network results in network depolymerization through the production of NBOs and NMR studies (Stebbins,
Small 3-membered rings are virtually absent in SiO2 (Galeener,
Limiting the analysis only to compositions below 40 mol% alkali oxide for which f1 = f0 = 0, we arrive at 13 possible configurations that a SiO4 tetrahedron could adopt that are summarized in Table 2. The connectivity assignments in the table for free units and rings follow directly from the previous discussion on coarse-graining of the alkali germanates but must be augmented slightly to allow for SiO4 units in rings with NBOs. The presence of NBOs in the alkali silicates raises the topological complication of so-called “dangling bonds” (Thorpe,
Table 2
| fF | fST | fES(1−fES) | fR(1−fR) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| f4 | n = 4 | n = 2 | n = 3 | n = 3 | n = 2 | n = 0 |
| f3 | n = 3 | n = 0 | n = 2 | n = 2 | NA | NA |
| f2 | n = 2 | NA | n = 0 | n = 0 | NA | NA |
Coarse-grained connectivity of 13 allowed configurations found in alkali silicate glass networks with <40 mol% alkali oxide as discussed in the text.
Each row and column combination represent a single RSU species whose likelihood is proportional to the product of the row by column headings and whose connectivity is given by the table entry. Entries with NA denote situations that are not possible. The parameters, fi = 4, 3, 2, R, ES, ST, F, represent the fraction of silicon that have 4, 3, 2 bridging oxygen, are participants in 3-membered rings, edge-sharing connections, supertetrahdrons, or uninvolved in any RSU, respectively.
Coarse-graining the connectivity of these alkali silicate melts is thus an ambitious effort involving a properly-normalized weighted average of the form:
where
Not only is the greater diversity of potential structural motifs a challenge, so too is the limited availability of quantitative values of the compositional dependence of the fractions (fF, fST, fES, and fR) of these motifs needed to complete the calculations. In principle, these fractions together with the fractions of BO per Si (f4, f3, and f2) would present an ill-advised curve fitting exercise with seven adjustable parameters. In an effort to avoid a result that to the reader might appear to be merely contrived from some arbitrary, free adjustment of these parameters, the parameters have been fixed to values dictated by the literature sources cited earlier. The values of f4, f3, and f2, for example, are set by values taken directly from data tables in the NMR study (Maekawa et al.,
Figure 10

The fragility indices of SiO2 and selected sodium and potassium silicate glasses (Poole,
Network-Forming Intermediates
Throughout our analysis of network connectivity in alkali-modified oxide glasses, we have not attached any connectivity to the alkali ion itself. This decision stems from evidence that alkali ions are only weakly tethered to their charge-compensating site on the network (either a NBO or a higher coordinated unit, e.g., GeO5 or BO4) and remain considerably mobile in the glassy state well below Tg. Many impedance spectroscopy studies (Dyre et al.,
In the sodium metaphosphate glass, NaPO3, the oxide structure consists of chains of PO4 tetrahedra with n = 2 BO connections each (Brow,
If we treat Zn2+ and Al3+ as network-forming cations, we must presume that these cations form BO connections with PO4 tetrahedra that increase the connectivity of the network. In the instance of Zn(PO3)2 there are, in one chemical formula, two PO4 polyhedra associated with each Zn2+ cation allowing Zn2+ to complete its desired coordination of n = 4. Meanwhile each of the PO4 tetrahedra already maintain two BO connections to neighboring PO4 tetrahedra (to create a chain structure of polymeric [PO3]n) while the remaining two oxygen are free to coordinate to the Zn2+ cation. We assume that the Zn2+ cation can be coordinated either in a corner sharing fashion or an edge sharing fashion to the surrounding PO4 tetrahedra with equal likelihood and so arrive at three ways in which the Zn2+ cation in one chemical formula could be connected with the network. These are illustrated in the inset to Figure 11. Firstly, the Zn2+ cation could bond with four separate PO4 tetrahedra via corner sharing connections only. In this case both the ZnO4 tetrahedron and the two PO4 tetrahedra (per chemical formula) would be assigned a connectivity of n = 4. On a per chemical formula basis the average connectivity per network-forming cation of such a configuration would then be:
Figure 11

The fragility indices of [Al(PO3)3]y[NaPO3]1−y and [Zn(PO3)2]y[NaPO3]1−y plotted as a function of the connectivity coarse-grained to include both edge-sharing and corner-sharing configurations as described in the text. Also shown are the collective data from previous figures: sodium phosphates (solid circles), chalcogenides (open circles), alkali borates (open squares), alkali germanates (open diamonds), and alkali silicates (solid diamonds). The inset shows the three possible configurations of a Zn cation in Zn(PO3)2 glass.
Secondly, it could bond with just two separate PO4 tetrahedra via edge sharing connections only. In this case the ZnO4 tetrahedron would have a connectivity of n = 2 (one redundant BO bond to each PO4), while each PO4 tetrahedra would have n = 3 (one redundant BO bond to the Zn). In this instance the average connectivity would be:
Lastly, the Zn2+ could form a corner sharing connection to two PO4 tetrahedra and an edge sharing connection to another. In this last case, the ZnO4 tetrahedron would have a connectivity of n = 3 (one redundant bond to one PO4 unit) while one PO4 unit would have connectivity of n = 3 and the other n = 4. In this last scenario there are two permutations each with the same average connectivity:
If we now add to this the reasonable assumption of a purely random distribution in which the probability for corner sharing equals that for edge sharing (i.e., fCS = fES = 50%), then fCSfCS = fESfES = fCSfES = 1/4 and the coarse-grained connectivity of zinc metaphosphate glass would be:
and (assuming ideal mixing) the connectivity of mixtures of the form [Zn(PO3)2]y[NaPO3]1−y would have a connectivity given by:
A similar analysis (Sidebottom and Vu,
with mixtures of the form [Al(PO3)3]y[NaPO3]1−y having connectivity:
Using Equations (9) and (11), the fragility of both Zn-Na and Al-Na metaphosphate melts is plotted together with the master curve in Figure 11 and again show good coincidence.
Glass Transition Temperature
In this final section we turn attention to the nature of the glass transition temperature in network-forming oxides. The glass transition temperature should be viewed as a relevant energy scale associated with the average thermal energy needed to generate sufficient bond breaking so as to facilitate a viscous flow of 1012 Pas (as the Tg is commonly defined) and this identification is further supported by the well-known empirical “2/3 rule” (Wang et al.,
Firstly, consider the glass transition temperature of both the alkali borates and germanates which are plotted in Figure 12 as a function of the alkali oxide content just up to the levels where substantial numbers of NBOs would begin to develop. The general increase in the glass transition would suggest that this energy scale is mainly influenced by the degree of network polymerization (characterized either by 〈r〉 or 〈n〉) which initially increases as a result of increasing coordination. This suspicion is also supported at higher alkali concentrations (beyond that plotted in Figure 12) where the Tg of both systems begins to decrease due to the formation of NBOs that then depolymerize the network. In both cases, the initial absence of NBOs in the network preclude the possibility for the alkali ions to function as crosslinks between separate “patches” of disconnected oxide network and so the restorative effect seen in the alkali phosphate is not present at these lower concentrations and would not be anticipated until large numbers of NBOs have formed. This tie between network constraints and Tg has long been suggested as the cause for the borate and germanate “anomalies” (Henderson,
Figure 12

The glass transition temperature of alkali germanates (Shelby,
Secondly, we highlight results of a study of borophophate glasses (Christensen et al.,
Figure 13

The glass transition temperature (open squares, scale on left side) and average bridging oxygen per network forming cation (open circles, scale on right side) of sodium borophosphate glasses (Christensen et al.,
Lastly, we reflect on the possibility for the coarse-grained connectivity, 〈nIRO〉, to influence the glass transition temperature. Returning to the glass transition temperatures of the alkali borates and alkali germanates in Figure 12, one sees that although the Tg of both generally increases with the polymerization of these oxide networks, the Tg of the alkali germanates actually decreases by some 80 degrees K with the initial addition of just 1 or 2 mol% alkali oxide (Shelby,
These examples support the general notion that the glass transition temperature increases with increasing network connectivity. This makes intuitive sense. Our view of kBTg is that of a level of thermal energy needed to break (and reform) sufficient numbers of bridging bonds to achieve a bulk viscosity of 1012 Pas. Increasing the density of these bridging bonds implies that a higher level of energy would be needed in order to re-establish the same transition-level viscosity. What might be more speculative is the notion that the generation of IRO structures could lower the glass transition temperature by virtue of lowering the density of those bridging bonds that matter to viscous flow. Despite an increasing number of BO per cation, the formation of IRO is accompanied by larger-scale rigid elements that flex primarily through bridging oxygen at their vertices and it is only these weaker linkages that need be broken to facilitate viscous flow. As we have witnessed in the alkali germanate glasses, the density of these weaker linkages can decrease very rapidly causing a similar drop in viscosity (see Figure 12) along with a drop in Tg.
Conclusions
The equilibrium viscosity of some glass forming materials can change by over 10 orders of magnitude for as little as a 10% increase in thermal energy and this sensitivity to temperature changes near the glass transition point is characterized by the fragility. The fragility varies quite appreciably among glasses across a spectrum of chemical compositions including traditional network-forming oxides and simple molecular liquids but appears to be most closely correlated to the nature of the structural bonding present in the glass. In the instance of network-forming materials, this then allows one to consider the role of network topology in determining the fragility. Here, we have demonstrated how the fragility of a great many network-forming oxide glasses is seen to follow a very common dependence on the topological connectivity of the network provided this connectivity is adjusted to reflect the presence of larger-scaled rigid structural units that form in some systems. Throughout, we have emphasized how the needed coarse-graining of these structural units is achieved in like fashion for several alkali oxide glasses using a single method.
The collapse of the fragility for a great many oxide glasses considered here suggests that fragility is determined only by a single, mean field parameter—either ϕ = 〈r〉, 〈n〉 or 〈nIRO〉– whichever captures the connectivity of weakest linkages present in the network structure. This result is in accord with our viewpoint that the sort of network deformations required for bulk viscous flow need not involve all the covalent bonds present but can be achieved while certain rigid structural units remain largely undeformed. An understanding for why this universality exists is not fully certain, but we have speculated that it is deeply rooted in the nature of the configurational entropy, SC, of cross-linked networks (Sidebottom,
Statements
Author contributions
The author confirms being the sole contributor of this work and has approved it for publication.
Acknowledgments
The author is grateful to Dr. G. S. Henderson for his willingness to share data files of Raman spectra in a series of sodium germanate glasses and provide advice on the analysis.
Conflict of interest
The author declares that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
References
1
AdamG.GibbsJ. H. (1965). On the temperature dependence of cooperative relaxation properties in glass-forming liquids. J. Chem. Phys.43, 139–146. 10.1063/1.1696442
2
AngellC. A. (1984). Strong and Fragile Liquids Relaxations in Complex Systems. National Technical Information Service, US Department of Commerce, 3–11.
3
AngellC. A. (1991). Relaxation in liquids, polymers and plastic crystals - strong/fragile patterns and problems. J. Non-Cryst. Sol.131–133, 13–31. 10.1016/0022-3093(91)90266-9
4
BöhmerR.AngellC. A. (1992). Correlations of the nonexponentiality and state dependence of mechanical relaxations with bond connectivity in Ge-As-Se supercooled liquids. Phys. Rev. B45:10091. 10.1103/PhysRevB.45.10091
5
BoolchandP.ThorpeM. F. (1994). Glass-forming tendency, percolation of rigidity, and onefold-coordinated atoms in covalent networks. Phys. Rev. B50, 10366–10368. 10.1103/PhysRevB.50.10366
6
BrowR. K. (1993). Nature of alumina in phosphate glass I: properties of sodium aluminophosphate glass. J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 76, 913–918. 10.1111/j.1151-2916.1993.tb05315.x
7
BrowR. K. (2000). Review: the structure of simple phosphate glasses. J. Non-Cryst. Sol.263–264, 1–28. 10.1016/S0022-3093(99)00620-1
8
BrowR. K.KirkpatrickR. J.TurnerG. L. (1993). Nature of alumina in phosphate glass II: structure of sodium aluminophosphate glass. J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 76, 919–928. 10.1111/j.1151-2916.1993.tb05316.x
9
ChristensenR.ByerJ.OlsonG.MartinS. W. (2012). The glass transition temperature of mixed glass former 0.35 Na2O+ 0.65 [xB2O3+(1– x) P2O5] glasses. J. Non-Cryst. Sol.358, 826–831. 10.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2011.12.068
10
ChryssikosG. D.DuffyJ. A.HutchinsonJ. M.IngramM. D.KamitsosE. I.PappinA. J. (1994). Lithium borate glasses: a quantitative study of strength and fragility. J. Non-Cryst. Sol.172, 378–383. 10.1016/0022-3093(94)90460-X
11
DebenedettiP. G.StillingerF. H. (2001). Supercooled liquids and the glass transition. Nature410, 259–267. 10.1038/35065704
12
DyreJ. C.MaassP.RolingB.SidebottomD. L. (2009). Fundamental questions relating to ion conduction in disordered solids. Rep. Prog. Phys.72:046501. 10.1088/0034-4885/72/4/046501
13
EisenbergA.FarbH.CoolL. G. (1966). Glass transitions in ionic polymers. J. Polymer Sci. A-24, 855–868. 10.1002/pol.1966.160040603
14
FabianR.Jr.SidebottomD. L. (2009). Dynamic light scattering in network-forming sodium ultraphosphate liquids near the glass transition. Phys. Rev. B80:064201. 10.1103/PhysRevB.80.064201
15
GaleenerF. L. (1982). Planar rings in vitreous silica. J. Non-Cryst. Sol.49, 53–62. 10.1016/0022-3093(82)90108-9
16
GaleenerF. L.LucovskyG.GeilsR. H. (1979). Raman and infrared spectra of vitreous As2O3. Phys. Rev. B19, 4251–4258. 10.1103/PhysRevB.19.4251
17
GaleenerF. L.MikkelsenJ. C.Jr.GeilsR.MosbyW. J. (1978). The relative Raman cross sections of vitreous SiO2, GeO2, B2O3, and P2O5. Appl. Phys. Lett.32, 34–36. 10.1063/1.89823
18
GiacomazziL.UmariP.PasquarelloA. (2005). Medium-range structural properties of vitreous germania obtained through first-principles analysis of vibrational spectra. Phys. Rev. Lett.98:075505. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.95.075505
19
GriscomD. L. (1978). Borate glass structure, in Borate Glasses: Structure, Properties and Applications, Vol. 12. eds PyeL. D.FrechetteV. D.KreidelN. J. (New York, NY: Materials Science Research), 11–138. 10.1007/978-1-4684-3357-9_2
20
GuptaP. K.MauroJ. C. (2009). Composition dependence of glass transition temperature and fragility. I. A topological model incorporating temperature-dependent constraints. J. Chem. Phys.130:094503. 10.1063/1.3077168
21
HalfpapB. L.LindsayS. M. (1986). Rigidity percolation in the germanium-arsenic-selenium alloy system. Phys. Rev. Lett.57:847. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.57.847
22
HeH.ThorpeM. F. (1985). Elastic properties of glasses. Phys. Rev. Lett.54:2107. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.54.2107
23
HendersonG. S. (2007). The germanate anomaly: what do we know?J. Non-Cryst. Sol.353, 1695–1704. 10.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2007.02.037
24
HendersonG. S.FleetM. E. (1991). The structure of glasses along the Na2O - GeO2 join. J. Non-Cryst. Sol.134, 259–269. 10.1016/0022-3093(91)90384-I
25
HoppeU.WalterG.KranoldR.StachelD. (2000). Structural specifics of phosphate glasses probed by diffraction methods: a review. J. Non-Cryst. Sol. I, 29–47. 10.1016/S0022-3093(99)00621-3
26
HudgensJ. J.BrowR. K.TallantD. R.MartinS. W. (1998). Raman spectroscopy study of the structure of lithium and sodium ultraphosphate glasses. J. Non-Cryst. Sol.223, 21–31. 10.1016/S0022-3093(97)00347-5
27
KalampouniasA. G.YannopoulosS. N.PapatheodorouG. N. (2006a). Temperature-induced structural changes in glassy, supercooled, and molten silica from 77 to 2150 K. J. Chem. Phys.124:014504. 10.1063/1.2136878
28
KalampouniasA. G.YannopoulosS. N.PapatheodorouG. N. (2006b). A high-temperature Raman spectroscopic investigation of the potassium tetrasilicate in glassy, supercooled, and liquid states. J. Chem. Phys.125:164502. 10.1063/1.2360275
29
Krogh-MoeJ. (1962). New evidence on the boron coordination in alkali borate glasses. Phys. Chem. Glasses3, 1–6.
30
LaughlinW. T.UhlmannD. R. (1972). Viscous flow in simple organic liquids. J. Phys. Chem.76, 2317–2325. 10.1021/j100660a023
31
MaekawaH.MaekawaT.KawamuraK.YokokawaT. (1991). The structural groups of alkali silicate glasses determined from 29Si MAS-NMR. J. Non-Cryst. Sol.127, 53–64. 10.1016/0022-3093(91)90400-Z
32
MalfaitW. J.HalterW. E.MorizetY.MeierB. H.VerelR. (2007). Structural control on bulk melt properties: Single and double quantum 29Si NMR spectroscopy on alkali-silicate glasses. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta71, 6002–6018. 10.1016/j.gca.2007.09.011
33
NascimentoM. L. F.AparicioC. (2007). Viscosity of strong and fragile glass-forming liquids investigated by means of principal component analysis. J. Phys. Chem. Sol.68, 104–110. 10.1016/j.jpcs.2006.09.013
34
NemilovS. V. (1966). A structural investigation of glasses in the B2O3-Na2O system by the viscosimetric Method. Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR, Neorg. Mater.2, 349–359.
35
NemilovS. V. (1970). Viscosity and structure of binary germanate glasses in the softening range. J. Appl. Chem. USSR43, 2644–2651.
36
NemilovS. V. (2007). Structural aspect of possible interrelation between fragility (length) of glass forming melts and Poisson's ratio of glasses. J. Non-Cryst. Sol.353, 4613–4632. 10.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2007.08.045
37
OldekopW. (1957). Theoretical discussion of the viscosity of glasses. Glastech. Ber.30, 8–14.
38
PhillipsJ. C. (1979). Topology of covalent non-crystalline solids I: short-range order in chalcogenide alloys. J. Non-Cryst. Sol.34, 153–181. 10.1016/0022-3093(79)90033-4
39
PooleJ. P. (1949). Low-temperature viscosity of alkali silicate glasses. J. Am. Ceram. Soc.32, 230–233. 10.1111/j.1151-2916.1949.tb18952.x
40
RieblingE. F. (1963). Structure of molten oxides. I. Viscosity of GeO2 and binary germanates containing Li2O, Na2O, K2O, and Rb2O. J. Chem. Phys. 39, 1889–1895. 10.1063/1.1734549
41
RodriguesB. P.WondraczekL. (2014). Cationic constraint effects in metaphosphate glasses. J. Chem. Phys.140:214501. 10.1063/1.4879559
42
ShelbyJ. E. (1974). Viscosity and thermal expansion of alkali germanate glasses. J. Am. Ceram. Soc.57, 436–439. 10.1111/j.1151-2916.1974.tb11376.x
43
SidebottomD. L. (2015). Fragility of network-forming glasses: a universal dependence on the topological connectivity. Phys. Rev. E92:062804. 10.1103/PhysRevE.92.062804
44
SidebottomD. L. (2019). The fragility of alkali silicate glass melts: part of a universal topological pattern. J. Non-Cryst. Sol.516, 53–66. 10.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2019.04.033
45
SidebottomD. L.ChangstromJ. R. (2008). Viscoelastic relaxation in molten phosphorus pentoxide using photon correlation spectroscopy. Phys. Rev. B77:020201. 10.1103/PhysRevB.77.020201
46
SidebottomD. L.RodenburgB. V.ChangstromJ. R. (2007). Connecting structure and dynamics in glass forming materials by photon correlation spectroscopy. Phys. Rev. B75:132201. 10.1103/PhysRevB.75.132201
47
SidebottomD. L.SchnellS. E. (2013). The role of intermediate range order in predicting fragility of network-forming liquids near the rigidity transition. Phys. Rev. B87:054202. 10.1103/PhysRevB.87.054202
48
SidebottomD. L.TranT. D.SchnellS. E. (2014). Building up a weaker network: the effect of intermediate range glass structure on liquid fragility. J. Non-Cryst. Sol.402, 16–20. 10.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2014.05.010
49
SidebottomD. L.VuD. (2016). Assessing the network connectivity of modifier ions in metaphosphate glass melts: a dynamic light scattering study of Na-Zn mixtures. J. Chem. Phys. 145:164503. 10.1063/1.4965815
50
StanleyH. E. (1971). Introduction to Phase Transitions and Critical Phenomena. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
51
StebbinsJ. F. (1987). Identification of multiple structural species in silicate glasses by 29Si NMR. Nature330, 465–467. 10.1038/330465a0
52
TatsumisagoM.HalfpapB. L.GreenJ. L.LindsayS. M.AngellC. A. (1990). Fragility of Ge-As-Se glass-forming liquids in relation to rigidity percolation, and the Kauzmann paradox. Phys. Rev. Lett.64:1549. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.64.1549
53
ThorpeM. F. (1983). Continuous deformations in random networks. J. Non-Cryst. Sol.57, 355–370. 10.1016/0022-3093(83)90424-6
54
TranT. D.SidebottomD. L. (2013). Glass-Forming dynamics of aluminophosphate melts studied by photon correlation spectroscopy. J. Am. Ceram. Soc.96, 2147–2154. 10.1111/jace.12444
55
WalrafenG. E.SamantaS. R.KrishnanP. N. (1980). Raman investigation of vitreous and molten boric oxide. J. Chem. Phys. 72, 113–120. 10.1063/1.438894
56
WangL. M.AngellC. A.RichertR. (2006). Fragility and thermodynamics in nonpolymeric glass-forming liquids. J. Chem. Phys. 125:074505. 10.1063/1.2244551
57
XiaY.ZhuW.LockhartM.AitkenB.SenS. (2019). Fragility and rheological behavior of metaphosphate liquids: Insights into their chain vs. network characters. J. Non-Cryst. Sol.514, 77–82. 10.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2019.03.036
58
YannopoulosS. N.PapatheodorouG. N.FytasG. (1999). Light-scattering study of slow and fast dynamics in a strong inorganic glass former. Phys. Rev. B60, 15131–15142. 10.1103/PhysRevB.60.15131
59
YoungmanR. E.ZwanzigerJ. W. (1996). Network modification in potassium borate glasses: structural studies with NMR and Raman spectroscopies. J. Phys. Chem.100, 16720–16728. 10.1021/jp961439
60
ZachariasenW. H. (1932). The atomic arrangement in glass. J. Am. Chem. Soc.543841–3851. 10.1021/ja01349a006
61
ZarzyckiJ. (1991). Glasses and the Vitreous State. Great Britain: Cambridge University Press.
Summary
Keywords
fragility, viscosity, networks, oxide glass, universality
Citation
Sidebottom DL (2019) Connecting Glass-Forming Fragility to Network Topology. Front. Mater. 6:144. doi: 10.3389/fmats.2019.00144
Received
17 April 2019
Accepted
07 June 2019
Published
25 June 2019
Volume
6 - 2019
Edited by
Matthieu Micoulaut, Sorbonne Universités, France
Reviewed by
Sabyasachi Sen, University of California, Davis, United States; Yann Gueguen, University of Rennes 1, France
Updates

Check for updates
Copyright
© 2019 Sidebottom.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: David L. Sidebottom sidebottom@creighton.edu
This article was submitted to Glass Science, a section of the journal Frontiers in Materials
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.