Page 1 of 12

European Journal of Applied Sciences – Vol. 13, No. 02

Publication Date: April 25, 2025

DOI:10.14738/aivp.1302.18168.

Hosino, M. (2025). Nematic Phase Transitions in an Assembly of Molecules with a Bent Core. European Journal of Applied Sciences,

Vol - 13(02). 153-164.

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

Nematic Phase Transitions in an Assembly of Molecules with a

Bent Core

Masahito Hosino

Independent researcher, Norikura 1-1303-2,

Midori-ku, Nagoya 458-0004, Japan

ABSTRACT

Approximately 20 years ago, Hosino and Nakano [1] investigated the phase

transitions in an assembly of biaxial molecules that interact via dispersion forces,

discovering the existence of one uniaxial and two biaxial nematic phases and

disconematic phase in the assembly. Follow-up studies obtained valuable results on

the phase transitions in an assembly of biaxial molecules with hard cores [2],

chirality [3, 4], and flexibility [5] based on the initially proposed method [1]. In this

study, the phase transitions in the assembly of molecules with a bent core were

investigated using the same method, demonstrating the occurrence of sequence of

transitions between various nematic phases in the system.

Keyword: bent-core molecules, temperature dependence of anisotropic parameters,

sequence of transitions between nematic phases

INTRODUCTION

Approximately 20 years ago, Hosino and Nakano [1] investigated the phase transitions in an

assembly of biaxial molecules that interact via dispersion forces, thereby noting the existence

of a uniaxial and two biaxial nematic phases and a disconematic phase.

In addition, the phase diagram revealed sequence of transitions between these phases at points

where anisotropy parameters εx and εy, which represent the anisotropy in the x and y directions

of a molecule toward the z direction, respectively, are limited. As such, subsequent studies

proposed the use of the initially proposed the analytical method [1] to investigate the phase

transitions in an assembly of biaxial molecules with hard cores [2], and a system of molecules

with a chiral plane [3, 4]. These investigations revealed the similar phase transition diagrams

in a system of molecules with hard cores and molecules interacting via dispersion forces. In

addition, the mechanism for the chiral phases in a molecular system with chiral plane was

elucidated. Recently, the method obtained by Hosino and Nakano [1] was used to analyze the

phase transitions in an assembly of flexible molecules [5]. Thus, the proposed analytical method

was demonstrated to be a useful and powerful tool for investigating biaxial liquid crystals.

Several experimental and theoretical works have focused on bent liquid crystalline molecules

over the past decades [6]. It is noticed that there are two types in regard of bent liquid

crystalline molecule. One is a molecule having a bent core with a wing at each side of its core.

Another one is dimers linked by flexible chain. Both types of molecule bend depending on

temperature and/or a density of molecules. However, different model has to be proposed for

each type of molecule, respectively. The molecular model of dimers linked by flexible chain was

already proposed and the dependence of nematic transitions on molecular shape and/or

Page 2 of 12

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom 154

European Journal of Applied Sciences (EJAS) Vol. 13, Issue 02, April-2025

anisotropy of interaction was elucidated [7, 8]. In those studies, the dependence of molecular

shape and/or anisotropy of interaction on temperature is induced by the internal rotation

around the C―C bond in the alkyl chain when transforming between the gauche and trans states

[9, 10]. However, another type bent liquid crystalline molecule can’t give rise to such an internal

rotation as dimers linked by flexible chain. So then, molecular model of biaxial molecule with

bent core, which has a mechanism giving the dependence of molecular shape and/or anisotropy

of interaction on temperature, is proposed in present study. Molecular model in present study

can be expanded to the one of dimers linked by flexible chain, and such an expanded model

elucidates nematic transitions more clearly than the studies carried out until now, because the

dependence of anisotropy parameters εx and εy on temperature can be obtained accurately,

and the proposed method described in previous work [5] elucidates more clearly nematic

transitions basing on phase diagram on these anisotropy parameters plane. Furthermore, in

such an expanded model, molecular shapes including chiral one are explicitly defined

depending on temperature. This fact is very important to elucidate phase transitions among

various smectic phases as SmA, SmC, and SmC* phases. The interaction potential between a pair

of molecules based on previously developed analytical methods [1―5] and one of a system of

biaxial molecules with a bent core were similar, whereby, εx and εy are functions of θB as

follows:

εx = cos(θB⁄2)⁄sin(θB⁄2) , εy = 0. (1)

As the dependence of θB on the temperature could be estimated, (as described in Section 2), the

previously proposed approach [5] elucidated the phase transition of the assembly of molecules

with a bent core.

INTRAMOLECULAR INTERACTION AND DEPENDENCE OF θB ON TEMPERATURE

As an example, the molecule of the mesogenic compound 4,6-dichloro-1,3-phenylene bis [4-(4-

n-alkyloxy-3-fluoro-phenyliminomethyl) benzoate] [Fig.1(a) and 1(b)] was considered to be a

biaxial molecule with a bent core. The θB value of this molecule was limited to the range of 2π/3

to π. The upper limit of θB was attributed to the repulsion force between the chlorine

substituent on the phenylene group and oxygen atom of carboxyl group, whereas lower limit of

θB, was ascribed the structure of the phenylene group. In addition, dipoles induced in the

benzoate groups of either side of the molecular core and both intra-molecular and inter- molecular interactions were induced between the pairs of induced dipoles. The sides of the

molecule are denoted as sides A and B (Fig. 1(b)).

With respect to the intramolecular interaction, the pseudopotential for limiting θB is introduced

as

Upseu(cosθB) =

Upseu

Cl

cos (θB)+1

Upseu

0

cos (θB)+1/2

(2)

Although other functions of cos(θB) can be introduced as the pseudopotential for the limiting

on θB, Eq. (2) was conveniently adopted in this work. The intramolecular interaction caused by

the induced dipoles at both sides of the core is

Page 3 of 12

155

Hosino, M. (2025). Nematic Phase Transitions in an Assembly of Molecules with a Bent Core. European Journal of Applied Sciences, Vol - 13(02).

153-164.

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/aivp.1302.18168.

Udis(cosθB

) = −

Udis

0

|r⃗⃗⃗AB⃗⃗⃗⃗⃗ |

2n

(cosθB

)

2 = −

Udis

0

(2r0

)2n

(cosθB)

2

(sin(θB⁄2))

2n = −

Udis

0

(2r0

)2n

(cosθB)

2

(1−cosθB)n

(3)

where r⃗⃗AB⃗⃗⃗ is the distance between the induced dipoles on sides A and B and r0 is the distance

between the center of the molecule and point at which the dipole was induced. Eq. (3) was

introduced as an application of Eq. (9) in Ref. [1].

The average of quantities Q depending on cosθB is

〈Q(cosθB)〉cosθB =

∫ Q(cosθB)P(cosθB)d(cosθB)

∫P(cosθB)d(cosθB)

(4)

where P(cosθB) is a weight function with respect to cosθB, calculated as

P(cosθB) = P0exp (−

Upseu(cosθB)

Udis

̅̅̅0̅̅̅ − βUdis(cosθB)) . (5)

In Eq. (5), Upseu(cosθB) is normalized with Udis

̅̅̅0̅̅ ≡ Udis

0

(2r0

)

2n ⁄ , instead of kBT, because it is

largely independent of the temperature and imposes the limitation on cosθB. Meanwhile,

Udis(cosθB) was normalized with kBT because the interaction represented with this potential

highly depends on the temperature. Although the average cosθB, denoted as cosθB

av, could be

obtained using Eq. (4), such a calculation is difficult. Therefore, a simpler method was proposed

to obtain cosθB

av. As P(cosθB) reaches its maximum value at cosθB

av

, ∂P(cosθB)⁄∂(cosθB) = 0

:thus, following equation is deduced as

Upseu

Cl Udis

̅̅̅0̅̅̅ ⁄

(cosθB

av+1)

2 +

Upseu

O Udis

̅̅̅0̅̅̅ ⁄

(cosθB

av+1/2)

2 =

2Udis

̅̅̅0̅̅̅

kBT

2cosθB

av+(2+n)(cosθB

av)

2

(1−cosθB

av)

n+1 . (6)

Eq. (6) can be solved graphically as shown in Fig. 2(a). First, curve lL was drawn by plotting the

values on the left-hand sides of Eq. (6) on the x-y plane for each of cosθB value. lL was drawn

within the cosθB range from -1/2 to -1. Similarly, lR was drawn by plotting the values of the

right-hand side of Eq. (6) on the same plane for each cosθB value.

The solution of Eq. (6) is given as the intersection of lL and lR. lL intersects the x-axis at cosθB

0

where the value of the pseudopotential is minimized. Moreover, the curve lL becomes infinitely

monotonic and asymptotic near cosθB = ― 1⁄2 as cosθB increases from cosθB

0

to -1/2. As

cosθB decreases from cosθB

0

to -1, lL becomes infinitely monotonic and asymptotic near

cosθB = ― 1. In contrast, lR intersects the x-axis at cosθB = 0 and-2/(n+2), which remains

below the x-axis in the cosθB region from 0 to -2/(n+2). Above the x-axis, lR exists as an

approximately straight line. When cosθB 〈- 2/(n+2), lR has a slightly upward convex.

Hereafter, n=3, in which -2/(2+n) is equal to -0.4, was assumed. When the temperature

decreased to 0, lR became asymptotic to the cosθB = -0.4. when the temperature increased

from 0 to infinity, lR became asymptotic to the x-axis.

Page 4 of 12

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom 156

European Journal of Applied Sciences (EJAS) Vol. 13, Issue 02, April-2025

Therefore, an intersection always exists between the curves for all temperatures. As the

temperature decreased to 0, cosθB increased to -1/2 and εx increased to √3

3

≈ 0.5774. As the

temperature increased from 0 to infinity, cosθB decreased to cosθB

0

and εx decreased to εx

0

, as

defined in

εx

0 = √(1 + cosθB

0

) (1 − cosθB

0 ⁄ ) . (7)

Using parameter u defined as (Upseu

Cl Upseu

O ⁄ )

1

2

, cosθB

0

and εx

0

are expressed as

cosθB

0 = −

1

2

u+2

u+1

, (8)

εx

0 = (

1−1⁄(1+u)

3+1⁄(1+u)

)

1

2

. (9)

Overall, εx decreases from 0.5574 to εx

0

, as the temperature increases from 0 to infinity,

determining the dependence of εx on temperature. Interestingly, the dependency of εx on

temperature depends on u, which represents the intramolecular interactions as Upseu

Cl and

Upseu

O [Fig. 2(b)]. The dependence of εx on T̅ is depicted in εx

(T̅: εx

0

) curve, where T̅ is the

normalized temperature T̅ = kBT 2Udis

̅̅̅0̅̅ ⁄ . These results of the dependence of θB on

temperature derived in this section are the reasonable and consistent with the experimental

results [10]. The results obtained in this section are discussed in Section 3.

INTERMOLECULAR INTERACTION

Subsequently, the intermolecular interaction potential between the I- and J-th molecules was

investigated, as follows:

ФIJ(RIJ) = Ф(p A

(I), p A

(J)) + Ф(p A

(I), p B(J)) + Ф(p B(I), p A

(J)) + Ф(p B(I), p B(J)) (10)

where p A

(I) is the dipole induced in the group on A side of the I-th molecule, and

Ф(p A

(I), p A

(J)) is the potential of the interaction between p A

(I) and p A

(J). p A

(I) and p B(I) are

expressed in the molecular coordinate system as(|p A

(I)|cos(θB⁄2), 0, |p A

(I)|sin(θB⁄2)) and

( |p B(I)|cos(θB⁄2), 0, −|p B(I)|sin(θB⁄2)), respectively. The direction of the long axis of the

molecule and direction of vector r⃗A + r⃗⃗⃗B are defined as the z and x directions of the molecular

coordinate system, respectively. Thus, the bent molecule considered in this has a biaxial shape

with a direction normal to the molecular plane, defined as the y direction of the molecular

coordinate system. As the intermolecular potential for the biaxial molecules, particularly, the

potential for interacting via dispersion forces was introduced in a previous work [1], the terms

in Eq. (10) can be written as follows:

Ф(p A

(I), p A

(J)) = Фr(|R⃗

IJ + r A

(J) − r A

(I)|) (sin (

θB

2

))

4

f(εx

) , (11)

Page 5 of 12

157

Hosino, M. (2025). Nematic Phase Transitions in an Assembly of Molecules with a Bent Core. European Journal of Applied Sciences, Vol - 13(02).

153-164.

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/aivp.1302.18168.

Ф(p A

(I), p B(J)) = Фr(|R⃗

IJ + r B(J) − r A

(I)|) (sin (

θB

2

))

4

f(εx

) , (12)

Ф(p B(I), p A

(J)) = Фr (|R⃗

IJ + r A

(J) − r B(I)|) (sin (

θB

2

))

4

f(εx

) , (13)

Ф(p B(I), p B(J)) = Фr (|R⃗

IJ| + r B(J) − r B(I)) (sin (

θB

2

))

4

f(εx

) , (14)

where R⃗

IJ ≡ R⃗

J − R⃗

I

, that is the vector connecting the center of the I- and J-th molecules; r A

and r B are the vectors connecting the center of the molecule and positions of the induced dipole

in the group on sides A and B, respectively; and f(εx

) is defined as

f(εx

) = ∑ Q11

αβ(I)

α,β=x,y,z

Q11

αβ(J) +

(εx

)

2

2 − (εx

)

2 ∑ [Q11

αβ(I)R

αβ(J) + Q11

αβ(J)R

αβ(I) ]

α,β=x,y,z

+

(

(εx)

2

2−(εx)2

)

2

∑ R

αβ(I)R

αβ(J) α,β=x,y,z

, (15)

where Q11

αβ(I) and R

αβ(I) are defined as follows. First, the unit vector a 1

(I) was defined to

extend along the long molecular axis; the unit vector a 2

(I) was defined to extend along the

vector r⃗A + r⃗⃗⃗B ; and a 3

(I) = a 1

(I) × a 2

(I) was established to be normal to the molecular

plane. Table I presents the relationship between the directions of the orthogonal coordinate

system (ξ,η,ζ) in the molecular frame and orthogonal coordinate system (x, y, z) of the

laboratory frame with cosines between two coordinate systems shown in terms of the Eulerian

angles (θI

,φI

, ψI) (Fig. 3). Second, according to Priest and Lubensky [11], the tensors in Eq. (15)

are defined as

Qpq

ij (I) = ap

i

(I)aq

j

(I) −

δpq δij

3

(p, q = 1,2,3; i, j = x,y,z) (16)

R

αβ(I) ≡ Q22

αβ(I) − Q33

αβ(I). (17)

In Eq. (16), ap

i

(I) denotes the i-th orthogonal component of unit vector a p

(I) parallel to the p- th principal axis of the I-th molecule, andδpq and δij are the Kronecker’s delta functions.

ФIJ(RIJ) in Eq. (10) can be written as

ФIJ(RIJ) = 4 (sin (

θB

2

))

4

Фr(|R⃗

IJ|)f(εx

) . (18)

The terms r A

(J) − r A

(I) , r B(J) − r A

(I) , r A

(J) − r B(I) , and r B(J) − r B(I) in Eqs. (11―14) are

neglected because they do not affect the orientational ordering in the nematic phase. However,

they are considered to affect the translational ordering in the smectic phase, causing the

smectic A-to-smectic C phase transition. This problem is discussed in detail in Section 5. The