Barlow Packings All Have Maximum Packing Fraction: Why it is so Hard to Find Barlow Structures Other than fcc or hcp?
Abstract
We apply lattice theory to periodic Barlow packings (X1X2… XN)∞ where Xi∈{A,B,C} and Xi≠ Xi+1, formed by stacking two-dimensional hexagonal close-packed layers, interacting via generalized (n,m)-Lennard-Jones potentials. The cohesive energies of all packings lie between those of hexagonal close-packed (hcp, (AB)) and face-centered cubic (fcc, (ABC)) structure and vary almost linearly with the fcc stacking fraction. The equilibrium lattice constant, bulk modulus, Einstein frequency, and vibrational entropy show similarly near-linear trends. For the standard (12,6) potential, fcc has the highest vibrational entropy and hcp the lowest, with other Barlow packings falling between them, consistent with previous sticky-hard-sphere Monte Carlo simulations and supported by phonon dispersion calculations. These trends imply an approximately linear dependence of free energy on fcc stacking fraction, with hcp and fcc as endpoints. This provides a simple thermodynamic explanation for why intermediate Barlow stackings are rare in nature: near-linearity offers little driving force to favor them. Exceptions may arise when hcp and fcc are nearly degenerate in energy or when many-body interactions, absent from the present model, favor another stacking. Density-functional calculations including dispersion forces for argon Barlow packings with periods N=2,3,4, and $12$ corroborate the predicted near-linear cohesive energy dependence.
Related
- The maximum packing fraction of disordered bidisperse discs: theory and predictions
- Disentangling universality from shape in Platonic granular packings
- Basin-volume distributions in monodisperse particle packings -- the soul of memory
- Proximity to Jamming Governs Acoustic Attenuation in Damped Packings
- Denser-than-crystalline disordered polydisperse ellipse packings
BibTeX
@misc{roblesnavarro2026barlow,
title = {{Barlow Packings All Have Maximum Packing Fraction: Why it is so Hard to Find Barlow Structures Other than fcc or hcp?}},
author = {Andres Robles-Navarro and Shaun Cooper and Alex Travesset and Peter Schwerdtfeger},
howpublished = {arXiv},
year = {2026},
month = nov,
doi = {10.48550/arxiv.2611.07197},
eprint = {2611.07197},
archivePrefix = {arXiv},
url = {https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.07197},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - UNPB
TI - Barlow Packings All Have Maximum Packing Fraction: Why it is so Hard to Find Barlow Structures Other than fcc or hcp?
AU - Andres Robles-Navarro
AU - Shaun Cooper
AU - Alex Travesset
AU - Peter Schwerdtfeger
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/11/04
PB - arXiv
DO - 10.48550/arxiv.2611.07197
UR - https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.07197
AB - We apply lattice theory to periodic Barlow packings (X_1X_2… X_N)_∞ where X_i∈{A,B,C} and X_i≠ X_i+1, formed by stacking two-dimensional hexagonal close-packed layers, interacting via generalized (n,m)-Lennard-Jones potentials. The cohesive energies of all packings lie between those of hexagonal close-packed (hcp, (AB)) and face-centered cubic (fcc, (ABC)) structure and vary almost linearly with the fcc stacking fraction. The equilibrium lattice constant, bulk modulus, Einstein frequency, and vibrational entropy show similarly near-linear trends. For the standard (12,6) potential, fcc has the highest vibrational entropy and hcp the lowest, with other Barlow packings falling between them, consistent with previous sticky-hard-sphere Monte Carlo simulations and supported by phonon dispersion calculations. These trends imply an approximately linear dependence of free energy on fcc stacking fraction, with hcp and fcc as endpoints. This provides a simple thermodynamic explanation for why intermediate Barlow stackings are rare in nature: near-linearity offers little driving force to favor them. Exceptions may arise when hcp and fcc are nearly degenerate in energy or when many-body interactions, absent from the present model, favor another stacking. Density-functional calculations including dispersion forces for argon Barlow packings with periods N=2,3,4, and $12$ corroborate the predicted near-linear cohesive energy dependence.
ER -