Examination of the atypical electrophoretic mobility behavior of charged colloids in the low salt region using the O’Brian-White theory
Abstract
Polystyrene microspheres having roughly the same size but different negative surface charge densities were prepared by emulsion polymerization. The amount of sulfate groups on the surface of the particles was controlled by variation of the amount and the decomposition rate of the initiator used, potassium, persulfate. After the cleaning process involving dialysis and extensive ultrafiltration the surface-charge density of the samples was determined and their electrokinetic behavior was studied.
A simple model based on the Gouy-Chapman theory and the O’Brian-White approach allows the calculation of the dependence of the electrophoretic mobility on salt concentration. Comparison of the theoretical and experimental curves showed that they were in good agreement in a number of qualitative features. Moreover, the model revealed that a monotonously increasing zeta potential with falling electrolyte concentration results in a mobility maximum, and that this so-called atypical behavior is in accordance with the standard electrokinetic theory. No ion adsorption mechanism or the existence of a charged hairy layer, current standard explanations for this anomality, had to be invoked.
Key words
Polystyrene latices electrophoretic mobility zeta potentialList of symbols
- c
electrolyte concentration
- D
dielectric permittivity of the continuous phase
- ɛ0
dielectric vacuum permittivity
- η
viscosity of the continuous phase
- k
reciprocal of the double-layer thickness
- Λ0
limit equivalence conductance
- μ
electrophoretic mobility
- Ψ
diffuse layer potential
- R
gas constant
- σ
surface-charge density
- T
absolute temperature
- z
valency of ions
- ζ
electrokinetic potential
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- 1.Bastos D, de las Nieves FJ (1993) Colloid Polym Sci 271:860–867CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 2.de las Nieves FJ, Daniels ES, El-Aasser MS (1991) Colloids and Surfaces 60: 107–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 3.Hidalgo-Alvarez R, Martin A, Fernandez A, Bastos D, Martinez F, de las Nieves FJ (1996) Adv Colloid Interface Sci 67:1–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 4.Chow RS, Takamura KJ (1988) Colloid Interface Sci 125:226–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 5.Verdegan BM, Anderson MA (1993) J Colloid Interface Sci 158:372–381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.Dukhin SS, Derjaguin BV (1974) In: Matijevic (ed) Surface and Colloid Science. Vol 7, Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- 7.Zukoski CF, Saville DA (1986) J Colloid Interface Sci 114:32–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.Mangelsdorf CS, White L (1990) J Chem Soc Farad Trans 86:2859–2870CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.Ottewill RH, Shaw JN (1966) Kolloid ZZ Polym 215:161–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.Hunter RJ (1981) In: Ottewill RH, Rowel RI (eds) Zeta Potential in Colloid Science. Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- 11.O’Brian RW, White LR (1978) J Chem Soc Faraday Trans 2 74:1607–1626Google Scholar
- 12.Fernandez Barbero A, Martinez Garcia R, Cabrezizo Vilchez MA, Hidalgo-Alvarez R (1994) Colloids Surfaces A 92:121–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.Bastos D, de las Nieves FJ (1993) Colloid Polym Sci 271:860–867CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.Gittings MR, Saville DA (1995) Langmuir 11:798–800CrossRefGoogle Scholar