Skip to main content

Full text of "Equation of state of charged colloidal suspensions and its dependence on the thermodynamic route"

See other formats


Equation of state of charged colloidal suspensions and its dependence on the 

thermodynamic route 



o 

(N 






O 

a 

B 

o 

> 

in 

rn 

O 



X 



Thiago E. Colla, Alexandre P. dos Santos, and Yan Levin 
Instituto de Fisica, Universidade Fedaral do Rio Grande do Sul, 
CP 15051, 91501-970 Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil. 

The thermodynamic properties of highly charged colloidal suspensions in contact with a salt 
reservoir are investigated in the framework of the Renormalized Jellium Model (RJM) . It is found 
that the equation of state is very sensitive to the particular thermodynamic route used to obtain 
it. Specifically, the osmotic pressure calculated within the RJM using the contact value theorem 
can be very different from the pressure calculated using the Kirkwood-BufF fluctuation relations. 
On the other hand, Monte Carlo (MC) simulations show that both the effective pair potentials 
and the correlation functions are accurately predicted by the RJM. It is suggested that the lack of 
self-consistency in the thermodynamics of the RJM is a result of neglected electrostatic correlations 
between the counterions and colons. 

PACS numbers: 



I. INTRODUCTION 

In spite of the fundamental importance — both prac- 
tical and theoretical — the thermodynamic properties of 
charged colloidal suspensions are far from understood^"— . 
Even such basic question as the existence of a liquid-gas 
phase transition in these systems still remains a topic 
of debate^"—. The difRculty in describing the thermody- 
namics of charged colloidal suspensions is a consequence 
of both size and charge asymmetry between the different 
components of the system and the long-range nature of 
the Coulomb interactio n^i^i^° . To simplify the theoretical 
description one often uses the, so-called. Primitive Model 
(PM). In this model all charged components — colloidal 
particles, colons, and counterions — are treated explic- 
itly, while the solvent — usually an aqueous medium — 
is considered as a dielectric continuum. The interactions 
between the colloidal particles, the counterions, and the 
colons have both Coulomb and hard-core components. 
Image effects resulting from the dielectric discontinuities 
across the particle surface are usually neglected at the 
lowest order of approximation. 

Colloidal suspensions often contain salt. For theoret- 



ical description it is, therefore, convenient to work in a 
semi-grand-canonical ensemble in which the number of 
colloidal particles is fixed, while the concentration of salt 
is controlled by an externally imposed chemical potential. 
Physically this can be realized by separating the suspen- 
sion from a salt reservoir by a semi-permeable membrane 
transparent only to microionsiiii^. 

The large asymmetry between the colloidal particles 
and the microions, forces us to employ different approx- 
imations to account for the correlations among the var- 
ious components of suspension. The correlations among 
the microions can be described by a linear Debyc-Hiickel 
(DH) like theory. For dilute colloidal suspensions these 
correlations arc usually negligible. On the other hand, to 
account for strong colloid-ion and colloid-colloid interac- 
tions requires a full non-linear theory. One approach that 
has proven to be very useful for describing the non-linear 
correlations between the colloidal particles and the coun- 
terions is the concept of charge rcnormalizatioE>i*i^'i^. 
The idea is that strong electrostatic attraction between 
the colloidal particles and their counterions will lead 
to accumulation of counterions near the colloidal sur- 



face. These countcrions can be considered to be "con- 
densed" (strongly bound) to the coUoidal particle, ef- 
fectively renornializing its bare charge. For strongly 
charged colloidal particles the renormalized charge will, 
in general, be much smaller in magnitude than the bare 
chargoH. 

An alternative, but equivalent way of modeling col- 
loidal suspensions is to explicitly trace out the microion 
degrees of freedom in a semi-grand-canonical partition 
functioni^. This way the multi-component colloidal sus- 
pension is mapped onto an equivalent one-component 
system in which only the colloidal particles are explicit. 
This coarse-graining procedure defines the, so-called. 
One Component Model (OCM). In this approach, all 
the contributions coming from the traced-out microions 
arc implicit in the effective interactions between the col- 
loidal particlesi^. The apparent simplification over the 
original problem is only formal, since the effective inter- 
action between the colloidal particles now has a many- 
body character—""— and is state-dependen t ^^'^^ , further 
complicating the thermodynamic calculationsiSri^. 

For weakly charged colloidal particles, the effective 
interaction potential in the OCM takes a particularly 
simple form known as the Derjaguin-Landau-Overbeek- 
Verwey (DLVO) pair potential^^i^^. 



Pu{r) = \i 



Ze'' 



1 + Kfl 



2 _-« 



(1) 



where a and —Zq are the colloidal radius and charge, re- 
spectively. The inverse Debye screening length is k^ = 
y''4:TrXB{p+ + P-), where p+ and /?_ are the mean con- 
centrations of the monovalent counterions and colons in- 
side the suspension, and A^ = Pq^ /e is the Bjerrum 
length. Due to the global charge neutrality, p+ — p^ — 
Z p — 0, where p is the concentration of colloidal parti- 
cles. 

For strongly charged colloidal particles, the linear 
DLVO theory is not sufficient to describe the pairwise 
interactions. The non-linear effects, however, can be in- 
cluded into DLVO potential by explicitly accounting for 



the counterion condensation. This can be achieved by re- 
placing the bare colloidal charge in Eq. ([1]) by the renor- 
malized effective charge Z -^ Z^jj. The charge renor- 
malization accounts for the strong non-linear particle- 
counterion correlations near the colloidal surfaces. 

Besides the DLVO pair potential, the effective colloidal 
interactions in the OCM formalism also have the, so- 
called, volume terms which depend on colloidal density, 
but not on colloidal coordinates^. The volume terms 
were argued to play important role for the thermodynam- 
ics of charged colloidal suspension a^^i^^'^^ . For structural 
properties of the OCM, however, these terms do not play 
any role, since they do not depend on colloidal coordi- 
nates. This point must be considered with special care 
when one wants to study colloidal thermodynamics us- 
ing the 0CMi^i2£i^. In fact, there are some approaches 
that describe the effective interaction by simply defin- 
ing a pair potential which reproduces the correct colloid- 
colloid correlations in using the OCM. Clearly, such ap- 
proaches must loose some thermodynamic informations 
contained in the volume terms. 

The question of whether the effective potential models 
based purely on pair interactions arc sufficient to study 
the thermodynamics of a fully multi-component system is 
still under discussio n^^'^^ . In the case of charged colloidal 
systems, the problem is even more subtle, since such sys- 
tems must obey additional constraints i. e. global electro- 
neutrality and the well-known Stillinger-Lovett moment 
conditional^. As a consequence, many theoretical tools 
originally designed for unconstrained systems have to 
be reformulated before they can be applied to charged 
systems2L2^. 

The aim of this work is to address some thermody- 
namic inconsistencies which arise when different routes 
are used to calculate the thermodynamic functions of 
charged colloidal suspensions. To this end, we will use the 
Renormalized Jellium Model (RJM), from which both 
the renormalized charge and the osmotic pressure can be 
easily calculate d^^i"^" . From the renormalized charge, the 



effective pair potential — and hence the cohoid-coUoid 
pair correlation functions — can be obtained using the 
OCM Ornstein-Zernike (OZ) equationSl with an appro- 
priate closure. Knowing the correlations, it is possi- 
ble to calculate the osmotic compressibility using the 
Kirkwood-BufF (KB) fluctuation theorj«22. In this work 
we will compare the osmotic compressibilities of the RJM 
calculated using both the contact theorem and the KB 
fluctuation relations. 

The paper is organized as follows. In section II we 
will briefly review the theoretical methods used for the 
thermodynamic investigations — the RJM, the Donnan 
Equilibrium, and the Kirkwood-BufF relations. In sec- 
tion III, we will briefly discuss the simulation techniques 
employed in this study. The results will be presented in 
section IV, and conclusions, discussion, and suggestions 
for the future investigations will be given in section V. 

II. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND 

A. The Renormalized Jellium Model 

The RJM is a model that allows one to calculate the 
effective charge of colloidal particles and the thermody- 
namic properties of colloidal suspensions based on the 
mean-field Poisson-Boltzmann-like (PB) equation. RJM 
is known to be very accurate for salt-free colloidal sus- 
pensions with monovalent counterions. In contrast to the 
traditional Cell Model (CM), where a lattice-like struc- 
ture is assumed for colloidal particles, in the RJM the 
colloidal correlations are modeled by a uniform neutral- 
izing background. The major conceptual advantage of 
the RJM over the CM is that the pair potential Eq. ([T]) 
is exact within the RJM formalism, while for CM there is 
no pairwise interaction between the colloidal particles22. 
Thus, the effective charges calculated using CM have no 
clear connection with the DLVO potential. Recently, 
the RJM was successfully extended to incorporate inter- 
colloidal correlation9^2i2i, the multivalent counterions^^. 



and colloidal polydispersity^^. 

In the RJM, one colloidal particle of charge —Z^areq 
and radius a is fixed at the origin of the coordinate sys- 
tem. The distribution of free (uncondensed) ions around 
this particle is assumed to follow the Boltzmann distri- 
bution, p±{r) — p±e^^'^'^^^\ where p± are the counte- 
rion and colon mean densities, and ^(r) is the mean 
electrostatic potential. The remaining colloidal parti- 
cles, along with their condensed counterions, are taken 
to provide a uniform neutralizing background of charge 
density —Zej/qp- The reduced mean electrostatic poten- 
tial 0(r) — f3qil){r) then satisfies the Poisson-Boltzmann- 
Jellium (PBJ) equation: 

V2(/,(r) = -47rAB (p+e-^^'^^ - p^e^^"-^ - Z^ffp) . (2) 

This equation can be numerically solved with the bound- 



ary conditions 



oo) -^ and 



d<j){r 



Zhare^E 



dr !'■=" 

The first condition defines the zero of the electrostatic 
potential in the bulk of suspension, while the second one 
determines the electric field at the colloidal surface using 
the Gauss law. 

Far from the central colloidal particle — the region 
where the electrostatic potential is weak — the PBJ 
equation can be linearized, resulting in the following long- 
distance behavior: 

Z/pffABS e 



Hr) 



(1 + Ka) r 



(3) 



where k = ^47rAs(/9+ +p_) = ^/4^^XB(2p^+Z^ p) is 
the effective screening length, and where we have used 
the global charge neutrality condition pj^— p^ — P^eff = 
0. Note that in the far-field, the bare charge Zbare is 
replaced by the renormalized charge Z^ff, reflecting the 
nonlinear correlations at the colloidal surface. 

For a given salt and colloidal concentrations, p_ and p, 
respectively, the effective charge is calculated by match- 
ing the numerical solution of Eq. ([2]) with the linearized 
potential Eq. ([3]), in the far- field. Since within the 
RJM the background charge arises from the smeared-out 
charge of colloidal particles and their condensed coun- 
terions. the self-consistency requires that the effective 



colloidal charge must be the same as the charge of the 
miiform neutralizing background. This procedure can be 
easily implemented numericallj*^. Suppose that we know 
Zeff, then from Eq. ^ we will also know the potential 
and the electric field in the far-field region. We can then 
integrate the PBJ equation using a standard Rounge- 
Kutta algorithm to obtain the electrostatic potential all 
the way up to the colloidal surface. The corresponding 
bare colloidal charge Z^are is obtained using the Gauss 
low at the colloidal surface. In reality, of course, one 
wants to calculate the effective charge for a given bare 
charge. This can be done by varying Z^ff until the de- 
sired Zfjare IS found. lu practicc, this can be easily imple- 
mented numerically by incorporating a Newton-Raphson 
root-finding subroutine in the PBJ solver. 

The osmotic pressure within the RJM is given by 



/3P = /?+ + p_, 



(4) 



where p± are the bulk concentrations of free colons and 
counterions. In spite of its apparent simplicity, this ideal- 
gas-like equation of state requires a knowledge of nii- 
croion concentrations in the far-field which, in turn, de- 
pend on the charge rcnormalization and osmotic equilib- 
rium with the salt reservoir. We should also note that 
unlike for CM, for which the contact value theorem is an 
exact statemenli^i^ai^-ii, Eq. (g]) of the RJM is only 
valid in the mean-field approximation. We will later ar- 
gue that the failure to properly account for ionic corre- 
lations leads to thermodynamics inconsistencies in the 
RJM. 

B. The Donnan Equilibrium 

In this work we will consider a colloidal suspension in 
contact with a salt reservoir. The system is separated 
from the reservoir by a semi-permeable membrane which 
allows for a free flux of microions. The ionic concen- 
tration inside the suspension will then be determined by 
the osmotic equilibrium with the salt reservoir. Contrary 



to uncharged systems, for which the osmotic equilibrium 
simply results in a solvent flow from a solute poor to a so- 
lute reach region, the osmotic equilibrium in charged sys- 
tems is also constrained by the overall charge neutrality 
of the system. Physically, this is refiected in the appear- 
ance of a potential difference across the semi-permeable 
membrane which controls the overall build up of charge 
in the systeroiiii^. This potential difference is known 
as the Donnan potential^. From a theoretical point of 
view, it can also be thought of as a Lagrange multiplier 
used to enforce the charge neutrality of the systemMii^. 
In equilibrium, the ionic electrochemical potentials in- 
side the system must be equal to the ones in the salt 
reservoir. Neglecting the electrostatic correlations be- 
tween the microions, the ionic concentrations in the bulk 
and reservoir are related by p± = psC^'^" , where ps is 
the salt concentration in the reservoir, and 0d is the adi- 
mensional Donnan potential. Using the charge neutrality 
condition for free ions, /9+ — p_ — pZ^jf = 0, the Donnan 
potential can be eliminated to yield the bulk concentra- 
tions of free (uncondensed) microions: 



P± = 



i (^^{pZefff + {2psf ± ZeffP^ . (5) 



This expression can be used, together with the equa- 
tion of state Eq. ^, to write the osmotic pressure (311 



l3U = l3P~2p,=p+ ^{pZefff + {2psY - 2ps. (6) 

where we have also added the colloidal ideal gas con- 
tribution /3Pc = p. It is important to stress that the 
above expression for the osmotic pressure completely ig- 
nore the microion correlations. This can be justified as 
long as the concentration of colons in the bulk is very 
low. The colloid-counterion correlations are taken into 
account through the charge renormalization. 

Using Eq. ^, two important limits can be verified. 
For high salt concentrations — Zeffp/2ps ^ 1, salt- 
dominated regime — there is no significant variation in 
the ionic concentrations across the membrane and the 



osmotic pressure (j6]) is small. On the other hand, in the 
limit Zef fp/2ps ^1 — the eounterion-dominated regime 
— there is a significant variation in the microion concen- 
tration between the bulk suspension and the reservoir 
and the osmotic pressure is large^i. 

The inverse osmotic compressibility Xt ~ 

p I — — j follows directly from Eq. ©: 



PXt' 



p'zl 



ff 



VipzIffV+WJ^ 



dlog{r]) 



(7) 

where t] = 47ra^p/3 is the colloidal volume fraction. The 
derivative on the right-hand-side of this expression can be 
neglected, since in the RJM the effective charge depends 
only weakly on the colloidal volume fractio n^^i^" . 

C. The Kirkwood-Buff relation 

Once the nonlinear colloid-ion correlations are properly 
taken into account through the charge renormalization, 
the DLVO pair potential Ec^. (1) can be used to investi- 
gate the structural properties of the suspension. This can 
be done by solving the OCM Ornstein-Zernike equation: 



h{r) = c(r) + p / h{r')ci\r - r'|)dr', 



(8) 



where /i(r) and c(r) are the total and the direct cor- 
relation functions, respectively. This equation has to be 
supplemented by an appropriate closure relation between 
h(r) and c(r)^. 

Once the structural properties are known, the ther- 
modynamic informations can then be obtained using the 
Kirkwood-Buff (KB) fluctuation theory^^. KB theory al- 
lows us to express the thermodynamic functions, such 
as the osmotic coefficients and the compressibilities, as 
integrals over the pair correlation functions. Originally 
formulated for unconstrained mixtures, KB theory re- 
quires some extra care when extended to systems in 
which the number densities of different components are 
not independen t ^^i^^i^^ . This is precisely the case for 



the charged systems, for which long-range Coulomb in- 
teraction requires an overall charge neutrality. In ad- 
dition to this, there are also other constraints known as 
the Stillinger-Lovett moment conditions, that restrict the 
fluctuations of different components'^ of a charged sys- 
tem. A naive application of the original KB theory to 
charged systems leads to undetermined results^iS. One 
way of avoiding these difficulties is to study the KB inte- 
grals for arbitrary k vectors in the Fourier spaco^^, tak- 
ing the limit fc — > at the end of the calculations. The 
extended KB theory then relates the osmotic compress- 
ibility with the Fourier transform of the total correlation 
function /i(k). 



XT = 1 + P / hir)dr = 1 + ph{0), 



(9) 

Using OZ equation, this expression can be inverted to 
yield 



(^)..--<°'- 



(10) 



KB theory shows that the knowledge of colloidal pair 
correlation function is sufficient for calculating the equa- 
tion of state of the colloidal suspension. Curiously, 
Eqs. ^ and (jlO[) rely only on the pair correlations which 
are well modeled using only the effective pair potential, 
Eq. ([T]). This suggests that the zero-order volume terms, 
which depend on colloidal concentration^, are not very 
important for the thermodynamics. 

III. MONTE CARLO SIMULATIONS 

To explore the validity of the RJM model, we perform 
Monte Carlo simulations to obtain the "exact" pairwise 
interaction potential. The simulations are performed for 
several flxed distances R between two spherical colloidal 
particles of charge —ZtareQ, which are restricted to move 
along the main diagonal of a box of side length L ~ 180A. 
Colloid particle 1 is located at x,y,z = —R/2^/3, and 
colloidal particle 2 at x,y,z ~ i?/2\/3. In order to keep 
the electro-neutrality, 2Zi,are microions of charge q are 



also present in the simulation box. If salt is added to 
the system, then L^ ps microions of charge q and L^ ps 
mieroions of eharge —q are included inside the box. The 
total number of microions in the system is then N = 
2L^ps + 2Zbare- The radii of all the ions are set to 2 A. 
The usual Coulomb potential is considered between all 
the charged species. The total energy used in the MC 
simulations is: 



„ N-l N 2 N „ AT „ 

^B -1 11 ''*i 1 ^ii 1 ''2i 

Z— 1 J— 2+1 -^ 2—1 2 — 1 



where Zi is the charge valence of the ion i (+1 or —1), 
rij is the distance between two ions i and j, rn and 
r2i are the distances between the ion i and the colloidal 
particles 1 and 2, respectively. Since we consider periodic 
boundary conditions, the Ewald summation technique is 
employed^. The equilibration is achieved after 2.5 x 10'^ 
simulation steps per particle; every 100 movements per 
particle an uncorrelated state is saved. The mean force 
is calculated using 1 x lO"' uncorrelated configurations. 

The average electrostatic force on a colloidal particle 
(positive force corresponds to repulsion), along the diag- 
onal direction is 

/ N 



UR)^{Y. 



ZbareZi f COS 9u , COS 6*22 



^bare 




where Fe{R) ~ -^Fe{R), On and 621 are the angles be- 
tween the diagonal and the line connecting the particle 
i to the colloid 1 and the colloid 2, respectively. These 
distances are measured from the diagonal in the counter- 
clockwise, for particle 1, and in the clockwise, for particle 
2 direction, respectively. The Ewald technique is used 
to calculate the electrostatic forces. Besides the aver- 
age electrostatic force, there is also an entropic depletion 
force which must be taken into account. To do this we 
use the method of Wu et al.— , which consists of a small 
displacement of the colloidal particles along the diago- 
nal (while the microions remain in a fixed configuration) 
in order to count the resulting overlaps between the col- 
loidal particle and the microions. This entropic force can 



be expressed as 

(ivf) - (nI) + (7V|) - (nI) 

where Fd{R) ~ ■^Fd{R), -/Vf is the number of overlaps of 
colloidal particle 1 with the microions (both anions and 
cation), after a small displacement Ai? (w lA) in the di- 
rection of the colloidal particle 2 (superscript c stands for 
closer) and Nl , is the number of overlaps after a displace- 
ment AR in the opposite direction (superscript f stands 
for farther). Similarly iV^ and iVg, are the number of 
overlaps of colloidal particle 2 with the microions after a 
displacement AR in the direction of the colloidal particle 
1 and in the opposite direction respectively. The effec- 
tive pair potentials can then be calculated by integrating 
the mean force, -As jj^^^^ dR' [Fe{R') + Fd{R')] , where 
Rmax is the reference distance at which the interaction 
between the two colloidal particles is negligible. 

IV. RESULTS 

We are now in a position to compare the thermody- 
namic predictions from Eqs. ([7]) and Q. To this end, the 
OZ equation is numerically solved using the hipernetted- 
chain (HNC) closure: 

c(r) = hir) - log(ft.(r) -I- 1) - /3u(r). (14) 

This closure is known to be very accurate for Yukawa- 
like pair potentials'"^. For a given reservoir salt con- 
centration ps and volume fraction 77, the pair potential 
is given by H]), with the effective charge calculated using 
the RJM. 

In order to test the accuracy of the effective pair po- 
tential predicted by the RJM, in Fig. [1] we compare it 
with the results of the Monte Carlo simulations. As 
can be seen, the DLVO pair potential with the bare 
colloidal charge considerably overestimate the effective 
colloid-colloid interaction. On the other hand, the pair- 
potential predicted by the RJM agrees well with the MC 
simulations. Near the colloidal surface, however, a small 




FIG. 1: Effective pair potentials calculated using the MC sim- 
ulations (squares), bare DLVO pair potential (dashed line) 
and DLVO with RJM effective parameters (solid line) for 
Zbare = 20, a = lOA and Xb = 7.2A. 



0.5- 



-(a) 




' ' 








-RJM 
- Simulation 


- 








p^ = 24.9mlVl 
ireV^ = 21.6 - 
ri = 0.0084 


2 


4 




6 8 


10 



1.5 
0.5- 



-(b) 










-RJIVI 
- Simulation 


- 










p^ = 249mM 
4reV^ = 21.6 - 
Ti = 0.0084 


1 2 


3 


4 


5 



r/o 



r/o 



FIG. 2: Colloid-colloid pair correlation functions obtained us- 
ing the MC simulations (Ref.47) and the RJM-OZ approach, 
for a) ps = 24.9 mM and b) ps = 249 mM. In both cases, the 
bare charge is ZtareXB/a = 21.6, and the volume fraction is 
ri = 0.0084. 

deviation from the Yukawa functional form is evident. 
These non-linear screening effects are a consequence of 
electrostatic correlations between the counterions near 
the colloidal surface. 

In Fig. [21 the colloid-colloid pair correlation func- 
tion g{r) calculated using the RJM and the HNC in- 
tegral equation, is compared with the results of the 
MC simulations^ in the high salt concentration regime. 
Again, wc sec a good agreement between the theory and 
the simulations. 

Figs. [1] and [2] show that the effective charges calcu- 
lated using the RJM arc able to correctly predict both 



the pair interactions and the structural properties of col- 
loidal suspensions containing added electrolyte. We next 
check if this good agreement also extends to the ther- 
modynamic functions. Unfortunately, very quickly we 
run into difficulties. We find that for the intermediate 
salt concentrations, the osmotic compressibility calcu- 
lated using the KB fluctuation relation Eq. ([9]) strongly 
deviates from the one calculated using the RJM equation 
of state (JEOS), Eq. (|6]). The discrepancy between the 
two routes can be clearly seen in Fig. [3j which shows the 
osmotic compressibility Xosm as a function of the reser- 
voir salt concentration p^, for colloidal particles of bare 
charge Z = 1000 and various volume fractions. Although 
both routes agrees in the low-salt and high-salt regimes, 
there are strong deviations at intermediate salt concen- 
trations. Furthermore, as the colloidal concentration in- 
creases, the discrepancy between the two thermodynamic 
routes becomes stronger. At low volume fractions and 
high salt concentration, both routes approach the cor- 
rect ideal gas limit Xosm ~ 1, when strong screening 
makes the system to behave as a dilute suspension of 
hard spheres. 

The question that arises then is: Which thermody- 
namic route is more reliable? Unfortunately the answer 
is not very clear. Due to the difficulty of performing 
large scale simulations on suspensions containing elec- 
trolyte, there is very little data available to us to answer 
this question. Furthermore, there is also a scarcity of 
the experimental data dealing with osmotic properties of 
charged colloidal suspensions. In Fig.|4l we compare both 
the osmotic pressure calculated using the JEOS and the 
KB fluctuation theory with the experimental measure- 
ments of Rasa et al.— . Neither one of the thermody- 
namic routes seems to be able to accurately describe this 
experimental data. Most likely this is a consequence of 
the strong electrostatic correlations between the ions re- 
sulting from the use of a low dielectric solvent by Rasa 
et al. Nevertheless, the fluctuation route seems to give 
results in a closer agreement with the experimental data 




10" 10 

D ImMl 









(b) 


-JEOS 
-KB 




- 





10 10' 









(c) 


-JEOS 
-KB 




- 


.-i/ 


'/^ 


' 





10 10' 



10" 10 10 10 10" 10" 
p [mM] 





0.5 1 

kTp[Nm"-] 



0.5 1 1.5 

kJp[Nm"'] 



10 10" 10 10" 10 

p,[mM] 



FIG. 4: Comparison between the osmotic pressure calculated 
using the JEOS, (solid line) and using the explicit integration 
of Eq. ^ (dashed line) with the experimental results reported 
in Ref. 48. The reservoir salt concentration is ps = 8/iM, 
while the Bjerrum length is As = 2.38 nm, the colloidal radius 
is a = 21.9 nm, and colloidal charges are: a) Z = 34 and b) 
Z = 40. 



FIG. 3: Reduced osmotic compressibility x = px//^ eis a func- 
tion of the reservoir salt concentration ps for a colloidal par- 
ticles of radius a — 30Aand bare charge Z = 1000. The 
colloidal volume fractions are: &) r\ = 10~*, b) 77 = 10~*, 
c) 77 = 10""^ and d) 77 = 10~^. We see a dramatic discrep- 
ancy between the predictions of the JEOS (solid lines) and the 
Kirkwood-Buff fluctuation theory (dashed lines), especially at 
intermediate salt concentrations and high volume fractions. 

than the JEOS. This suggest that for the RJM the fluc- 
tuation route might be more reliable for calculating the 
thermodynamic functions. We will now explore the pos- 
sible causes of the discrepancy between the two thermo- 
dynamic routes. 



A. Colloid-colloid correlations 

One possibility is that the discrepancy observed in 
Fig. [3] is due to the way that colloidal correlations enter 
into the theory in the two thermodynamic route a^^'^° . In- 
deed, while the colloid-colloid correlations are neglected 
in the JEOS, they contribute to the osmotic pressure cal- 
culated using the KB formalism Eq. ([5|), since the HNC 
equatioD^ used to obtain the correlation function takes 



into account colloidal hard-cores. The colloid-colloid re- 
pulsion is particularly important for large volume frac- 
tions and high-salt concentration {Zpjlps ^1), when 
ionic contribution to osmotic pressure is small. To asses 
the relevance of these correlations, we can add to the 
JEOS the excess colloidal virial pressure, 
27rp2 



/3P" 



/ 9iry^dr+2TTp^V g{r)^r^dr, 

(15) 



where u{r) is the effective pair potential in the OCM de- 
scription. The first term on the right hand side of this 
equation represents the standard excess virial pressure 
for the one-component system, while the second term ac- 
counts for the density dependent effective pair potential. 
This term is essential to reproduce the correct Debye- 
Hiickel limiting law in the infinite dilution limit-''. Sub- 
stitution of Eq. dl]) into Eq. (flS)) produces the following 
expression for the excess pressure, 
2^p2 



PP^ 



-np 



g(r)f3u(r){Kr + l)r dr 



g{r)(3u{r) nr — 



2{Kaf 



1 



Ka 



(16) 



r dr. 



where u{r) is the effective colloidal pair potential, Eq. [T] 
For all the parameters studied here, however, we find that 
I pea; I ^ Pj^iu ^nd the cffcct of coUoidal correlations is 



too small to account for the strong discrepancy observed 
in Fig. 13 



B. Ion-ion correlations 

As the salt concentration increases, the mean distance 
between the cations and anions becomes smaller, leading 
to strong inter-ionic correlations. Such correlations are 
completely ignored by the mean-field Poisson-Boltzmann 
equation, which is the basis of the RJM. Indeed, in 
the absence colons (and for monovalent counterions), 
the RJM model was found to provide an excellent ac- 
count of both thermodynamic and structural properties 
of charged suspensions22ii2£iSi24. This good accuracy of 
the model is the result of large characteristic distance be- 
tween the counterions inside a salt-free suspension. On 
the other hand, presence of salt leads to strong cation- 
anion correlations neglected in the RJM. 

In order to explore the influence of inter-ionic correla- 
tions on the osmotic pressure in a colloidal suspension, 
we modify the JEOS by adding the correlational Debye- 
Hiickcl contributioE^ii^, 



/3P" 






(17) 



Figure [S] shows the osmotic compressibilities resulting 
from addition of Eq. [T7]to the JEOS, Eq. [H As can be 
seen from this figure, incorporation of ionic correlations 
even at this leading-order level, significantly improves the 
agreement between the two thermodynamic routes, es- 
pecially at large colloidal volume fractions. This simple 
calculation suggests that the thermodynamic consistency 
of the RJM can be restored by incorporating the inter- 
ionic correlations into the RJM. Unfortunately, at the 
moment, it is not clear how the inter- ionic correlations 
can be included into the RJM in a fully self-consistent 
fashion. This will be the subject of future research. 





(a) 






1 


-JEOS 


- 




JEOS + Ion-Ion 








--Fluctuations 




a 


,,--'' 










qO.5 








0.5- 

0.4- 

a 

?<0.3- 

ca 

0.2- 



(b) 



■JEOS 

JEOS + Ion-Ion 
■ Fluctuations 



250 



500 
),|mM] 



750 



1000 



250 



500 
),[inM] 



750 



1000 



FIG. 5: Comparison between the osmotic compressibilities 
calculated using the JEOS Eq. [6] (solid lines), using the JEOS 
with explicit ionic correlations Eqs. ^ and {TTJ, and using 
the the KB fluctuation theory, Eq. (|9}. The radius of colloidal 
particles is a = lOA, the bare colloidal charge \s Z = 1000, 
and the Bjerrum length is A5 = 7.2A. The volume fractions 
are: a) 77 = 0.01 and b) 77 = 0.05. 

V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 

We have reported an inconsistency arising when dif- 
ferent routes are employed to calculate the thermody- 
namic functions in the the RJM. The discrepancies are 
particularly strong at moderate salt concentrations. On 
the other hand, comparing the predictions of the RJM 
with the MC simulations, we see that the model accu- 
rately accounts for the effective pair interactions and the 
colloidal correlation functions, even for suspensions con- 
taining electrolyte. 

Thermodynamic inconsistency between different 
routes is not particular to the RJM and is found for 
many other system^. Even for a Debye-Hiickel elec- 
trolyte, the osmotic compressibility calculated via the 
PM virial equation is quite different from the predictions 
of the fluctuation theory^. In these cases, MC simula- 
tions are particularly helpful to choose the more accurate 
route to thermodynamics^. Unfortunately, simulations 
of charged colloidal suspensions at even moderate salt 
concentrations are still too computationally demanding 
while the experimental data is still very scarce. The 
experimental and the simulational data available to 
us seems to indicate that KB fluctuation relations 



10 



provide a more reliable route to thermodynamics of 
the RJM. The KB route seems to partially account 
for the inter-ionic correlations which are completely 
neglected by the JEOS. These correlations are negligible 
in the absence of colons, they however become relevant 
when salt concentration increases and the characteristic 
distance between the cations and the anions becomes 
smalli. In Section IV (B), we showed that even a simple 
incorporation of the DH contribution to the osmotic 
pressure already brings the JEOS and the fluctuation 
results into a closer agreement. A fully self-consistent 



incorporation of ionic correlations into the RJM requires, 
however, development of a new methodology closer in 
spirit to the density functional theory. The work in this 
direction is now in progress. 



VI. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 

This work was partially supported by the CNPq, 
FAPERGS, INCT-FCx, and by the US-AFOSR under 
the grant FA9550-09-1-0283. 



^ Y. Levin, Rep. Prog. Phys. 65, 1577 (2002). 
^ R. Messina, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 21, 113102 (2009). 
^ L. Belloni, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 12, R549 (2000). 
* K. Mahdi and M. O. de la Cruz, Macromolecules 33, 7649 

(2000). 
^ A. Diehl, M. C. Barbosa, and Y. Levin, Europhys. Lett. 

53, 86 (2001). 
® Y. Levin, E. Trizac, and L. Bocquet, J. Phys.: Cond. Mat. 

15, S3523 (2003). 
'' A. R. Denton, Phys. Rev. E 2007, 051401 (76). 
^ B. Lu and A. R. Denton, Phys. Rev. E 75, 061403 (2007). 
^ J.-P. Hansen and H. Lowen, Annu. Rev. Phys. Chem. 51, 

209 (2000). 
^° G. Vernizzi, G. I. Guerrero-Garcia, and M. O. de la Cruz, 

Phys. Rev. E 84, 016707 (2011). 
^^ M. Tamashiro, Y. Levin, and M. Barbosa, Eur. Phys. J. B 

1, 337 (1998). 
^^ M. Deserno and H. H. von Griinberg, Phys. Rev. E 66, 

011401 (2002). 
" L. Belloni, Colloids and Surfaces A 140, 227 (1998). 
^'' P. Gonzalez-Mozuleos and M. O. de la Cruz, Physica A 

387, 5362 (2008). 
1^ C. N. Likos, Physics Reports 348, 247 (2001). 
^ A. Denton, in Nano structured Soft Matter: Experiment, 
Theory, Simulation and Perspectives (Springer, Dordrecht, 
2007). 
" A. R. Denton, Phys. Rev. E 67, 011804 (2003). 
^^ F. H. Stillinger, H. Sakai, and S. Torquato, J. Chem. Phys. 



117, 288 (2002). 
^^ A. A. Louis, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 14, 9187 (2002). 
^" M. Dijkstra, R. van Roij, and R. Evans, J. Chem. Phys. 

113, 4799 (2000). 
^^ E. Trizac et ai, Phys. Rev. E 75, 011401 (2007). 
^^ B. V. Derjaguin and L. Landau, Acta Physicochim. URSS 

14, 633 (1941). 
^^ E. J. Verwey and J. T. G Overbeek, Theory of the Stability 

of Lyophobic Colloids (Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1948). 
2" B. Zoetekouw and P. R. E. R. van Roij, Phys. Rev. E 73, 

021403 (2006). 
^^ D. Y. C. Chan, P. Linse, and S. N. Petris, Langmuir 17, 

4202 (2001). 
^■^ F. Stillinger and R. Lovett, J. Chem. Phys. 49, 1991 

(1968). 
■^^ H. L. Friedman and P. S. Ramanathan, J. Phys. Chem. 

74, 3756 (1970). 
2* P. G Kusalik and G N. Patey, J. Chem. Phys. 86, 5110 

(1987). 
^^ E. Trizac and Y. Levin, Phys. Rev. E 2004, 031403 (69). 
^'^ S. Pianegonda, E. Trizac, and Y. Levin, J. Chem. Phys. 

126, 014702 (2007). 
^^ J.-P Hansen and I.R. McDonald, Theory os Simple Liquids 

(Academic Press, New York, 1976). 
^^ J. G Kirkwood and F. P. BuflF, J. Chem. Phys. 19, 774 

(1951). 
^^ R. Castaneda-Priego, L. F. Rojas-Ochoa, V. Lobaskin, and 

J. C. Mixteco-Sanchez, Phys. Rev. E 74, 051408 (2006). 



11 



^* T. E. CoUa, Y. Levin, and E. Trizac, J. Cliem. Phys. 131, 

074115 (2009). 
^^ T. E. CoUa and Y. Levin, J. Chem. Phys. 133, 234105 

(2010). 
^^ J. M. Falcon-Gonzalez and R. Castaiieda-Priego, Phys. 

Rev. E 83, 041401 (2011). 
^^ J. M. Falcon-Gonzalez and R. C. Priego, J. Ghem. Phys. 

133, 216101 (2010). 
^* H. Wennerstrom, B. Jonsson, and P. Linse, J. Ghem. Phys. 

76, 4665 (1982). 
^® M. Deserno and G. Holm, in "Electrostatic Effects in Soft 

Matter and Biophysics", eds. G. Holm, P. Kekicheff, and R. 

Podgornik, NATO Science Series II - Mathematics, Physics 

and Ghemistry 46, (2001). 
^° S. L. Garnie and D. Y. G. Ghan, Ghem. Phys. Lett. 77, 

437 (1981). 
"1 R. A. Marcus, J. Ghem. Phys. 23, 1057 (1955). 



^'^ F. G. Donnan, Ghem. Rev. 1, 73 (1924). 

*^ R. Behera, J. Ghem. Phys. 108, 3373 (1997). 

■*■* M. P. Allen and D. J. Tildesley, Computer Simulations of 

Liquids (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1987). 
"■■^ J. Z. Wu, D. Bratko, H. W. Blanch, and J. M. Prausnitz, 

J. Ghem. Phys. Ill, 7084 (1999). 
■"^ P. Attard, Avd. Ghem. Phys. 92, 1 (1996). 
"■^ V. Lobaskin and K. Qamhieh, J. Phys. Ghem. B 107, 8022 

(2003). 
"^ M. Rasa et al, J. Phys.: Gondens. Matter 17, 2293 (2005). 
^^ L. Belloni, J. Ghem. Phys. 123, 204705 (2005). 
^" J. Dobnikar, R. Gastafieda-Priego, H. von Griinberg, and 

E. Trizac, New Journal of Physics 8, 277 (2006). 
^'^ Y. Levin and M. Fisher, Physica A 225, 164 (1996). 
^^ J. G. Rasaiah and H. L. Friedman, J. Ghem. Phys. 48, 

2742 (1968).