Understanding the response of the
charged polyelectrolyte (PE)
brushes and brush-supported water and ions to the changes in the nature
of screening counterions is significant in developing strategies for
utilizing PE brushes in various applications. In this paper, we employ
all-atom molecular dynamics (MD) simulations for studying the behavior
of cationic [poly(2-(methacryloyloxy)ethyl) trimethylammonium] (PMETA)
brushes and brush-supported water and ions in the presence of different
halide (X: I–, Br–, Cl–, and F–) screening counterions. We find that despite
the F– ion having the largest charge density, the
extent of binding of the counterions on the PMETAX brushes varies
as I– > Br– > Cl– > F–, leading to PMETAX brush height being
least
with I– counterions and greatest with F– counterions. This trend in the binding of the halide ions matches
the previous experimental result and can be explained by identifying
the chaotropic nature of the I– and Br– ions that promote a disruption of water structure and a more favorable
binding of the ions to the polymer chains. Such a binding trend also
ensures that the order of the water molecules around the PMETAX chains
or the counterions as well as the number of water–water hydrogen
bonds inside the brush layer increases in the following order of the
counterion-specific PMETAX brushes: F– > Cl– > Br– > I–. Furthermore,
halide-ion-PMETAX-chain binding takes place via both interchain and
intrachain bridging: intrachain bridging dominates for the case of
counterions that show enhanced binding (I– and Br–), while interchain bridging is more favored for the
case of counterions that show weakened binding (F– and Cl–). Also, a greater degree of intrachain
bridging leads to greater compressibility and flexibility of the brush
layer. Finally, we show that the mobility of the halide ions follows
a nonmonotonic trend with the charge density: the mobility decreases
as I– < Br– < Cl– (as their binding to the PMETAX chains varies as I– > Br– > Cl–), but the
mobility
of F– ions is in between that of I– and Br– ions. We argue that the strongly attached
hydration layer and the ensuing friction inside the brush layer lead
to such a reduced mobility of the F– ions.