2005
DOI: 10.1063/1.1856925
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The influence of discrete surface charges on the force between charged surfaces

Abstract: The force between two parallel charged flat surfaces, with discrete surface charges, has been calculated with Monte Carlo simulations for different values of the electrostatic coupling. For low electrostatic coupling (small counterion valence, small surface charge, high dielectric constant, and high temperature) the total force is dominated by the entropic contribution and can be described by mean field theory, independent of the character of the surface charges. For moderate electrostatic coupling, counterion… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
31
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
3

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 33 publications
(32 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
1
31
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The results presented show that the common approach of dividing a generic interface into a Stern Layer, where counterions are strongly interacting, and a diffuse layer, which at least for dilute concentrations can be described within PB theory, is only valid for monovalent counterions and becomes grossly inaccurate for divalent counterions at any surface charge and electrolyte concentration: At low surface charge (high molecular area) because the effects of charge discreteness extend up to a distance of a L /3, while at high surface charge (small molecular area), counterions within the diffuse layer are strongly correlated with the ones within the Stern layer, thus negating any approximation where the Stern layer is approximated as a uniform surface charge. The differences between the osmotic pressure of a plane with discrete and uniform charges discussed in [106,107] is in agreement with these findings.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 84%
“…The results presented show that the common approach of dividing a generic interface into a Stern Layer, where counterions are strongly interacting, and a diffuse layer, which at least for dilute concentrations can be described within PB theory, is only valid for monovalent counterions and becomes grossly inaccurate for divalent counterions at any surface charge and electrolyte concentration: At low surface charge (high molecular area) because the effects of charge discreteness extend up to a distance of a L /3, while at high surface charge (small molecular area), counterions within the diffuse layer are strongly correlated with the ones within the Stern layer, thus negating any approximation where the Stern layer is approximated as a uniform surface charge. The differences between the osmotic pressure of a plane with discrete and uniform charges discussed in [106,107] is in agreement with these findings.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 84%
“…The discrepancy may be tentatively attributed to the mean-field smeared surface charge applied here, neglecting the discrete nature of binding sites as well as the specific amino acid residues hosting the carboxylate and amine sites, which is included in molecular dynamics simulations. Discrete surface charges tend to increase counterion physisorption, increasing repulsion (or diminishing attraction) between surfaces [50]. Anions are rsfs.royalsocietypublishing.org Interface Focus 7: 20160137 counterions for the mildly positive haemoglobin surface charge found in our model.…”
Section: Matching Theory To Experimentsmentioning
confidence: 78%
“…In the future we hope to study plates with more complex interactions, including heterogeneous surfaces, which are physically relevant, and have been shown to induce complex behavior. [55][56][57] 8. The effective potential is calculated in the HNC approximation and plotted for various intensities of wall-particle attraction.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%