Ekaterina B Zhulina1, Michael Rubinstein2. 1. Institute of Macromolecular Compounds, Russian Academy of Sciences , Saint Petersburg 199004, Russia ; ITMO University , Saint Petersburg 197101, Russia. 2. Department of Chemistry, University of North Carolina , Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599-3290, United States.
Abstract
We develop a scaling model relating the friction forces between two polyelectrolyte brushes sliding over each other to the separation between grafted surfaces, number of monomers and charges per chain, grafting density of chains, and solvent quality. We demonstrate that the lateral force between brushes increases upon compression, but to a lesser extent than the normal force. The shear stress at larger separations is due to solvent slip layer friction. The thickness of this slip layer sharply decreases at distances on the order of undeformed brush thickness. The corresponding effective viscosity of the layer sharply increases from the solvent viscosity to a much higher value, but this increase is smaller than the jump of the normal force resulting in the drop of the friction coefficient. At stronger compression we predict the second sharp increase of the shear stress corresponding to interpenetration of the chains from the opposite brushes. In this regime the velocity-dependent friction coefficient between two partially interpenetrating polyelectrolyte brushes does not depend on the distance between substrates because both normal and shear forces are reciprocally proportional to the plate separation. Although lateral forces between polyelectrolyte brushes are larger than between bare surfaces, the enhancement of normal forces between opposing polyelectrolyte brushes with respect to normal forces between bare charged surfaces is much stronger resulting in lower friction coefficient. The model quantitatively demonstrates how polyelectrolyte brushes provide more effective lubrication than bare charged surfaces or neutral brushes.
We develop a scaling model relating the friction forces between two polyelectrolyte brushes sliding over each other to the separation between grafted surfaces, number of monomers and charges per chain, grafting density of chains, and solvent quality. We demonstrate that the lateral force between brushes increases upon compression, but to a lesser extent than the normal force. The shear stress at larger separations is due to solvent slip layer friction. The thickness of this slip layer sharply decreases at distances on the order of undeformed brush thickness. The corresponding effective viscosity of the layer sharply increases from the solvent viscosity to a much higher value, but this increase is smaller than the jump of the normal force resulting in the drop of the friction coefficient. At stronger compression we predict the second sharp increase of the shear stress corresponding to interpenetration of the chains from the opposite brushes. In this regime the velocity-dependent friction coefficient between two partially interpenetrating polyelectrolyte brushes does not depend on the distance between substrates because both normal and shear forces are reciprocally proportional to the plate separation. Although lateral forces between polyelectrolyte brushes are larger than between bare surfaces, the enhancement of normal forces between opposing polyelectrolyte brushes with respect to normal forces between bare charged surfaces is much stronger resulting in lower friction coefficient. The model quantitatively demonstrates how polyelectrolyte brushes provide more effective lubrication than bare charged surfaces or neutral brushes.
Many
processes in nature and technology involve polymer-decorated
surfaces in liquid media, and therefore understanding of interactions
between such surfaces is important from both academic and technological
points of view. Dense grafting of polymer chains to a surface leads
to the extension of these polymers due to interchain repulsions resulting
in structures called polymer brushes.Interactions between polymer
brushes determine their effectiveness
in steric stabilization, controlled by the normal forces between polymer-decorated
surfaces. These interactions also determine friction between brushes,
which is conventionally characterized by the friction coefficient,
defined as the ratio of shear and normal forces between the two substrates
sliding over each other. It was demonstrated experimentally that solid
substrates decorated with charged polymer brushes have low friction
coefficient when sheared against each other in polar solvents.[1] In contrast to sliding solid surfaces with typically
velocity-independent friction coefficient, shear force between two
surfaces with a liquid or brush layer between them increases with
shear velocity. Since the friction coefficient of these sliding surfaces
is velocity-dependent, the shear stress in this case is better described
by the effective viscosity[2] defined as
the ratio of shear stress and the effective shear rate.The
normal and shear forces between polymer-decorated surfaces
were extensively studied over several decades.[1,3−15] The theoretical predictions for normal forces arising upon compression
of neutral brushes were found to be in reasonable agreement with experiments
and computer simulations.,[8,9,6] The Alexander–de Gennes scaling model of neutral brushes,[16,17] was generalized to incorporate the shear-induced deformation of
tethered polymers in nonlinear response regime.[8]The understanding of interactions between polyelectrolyte
(PE)
brushes is not as complete as between neutral ones. The Poisson–Boltzmann
model of a pair of apposing PE brushes,[18,19] described
the density profiles of polymer segments strongly coupled to the distribution
of mobile counterions. The increase in normal force upon compression
of apposing polyelectrolyte-decorated substrates is due to the increase
of counterion concentration in the midplane between them (as there
is no electric field at the midplane).[20] Since most counterions are confined within the brushes, the sharpest
increase of the normal force upon compression occurs at the distance
between grafted surfaces on the order of brush thickness. At this
distance the concentration of counterions at the midplane changes
from a very low value outside the brushes to a very high value inside
the brushes.[19] One of the predictions of
these works,[18,19] is the existence of a polymer-free
gap filled with solvent and counterions between brushes compressed
against each other due to partial contraction of PE chains. The computer
simulations[21] confirmed the shrinking of
apposing PE brushes upon compression. The early theoretical studies[11,12] extended the scaling models[22,23] of PE brushes to analyze
the change in conformations of tethered polyelectrolytes in strong
flows under a constant normal load. They demonstrated the coupling
between normal and shear forces due to tilting and stretching of polyions
in apposing PE brushes in the direction of flow and predicted equilibrium
distance between brush-decorated substrates as a function of shear
and normal stresses.In this paper we consider two planar substrates
decorated with
charged polymer brushes sliding over each other, and examine how the
resulting shear force depends on length and degree of ionization of
tethered polyelectrolytes, chain grafting density, and solvent quality.
We demonstrate that charged polymer brushes enhance both normal and
lateral forces between substrates in comparison to bare surfaces with
equivalent charge densities. The normal force between strongly charged
bare surfaces involves only distal Gouy–Chapman tails of counterions,[20] and is therefore much smaller than the normal
force between compressed polyelectrolyte brushes separated by the
same distance. The friction between bare charged surfaces is governed
by the solvent viscosity and is also smaller than the friction between
brushes at similar distances. We demonstrate that the enhancement
of normal force by polyelectrolyte brushes with respect to bare charged
surfaces is much larger than the corresponding increase of friction
force resulting in lower friction coefficient between polyelectrolyte
brushes. The behavior of polyelectrolyte brushes in salt-free solutions
considered in this paper is also retained in solutions with added
salt as long as counterion concentration is higher than that of salt
ions. The mechanism of relatively low friction at high normal pressure
maintained in polyelectrolyte brushes and gels sheds some light on
lubrication phenomenon in biological systems, e.g., low friction at
high load in synovial joints.The rest of the paper is organized
as follows. In section 2, we review the behavior
of planar polyelectrolyte
brushes immersed in a salt-free solvent (section 2.1), the normal force between a pair of polyelectrolyte brushes
(section 2.2) and their interpenetration (section 2.3). Our results on the friction between polyelectrolyte
brushes are presented in section 3 and compared
with the friction between bare charged surfaces in section 4. In section 5, we formulate
the conclusions. In the Appendix, we estimate
the solvent penetration length for neutral brushes and for PE brushes
in the osmotic regime.
Polyelectrolyte Brushes
Single Brush
Properties of a single
planar polyelectrolyte (PE) brush in contact with a salt-free solution
depend on the following parameters: (i) contour length Nb where N is the number of Kuhn segments of length b, (ii) degree of chain ionization f (fraction
of charged Kuhn segments), (iii) Bjerrum length l defined as the distance at which two
elementary charges e interact with thermal energy kT = e2/(εl) in a solvent with dielectric constant ε, (iv) grafting
density ρ (number of chains tethered per unit surface area).
Each polyion has fN elementary charges e uniformly distributed along its backbone, and the same number fN of mobile monovalent counterions distributed in solution
above the grafted surface (both inside the brush and outside it).
We assume relatively low charge density along the chain (less than
one charge per Bjerrum length, or l < bf–ν). Brushes
with higher charge density and the resulting Manning condensation
of counterions are considered in section 5.
Nonelectrostatic interactions between monomers determine local chain
statistics: size r ≃ bgν for a small chain section with g Kuhn
monomers with exponents ν ≈ 3/5 and ν = 1/2 for
good and Θ solvent conditions, respectively.
Free Chain in a Dilute
Solution
Balancing Coulomb electrostatic
energyof a polyion with end-to-end distance L and backbone elastic free energy[24]leads
to the average end-to-end distance of
a polyion in a dilute salt-free solution,[25]where we define the dimensionless ratio u of Bjerrum length l and Kuhn length bThe exponent of the effective interaction
parameter uf2 in eq 3 is 1/3 in a Θ solvent with ν = 1/2, and 2/7 in a good
solvent with ν = 3/5. A single polyion can be envisioned as
a stretched string of N/g electrostatic blobs with sizecontainingmonomers
each. On length scales smaller than
ξ, the electrostatic energy is
less than thermal energy kT, and the local chain statistics is almost
unperturbed (ξ ≃ bgν). On length scales larger than ξ, polyion is stretched by electrostatic repulsion
between charges, and its end-to-end distance in a salt-free solution
is L ≃ ξN/g (see eq 3).
Charged Mushroom (CM) Regime
If polyions are sparsely
tethered to the substrate, with grafting density ρ ≪ L–2, the grafted layer is considered to
be in charged mushroom (CM) regime with characteristic end-to-end
distance of chains given by eq 3. In contrast
to neutral grafted chains in mushroom regime, polyelectrolytes in
charged mushroom (CM) regime interact with each other. This long-range
interaction can result in their orientation perpendicular to the grafted
surface. The electric field due to grafted chains with charge efN on each creates surface charge density efNρ and electric field in solvent with dielectric constant εThis field imposes a force on each
grafted chainThe energy gain due to orienting chain perpendicular to the grafted
surface (along the field) is on the order of the product of this force
and chain size L (see eq 3)which is the energy cost of rotating one chain
in the electric field of other grafted chains by an angle on the order
of unity. The onset of the orientation occurs at grafting densities
ρ at which this electrostatic
orientation energy per chain U is on the order of thermal energy kT. This onset of grafted polyelectrolytes,
orienting each other in the CM regime, occurs atAt lower grafting densities ρ < ρ, tethered polyelectrolytes are almost
noninteracting and freely
rotating. At higher grafting densities ρ > ρ, intermolecular interaction (eq 9) is strong enough to orient polyelectrolytes primarily perpendicular
to the grafted surface, but not strong enough to deform them significantly.
At these grafting densities, the intramolecular electrostatic repulsion
(eq 1) is much stronger than the intermolecular
one and controls chain extension (see the first plateau in Figure 1). This crossover grafting density at which the
intermolecular electrostatic interaction energy (eq 9) becomes on the order of the intramolecular one (eq 1) corresponds to the separation between chains on
the order of their size L (eq 3),
Figure 1
Schematic dependence of PE brush thickness H on
chain grafting density ρ in logarithmic coordinates.
Schematic dependence of PE brush thickness H on
chain grafting density ρ in logarithmic coordinates.In contrast to tethered neutral chains, the crossover
between charged
mushroom and charged brush regimes occurs prior to the overlap of
chain projections onto grafted surface. Note that for polyions elongated
by the intramolecular Coulomb repulsions between charged monomers
ρ ≪ ρ*.
Pincus
Brush (PB) Regime
At higher grafting densities
ρ > ρ* tethered polyions create an electric field E (eq 7) which stretches each chain
beyond the size of a free polyion L (eq 3). The size of the chain in this regime is determined by the
balance of the electrostatic energy per chain (eq 9 with L replaced by H)and elastic free energy per chain (eq 2 with L replaced by H)resulting in the brush heightincreasing with grafting density ρ linearly
in a Θ solvent and with exponent 2/3 in a good solvent (see
Figure 1). This regime of unscreened electrostatics
(referred to as Pincus regime) continues as long as counterions are
able to escape from the brush. The counterion confinement length Λ
(called Gouy–Chapman length) is defined as the distance at
which the energy of counterion attraction to the charged surface is
higher than that at the surface by the thermal energy kT. Half of all counterions
are located within the Gouy–Chapman length[20]from
the charged surface. The upper boundary
of the Pincus regime corresponds to Λ = H or
to the grafting densitywhere H0 is the
thickness of the brush with grafting density at or above the crossover
value ρ (see eq 17 below). Note that Pincus regime (ρ* < ρ <
ρ) exists only for weakly charged
grafted polyions with bf–ν > l, while for
strongly
charged polyelectrolytes (bf–ν < l) with condensed
counterions there is no Pincus regime and ρ* ≃ ρ (see section 5).
Osmotic Brush (OB) Regime
At higher grafting densities
ρ > ρ, counterions
become localized within the brush, and their entropy (osmotic pressure)
dominates the brush properties. This main regime of polyelectrolyte
brushes is called osmotic brush (OB) regime. Here, the size of the
brush is determined by the balance of the osmotic pressure of counterions,
trying to maximize their entropy by increasing the brush volume, and
the elasticity of tethered chains opposing this tendency. The balance
of the two forces corresponds to both, osmotic and elastic parts of
the free energy per chain ∼ fNkT, independent of the grafting density.
Therefore, the scaling model[22,23] predicts the brush
thickness in this osmotic regimeto be independent of the grafting
density
ρ (see the second plateau in Figure 1). The chain size H0 in the osmotic brush
regime of weakly charged polyions (with bf–ν > l) is strongly
stretched
compared to its free polyelectrolyte size L with
effective tension blobs[24] containing one
elementary charge and consisting of g ≈ 1/f monomers of sizeThus, the size of the stretched chain (and
the thickness of the osmotic brush) is H0 ≈ ξN/g (see eq 17).
Quasi-Neutral Brush (q-NB) Regime
At very high grafting
densitiesthe distance between chains ρ–1/2 becomes
smaller than the Pincus blob size ξ (eq 18) and the energy of short-range
excluded volume interactions between monomers becomes higher than
the counterion osmotic contribution to the brush free energy. For
these very high grafting densities ρ > ρ tethered polyions enter the quasi-neutral brush
(q-NB) regime.
PE brushes in q-NB regime have the same properties as neutral brushes.
The thickness of a neutral brush is determined by the balance of short-range
excluded volume repulsion and chain elasticity. It can be estimated
by the Alexander–de Gennes scaling model[16] as the length of a stretched array of correlation blobs
with the size of each blob on the order of the distance between grafting
points, ξ = ρ–1/2. The number of correlation blobs per chain is N/g = N(ρb2)1/(2ν), and
the brush thickness increases with grafting density asFigure 1 shows
the increase in brush thickness H with grafting density
ρ in this quasi-neutral regime with the scaling exponent (1−ν)/(2ν)
which is half of the exponent in the Pincus brush regime. In Θ
solvent with ν = 1/2, the exponent (1−ν)/(2ν)
= 1/2 while in good solvent with ν = 3/5 the exponent (1−ν)/(2ν)
= 1/3.
Parabolic Molecular Field
In the Alexander–de
Gennes model of neutral brushes,[16,17] all chain
ends are assumed to be located in the outmost blob, and the density
is assumed to be uniform throughout the brush. In more sophisticated
models of neutral brushes,[26−28] chain ends are distributed throughout
the brush in such a way that the effective molecular field acting
on chain segments is parabolic. This results in the almost parabolic
density profile of solvated neutral brushes in good solvents.As in neutral brushes, the molecular field in polyelectrolyte brushes
with fractional charge ef per Kuhn monomer is also
almost parabolic.[19] However, this field
in the charged brushes is essentially electrostatic acting on the
charged monomers. Therefore, the electrostatic potential inside a
polyelectrolyte brush is parabolic, resulting in the Gaussian distribution
of counterions, as dictated by the Boltzmann law.[19] This parabolic electrostatic potential is produced by the
combined electric charges of both tethered polyions and counterions.
The parabolic shape of the electrostatic potential indicates that
electric field (derivative of the electrostatic potential) in the
brush increases linearly with the distance from the grafted surface.
Linear increase of the electric field implies by the Gauss law that
the net charge density in the brush is uniform. This net charge density
is the difference between charges on the chains and counterions. Therefore,
the polymer density profile follows that of counterions and is also
Gaussian to ensure that the difference between counterion and polymer
charge profiles is distance-independent. Since the net charge of the
brush is not exactly zero, the compensating counterions (Δn per chain) escape from the brush and form Gouy–Chapman
layer of thickness λ. These escaped counterions create a capacitor
with characteristic thickness H0 + λ
and the escaped charge eΔn is related to Gouy–Chapman length λ (cf. eq 15) outside the brushThe electrostatic energy per unit area of this capacitoris balanced by the entropic part of free energy
per unit area gained by escaped counterionswith concentration c0 = fNρ/H0 of ions inside
the brush and concentration of ions c = Δnρ/λ in
the Gouy–Chapman layer. This balance leads to
the width of Gouy–Chapman layer λ comparable to the polyelectrolyte
brush thickness H0 in the osmotic regime
(eq 17)up to logarithmic
correction on the order
of ln(c0/c).The net number of charges escaped from
the brush per unit area
is therefore reciprocally proportional to the product of the brush
thickness H0 and Bjerrum length l,Note
that the concentration of counterions in the Gouy–Chapman
layer outside the brush, c = ρΔn/λ ≃ ρ2lΔn2 ≃ (lH02)−1, is much smaller than
concentration of counterions inside the brush, c0 = fNρ/H0, in the osmotic regime, ρ ≫ ρ, with the ratio of the two concentrations (see eq 16)determined by how deep the brush is inside
the osmotic regime ρ/ρ.
We emphasize the difference between Gouy–Chapman length Λ
due to all charges (eq 15) and Gouy–Chapman
length λ due only to charges Δn escaped
from the brush (eq 21).We estimate the
boundaries between different PE brush regimes using
the values of parameters close to those in[14] For grafted polyelectrolyte chains with N = 200
Kuhn monomers of length b ≈ l = 0.7 nm, and degree of ionization f = 0.5 one finds crossover surface densities: ρ ≃ 2 × 10–8 nm–2, ρ* ≃ 1.3 × 10–4 nm–2, ρ ≃
1.4 × 10–4 nm–2, and ρ ≃ 1 nm–2. Note
that the experimentally relevant and the widest range of surface densities
of grafted chains corresponds to the osmotic regime. For example,
the experimentally studied surface density of grafted chains[14] ρ ≈ 0.2 nm–2 is in the osmotic regime of PE brush with predicted brush thickness H0 ≃ 100 nm much larger that the “bare”
Gouy–Chapman length Λ ≃ 0.01 nm and therefore
with very large ratio c/c ≃ H0/Λ ≃ 104. Below we
consider polyelectrolyte brushes prepared in this main (OB) regime.
Note that upon strong compression they could enter the quasi-neutral
regime.
Normal Force between a
Pair of Polyelectrolyte
Brushes
The main focus of this paper is on the interactions
between two polyelectrolyte brushes. In contrast to neutral brushes,
polyelectrolyte brushes repel each other at distances D between grafted surfaces much larger than twice the thickness H0 of each brush. The source of this long-range
interaction is the confinement of counterions in the space between
two surfaces. The free energy of dissociated counterions is dominated
by their translational entropy, which is much larger than interaction
part of their free energy. The self-energy of counterions does not
change upon brush deformation and therefore does not contribute to
the variation of free energy.The resulting pressure P felt by the surfaces is given by Van’t Hoff (ideal
gas-like) law for counterion density c(D/2) in the middle of the gap, P = kTc(D/2). At
distances between grafted surfaces D ≫ λ
≃ H0, the pressureis determined by the “tail”
of the Gouy–Chapman counterion distribution, c(z) ≈ (lz2)−1 at distance z = D/2. Note that this pressure is independent of brush parameters and
depends only on the separation D between grafted
surfaces and Bjerrum length l (for monovalent counterions).At stronger compressions, D < H0, counterions are distributed
almost uniformly between
the two grafted surfaces with concentration c = 2fNρ/D, and produce osmotic pressureNote that there is sharp crossover
between these two expressions,
eqs 27 and 28, with rapidly
increasing pressure from a low value of kT/(lH02) to a high
value of kTc0 ≃ kTfNρ/H0 by a large factor fNρH0l ≃ λ/H0 upon the decrease of separation D by the factor on the order of unity (for example, from D = 2H0 to D = H0) as depicted in Figure 2. The crossover between two asymptotic dependences of osmotic pressure
(lines with slopes −2 and −1 given by respective eqs 27 and 28) is indicted by the
vertical dashed line.
Figure 2
Normal force per unit area in compressed osmotic PE brushes
as
a function of distance D between surfaces in logarithmic
coordinates. c0 = fNρ/H0. The interval of D with a sharp increase in force is shadowed pink.
Normal force per unit area in compressed osmotic PE brushes
as
a function of distance D between surfaces in logarithmic
coordinates. c0 = fNρ/H0. The interval of D with a sharp increase in force is shadowed pink.The normal force between compressed polyelectrolyte
brushes is
dominated by counterions (eq 28) as long as
there is more than one free counterion per correlation volume. The
normal pressure at higher compression is controlled by direct interactions
between polymer chains and is similar to the pressure in neutral brushes
(see eqs 38 and 39 below)where c is the monomer number
density c = 2Nρ/D.
Interpenetration of Polyelectrolyte Brushes
In contrast to neutral brushes, polyelectrolyte brushes contract
upon compression leaving the gap of width ΔD = D – 2H filled with solvent
and counterions.[19] Therefore, there is
a regime of intermediate compression without physical contact and
interpenetration of monomers from apposing brushes. This gap acts
as a lubrication layer upon shear of apposing brushes at distances
between plates D > L larger than
the size of a free polyion (eq 3).At
smaller separations between surfaces D < L, polyions penetrate into apposing brushes up to characteristic
distance, called penetration length δ.The polymer penetration
length δ in neutral brushes with
parabolic molecular field was estimated
in refs (29 and 30)It increases upon brush compression (a decrease
in brush thickness H = D/2). Equation 30 is applicable for chains with Gaussian elasticity
in both dry (solvent-free) and solvated neutral brushes. It can also
be applied to compressed polyelectrolyte brushes on scales larger
than correlation length ξ, as we demonstrate below (see eq 34).At strong compressions D ≪ L, polyelectrolyte chains uniformly fill
the space between grafted
surfaces similar to semidilute salt-free polyelectrolyte solution
with concentration c = 2Nρ/D and correlation length[31,32]This solution could be envisioned
as densely
packed melt of correlation blobs with size ξ. At distances r smaller than correlation length ξ, polyelectrolytes
retain the extended conformations of dilute solution polyions, and
blob size ξ is related to the number of monomers g in the blob according to eq 3At larger
distances r ≫
ξ polyions are envisioned as Gaussian chains of N/g correlation blobs each. The end-to-end distance
of unconstrained polyions in a semidilute polyelectrolyte solution
is[32]which is on the order of the fluctuation
size
of a polyelectrolyte chain at this concentration.We distinguish
two cases for a pair of apposing polyion brushes
in strongly compressed regime (D < L) depending on the separation between grafted surfaces D in comparison to this fluctuation size R (eq 33). If R < D < L the grafted chains are stretched in comparison
to their “happy” fluctuation size (H > R) and the interpenetration between apposing
brushes is only partial (δ < H). If the
separation between plates is smaller than the fluctuation size D = 2H < R the grafted
chains are compressed and the two brushes fully interpenetrate (δ
≈ H).
Partial Interpenetration
In a compressed
polyelectrolyte brush with thickness H in the interval R < H < L, the chains
of blobs of size ξ each are stretched in the normal direction.
To optimize their free energy, tethered polyions distribute free ends
throughout the slit between surfaces with partial penetration into
apposing brush. Similarly to dry (solvent-free) brush of neutral polymers,
tethered chains of correlation blobs experience parabolic potential,
and interpenetration length δ for polyions can be found by substituting b → ξ and N → N/g and H = D/2 in eq 30 to giveNote that fluctuation size R of polyelectrolyte
chain in solution (eq 33) decreases with concentration c as R ∼ c–1/4 ∼ D1/4. Therefore,
interpenetration width δ
in eq 34 is independent of spacing D between plates in the regime of partial interpenetration. In the
case of weak interpenetration δ ≪ D,
only a small fraction δ/D of all monomers is
in the interpenetration zone. The total number of blobs per unit area
in the interpenetration zone is n = δ/ξ3 with n/2 from each brush. Each chain section in
the interpenetration zone is almost unstretched with (δ/ξ)2 blobs per section. The number of chain sections per unit
area in the interpenetration zone 1/(δξ) is smaller than the total grafting density ρ = D/(ξ3N/g) by the
factorwhere we used eqs 33 and 34, ξ2N/g ≃ R2 ≃
δ3/2D1/2. Therefore,
the fraction of polyions with free ends in the interpenetration zone
is (δ/D)1/2, while the fraction
of monomers in this zone δ/D, leading to the
average number of monomers per chain section in the interpenetration
zone N(δ/D)1/2.
Full Interpenetration
A decrease
in spacing between plates D eventually results in
the full interpenetration of apposing brushes, δ ≃ D, at plate separation D ≃ R. At smaller distances D < R, there is full interpenetration of apposing brushes, δ
= D, with total number of “interpenetrating”
blobs per unit area n = D/ξ3 where blob size ξ
is given by eq 31.At distances D between plates smaller thanthe correlation length ξ in compressed
polyelectrolyte brushes is governed by the nonelectrostatic interactions,As long
as there are many counterions (with
translational entropy ≃ kT each) per correlation blob with size ξ
(eq 37), the normal force P is dominated by the osmotic pressure of counterions. This mixed
regime with correlation length controlled by nonelectrostatic interactions
(eq 37), but osmotic pressure dominated by counterions
is expected in the interval of distances between surfaces D < D < D. At the lower boundary of
this intervalthere is one counterion per correlation
volume.
At even stronger compressions with D < D, the number of counterions
per correlation blob becomes smaller than unity. Here, both correlation
length ξ and osmotic pressureare determined by the nonelectrostatic interactions
between monomers. In this interval of plate separations (D < D), compressed
polyelectrolyte brushes behave as quasi-neutral ones.
Friction between Polyelectrolyte Brushes
Bare
Surfaces
Before describing the
effect of PE brushes on the friction between substrates, consider
the friction between bare planar surfaces with charge number density Nfρ immersed in a Newtonian liquid with viscosity
η. We assume that shear does not
perturb the Gouy–Chapman counterion distribution. The normal
force P is determined by the counterion pressure
in the middle of the gap between surfaces[20]The shear stress σ (friction
force per unit area) experienced by
planar surfaces in laminar flow with effective velocity gradient V/D equal to the actual strain rateisTherefore, in the case of bare surfaces the effective viscosity
defined as the ratio of measured shear stress σ and externally
imposed effective shear rate V/Dis
equal to the solvent viscosity η.
Polyelectrolyte Brushes
The shear
of polymer-covered substrates with a low sliding velocity V results in linear velocity dependence of shear stress
(friction force per unit area) σ ∼ V. Velocity V in this linear regime is low enough
to allow complete relaxation of polyion conformations with almost
unperturbed distribution of monomers in PE brush in both normal and
lateral directions.
Regime of Weak Compression
(D ≫ H0)
In the case of
weak compression there is a gap between brushes acting as a lubrication
layer. The flow of solvent within the brush is suppressed on hydrodynamic
screening length scale ξ much smaller
than PE brush thickness H0. The shear-induced
laminar flow of the solvent is therefore limited to the gap of thickness D – 2H + 2ξ = ΔD + 2ξ, where ξ is the flow penetration length into each of the brushes. The thickness
of this gap is estimated in the Appendix for the polyions with the
Gaussian elasticity. The shear stress σ is obtained in this regime of weak PE brush compression by
substituting D by ΔD + 2ξ in eq 42,with effective viscosityenhanced with respect to the solvent viscosity
η by the geometric factor D/(ΔD + 2ξ). If the thickness H0 of the PE
brush is much smaller than spacing between grafted surfaces H0 ≪ D, the
shear stressis similar to the shear stress between two
bare charged surfaces (eq 42). The effective
viscosity ηeff (eq 45) in this
regime of weak PE brush compression is approximately equal to the
solvent viscosity η. The reduced
viscosityis close to unity, as depicted in
Figure 3 by the plateau located at distances
between surfaces D > H0.
Figure 3
Reduced effective viscosity ηeff/η (equal to enhancement of shear stress σ/σ) as a function of distance D between surfaces in
logarithmic coordinates. Charges on polyions and mobile ions are not
shown, brush interpenetration regions are shadowed gray, the gap of
laminar solvent flow with width ΔD + 2ξ is shadowed blue. Regions with sharp increase
in reduced effective viscosity ηeff/η are shadowed pink.
Reduced effective viscosity ηeff/η (equal to enhancement of shear stress σ/σ) as a function of distance D between surfaces in
logarithmic coordinates. Charges on polyions and mobile ions are not
shown, brush interpenetration regions are shadowed gray, the gap of
laminar solvent flow with width ΔD + 2ξ is shadowed blue. Regions with sharp increase
in reduced effective viscosity ηeff/η are shadowed pink.
Regime of Intermediate Compression (L < D < H0)
As the distance between grafted surfaces approaches the
thickness of uncompressed brushes D ≈ H0, the size of the gap D –
2H + 2ξ rapidly
decreases. The corresponding shear stress (eq 44) and the effective viscosity (eq 45) increase
and become much larger than in the case of the bare charged surfaces
at the same spacing D (eqs 42 and 43). The reduced viscosity becomes much
larger than unity ηeff/η ≫ 1 (see Figure 3).As
the spacing between the surfaces becomes smaller than the uncompressed
brush thickness D ≲ H0, the width ΔD of the polymer-free
gap between apposing brushes decreases below the hydrodynamic penetration
length ξ, and the thickness of
the effective gap saturates at 2ξ withestimated assuming Gaussian elasticity of
polyions (see Appendix for details). In this
case the shear stress due to penetration of flow inside polyelectrolyte
brushes weakly increases with decreasing separation D between platesand the reduced effective
viscosityis
much larger than unity and decreases with
decreasing D (see Figure 3). The sharp increase of the effective viscosity at plates separation D ≈ H0 is by the large
factor (ρH02)2/5. Note that although the effective
viscosity is much higher than the solvent viscosity, the actual viscosity
in the lubrication layer is still solvent-like η because the concentration of polymer segments in
this layer is small.
Regime of Strong Compression
(D < L)
The solvent-like
friction is replaced
with the polymer solution-type friction at the boundary between intermediate
and strong compression regimes D ≃ L. This corresponds to another sharp increase of shear stress
and effective viscosity upon compression (see the vertical dashed
line at H = L in Figure 3). The concentration of polymer segments c = 2Nρ/D in the
regime of strong compression D ≪ L, becomes almost uniform in the gap between the grafted surfaces.
Subregime of Partially Penetrating PE Chains (D* < D < L)
In this subregime, the lateral force σ is governed by the polymer solution - type friction in the
interpenetration zone with thickness δ. Polymer segments from
one brush in this zone are dragged with velocity ∼V with respect to segments from the apposing brush. Assuming that
hydrodynamic interactions are screened on length scales on the order
of correlation length ξ and that the chains are unentangled,
the friction force per correlation blob of size ξ can be estimated
by the Stocks law as Vηξ. Therefore, the total shear stress is given bywhere n ≈ δ/ξ3 is the number of correlation
blobs per unit area in the interpenetration zone. The interpenetration
length δ for partially interpenetrating PE brushes can be estimated
using eq 34and is compression-independent and does not
depend on distance D between plates in the interval
of D* < D < L. The resulting friction stressincreases
linearly with concentration c = 2Nρ/D or reciprocally
with spacing D between grafted surfaces upon PE brush
compression (σ ∼ c ∼ D–1). Therefore, the reduced effective viscosityis independent of the distance between
grafted
surfaces D in this strong compression regime with
partially interpenetrating PE brushes. This behavior of reduced effective
viscosity ηeff/η is depicted by the high plateau located to the left of the dashed
vertical lines in Figure 3. The jump of the
effective viscosity at D ≈ L is by the factor (ρL2)4/15.This regime of constant reduced effective viscosity ηeff/η ends at the separation
between grafted surfaces D on the order of the compression-independent
interpenetration length δ (eq 51)Note that at this boundary of the subregime
the plate separation D* (eq 54) is on the order of the fluctuations of the polyelectrolyte
chains R (eq 33)—the
size of unstretched chains, as expected for the interpenetration zone.
Subregime of Fully Penetrating PE Chains (D < D*)
At smaller separations
between grafted surfaces, D < R, there is full interpenetration between chains from apposing brushes
and all D/ξ3 correlation blobs per
unit area contribute to the friction force. The resulting friction
stress in this regimeis D-independent. The corresponding
effective viscosity ηeff = σD/V is proportional to the separation D between grafted surfaces. This behavior of the reduced viscosityis depicted by the solid line with slope 1
in Figure 3.
Subregime of Quasi-Neutral
Chains
At very strong compressions
with D < D (eq 36) the correlation length ξ
of the space between plates is governed by the nonelectrostatic interactions
(eq 37), and the friction stress σ approaches
the value for neutral brushes[8]with the effective viscosityThis effective viscosity is independent
of distance D between grafted surfaces for a brush
in Θ-solvent with ν = 1/2. In good solvent with ν
= 3/5 the effective viscosity in quasi-neutral regime decreases as
square root of plate separation D. The reduced viscosity
ηeff/η in this
quasi-neutral regime is indicated by the line with slope (4ν–2)/(3ν–1)
in the left part of Figure 3.
Discussion
Bare Charged Surfaces vs
PE Brushes
Comparison of forces between bare charged and
polyelectrolyte-decorated
surfaces with the same surface charge density (eqs 42, 44, 52, and 55) indicates that polyelectrolyte brushes considerably
enhance both normal and lateral forces at distances smaller than original
brush thickness D ≲ H0. This enhancement for planar substrates decorated with PE
brushes with respect to bare plates with equivalent surface charge
density efNρ is demonstrated in Figure 3 displaying the ratio of lateral (friction) stresses
σ/σ = ηeff/η and in Figure 4 presenting the ratio of normal
pressures P/P as functions of the separation
between plates D.[37]
Figure 4
Ratio of normal
forces per unit area P/P for PE
brush-decorated and bare surfaces with the same surface
charge density as a function of distance D in logarithmic
coordinates. Region of sharp increase in P/P is shadowed pink.
Ratio of normal
forces per unit area P/P for PE
brush-decorated and bare surfaces with the same surface
charge density as a function of distance D in logarithmic
coordinates. Region of sharp increase in P/P is shadowed pink.
Comparison of Normal Stresses
The enhancement of normal
force per unit area P is very large: the ratio iswith the largest value on the order of H0/Λ at plate separation D ≈ H0. The ratio of normal stresses P/P remains much larger than unity in the
whole interval of compressions D < H0 passing through a minimum at distance between plates D ≃ D, as shown in Figure 4. The physical reason
for this large enhancement of pressure (eq 59) is the difference between the counterion distributions in the two
cases. Counterions are localized within the volume of the polyelectrolyte
brush and the pressure P quickly increases upon compression of the PE brush down to D ≃ H0. In the case of
bare charged surfaces, counterions are localized very close to the
surfaces with half of them within the Gouy–Chapman layer of
thickness Λ much smaller than the brush thickness Λ ≪ H0. Therefore, the normal stress P between bare surfaces is due to
the confinement of loose tails of ion distributions (eq 40) at distances Λ < D < H0, and is very small because counterion concentration
is very low outside the Gouy–Chapman layer. At separations
between plates smaller than D at which polyelectrolyte brushes exhibit quasi-neutral behavior
(eq 39), the ratio of normal forces iswith exponent −(2 – 3ν)/(3ν
– 1) (see Figure 4) equal to −1
in Θ solvents and −1/4 in good solvents.
Comparison
of Friction Stresses
Friction forces between
polymer-decorated surfaces are also considerably enhanced compared
to these for bare surfaces (see Figure 3).
The distribution of counterions is not as important because counterions
do not directly participate in friction. The first sharp increase
of shear stress upon compression of brushesis due to the reduction of the thickness of
lubrication layer from H0 to ξ at plate separations D ≈ H0. The enhancement of shear stress in the intermediate
compression regime is (see eq 49)The
second sharp increase of shear stress
by the factor (ρL2)4/15at plate separations D ≃ L, occurs because solvent-like friction is substituted by polymer
solution-type friction in the interpenetration zone between apposing
brushes. The high ratio of friction stresses (eq 53)is independent of plate separation D in the first
regime of strong compression because interpenetration
length δ is D-independent in this regime (see
plateau in Figure 3).In the second regime
of strong compression with full interpenetration of apposing brushes
the ratio of friction stresses (eq 56)decreases linearly with distance between plates D (see eq 56). Note that enhancement
of friction stresses between grafted surfaces σ/σ in all
regimes with D < H0 is smaller than the ratio of normal forces P/P. This explains why polymer brushes are better lubricants than
simple liquids as discussed in detail below.
Friction Coefficient
Friction coefficient
is conventionally defined[1] as the ratio
of friction to normal forcesThe normal force–pressure P between apposing brushes is velocity-independent in the
linear regime, while the shear stress σ is linearly proportional
to sliding velocity V. Therefore, friction coefficient
μ for brushes is a velocity-dependent quantity, and thus does
not directly characterize the properties of participating surfaces
unlike the friction coefficient between solid surfaces. In particular,
one can always select small enough velocity to obtain as low friction
coefficient μ as one would like. Note that the friction coefficient
μ between bare charged surfaces
is also velocity-dependentwhere we
used eqs 40, 42, and 65, while the
case D < Λ is not of practical interest
for strongly charged surfaces with Λ ≲ b.Nevertheless the velocity-dependent friction coefficients
μ
can be compared between different pairs of surfaces at similar shear
conditions. By using the results of previous subsections, we compare
friction coefficients for two systems: planar surfaces decorated by
osmotic polyelectrolyte brushes and bare charged surfaces with equivalent
charge densityFor polyelectrolyte-decorated surfaces
at large distances D ≫ H0 between
plates, the friction coefficient (calculated with eqs 27 and 46)is almost unaffected by the presence
of polymer
brushes. This behavior of μ is indicated in Figure 5a by solid line with slope 1 at large separations D ≫ H0 between plates
and is the same as between bare surfaces (eq 66).(see the corresponding horizontal
line in
Figure 5b).
Figure 5
(a) Friction coefficient μ between
planar surfaces decorated
by PE brushes (solid lines) and neutral brushes with the same degree
of chain polymerization N and grafting density ρ
(dotted lines) as a function of distance D between
surfaces in logarithmic coordinates. (b) Ratio of friction coefficients
μ/μ for PE brush-decorated and bare surfaces with the same surface
charge density in logarithmic coordinates. The region of enhanced
lubrication by PE brushes is shadowed pink.
(a) Friction coefficient μ between
planar surfaces decorated
by PE brushes (solid lines) and neutral brushes with the same degree
of chain polymerization N and grafting density ρ
(dotted lines) as a function of distance D between
surfaces in logarithmic coordinates. (b) Ratio of friction coefficients
μ/μ for PE brush-decorated and bare surfaces with the same surface
charge density in logarithmic coordinates. The region of enhanced
lubrication by PE brushes is shadowed pink.At the boundary between weak and intermediate compressions
(D ≈ H0) both
the normal
and shear stresses sharply increase, but the friction coefficient
μ drops because enhancement
of normal force by factor H0/Λ is
stronger than enhancement of friction stress between the brush-decorated
surfaces by factor (ρH02)2/5at relatively
high grafting densities of polyions in the osmotic regime with ρ/ρ>(uf ν)−2/3 >
1. This case is depicted in Figure 5b.In the regime of intermediate compression, L < D < H0, the friction stress
σ is still solvent-like, but
is enhanced in comparison to shear stress between bare charged surfaces
due to very thin lubrication layer between brushes. In this regime
of intermediate compression the thickness ΔD of the gap between brushes is already much smaller than the hydrodynamic
penetration length ξ. The latter
determines the effective gap thickness where the friction remains
solvent-like. The normal pressure P between brushes is enhanced more than shear stress σ due to the contribution to the pressure
from almost all counterions. In this interval of distances D, the friction coefficient μ is estimated assuming Gaussian elasticity of polyions (using
eqs 28 and 48) asdecreasing
as μ ∼ D4/5 upon the decrease
in plate separation D (see line with slope 4/5 in
Figure 5a). The ratio of friction coefficientsdrops sharply at D ≃ H0 and weakly increases as μμ ∼ D–1/5 with decreasing D (see Figure 5b).The sharp increase
of the friction coefficient μ at D ≃ L indicated by the
left vertical dashed line in Figure 5a is associated
with the interpenetration of PE chains and
the appearance of polymer solution-type friction. PE brushes start
to overlap in the regime of strong compressions at distances between
plates D < L and the friction
coefficient (calculated using eqs 28 and 52)is independent of
the distance D between plates. This behavior of μ is shown by the horizontal line in Figure 5a. The ratio of friction coefficients in this regimevaries reciprocally
with spacing between plates D (μμ ∼ D–1, see the line with slope −1
in Figure 5b).As polyelectrolyte brushes
fully interpenetrate each other at distances D < D < D*, eqs 28 and 55 give friction coefficientlinearly proportional to plate separation
(as indicated by the solid line with slope 1 at D < D* in Figure 5a). The ratio of friction coefficientsis independent of plate spacing D (left horizontal
line in Figure 5b). Note
that uf ν < 1 for charge
density f below Manning condensation threshold[33] and uf ν = 1 for highly charged chains with f above this
threshold. Therefore, the ratio of friction coefficients in this regime
is greater than or on the order of unity, indicating that polyelectrolyte
brushes can produce solvent-like friction at very high normal loads.At larger compressions D < D < D, correlation length ξ is governed by nonelectrostatic
interactions (eq 37) while the normal pressure
is still determined by mobile counterions. By using eqs 28 and 57 one finds friction coefficient
in this mixed subregime,with no D-dependence in Θ-solvent
(ν = 1/2) and decreasing as μ ∼ D1/2 upon further compression under good solvent conditions
(ν = 3/5). Scaling dependence for μ in this subregime
is shown in Figure 5a by the solid line with
exponent (4ν – 2)/(3ν – 1). The corresponding
ratio of friction coefficients in this mixed regimeincreases with decreasing D as indicated by the
line with slope (ν – 1)/(3ν
– 1) in Figure 5b.Finally the
compressed polyelectrolyte brushes behave as quasi-neutral
at distances between plates D < D. The friction coefficient in this
subregime is determined by eqs 39 and 57 asand decreases upon
compression as sketched
in Figure 5a by the solid line with exponent
(4ν – 1)/(3ν – 1). In Θ solvent with
ν = 1/2, this exponent is equal to 2 while in good solvent with
ν = 3/5 it decreases to 7/4. The ratio of friction coefficients
between a pair of quasi-neutral brushes μ and a pair of bare charged surfaces μdecreases
with decreasing D, as indicated by the line with
slope ν/(3ν –
1) in Figure 5b and can become less than unity
at high enough compression as long as polymer volume fraction between
plates is still low.As shown in Figure 5b, the brush-decorated
surfaces can produce noticeably smaller friction coefficient compared
to friction between bare charged surfaces. A significant drop in μ/μ is achieved for polyelectrolyte brushes in the interval of distances
between plates D* < D < H0. This range of conditions is
marked by shadowed (pink) region in Figure 5b. Here, charged polymer brushes behave as better lubricants than
low molecular weight liquids, while supporting much higher loads.
Different regimes of friction between polyelectrolyte brushes are
summarized in Table 1.
Table 1
a Normal
Pressure P/(kT), Reduced
Effective Viscosity η/η, and Ratio of Friction Coefficients μ/μ between a Pair of Apposing Polyelectrolyte Brushes with Weakly Charged
Chains bf–ν < l
regimes
Pbrush/(kBT)
ηeff/ηs = σbrush/σbare
μbrush/μbare
D ≫ H0
(lBD2)−1
1
1
L < D < H0
fNρ/D
(ρD2)2/5
(lBD1/5ρ3/5)−1
D* < D < L
fNρ/D
(ρL2)2/3
(ρL2)2/3/(f N lBρD)
Dn < D < D*
fNρ/D
ρDL
(ufν)−1/(2−ν)
Dqn < D < Dn
fNρ/D
(Nρb3/D)2ν/(3ν–1) (D/b)2
(1/uf)(Nρb3/D)(1−ν)/(3ν–1)
D < Dqn
b–3(Nρb3/D)3ν/(3ν–1)
(Nρb3/D)2ν/(3ν–1) (D/b)2
(1/u)[D/(Nρb3)]ν/(3ν–1)
Here σ ≈ ηV/D and μ ≈
ηVlD/kT are shear stress and friction
coefficient between bare surfaces with the same charge density e f N ρ as polyelectrolyte brushes.
Here σ ≈ ηV/D and μ ≈
ηVlD/kT are shear stress and friction
coefficient between bare surfaces with the same charge density e f N ρ as polyelectrolyte brushes.Note that the volume fraction of
monomers cb3 ≈ Nρb3/D in the compressed brushes is assumed
to be much less than unity
in all regimes to avoid the effect of high monomeric friction coefficient
and glass transition of bulk polymers.The schematic behavior
of the friction coefficient μ for
neutral polymer brushes (with fraction of charged monomers f = 0) and the same grafting density ρ is
depicted by the dotted lines in Figure 5a.
In contrast to polyelectrolyte brushes, neutral polymer brushes start
to interact with each other at distances D ≃ H with unperturbed brush thickness H specified by eq 20 (indicated by the dotted vertical line in Figure 5a). At stronger compressions, D* < D < H (with distance D* on the order
of unperturbed chain length in semidilute polymer solution with concentration Nρ/D*), neutral brushes are
partially interpenetrating, and the decrease in friction coefficient
μ in this subregime is indicated by the dotted line with slope
(4ν – 1)/[3(3ν – 1)] (that is, 7/12 for
ν = 3/5, and 2/3 for ν = 1/2). In the regime of full interpenetration
of neutral brushes at distances D < D*, friction coefficient μ is described by eq 77 and is depicted by the dotted line with slope (4ν
– 1)/(3ν – 1) (that is, 7/4 for ν = 3/5,
and 2 for v = 1/2) in Figure 5a. As shown in Figure 5a, polyelectrolyte
brushes provide lower friction coefficient than neutral brushes at
the same conditions (same sliding velocity, mass per unit area, and
plate separation) except for very strong compressions with distance
between plates D < D at which polyelectrolyte brushes exhibit quasi-neutral
behavior and friction coefficients of polyelectrolyte and neutral
brushes are similar.Our theoretical predictions were obtained
for salt-free solutions,
but they are also applicable for solutions with added salt as long
as salt concentration c is lower than the concentration of counterions, c = 2fNρ/D. The concentration of counterions c in the gap between apposing brushes increases
upon compression (with the decrease of the spacing D between plates), and the applicability of our results expands at
stronger compressions.
Effect of Counterion Condensation
on Friction
between Polyelectrolyte Brushes
The equations discussed above
and summarized in Table 1 were derived for
flexible weakly charged polyelectrolytes with degree of ionization
below the Manning condensation threshold (bf–ν < l, where f is the number of elementary charges
per Kuhn length b). If the charge density f, increases up to the value of f ≈ u–1/ν both the size of electrostatic
blob (ξ), and the distance between
charges along the chain (L/fN) approach
the value of the Bjerrum length (l). At higher bare charge densities f > u–1/ν the Manning condensation of
counterions maintains the distance l between the uncondensed charges along the polyion
with the effective charge density feff ≈ u–1/ν. There is
no Pincus regime with intermolecularly induced stretching for such
strongly charged brushes with condensed counterions because ρ ≈ ρ* ≈ L–2 (see eqs 11 and 16). In this counterion condensation regime with feff ≈ u–1/ν, brush height H ≈ H0 ≈ L ≃ bNu(ν–1)/ν is independent of chain grafting
density ρ (eq 17 and 3).For these brushes with condensed counterions the regime
of intermediate compression with interval of distances L < D < H0 between
surfaces shrinks into the crossover region between the regime of weak
compression (with D ≫ H0 ≃ L) and the regime of strong compression
(with D < L). There is also no
mixed subregime with interval of distances between surfaces D < D < D. The two remaining crossover
distances separating various subregimes in the regime of strong brush
compression (eqs 54, 36, and 38) are D* ≃ (bNu[(2ν–1)(1−ν)]/[ν(2−ν)]/ρ)1/3 and D ≃ D ≃ b3Nρu(3ν–1)/ν. By substituting the effective charge density feff ≈ u–1/ν and L ≃ Nbu(ν–1)/ν into the corresponding equations for shear stress σ and the friction coefficient μ, one finds
the reduced effective viscosity ηeff/η and the ratio of friction coefficients μ/μ for strongly charged (f > u–1/ν) flexible polyions with electrostatic
interaction
parameter u = l/b > 1 (see Table 2).
Table 2
Normal Pressure P/(kT), Reduced Effective Viscosity
η/η, and Ratio of Friction Coefficients μ/μ between a Pair of
Apposing Polyelectrolyte Brushes with Strongly Charged (bf–ν > l) Flexible (b < l) Chainsa
regimes
Pbrush/(kBT)
ηeff/ηs = σbrush/σbare
μbrush/μbare
D ≫ H0 ≃ L
(lBD2)−1
1
1
D*< D < L
u–1/νNρ/D
ρ2/3(bNu(ν–1)/ν)4/3
b1/3N1/3u(ν–1)/3ν/(ρ1/3D)
Dn< D < D*
u–1/νNρ/D
ρDbNu(ν–1)/ν
1
D < Dqn ≃ Dn
b–3(Nρb3/D)3ν/(3ν–1)
(Nρb3/D)2ν/(3ν–1) (D/b)2
(1/u)[D/(Nρb3)]ν/(3ν–1)
Here σ ≈ ηV/D, μ ≈
ηVlD/kT are shear stress and friction
coefficient between bare surfaces with the same charge density efNρ as polyelectrolyte brushes.
Here σ ≈ ηV/D, μ ≈
ηVlD/kT are shear stress and friction
coefficient between bare surfaces with the same charge density efNρ as polyelectrolyte brushes.In the case of stiff chains with b > l there
is another regime with increasing
charge density f preceding counterion condensation
regime. If charge density f is higher than u–1/2 the electrostatic blob size ξ becomes smaller than Kuhn length b. These stiff polyelectrolyte chains are almost fully stretched
with end-to-end distance approaching contour length bN but for u–1/2 < f < u–1 there is no counterion
condensation. At higher charge densities f > u–1 counterions condense on these almost
fully stretched polyions saturating the effective charge density at
the Manning value of one charge per Bjerrum length corresponding to
effective charge density f ≈ 1/u charges per Kuhn length.For flexible polyelectrolytes with
a typical Kuhn segment length b ≃ 1.5–2.0
nm, the value of electrostatic
parameter u = l/b is estimated in water to be u ≃ 0.3–0.5. That is, in scaling terms u = l/b is close to unity, and many experimental systems (e.g., ref (13)) are at the crossover
between the scaling regimes with u ≫ 1 and u ≪ 1. For strongly charged polyelectrolytes with
condensed counterions, one can approximate this crossover region by
substituting u = 1 in the equations presented in
this subsection to find brush thickness H0 ≃ L ≃ bN, and two
threshold spacings between surfaces D* ≃ (bN/ρ)1/3 and D ≃ D ≃ b3Nρ. The subregime of
quasi-neutral brush behavior is shifted to very high polymer concentrations b3Nρ/D ≃ 1 in the gap between surfaces,
and is thereby eliminated. By substituting u = 1
in Table 2 above we find the reduced effective
viscosity ηeff/η and relative friction coefficient μ/μ for the case of crossover
electrostatic parameter u = l/b ≃ 1 (Table 3).
Table 3
a Normal
Pressure P/(kT), Reduced
Effective Viscosity η/η, and Ratio of Friction Coefficients μ/μ between a Pair of Apposing Strongly Charged (bf–ν > l) Polyelectrolyte Brushes with l = b
regimes
Pbrush/(kBT)
ηeff/ηs = σbrush/σbare
μbrush/μbare
D ≫ bN
(lBD2)−1
1
1
D* < D < bN
Nρ/D
ρ2/3(bN)4/3
D*/D < 1
D < D*
Nρ/D
ρDbN
1
Here the crossover plate separation D* ≃ (bN/ρ)1/3.
Here the crossover plate separation D* ≃ (bN/ρ)1/3.At separations D between surfaces much larger
than brush thickness bN, effective viscosities, shear
stresses, and friction coefficients between pairs of apposing brushes
and between pairs of bare surfaces are almost the same (all ratios
are ≈1). Upon intermediate compression with partial interpenetration
between brushes (D* < D < bN) the enhancement of shear stress σ/σ is smaller than the enhancement of normal stress P/P and the relative friction coefficient between
brushes μ is smaller than friction
coefficient between bare surfaces μ by the factor μ/μ ≈ D*/D. Upon further compression (D < D*) friction coefficients between
polyelectrolyte brushes and bare surfaces are the same, but brushes
support much higher load.
Conclusions
The scaling theory developed in this paper is applicable for brushes
with relatively short polyelectrolyte chains with no entanglements
at salt-free conditions and for low sliding velocities V (linear response regime with friction stress σ proportional
to shear rate). In addition to the electrostatic interactions between
charged species, the model accounts for the short-range two-body and
three-body monomer–monomer interactions (with scaling exponents
ν = 3/5 and ν = 1/2 for good or Θ solvent conditions,
respectively). The simple scaling model neglects the higher order
nonelectrostatic interactions between monomers and the changes in
the dielectric constant and monomeric friction coefficient that become
significant at higher polymer concentrations (i.e., at strong compressions
of the brushes).The decrease in distance D between brush-decorated
surfaces gives rise to a sequence of regimes that are characterized
by different scaling dependences for friction coefficient μ.
The full set of regimes is predicted for grafting densities of polyions
ρ < b–2N–1/2 that are not too high. For this interval of
grafting densities, at the maximum compression of brushes to the polymer
volume fraction between surfaces close to unity, the distance between
surfaces D is smaller than the Gaussian size of the
polyions. For higher grafting densities ρ > b–2N–1/2some
subregimes predicted for strong compressions of brushes disappear.We demonstrate that enhanced lubricating properties of polyelectrolyte
brushes compared to bare surfaces with equivalent surface charge density
are linked to confinement of mobile counterions in the volume of PE
brush in the osmotic regime. Compression of apposing PE brushes with
interplate distances Λ < D < H0 leads to the increase in osmotic pressure
of confined counterions, P ∼ D–1, while bare
charged surfaces experience much smaller normal force, P ∼ D–2, due to significantly lower counterion concentration
outside the Gouy–Chapman layer of thickness Λ ≃
(lρfN)−1. Although shear stress σ arising upon interpenetration of sliding PE
brushes is larger than the stress σ between bare charged surfaces, the friction coefficient μ
= σ/P remains smaller for PE brushes due to
considerably higher values of pressure P ≫ P at interplate distances Λ < D < H0. This enhancement in lubrication is provided
by polyelectrolyte brushes with grafting densities of polyions ρ
> (uf ν)−2/3ρ. In the opposite case of very
low grafting densities of polyions, ρ < ρ < (uf ν)−2/3ρ, the
friction coefficient μ between bare charged surfaces is smaller
than between polyelectrolyte brushes under similar conditions (same
sliding velocity V and distance Λ < D < H0 between surfaces).Comparison of friction coefficient μ = σ/P for charged and neutral polymer brushes with the same mass per unit
area revealed enhanced lubrication (i.e., smaller values of μ)
between PE brushes. Only at strong compressions of the tethered polyions
in the interval of distances D < D (in the quasi-neutral regime, see
Table 1 and Figure 5a) do the friction coefficients for the two systems become similar.
Recent computer simulations,[34,35,15] confirmed smaller values of friction coefficient μ for charged
brushes compared to neutral systems under similar conditions. However,
the simulations mostly focused on the nonlinear regime with V-dependent width of the interpenetration zone[15] and shear stress σ described by the sublinear
dependence[34] on the sliding velocity V. Therefore, a comprehensive comparison between the results
of computer simulations as well as experiments and the predictions
of our model is still missing. The corresponding simulations are currently
under way and the results and comparison between simulations and theory
will be presented in a future publication.
Authors: Zhexun Sun; Elizabeth Feeney; Ya Guan; Sierra G Cook; Delphine Gourdon; Lawrence J Bonassar; David Putnam Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2019-06-04 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Jing Yu; Nicholas E Jackson; Xin Xu; Blair K Brettmann; Marina Ruths; Juan J de Pablo; Matthew Tirrell Journal: Sci Adv Date: 2017-12-08 Impact factor: 14.136
Authors: Krzysztof Halagan; Michal Banaszak; Jaroslaw Jung; Piotr Polanowski; Andrzej Sikorski Journal: Polymers (Basel) Date: 2021-12-08 Impact factor: 4.329