The specific interaction of ions with macromolecules and solid-liquid interfaces is of crucial importance to many processes in biochemistry, colloid science, and engineering, as first pointed out by Hofmeister in the context of (de)stabilization of protein solutions. Here, we use contact angle goniometry to demonstrate that the macroscopic contact angle of aqueous chloride salt solutions on mica immersed in ambient alkane increases from near-zero to values exceeding 10°, depending on the type and concentration of cations and pH. Our observations result in a series of increasing ability of cations to induce partial wetting in the order Na+, K+ < Li+ < Rb+ < Cs+ < Ca2+ < Mg2+ < Ba2+. Complementary atomic force microscopy measurements show that the transition to partial wetting is accompanied by cation adsorption to the mica-electrolyte interface, which leads to charge reversal in the case of divalent cations. In addition to electrostatics, hydration forces seem to play an important role, in particular for the monovalent cations.
The specific interaction of ions with macromolecules and solid-liquid interfaces is of crucial importance to many processes in biochemistry, colloid science, and engineering, as first pointed out by Hofmeister in the context of (de)stabilization of protein solutions. Here, we use contact angle goniometry to demonstrate that the macroscopic contact angle of aqueous chloride salt solutions on mica immersed in ambient alkane increases from near-zero to values exceeding 10°, depending on the type and concentration of cations and pH. Our observations result in a series of increasing ability of cations to induce partial wetting in the order Na+, K+ < Li+ < Rb+ < Cs+ < Ca2+ < Mg2+ < Ba2+. Complementary atomic force microscopy measurements show that the transition to partial wetting is accompanied by cation adsorption to the mica-electrolyte interface, which leads to charge reversal in the case of divalent cations. In addition to electrostatics, hydration forces seem to play an important role, in particular for the monovalent cations.
Competitive wetting
of oil and water on solid surfaces plays an
important role in many applications of colloid and interface science,
including environmental two-phase flows, remediation of environmental
contamination,[1] Pickering emulsions, separation
of emulsions,[2] and the recovery of crude
oil from geological reservoirs.[3−5] In many of these applications,
the fluids involved are rather complex due to the presence of various
solutes. Changes in the fluid composition can have important consequences
for the performance of the system, e.g., by affecting colloidal stability,[6−8] adsorption,[9,10] and resulting flow properties.[11] Understanding wettability[12] is particularly challenging because wetting involves the
interaction of three types of interfaces, the solid–oil (so),
solid–water (sw), and the oil–water (ow) interfaces
that are all susceptible to variations of the composition of the fluids.
Only the balance of all three tensions γso, γsw, and γ determines the contact angle following Young’s
equationUnderstanding variations of the contact
angle,
thus, requires simultaneous understanding of the response of all three
interfacial tensions to changes of the fluid composition. Classical
thermodynamics of interfaces teaches us that any solute that is either
attracted to or repelled from an interface will decrease or increase
the corresponding interfacial tension.[12,13] While surfactants
are arguably the most important common additive to control interfacial
tensions and wettability, almost any other solute does the same unless
a fortuitous compensation of molecular interaction forces suppresses
any interfacial activity. In the present work, we focus on the effect
of dissolved salts on the wettability of oil–water–mineral
systems, in particular, aqueous electrolytes on mica, an aluminosilicate
mineral, in an ambient alkane. While the work is motivated by the
possibility of enhancing the production of crude oil by reducing the
salinity of the water that is injected into geological reservoirs
in the course of the standard water flooding oil recovery process,
our primary goal is to identify the microscopic mechanisms controlling
wettability in this idealized model system.For both oil–water
and mica–water interfaces the
adsorption of ions from the aqueous phase has been studied in great
detail throughout several decades. Specific attention has been paid
to air–water interfaces. They serve as a general representative
of hydrophobic-water interfaces also including interfaces of water
with inert oils such as alkanes. In the case of air–water interfaces,
the interfacial tension increases with the increasing concentration
for the majority of “inert” inorganic ions. The basic
origin of this trend was explained by Onsager and Samaras,[14] who realized that ions dissolved in a more polar
medium, water, are repelled from an interface with a less polar medium,
oil, by electrostatic image forces. Even for point charges, this leads
to a depletion of ions from the interface and hence to an increase
of the surface tension following Gibbs’ adsorption equation.
Yet, dielectric polarization of the media involved is not the only
force acting on the ions. The surface tension is also affected by
the polarizability of the ion itself and also by hydration effects,
which are highly ion-specific. For many anions, their larger size
leads to a strong polarizability of the ion that overcompensates the
effect of image charge forces, and thus leads to accumulation rather
than depletion. In recent years, advanced experimental techniques
such as X-ray spectroscopy have generated a wealth of detailed information
about density profiles of various ions reflecting their specific affinity
towards (or depletion from) the water surface.[15−17]Mineral-water
interfaces have classically been studied using titration
measurements, electrokinetic techniques such as streaming potential
measurements, as well as various types of surface force measurements
(surface forces apparatus (SFA), atomic force microscopy (AFM), colloidal
probe-AFM).[9,10,18] Mica has been studied in particular detail because it can be prepared
by cleaving to generate clean atomically smooth surfaces over macroscopic
areas with well-defined tetrahedra of silicon oxide at the surface.
Mica displays a rather strong intrinsic negative surface charge caused
by isomorphic substitution of Si by Al atoms in the top layer of the
crystal lattice. Cations are known to adsorb to these interfaces to
compensate the negative charge density. Their affinity increases with
the increasing ion size along the alkali series, as reported consistently
in both electrokinetic and force measurements. Results for divalent
cations are less consistent. Early SFA measurements came to the conclusion
that the strong hydration of Ca2+ and Mg2+ suppress
surface adsorption.[19] Later, however, charge
reversal of mica–electrolyte interfaces was found for divalent
cation concentrations of the order of 10–20 mM[20] implying rather strong adsorption. This is consistent with
the stronger decreases of the ζ-potential as a function of divalent
cations’ concentration compared to monovalent ones.[21] Many aspects of these measurements could be
captured by surface speciation models that describe the adsorption
of ions to specific sites on the surface in combination with a standard
Poisson–Boltzmann description of the diffuse part of the electric
double layer.More recently, high-resolution AFM experiments[22−26] as well as X-ray reflectivity measurements[27] confirmed the overall increasing adhesion with
the increasing alkali ion size as well as the stronger adhesion of
divalent compared to monovalent cations. In addition, these experiments
provided a lot more details[23,25,27−29] regarding, e.g., competing inner shell and outer
shell adsorption,[27,30] the lateral position of adsorption
sites,[31] and in particular, the role of
hydration water for the stabilization of adsorbed ions.[23,25]The increasing experimental insights have been complemented
by
theoretical developments attempting to account for the observations
in terms of ion size, charge, and polarizability, invoking Coulombic[32,33] and dispersion[34,35] forces, and crucially, hydration.[36,37] Yet, disentangling the various individual contributions often proved
very challenging and perhaps even conceptually impossible. Molecular
dynamics simulations seem to provide a way out of this stalemate.
Rather than attempting to identify specific interaction mechanisms,
simulation results can be used to extract interaction potentials of
the mean force that include the full complexity of the ion-specific
behavior at interfaces. Such calculations have confirmed many of the
experimental trends. In particular, they consistently highlight the
prominent role of hydration[38,39] for ion-specific adsorption
to hydrophilic solid substrates. In this context, classical concepts
such as the like-likes-like principle have received renewed attention
and support.[26,40,41]Given the importance of ion-specific effects for the adsorption
of ions to the individual interfaces,[42−50] it is plausible that they will also affect the wetting properties.
Indeed, a number of studies analyzed the wettability of electrolytes
on solid surfaces.[51−53] Yet, these reports mainly focused on the pH dependence
and evaluated the variation of the charge density and energy of the
diffuse part of the electric double layer making use of Lippmann’s
equation.[13] Little attention was paid to
specific ion effects. Recently, some of us reported very distinct
variations of the wettability of aqueous solutions of CaCl2 on mica in ambient decane as a function of concentration and pH.[54] While the solutions displayed immeasurably small
contact angles at low salt concentrations and pH, finite contact angles
were found for concentrations exceeding a few tens of millimolar,
first at elevated pH and for higher concentrations beyond ≈100
mM across a wide pH range from 3 to 10. In contrast, NaCl and KCl
solutions were found to display near-zero contact angles for all concentrations
and pH values. Complementary streaming potential measurements showed
that the transition from vanishing to finite contact angles for CaCl2 coincided with the reversal of the charge of the mica–electrolyte
interfaces. A numerical model based on Derjaguin–Landau–Verwey–Overbeek
(DLVO) theory and surface speciation provided an excellent description
of the experimental observations for the limited set of salts investigated
at that time. A subsequent more detailed modeling effort highlighted
the role of charge regulation and short-range chemical forces for
the exact value of the contact angles.[55]In the present article, we extend our previous work on salt
and
pH-dependent wettability measurements to a wider range of ions, namely
for the chloride salts the alkali metals Li, Na, K, Rb, Cs, and for
the earth alkaline metals Mg, Ca, and Ba. Except for Na+ and K+, all of these cations induce a transition to finite
contact angles beyond the salt- and pH-dependent threshold concentrations.
We identified an order of increasing capability of cations to induce
partial wetting, which we will refer to as “Hofmeister series
of wettability” for the present system. The macroscopic contact
angle measurements are complemented by surface charge measurements
using atomic force microscopy (AFM). While the AFM results confirm
that the reduction of electrostatic repulsion by cation adsorption
indeed promotes partial wetting. Yet, in contrast to the suggestions
of our previous experiments based on a limited set of cations, the
present measurements also show that charge reversal is not a prerequisite
for achieving finite contact angles.The manuscript is organized
as follows: in the subsequent section,
we describe the experimental methods and procedures. In the Results and Discussion section, we report first
the brine composition-dependent contact angle measurements followed
by a description of a model of the wetting properties based on Derjaguin–Landau–Verwey–Overbeek
(DLVO) theory including an unknown part due to short-range chemical
(hydration) forces. Subsequently, we describe our atomic force microscopy
(AFM) measurements and the resulting surface charge densities. In
the Results and Discussion section, we rationalize
our results and point out the importance of hydration forces.
Experimental Section
Materials
Anhydrous
alkanes (decane, heptane, hexadecane:
>99%) were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich. Prior to the experiments,
they were purified by passing them five times through a column of
alumina powder (Al2O3, Sigma-Aldrich, Puriss
grade >98%) to remove surface-active impurities until the interfacial
tension between the oil and water remained constant to within 1°
within 30 min. Ultrapure water (Millipore, Synergy UV Instruments,
resistivity 18 MΩ) was used to prepare solutions of the salts
in a concentration range of 1 mM to 1 M. All salts were purchased
from Sigma-Aldrich (Analytical grade, purity >99.5%) and used without
further purification. The pH of the solutions is adjusted to 3, 6,
and 9 by adding HCl or HNO3 or NaOH (0.1 M, Sigma-Aldrich).
For the pH range investigated, this implies a maximum concentration
of the added ions of 10–5 M, which is small compared
to the minimum concentration of the dominant salt of 1 mM. In practice,
the pH of the aqueous stock solution was typically set to about 0.2
pH units higher than the target value to compensate upfront the effect
of dissolving CO2 from the ambient air atmosphere during
handling. All solutions were kept in air-tight containers between
their preparation and the contact angle measurements to minimize any
contamination, including CO2 dissolution. Measurements
of the pH after the contact angle experiments confirmed that the pH
decrease over time was not more than the provided offset.Muscovitemica sheets (B&M Mica Company Inc.; initial thickness 340 μm)
were cleaved in air using adhesive tape and immersed within seconds
into an oil-filled cuvette for the subsequent contact angle measurements.
A few test experiments with mica sheets cleaved directly under oil
with a tweezer and a knife edge resulting in identical results, demonstrating
that the potential contamination from the ambient air did not have
any measurable influence. Oxidized silicon wafers with an amorphous
silicon oxide layer (thickness: 30 nm) for the calibration measurements
of the AFM tips were cleaned using a combination of Piranha solution
(mixture of 30% conc. H2O2 and 70% conc. H2SO4) followed by extensive rinsing with ultrapure
water and plasma treatment for 30 min.
Contact Angle Goniometry
Macroscopic contact angle
measurements were performed using a commercial contact angle goniometer
(OCA 20L, Dataphysics Inc.) using the sessile-drop method with a drop
volume of 2 ± 0.2 μL. Droplets were deposited by slowly
approaching a syringe needle with the pendant drop to the mica surface.
Upon water–mica contact, the droplets spreaded and detached
from the needle. Contact angle values for each fluid composition shown
in this work are averages of 25 independent measurements on at least
5 different solid substrates. Additional pendant drop measurements
were performed to determine the oil/water interfacial tension of the
oil–water interface (see the Supporting Information).Contact angles ranging from 0 to approximately
15° were extracted from video snapshots using the tangent and
circle-fitting data analysis software (SCA 22) provided with the instrument.
The minimum absolute contact angle that can be determined on reflective
surfaces is approximately 2°. The absolute value of the contact
angle depends on details of the measurement conditions such as the
exact viewing angle, drop volume, illumination settings, and the exposure
time of the camera. By standardizing all these measurement conditions,
we achieved a relative accuracy of ±1°. Given the smallness
of the contact angles in our systems it was not possible to determine
a receding contact angle. On the basis of the deposition protocol,
the measured contact angle should thus be considered as advancing
contact angles. In addition to the side view imaging, we occasionally
determined the contact angle (θ) by measuring the base diameter
of the drop (2R) as determined from bottom view images
in combination with the known drop volume (Vcap) and the geometric relation: for spherical caps. A more detailed description
of the goniometry measurement procedures is provided in the Supporting Information.
Atomic Force Microscopy
Dynamic force spectroscopy
measurements were performed in an amplitude modulation mode (AM-AFM)
with an Asylum Research Cypher ES AFM equipped with photothermal excitation
along with a sealed fluid cell. The AFM cantilever is completely immersed
in the aqueous salt solution, which is sandwiched between the sample
and the top surface of the cantilever holder. The measurements were
performed using rectangular silicon cantilevers (MikroMasch NSC36/Cr-Au
BS) with a gold backside coating. Prior to use, the cantilevers are
cleaned by rinsing with an ethanol/isopropanol mixture followed by
plasma cleaning in residual air gas for 20–25 min. The cantilever
spring constant (kc), quality factor (Q), and eigen frequency (f0)
were determined by measuring the thermal noise spectrum at a tip–sample
distance of approximately 150 nm. Typical values are: kc ∼ 0.85 N/m, f0 ∼
22 kHz, and Q ∼ 3.0. The AFM tips were slightly
blunted by bringing them into frictional contact with the solid substrate
to increase the tip–sample interaction forces. This procedure
resulted in typical tip radii of 20–40 nm, as determined by
high-resolution scanning electron microscopy after the measurements.
Measured amplitude and phase vs tip–sample distance data were
converted into forces using standard procedures. For details of these
procedures, see (56).Subsequently, the charge density of the mica surfaces is
extracted from the tip–sample interaction forces by fitting
the force curves to a disjoining pressure model based on DLVO theory
including a charge regulation boundary condition that allows for ion
adsorption. This procedure involves calibration measurements of the
surface charge of the tip on an oxidized silicon wafer of identical
chemical composition. Details of these procedures are described in
refs (56) and (57).
Results and Discussion
Contact
Angle Measurements
Figure shows side view images of a series of drops
for all types of salts investigated. For each of these drops, the
concentration of the respective salt was set to 1 M and the pH was
adjusted to 9. These images summarize the essence of our observation.
There is a clear trend of the contact angle increasing systematically
from (in side view images) immeasurably small values for NaCl and
KCl solutions to values of ≈15° in the case of BaCl2. In the absence of any added salt, the contact angle is equally
immeasurably small as in the case of NaCl and KCl. Figure , thus, provides an order of
increasing capability of the cations to increase the water contact
angle. We denote this order as the cationic Hofmeister series of wettability.To provide a more complete and quantitative
account of our basic observation, we conducted the same type of contact
angle measurements for the full concentration range from 1 mM to 1
M for pH 3 to 9. The results of these experiments are summarized in Figure a–c for the
alkali series of monovalent cations and in Figure d–f for the divalent earth alkaline
cations. For Na+ and K+ ions, the contact angle
is immeasurably small for all concentrations and pH values, as reported
previously.[54] For all other salts, a clear
trend towards increasing the contact angle with increasing salt concentration
and pH is observed. For all these salts, there is a threshold concentration
beyond which the water contact angle is finite. The threshold concentration
deceases with the increasing pH. The relative order of the different
cations that is shown in Figure was found to persist for all other concentrations
and pH values, supporting the robustness of this Hofmeister series
of wettability. In summary, there are three key observations:A few additional remarks are in order: first of all, the divalent
cations systematically display a stronger dewetting capability than
the monovalent ones, i.e., the threshold concentrations for observing
finite contact angles are lower and the contact angles at identical
concentrations and pHs are higher. Secondly, within the series of
alkali ions, the order of cations in eq essentially corresponds to the classical “direct”
Hofmeister series of protein precipitation,[39] with the exception of Li+ compared to the position of
Na+ and K+. The relative order of the divalent
cations with respect to the monovalents, however, does not follow
the expectations of the classical Hofmeister series, yet consistent
with their stronger adsorption to the mica surface (see below). The
reversal of the order of Mg2+ with respect to Ca2+ may have similar reasons as in the positioning of Li+ wrt Na+ and K+. (Figure SI6 in the Supporting Information shows the detailed comparison
between Mg2+ and Ca2+ for a series of additional
intermediate pH values.) Thirdly, we note that the contact angle of
NaCl and KCl solutions as well as pure water is actually finite, despite
the appearance of the side view images. This can be revealed by recording
bottom view imaging of the drops through the transparent substrate
and by imaging ellipsometry measurements, as reported before[54] (data not shown here). In fact, finite contact
angles are expected in this system given the attractive nature of
the van der Waals interaction between the oil–water and the
mica–water interface, as can be estimated based on bulk refractive
indices and polarizabilities of the materials. Finally, we note that
additional tests with Ca(NO3)2 at variable pH
and concentration displayed qualitatively the same behavior as the
corresponding CaCl2 solutions, as shown in Supporting Information Figure SI7.
Figure 1
Snapshots of sessile brine drops on mica
in ambient decane (concentration:
1 M; pH 9). NaCl and KCl drops assume near-zero, yet finite contact
angles (<1°), as confirmed by visualizing the contact line
in top view (ellipsometric) imaging.[54] We
observe the finite contact angle not only for the heavier Rb+ and Cs+ ions but also for Li+. Consistently
higher contact angles are found for divalent cations. Blue lines:
circle fitting.
Figure 2
Equilibrium contact angle
of aqueous drops on mica in ambient decane
vs pH for various cation species and salt concentrations increasing
as indicated by the arrows. Top, alkali chlorides: (a) LiCl, at <1
and 1 M conc. (b) RbCl, at <1 and 1 M conc. (c) CsCl, at 0.01,
0.1, and 1 M conc.; NaCl/KCl displays immeasurably small contact angles
and are not shown here. Bottom, earth alkaline chlorides: (d) CaCl2, at 0.05, 0.1, and 1 M conc. (e) MgCl2, at 0.05,
0.1, and 1 M conc. (f) BaCl2, at 0.01, 0.1, and 1 M conc.
All measurements are averaged values of 25 independent experiments;
error bar: statistical standard deviation.
for all salts except
for NaCl and KCl,
a finite macroscopic contact angle is observed beyond some threshold
concentration.whenever
a finite contact angle can
be detected, it increases upon increasing pH and/or the salt concentration.there are strong ion-specific
effects
as summarized by the Hofmeister series of wettability.Snapshots of sessile brine drops on mica
in ambient decane (concentration:
1 M; pH 9). NaCl and KCl drops assume near-zero, yet finite contact
angles (<1°), as confirmed by visualizing the contact line
in top view (ellipsometric) imaging.[54] We
observe the finite contact angle not only for the heavier Rb+ and Cs+ ions but also for Li+. Consistently
higher contact angles are found for divalent cations. Blue lines:
circle fitting.Equilibrium contact angle
of aqueous drops on mica in ambient decane
vs pH for various cation species and salt concentrations increasing
as indicated by the arrows. Top, alkali chlorides: (a) LiCl, at <1
and 1 M conc. (b) RbCl, at <1 and 1 M conc. (c) CsCl, at 0.01,
0.1, and 1 M conc.; NaCl/KCl displays immeasurably small contact angles
and are not shown here. Bottom, earth alkaline chlorides: (d) CaCl2, at 0.05, 0.1, and 1 M conc. (e) MgCl2, at 0.05,
0.1, and 1 M conc. (f) BaCl2, at 0.01, 0.1, and 1 M conc.
All measurements are averaged values of 25 independent experiments;
error bar: statistical standard deviation.
Macroscopic Force Balance and Disjoining Pressure
To
understand our key observations, we need to relate the macroscopic
contact angle to the microscopic physico-chemical properties of the
various interfaces involved in the wetting process. To this end, we
will regard the observed contact angles as equilibrium values. Doing
so, we know from Young’s equation, eq , that the contact angle is determined by
the balance of the three interfacial tension forces at the contact
line. It is obvious that tensions of the oil–water and the
solid–water interface can (and indeed do) change upon changing
the composition of the brine, whereas, at first glance, one might
think that the solid–oil interfacial tension might not depend
on the brine composition. Yet, it does: Young’s force balance
applies on the macroscopic scale, i.e., outside the range of molecular
interaction forces at the interface, as indicated by the dotted control
volume in Figure .
Systems with rather small contact angles such as the present one usually
fall into the regime of “pseudopartial wetting”.[12] In this regime, the macroscopic drop is accompanied
by a microscopic equilibrium film of the droplet phase that is interspersed
between the solid and the ambient medium next to the drop, as sketched
in Figure a. The thickness h0 of this equilibrium film typically falls in
the range between zero and at most a few nanometers. It is governed
by the balance of molecular interaction forces, as given by the minimum
of the effective interface potential Φ(h) (blue
curves in Figure b,
which describes the excess tension of the thin film caused by the
proximity of the two interfaces). In our earlier work,[54] we showed using imaging ellipsometry that such
an equilibrium film is indeed present next to droplets of NaCl and
CaCl2 solutions. It was found to extend for at least 1
mm next to the macroscopic drop and—as qualitatively expected—it
displayed a thickness ranging from ≈0.5 to 10 nm, depending
on the type of cation and the salt concentration. From a macroscopic
perspective, the existence of this film implies that the value of
γso is in fact the equilibrium tension of the composite
solid–oil interface including the microscopic water film. In
the language of the effective interface potential, this means that
γso is given by the sum of γ, γsw and the excess tension of the equilibrium film, i.e., Φ(h0), as illustrated in Figure aThis thin water film is
in diffusive equilibrium
with the bulk aqueous drop. As a consequence, γso is also expected to depend on the composition of the brine. To understand
the observed increase of the contact angle increasing salt concentrations
and pH, we therefore need to consider the variations of all three
interfacial tensions.
Figure 3
(a) Force balance arising from interfacial tensions leading
to
the contact angle θ of a drop requires the supplementary contribution
of interaction potential Φ(h) when there is
a molecularly thin film of equilibrium thickness h0 present next to the drop. (b) Schematic examples of
repulsive and attractive Φ(h), where negative
Φ(h) with a pronounced minimum leads to a finite
contact angle. The arrow depicts the gradual change of cations following
our “cationic Hofmeister series”. (c) Left: In the case
of monovalent cations, both mica–water and oil–water
interfaces remain negatively charged (above), while divalent cations
above a certain concentration reverses the surface charge of mica
(below). Right: Ion-specific adsorption leads to different results
even among monovalent cations; a moderate sized and moderately hydrated
ion: Na+ or K+ (above) adsorb less strongly.
Very small cations (middle) such as Li+ get hydrated strongly
and as a result adsorb significantly with their large hydrated size.
Larger (bare) cations such as Cs+ (bottom) adsorb strongly
due to their large size despite the lack of hydration; the large size
leads to lateral interaction as well as interaction with the oil–water
interface. Figure (a) and (b) adapted from Mugele et al.[54]
(a) Force balance arising from interfacial tensions leading
to
the contact angle θ of a drop requires the supplementary contribution
of interaction potential Φ(h) when there is
a molecularly thin film of equilibrium thickness h0 present next to the drop. (b) Schematic examples of
repulsive and attractive Φ(h), where negative
Φ(h) with a pronounced minimum leads to a finite
contact angle. The arrow depicts the gradual change of cations following
our “cationic Hofmeister series”. (c) Left: In the case
of monovalent cations, both mica–water and oil–water
interfaces remain negatively charged (above), while divalent cations
above a certain concentration reverses the surface charge of mica
(below). Right: Ion-specific adsorption leads to different results
even among monovalent cations; a moderate sized and moderately hydrated
ion: Na+ or K+ (above) adsorb less strongly.
Very small cations (middle) such as Li+ get hydrated strongly
and as a result adsorb significantly with their large hydrated size.
Larger (bare) cations such as Cs+ (bottom) adsorb strongly
due to their large size despite the lack of hydration; the large size
leads to lateral interaction as well as interaction with the oil–water
interface. Figure (a) and (b) adapted from Mugele et al.[54]According to the Gibbs law, the variation of the tension
γ of an arbitrary interface i as a function of the fluid composition is determined by
the surface
excess Γ with respect to some reference state following dγ
= −Γ dμ, where μ = kT ln(c/c0) is
the chemical potential of the dissolved species with bulk concentration c. (c0 is the bulk reference
concentration.) Spontaneous adsorption of solute to an interface,
i.e., a positive surface excess Γ, thus implies a reduction
of γ. Vice versa, a negative surface
excess implies a spontaneous increase of γ. As mentioned in the introduction, hydrophobic-water interfaces
including oil–water and air–water interfaces display
a negative surface excess for the majority of “simple”
inorganic ions such as the ones studied here because image charge
forces repel electrostatic charges in the highly polarizable aqueous
phase from the interface with the less polarizable ambient oil. As
explained above, for hydrophobic-water interfaces the effect is dominated
by anions.[15,16] For air–water interfaces
dγ/dc ≈ 1.5 mJ/m2 for all
chloride salts of alkali metals, with a slightly lower coefficient
for Cs+ because of the higher polarizability of this large
ion. MgCl2 and CaCl2 dependence is approximately
twice as strong.[45] We performed a few test
experiments with selected salts to reproduce these trends (see Supporting
Information Figure SI5). Indeed, we find
positive values of dγ/dc with absolute values
approximately half the ones mentioned above for water–air interfaces.
This is consistent with the higher dielectric constant of decane compared
to air. Qualitatively, an increase of γ with the increasing
salt concentration translates into an increasing contact angle. Yet,
while the variation of γ certainly contributes to the absolute
values of the contact angles observed, it is unlikely that the oil–water
interface is the primary driver for the observed phenomena for the
following reasons. First of all, if we insert eq into Young’s equation, we can rewrite
the force balance asIn this equation, all quantities depend on
the salt concentration and pH. The variation of the left-hand side
with fluid composition is given by Δ(γ(cos θ
– 1)) = Δγ × (cos θ –
1) + γ × Δcos θ. Since θ varies
approximately between 0 and 10° in our experiments and γ
between 50 and 52 mJ/m2, it is clear that the variation
of γ is less important than the variation of cos θ.
Moreover, as mentioned above, ion specificity at hydrophobic-water
interfaces is generally dominated by anions and not by cations. The
strong cation effect in our experiments can certainly not be caused
by the oil–water interface. This statement is also supported
by the comparison of the contact angle data for CaCl2 and
Ca(NO3)2 solutions: dγ/dc for CaCl2 is 60% higher than for Ca(NO3)2 because of the larger surface affinity of the nitrate anion
compared to chloride.[45] Nevertheless, the
contact angle data for the two different salts agree with each other
within error (see Figure SI7).Similarly,
the solid–water interface cannot be at the origin
of the phenomenon. As discussed in the introduction, it is well-established
that cations spontaneously adsorb to mica–water interfaces
in an ion-specific manner[10,19,21,27,29,58,59] with adsorption
energies ranging between a few and several tens of kJ/mol. Hence,
γsw in Young’s equation is expected to decrease
with increasing salt concentration. This would lead to a decrease
in θ with the increasing salt concentration, in contrast to
the experimental findings. If we phrase the force balance equation
in the form of eq ,
γsw formally even completely drops out of the equation.
Hence, we conclude that the observed increase in θ with the
increasing salt concentration and pH must be driven primarily by the
variation of the tension γso of the composite solid–oil
interface, or, according to eq , by Φ(h0). (Note that the
density of adsorbed ions at the mica surface will be different in
the thin equilibrium film compared to the macroscopic drop.) This
difference, however, is included in Φ(h0), and thus does not change the cancellation of γsw in the derivation of eq .The effective interface potential is determined
by the molecular
interaction forces acting across the thin water film next to the drop.[12] In classical continuum wetting theory, Φ
is decomposed into different contributions arising from van der Waals
interaction ΦvdW, electrostatic interactions Φel, and short-range chemical forces Φch such
as hydration forcesThe
functional form of the last term is generally
not very well-known because it depends on atomic scale details of
the system. Frequently, it is modeled by an empirical exponentially
decaying function with a decay length of the order of 1 nm.[9,10] This functional form can be derived from a Landau-type free energy
functional involving an order parameter of the water phase, as first
proposed by Marčelja and Radic.[60] DLVO theory provides expressions for the first two terms. Namely,
the van der Waals contribution is given bywhere A = −0.4 ×
10–21J is the Hamaker constant of the decane–water–mica
system. (The exact value varies by 10–20% depending on the
salt species and concentration.) The negative sign of the Hamaker
constant indicates that the two interfaces attract each other and
that van der Waals interaction favors partial wetting.The most
interesting term for our present discussion is the electrostatic
interaction Φel(h). It requires
a solution of the Poisson–Boltzmann equation for the distribution
of ions and electrostatic potential within the thin film.[9,10] Frequently, this is done using either constant (i.e., h-independent) charge or constant potential boundary conditions. For
the present situation, however, where h0 becomes comparable to or smaller than the Debye screening length,
this is not justified and the regulation of the interfacial charge
due to adsorption (or desorption) of ions needs to be taken into account.
The resulting nonlinear charge regulation boundary conditions leads
to a self-consistent mathematical problem that is most easily addressed
numerically. To understand the physical principle leading to the observed
wetting transition, it is sufficient to consider the simplified linearized
version of Φel(h). Here, we linearize
both the Poisson–Boltzmann equation, which then reduces to
the Debye–Huckel equation and the charge regulation boundary
conditions. The latter leads to the linearized “constant regulation”
approximation.[55,61,62] The resulting expression readsHere, Ψi,∞ with i
= sw, ow are the (diffuse layer) potentials of the mica–water
and the oil–water interface for h →
∞ and Δi are the corresponding regulation
parameters of each interface. These parameters interpolate between
a constant charge (Δi = −1) and constant potential
(Δi = 1) behavior.[18,61] Analysis of eq shows that there are four
generic wetting scenarios, namely complete wetting, pseudopartial
wetting, true partial wetting (h0 = 0),
and a metastable wetting configuration in which a thin film can be
metastable despite the existence of a true partial wetting state of
lower energy,[55] depending on the values
of the Δi’s and Ψi’s.
For the present system, both regulation parameters are negative and
the diffuse layer potentials in the absence of adsorbing ions are
negative, too. In this case, Φel is positive and
monotonically increasing with decreasing h, as illustrated
by the red curve in Figure b. This corresponds to a situation of complete wetting. For
NaCl and KCl solutions, this situation prevails for all salt concentrations
and pH values. In contrast, for CaCl2, the sign of the
charge (and hence the potential) of the mica–water interface
reverses beyond a certain pH-dependent threshold concentration, as
described in ref (20). Under these conditions, the interface potential develops a local
minimum with a finite equilibrium thickness h0, as illustrated by the blue curves in Figure b. Consequently, the system undergoes a transition
to partial wetting with a contact angle determined by the value of
Φ(h0). On the basis of this scenario
of ion adsorption-induced charge reversal, we could explain the transition
from complete to partial wetting in our previous study that was limited
to Na+, K+, Ca2+, and Mg2+ ions.[54]
AFM Investigation of Ion
Adsorption
To test whether
the mechanism described above also explains the alteration of the
contact angles for all the salts in our present Hofmeister series
of wettability, we determined the surface charge of mica–electrolyte
interfaces for several types of salts using AFM. Solutions of LiCl,
NaCl, CsCl, Mg2+, and Ca2+ were analyzed at
a fixed pH of 6 for salt concentrations from 1 to 100 mM. (For higher
concentrations, efficient screening leads to very small forces and
unreliable measurements, similar to streaming potential measurements.) Figure shows the typical
force curves for NaCl, CsCl, and MgCl2. While the total
forces (left column) remain repulsive for NaCl for all salt concentrations,
a transition to attractive forces was observed for both CsCl and MgCl2 for elevated concentrations at short distances. To reveal
the contribution of the electrostatic forces, we first subtract the
van der Waals contribution to the force following the procedures described
in ref (56). Subsequently,
we focus on the range of tip–sample separations of ≈2
nm and larger, for which short-range hydration forces are negligible.
Doing so, we found that the electrostatic force is obviously repulsive
for all concentrations of NaCl. Yet, also for CsCl a small repulsive
force prevails all the way up to the highest concentration investigated
(Figure , right column).
Only in the case of MgCl2, a clear reversal towards attractive
electrostatic forces is observed at short distances beyond a threshold
concentration of ≈10–30 mM. The latter implies a reversal
of the surface charge consistent with our earlier streaming potential
measurements.[54] A similar behavior was
found for CaCl2 solutions. In contrast, LiCl solutions
were found to display very similar behavior as NaCl, despite the fact
that they do induce partial wetting at higher concentrations.
Figure 4
Tip–sample
interaction force measurements using the AM-AFM
mode on mica with (a) NaCl, (b) CsCl, and (c) MgCl2 salt
solutions with variable concentrations. The black dotted curves in
(a), (b), and (c) show the theoretically calculated force using DLVO
theory (a′), (b′), and (c′) show only the electrostatic
part of the interaction force for the corresponding salt solutions.
Note: Tip parameters used for Na+ ions: R = 40 ± 2 nm, kc ∼ 1.25 N/m, f0 ∼ 29.9 kHz, and Q ∼
3.5 and for Cs+ and Mg2+: R = 20 ± 2 nm, kc ∼ 0.463
N/m, f0 ∼ 17 kHz, Q ∼ 2.4.
Tip–sample
interaction force measurements using the AM-AFM
mode on mica with (a) NaCl, (b) CsCl, and (c) MgCl2 salt
solutions with variable concentrations. The black dotted curves in
(a), (b), and (c) show the theoretically calculated force using DLVO
theory (a′), (b′), and (c′) show only the electrostatic
part of the interaction force for the corresponding salt solutions.
Note: Tip parameters used for Na+ ions: R = 40 ± 2 nm, kc ∼ 1.25 N/m, f0 ∼ 29.9 kHz, and Q ∼
3.5 and for Cs+ and Mg2+: R = 20 ± 2 nm, kc ∼ 0.463
N/m, f0 ∼ 17 kHz, Q ∼ 2.4.Using the procedures
described in refs (56, 57), we converted these forces into surface
charge densities, Figure . As explained in the Experimental section, the charge density
probed by such a colloidal scale AFM spectroscopy measurement is the
negative of the charge density of the diffuse part of the electric
double layer, i.e., the sum of the intrinsic charge density of the
mica surface and any counter ion (including protons) adsorbed in the
Stern layer, extrapolated to infinite tip–sample separation.
For the monovalent ions Li+, Na+, and Cs+, this surface charge is negative for all concentrations investigated.
(Note, that the diffuse layer charge probed by the AFM is only a fraction
of this intrinsic charge density of mica (≈2 e/nm2).) As anticipated based on the force curves, the magnitude of the
surface charge decreases with increasing salt concentration for all
monovalent cations. While it remains clearly negative for Na+ and Li+, it approaches 0 within the error for Cs+ for concentrations approaching 100 mM. In contrast, for the
divalent cations, a clear reversal of the surface charge is observed
for concentrations of 10–20 mM, consistent with various reports
in the literature.[20,63] The larger error bars at high
salt concentrations arise from the very small forces under these conditions
due to efficient screening within the fitting range of 1.5–15
nm.
Figure 5
Diffuse layer charge (σ) at the mica–electrolyte interface
as determined by AFM spectroscopy: LiCl (green), NaCl (magenta), CsCl
(blue), CaCl2 (red), and MgCl2 (black). The
symbols are experimental datapoints based on 10–15 independent
AFM experiments under identical conditions. The straight lines are
guide to the eye.
Diffuse layer charge (σ) at the mica–electrolyte interface
as determined by AFM spectroscopy: LiCl (green), NaCl (magenta), CsCl
(blue), CaCl2 (red), and MgCl2 (black). The
symbols are experimental datapoints based on 10–15 independent
AFM experiments under identical conditions. The straight lines are
guide to the eye.The AFM measurements
confirm the reversal of the surface charge
for Ca2+ and Mg2+ that was reported earlier.
For these systems, charge reversal indeed occurs in the same concentration
range as the finite contact angles. This is consistent with our earlier
claim that the wetting transition in these systems is caused by ion
adsorption-induced charge reversal. For Li+ and Cs+, however, we do not find charge reversal, despite the occurrence
of finite contact angles. Unfortunately, the evidence is not completely
conclusive given the increasing uncertainties of the AFM method for
increasing concentrations. For CsCl, the measurement suggests that
the surface charge vanishes at the highest concentrations. Yet, the
error bar includes the possibility of a small positive surface charge.
For LiCl, the surface charge remains almost constant at a negative
value around −0.1 e/nm2 up to c = 100 mM. Yet, the error bars at the highest concentration become
very large—and the finite contact angles are only observed
for even higher concentrations. Nevertheless, considering the AFM
results as well as other classical reports in the literature,[64] it seems highly unlikely that Li+ ions and (to a somewhat lesser extent) Cs+ ions induce
charge reversal at mica–water interfaces at pH 6. Hence, it
is also unlikely that our previous assignment of charge reversal as
a driving force for the transition towards finite contact angles in
the presence of divalent cations also holds for the monovalent ones.
Instead, we would like to argue that the last term in eq , the contribution of hydration
and short-range chemical effects, might play a decisive role. As already
pointed out in refs (54, 55), this term plays an important role in the calculation of the exact
location of the minimum of Φ(h) including the
equilibrium contact angle. From our earlier ellipsometry measurements,
we know that the equilibrium thickness h0 of the wetting film frequently falls in the range below 2 nm for
conditions of partial wetting. This is precisely the range for which
hydration effects are important.[9,10,64,65] Hydration effects arise from
the complex interaction of water molecules with the mica surface and
the ambient oil that are both modified by the presence of potentially
adsorbed ions. In the first place, the presence of the interfaces
gives rise to positional ordering of the water molecules. For atomically
flat hydrophilic surfaces such as mica, this gives rise to a few discrete
layers of water.[66] For hydrophobic interfaces
such as the water–oil interface, the water density is believed
to decrease gradually within a few angstroms of the surface. In addition
to the positional ordering, the hydrogen bonding network of water
is affected by the (in)ability of forming H-bonds with the surface.
This effect in combination with local electric fields at the interface
gives rise to an additional orientational ordering in the interfacial
water. Both types of order typically have a range of not more than
a few molecular diameters, i.e., typically 1–2 nm, precisely
the expected thickness of the wetting film next to the macroscopic
drops. The contribution of hydration forces to the interface potential
can be qualitatively understood in terms of the mean field model by
Marčelja and Radic.[60] According
to this model, the mica–water and the water–oil interface
interact via the order that they induce in the thin water film. This
order is described by an order parameter η. η vanishes
in the bulk, but assumes finite values at the interfaces in response
to local surface fields that—say—orient the water molecules.
For the present system, the hydrophilic mica surface and the hydrophobic
oil–water interface will impose rather different boundary conditions
and order in the thin film. Microscopically, these boundary conditions
arise for instance from the local electric fields at the interface
that tend to orient the water molecules. The adsorption of cations
to hydrophilic surfaces such as mica has a strong effect on the structure
of the interfacial water, as shown in various recent X-ray reflectivity
experiments[27] and numerical simulations.[29,67] Our proposed scenario to explain the observed wetting transition
implies that such ion adsorption-induced variations of the water structure
give rise to an increased attractive interaction between the mica
surface and the oil–water interface. In the case of Rb+ and Cs+ ions, which are known to be poorly hydrated,[68] interfacial adsorption would effectively “hydrophobize”
the mica surface and thereby destabilize the thin water layer. For
the case of Li+, however, this explanation would not apply.
A detailed and complete understanding of all observations can therefore
not be provided. Possibly, the difficulties to explain the phenomenon
also illustrate the intrinsic deficiencies of extending continuum
physics models all the way down to molecular scales where very specific
chemical interactions are at play.
Conclusions
We
investigated the dependence of the wettability of water on mica
in ambient alkanes on the presence of dissolved chloride salts of
a variety of alkali and earth alkaline cations. We observed a transition
from near-zero to finite values of the contact angle (up to ∼15°).
The ability of cations to induce partial wetting increases from Na+, K+ to Li+, Rb+, Cs+ and then to divalent cations (Ca2+, Mg2+, Ba2+). We denote this ranking as cationic Hofmeister
series of wettability alteration—notwithstanding the fact that
the order of the ions differs from the conventional Hofmeister series
related to the precipitation of cations. While the strong effect of
the divalent cations stems from their strong adsorption to the mica
surface and the resulting charge reversal of the interface, the occurrence
of partial wetting in the case of the monovalent cations is tentatively
attributed to the alteration of the hydration structure of the mica–electrolyte
interface. We emphasize that the present cationic series applies to
the specific mica/water/alkane system. Nevertheless, given the fact
that the negative surface charge of oil–water interfaces is
rather common and robust, we expect that the mechanism of an ion adsorption-induced
charge reversal should apply to a wider class of mineral surfaces.
Elucidating that the role of hydration forces is a more complex challenge
that will require more targeted experimental and numerical approaches
than the measurements presented here.
Authors: Sutapa Ghosal; John C Hemminger; Hendrik Bluhm; Bongjin Simon Mun; Eleonore L D Hebenstreit; Guido Ketteler; D Frank Ogletree; Felix G Requejo; Miquel Salmeron Journal: Science Date: 2005-01-28 Impact factor: 47.728