Microemulsions have been attracting great attention for their importance in various fields, including nanomaterial fabrication, food industry, drug delivery, and enhanced oil recovery. Atomistic insights into the self-microemulsifying process and the underlying mechanisms are crucial for the design and tuning of the size of microemulsion droplets toward applications. In this work, coarse-grained models were used to investigate the role that droplet sizes played in the preliminary self-microemulsifying process. Time evolution of liquid mixtures consisting of several hundreds of water/surfactant/oil droplets was resolved in large-scale simulations. By monitoring the size variation of the microemulsion droplets in the self-microemulsifying process, the dynamics of diameter distribution of water/surfactant/oil droplets were studied. The underlying mass transport mechanisms responsible for droplet size evolution and stability were elucidated. Specifically, temperature effects on the droplet size were clarified. This work provides the knowledge of the self-microemulsification of water-in-oil microemulsions at the nanoscale. The results are expected to serve as guidelines for practical strategies for preparing a microemulsion system with desirable droplet sizes and properties.
Microemulsions have been attracting great attention for their importance in various fields, including nanomaterial fabrication, food industry, drug delivery, and enhanced oil recovery. Atomistic insights into the self-microemulsifying process and the underlying mechanisms are crucial for the design and tuning of the size of microemulsion droplets toward applications. In this work, coarse-grained models were used to investigate the role that droplet sizes played in the preliminary self-microemulsifying process. Time evolution of liquid mixtures consisting of several hundreds of water/surfactant/oil droplets was resolved in large-scale simulations. By monitoring the size variation of the microemulsion droplets in the self-microemulsifying process, the dynamics of diameter distribution of water/surfactant/oil droplets were studied. The underlying mass transport mechanisms responsible for droplet size evolution and stability were elucidated. Specifically, temperature effects on the droplet size were clarified. This work provides the knowledge of the self-microemulsification of water-in-oil microemulsions at the nanoscale. The results are expected to serve as guidelines for practical strategies for preparing a microemulsion system with desirable droplet sizes and properties.
The interest in microemulsions has been constantly renewed since
their discovery in 1943.[1] Nowadays, microemulsions
have found broad applications in many fields, including nanomaterial
fabrication,[2,3] food industry,[4,5] drug
delivery,[6] and enhanced oil recovery.[7−10] Microemulsions, as isotropic and transparent liquid mixtures of
water, oil, and a surfactant, are thermodynamically stable, which
are by definition different from emulsions and nanoemulsions.[11] Recently, preparing stable microemulsions with
a uniform particle size has been shown to be a practical pathway for
fabricating functional nanomaterials with desired microstructures.[2,12−14] Meanwhile, great efforts are still needed for the
exploration of the exact controlling parameters of stability, particle
size distribution, and morphology of microemulsions.[15]Microemulsions are sometimes confused with similar
systems of nanoemulsions,
largely owing to the prefix of “micro-” and “nano-”
in the system terminology.[11] It is known
that the droplets in microemulsions, namely, the microemulsified state
of a water/surfactant/oil mixed system, are thermodynamically stable,
while the ones in nanoemulsions are kinetically stable.[11,16,17] As such, the droplets in microemulsions
are able to maintain their sizes but are subjected to changes in nanoemulsions.The difference in Gibbs free energy between the mixed and the phase-separated
states of a water/surfactant/oil mixed system can be summarized as eq where ΔGinterface is the difference in interfacial free energy of different
phases
and TΔSconfiguration is the difference in configuration entropy of the phases. Compared
to the phase-separated state, the ΔGinterface of mixed states is always positive owing to the positive interfacial
tension and increased interface area. The TΔSconfiguration depends on the ways of arrangement
of phases within the system, which is negative owing to the higher
number of arrangements in the mixture than in the phase-separated
state. In addition, there is an optimum curvature or size of droplets
determined by the structural and chemical properties of the surfactant
molecules, which determines the droplet sizes in microemulsions according
to previous studies.[14,18,19] As such, the Gibbs free energy landscapes separating microemulsions
and nanoemulsions from separated phases are drastically different,
as depicted in Figure . Microemulsions reside at the global minimum, namely, thermodynamically
stable, while nanoemulsions reside at the intermediate local minimum,
namely, metastable or kinetically stable, of the system Gibbs free
energy profile.[20] As a result, microemulsification
of a water/surfactant/oil system is a spontaneous process of energy
minimization, while nanoemulsification is an energetically unfavorable
procedure. Nevertheless, nanoemulsions are often observed due to their
metastable state.
Figure 1
Free energy landscape of a water/surfactant/oil system
at different
states. (a) Energy difference between microemulsions (marked as state
A) and separated phases. (b) Energy difference between nanoemulsions
and separated phases.
Free energy landscape of a water/surfactant/oil system
at different
states. (a) Energy difference between microemulsions (marked as state
A) and separated phases. (b) Energy difference between nanoemulsions
and separated phases.For the evolution of
a water/surfactant/oil mixed system, the energy
barriers between different states (Figure ) and mass transport phenomena are two crucial
determining factors.[11] On the one hand,
the height of energy barriers determines the level of stability of
the current state.[11] On the other hand,
mass transport phenomena cause the microstructural arrangement of
small droplets in a water/surfactant/oil system in the process of
phase mixing or separation, which is responsible for the transfer
and reorganization of molecules in colloidal systems. The mass transport
phenomena have been serving as the focus of research interest. Different
mechanisms of mass transport, namely, Ostwald ripening, Lifshitz–Slyozov–Wagner
theory (LSW theory), and emulsion polymerization, were proposed for
explaining the stability of emulsion or nanoemulsion systems,[21−24] which shed light on the understanding of experimental observations
such as flocculation, coalescence, creaming, and so on. Ostwald ripening
is a thermodynamically driven process achieved by the fact that molecules
energetically favor larger particles rather than smaller ones.[25] Lifshitz–Slyozov–Wagner theory
(LSW theory), as a mathematical performance of Ostwald ripening, indicates
that the boundary is among small, shrinking particles and large, growing
particles.[26] The normal type of emulsion
polymerization[27] often happens in an oil-in-water
emulsion, which was first explained by Smith–Ewart–Harkins
theory.[27,28] Previous simulations using the dissipative
particle dynamics (DPD) method indeed demonstrated obvious Ostwald
ripening, the molecular transition from small droplets to large ones,
in emulsion systems, which provided strong theoretical evidence at
the atomistic scale.[29,30] Because both the sizes and positions
of droplets in emulsions and nanoemulsions change extremely fast,
owing to the metastable nature, it is highly challenging to characterize
the morphological evolution of microemulsions in experiments. Despite
the previous efforts devoted to estimating a single peak droplet size
distribution of microemulsions using light scattering measurements,[15,31,32] the fast dynamical process of
formation of stable droplets is still underexplored. Uncertainty in
the atomistic mechanisms governing the self-microemulsifying process
and the variation of droplet sizes await better clarification and
understanding. Furthermore, impacting factors, such as temperature
and the properties of surfactant molecules, on the stability of microemulsions
need to be thoroughly studied.[33,34]Herein, our work
aims to explore further atomistic insights into
droplet evolution in the preliminary stage of self-microemulsification
of a water/surfactant/oil system by molecular dynamics (MD) simulations.
Starting from well-mixed systems of water, oil, and surfactant molecules,
the fast dynamics of forming stable microemulsion droplets was dissected
with atomistic resolution. The variation of the morphology and droplet
size distribution in the colloidal system was monitored and analyzed
for revealing the fundamentals of controlling droplet sizes during
self-microemulsification. The results thus provide theoretical references
for microemulsion fabrication in relevant studies and applications.
Models and Methods
Atomistic Modeling
Due to the large
number of atoms and long simulation running time needed for the formation
of a sufficiently large system with a sufficient number of droplets
for statistics, coarse-grained modeling was employed in this work.
The system used in this study contained three types of molecules,
namely, water, surfactant, and oil molecules. The mW model with a
classical many-body potential was adopted for the water molecules.[35] This water model uses a three-body Stillinger–Weber
potential to capture nonbonding interactions, featuring hydrogen bonds,
among neighboring water molecules. Herein, water was considered as
the disperse phase in the final water-in-oil (W/O) microemulsion systems.
For the continuous phase, dodecane molecules were chosen to model
the oil. Linear diblock oligomer molecules were used as surfactant
molecules, following the modeling strategy in previous studies.[36] Briefly, the CH2 groups in the oil
and surfactant molecules were treated as one united atom, as shown
in Figure . The transferable
potentials for phase equilibria (TraPPE)[37] were used for both the oil and surfactant molecules. The amphiphilic
property of surfactant molecules was specifically represented by two
predetermined lengths of hydrophilic (labeled L) and hydrophobic (labeled
B) parts, capturing the molecular properties of linear diblock oligomer
surfactants. Besides water–water interactions, the other nonbonded
atomic interaction parameters are treated by the Lennard-Jones potential
(eq ) with a cutoff
distance of 9.0 Å, with detailed values given in Table . This atomic parameter set
was borrowed from previous studies[36−41] and features the formerly used minimalist model.[42] The parameters of bonded interactions including bonds,
angles, and dihedrals in the oil and surfactant molecules were borrowed
directly from the TraPPE force field used in alkanes.[43] The system contained 96 000 water molecules, 16 000
surfactant molecules, and 480 000 oil molecules, with a total
of 864 000 untied atoms in an evenly mixed initial state, as
shown in Figure S1. The simulation box
was set periodic, with a volume of 312.8 Å × 312.8 Å
× 312.8 Å in equilibrium, as shown in Figure .
Figure 2
Modeling of surfactant-coated water droplets
in the oil phase.
The structures of the three molecular types are colored differently
for visualization. A representative droplet is dissected, showing
the internal detailed layered structure.
Table 1
Detailed Interaction Parameters, Energy
Depth (ϵ) and van der Waals Radius (σ), of the LJ Potential
between Different Atoms
W:W
W:L
W:B
W:O
L:L
L:B
L:O
B:B
B:O
O:O
ϵ (kcal/mol)
SW[35]
0.602
0.119
0.119
0.602
0.091
0.091
0.091
0.091
0.091
σ (Å)
SW[35]
3.558
3.558
3.558
3.558
3.95
3.95
3.95
3.95
3.95
Modeling of surfactant-coated water droplets
in the oil phase.
The structures of the three molecular types are colored differently
for visualization. A representative droplet is dissected, showing
the internal detailed layered structure.
Molecular
Dynamics (MD) Simulations
The Large-scale Atomic/Molecular
Massively Parallel Simulator (LAMMPS)
package[44] was utilized to perform all of
the simulations. Before MD simulations, the system was energy minimized
using the steepest descent algorithm. All MD simulations were carried
out under the NPT ensemble, with a system temperature of 298 K coupled
by the Nose–Hoover thermostat[45] and
a pressure of 1 bar coupled by the Parrinello–Rahman barostat.[46] The temperature and pressure coupling constants
were 1 and 10 ps, respectively. The simulation time step was 10 fs.
Larger time steps enabled a longer simulation time for forming such
a big simulation system. The coarse-grained model enabled fast dynamics
of the simulation system, which was suitable for this study.[47] There was a vacuum space in the initial system,
which was eliminated in the early steps of the simulation. In the
first 2 ns, the trajectories of all atoms were recorded per 0.1 ns,
and then per 10 ns, to capture the fast formation and the morphology
dynamics of microemulsion droplets.With the ratio of water
and oil molecules modeled in the system, the resulting droplets had
a water core and surfactant shell dispersed in a continuous oil phase.
To characterize the diameters of the resulting droplets, all of the
droplets in the system were identified by a neighboring cluster search
with a cutoff distance of 3.2 Å, as shown in Figure . The work of cluster analysis
was done using the software OVITO.[48] The
function of the cluster was achieved by a modifier that can decompose
the particles into disconnected groups (so-called clusters) based
on the selected neighboring criterion. The neighboring criterion can
be distance-based (cutoff range) or topology-based (bond network).[48] Here, it is distance-based (a cutoff range of
3.2 Å). Each water cluster, with the size approximately taken
as the size of the whole surfactant-coated droplet, was then approximatively
considered as a sphere. By counting the number of water molecules
(NW) and the volume of a single water
molecule (ρ, 29.9 Å3) in each water cluster,
the diameter (D) and surface area (A) of each droplet were estimated using the following eqs and 4
Figure 3
Characterization
of droplet sizes in the simulation system. (a)
View of the whole simulation box after the formation of droplets.
(b) Water cluster by a neighboring search with a cutoff distance of
3.2 Å. The oil molecules and surfactant molecules are not shown
for the better visualization of the individual droplets. (c) Individual
droplets, represented by the water core, are labeled in different
colors. The number of water molecules in every water cluster was counted
for evaluating the droplet diameter and surface area.
Characterization
of droplet sizes in the simulation system. (a)
View of the whole simulation box after the formation of droplets.
(b) Water cluster by a neighboring search with a cutoff distance of
3.2 Å. The oil molecules and surfactant molecules are not shown
for the better visualization of the individual droplets. (c) Individual
droplets, represented by the water core, are labeled in different
colors. The number of water molecules in every water cluster was counted
for evaluating the droplet diameter and surface area.The diameters of all of the droplets in the system were monitored
and collected throughout the simulations. For clarifying the effect
of temperature on the size of droplets, the temperature range of 280–400
K (6.85–126.85 °C) was chosen to carry out the simulations,
with the results for detailed comparison. Temperature is an essential
factor that affects the evaluation of the droplet. Due to the complexity
and the content ratio of the component in microemulsions, the boiling
point of the microemulsions is not constant under atmospheric pressure.
Meanwhile, the boiling point of the system also depends on the type
of water model.[49]
Results and Discussion
Morphology and Droplet
Size Distribution in
the Water/Surfactant/Oil System during Self-Microemulsification
The initial evenly mixed state of water, oil, and surfactant molecules
(Figure S1) enabled a fast formation of
small droplets. For a practical emulsifying process, the initial free
energy of the system should be the red area shown in Figure S2. Mixing or shearing the components is mostly a necessary
step to prepare a microemulsion.[20] In this
work, normal mixing was considered as an essential step to prepare
a microemulsion to perform a complete self-microemulsification process.
Such a step increased the free energy of the system and offered the
initial driving force for the automatic formation of small droplets
in the preliminary stage of self-microemulsification. After a short
time, a colloid dispersion system with many nanoscale spherical droplets
was quickly achieved in the early stage, as shown in Figure a. These early-formed small
droplets were comprised of a water core and a surfactant shell and
were dispersed within an oil-continuous medium, which followed the
previous theoretical prediction of “droplet microemulsion”
or “swollen micelles”.[19] The
surfactant molecules swiftly assembled at the oil–water interface.
The hydrophilic heads of the surfactants were oriented toward the
water cores of the droplets due to the strong interatomic attraction
(Table ), while the
hydrophobic tails stretched into the surrounding oil-continuous phase.
As such, the surfactant molecules were arranged in an orderly manner
at the oil–water interface, forming spherical surfactant shells,
as shown in Figure . Such a core–shell structure of the droplets greatly reduced
the interfacial tension of the curved interface between the water
and oil phase,[50−52] which optimized the overall energy of the whole system.
Figure 4
Droplet
sizes in the system during the simulation. (a–d)
System snapshots of droplet sizes at different times of 0.1, 10, 150,
and 300 ns, respectively. Oil molecules are hidden for better visualization
of the droplets in the system. (e) Droplet size distribution in the
early state of simulation (at the time of 1.8 ns). The distribution
of the diameters is shown as the relative frequency. The cumulative
count indicates the total 180 droplets in the system. The normal distribution
of droplet sizes observed in experiments is shown as a dashed line
for comparison.
Droplet
sizes in the system during the simulation. (a–d)
System snapshots of droplet sizes at different times of 0.1, 10, 150,
and 300 ns, respectively. Oil molecules are hidden for better visualization
of the droplets in the system. (e) Droplet size distribution in the
early state of simulation (at the time of 1.8 ns). The distribution
of the diameters is shown as the relative frequency. The cumulative
count indicates the total 180 droplets in the system. The normal distribution
of droplet sizes observed in experiments is shown as a dashed line
for comparison.Due to the chosen potentials and
the water–oil–surfactant
molecular ratio, the system progressed extremely fast into a water-in-oil
(W/O) dispersion mixture. As shown in Figure a, a great number of small droplets formed
quickly and spontaneously in a period of 0.1 ns, meeting the purpose
of the modeling strategy. The small droplets further aggregated into
big ones during the ongoing simulation, mainly by droplet coalescence,
as shown in Figure b,c. The decrease in the number of droplets also led to a reduction
of the oil–water interface area and further lowered system
energy. The increasing droplet sizes gradually reached a stable state,
especially after a simulation time of 300 ns, as shown in Figure d. Such a phenomenon
was also explored by energy evolution, as shown in Figures S3 and S4. After 120 ns, the value of potential energy
and total energy mostly maintained a constant number, which means
that the system reached an equilibrium state. Finally, the average
diameter of the droplet remained constant and the size of the droplets
became more uniform, as shown in Figures and 6. And as such,
at the end of the simulation, the droplets are, or very close to,
microemulsions. According to the thermostability and size uniformity
of the droplets,[11] this model can be considered
as a microemulsion system.
Figure 5
Droplet size distribution in the system during
the simulation.
(a) Histograms of relative frequency against the diameter size of
the droplets at different simulation times. (b) Approximation of the
droplet size distribution by Gaussian fitting of the histograms shown
in panel (a) for better visualization of the droplet evolution during
the simulation.
Figure 6
Droplet number and size variation and the resulting
changes in
the interface surface area. (a) Total number of droplets during the
simulation and the resulting total interface surface area in the system.
The drastic changes in the droplet number and surface area in the
first 2 ns of the simulation are shown in the inset. (b) Average diameter
of all of the droplets in the system and its derivation during the
simulation. The drastic changes in the average diameter of the droplets
and its derivation in the first 5 ns of the simulation are shown in
the inset.
Droplet size distribution in the system during
the simulation.
(a) Histograms of relative frequency against the diameter size of
the droplets at different simulation times. (b) Approximation of the
droplet size distribution by Gaussian fitting of the histograms shown
in panel (a) for better visualization of the droplet evolution during
the simulation.Droplet number and size variation and the resulting
changes in
the interface surface area. (a) Total number of droplets during the
simulation and the resulting total interface surface area in the system.
The drastic changes in the droplet number and surface area in the
first 2 ns of the simulation are shown in the inset. (b) Average diameter
of all of the droplets in the system and its derivation during the
simulation. The drastic changes in the average diameter of the droplets
and its derivation in the first 5 ns of the simulation are shown in
the inset.
Evolution
of the Size Distribution of Droplets
The droplet sizes were
not uniform starting from the beginning
of the simulation. For the size distribution of droplets captured
at the time of 1.8 ns, for example shown in Figure e, the diameter of the droplets ranged from
4.0 to 8.0 nm, falling in the size range (1–100 nm) of typical
microemulsion droplets observed in previous studies.[11] It should be noted that the diameters of the droplets determined
here are the diameters of the water core, which are the approximation
of the whole surfactant-coated droplets. The peak value of the droplet
diameter distribution at this early state was around 6.0 nm, with
the most populated sizes in the range of 5.0–7.0 nm. Given
that the droplets were actively evolving at this early stage, the
distribution of the droplet sizes seemed slightly left-skewed and
deviated from a normal distribution commonly observed in experiments.[53,54] It is worth noting that there were still free water molecules not
fully coated by surfactant molecules diffusing in the oil phase at
this state, which was also contributing to the increasing sizes of
droplets besides the droplet coalescence effect in the ongoing simulations.
The droplet size distribution in the system was monitored during the
whole simulation for further analysis.The size of droplets
increased with simulation time in this preliminary stage of self-microemulsification
until the system reached the equilibrium state of microemulsion. The
sizes of all droplets in the simulation system were determined following eqs and 4 during the simulation from 0.1 to 322 ns. From the droplet size
distributions at different simulation times shown in Figure a and the evolution of the
droplets shown in the Supporting Video (self-emulsifying
process), the sizes of the droplets increased drastically in the first
50 ns of the simulation and stabilized in the second half of the simulation.
Specifically, the size distribution of droplets at the beginning of
the simulation was narrow with the peak value below 4.5 nm, as shown
in Figure b. Because
of the fast droplet coalescence and uptake of free water molecules,
the distribution of the droplet sizes quickly widened covering a size
range of 4–8 nm in the first 2 ns, with the peak value shifted
to around 6 nm (yellow-colored distribution, Figure b). Starting from 100 ns until the end of
the simulation, the distribution of droplet sizes became narrow again,
reaching a stable peak value at around 7.5 nm (purple-colored distribution, Figure b). It is worth noting
that the evolution of the droplet sizes and stabilization of the size
distribution at the beginning of the simulation were quick. The coarse-grained
modeling enables a fast simulation. But the models do not affect the
speed of the evolution of droplets. In this work, coarse-grained modeling
just not only saves the computer hours spent in the simulations due
to the larger time step of 10 fs but also has a smoother energy landscape
and fast dynamics.[47] So, it is beneficial
for this study. The long-term stabilization of droplet size distribution
in the second half of the simulation suggested that the system reached
an equilibrium state with long-term stable microemulsion droplets
resting in the energy state A in Figure a. The total system potential energy also
showed a plateau in the second half of the simulation as shown in Figures S3 and S4, clearly indicating that the
system was in equilibrium. External energy is thus needed to further
disturb the stability of the droplets and bring the system to the
phase-separated state.The evolution of the droplet number and
sizes directly resulted
in the changes of the interface surface area in the water/surfactant/oil
colloidal systems. As depicted in Figure a, the drastic decrease of the droplet number
at the beginning of the simulation in the system, namely, droplet
coalescence and the increase of droplet average sizes (Figure b), was accompanied by an extremely
fast decrease in the interface surface area. The decrease in the interface
surface area was greatly favorable to the lowering of the total system
energy (Figures S3 and S4) and the stabilization
of the droplets. As the droplets gradually stabilized after the early
stage of the simulation, the average diameter of the droplet remained
constant in the system, showing almost negligible deviation in the
average diameter of the droplets (Figures b and S5). To
better understand this section, Figure S6 is plotted to show more details about analyzing the data.
Temperature Effect on Droplet Sizes
It is known that
temperature has a significant effect on the microemulsion
system.[55,56] Here, the temperature was also found to
have a great impact on the droplet size evolution. Droplet evolutions
under different temperatures were compared, as shown in Figure . Under seven temperatures
of 280, 300, 320, 340, 360, 380, and 400 K, the average droplet diameters
all featured a steep increase at the beginning of the simulations
and stabilized in the final equilibrium state (Figure ). Generally, higher temperatures led to
a faster increase in the average droplet diameter in the initial stage
of the simulations. As the inset in Figure shows, larger droplets were observed with
the higher temperature at the same simulation time, which could be
attributed to the higher possibility of droplet collision and coalescence
and faster molecular dynamics at the higher temperature. As such,
the results suggested that a higher temperature can accelerate the
spontaneous microemulsifying process. A higher temperature also led
to averagely bigger droplets, as indicated by the final average droplet
sizes at the end of the simulation shown in Figure . It should be noted that the high temperatures,
especially 380 and 400 K, were used here only to demonstrate the obvious
temperature effect, which is higher than the phase separation temperature
and boiling point of some microemulsion systems. Despite the short
simulation time, the droplet size observed in the simulation at 400
K was much larger than those at the lower temperatures. It could be
speculated that a phase separation could be expected with a longer
time. In addition, the relationship between the droplet size and the
temperature is explored in Figure S7. The
result, shown in Figure S7b, clearly indicated
the presence of an optimum temperature at which the size of the droplets
formed was at its minimum. Away from the optimum temperature, any
temperature change will increase the droplet size, similar to the
result from an experimental study.[57]
Figure 7
Impact of temperature
on droplet evolution and the final sizes.
The average droplet sizes during simulations from 280 to 400 K are
colored differently in the figure.
Impact of temperature
on droplet evolution and the final sizes.
The average droplet sizes during simulations from 280 to 400 K are
colored differently in the figure.
Mass Transport Mechanisms in Self-Microemulsification
There were two possible modes of increase in the average sizes
of the droplets in the system, namely, droplet coalescence and Ostwald
ripening between droplets, as discussed in the previous sections.
To further reveal the dynamics of droplet coalescence, a smaller system
containing only two droplets was built and subjected to simulations
with the same controlling parameters, and the results are shown in Figure . A coalescence event
started with the merging of the hydrophilic tails of the surfactants
from two droplets (Figure a). Strikingly, a water bridge was gradually formed and enlarged
after the merging of the surfactant shell, as shown in Figure b,c,f,g and the Supporting Video (aggregating process). Afterward,
the two droplets became one large droplet with a spherical shape (Figure d,h). In this process,
the merging of the surfactant shell was a random and rate-limiting
step, while the formation of the water bridge and final coalescence
were highly efficient. Ostwald ripening was observed among droplets
during the whole course of simulations. As shown in Figure , water molecules in small
droplets were more likely to detach from the original droplet into
the oil phase, owing to the high Laplace pressure that resulted from
the big surface curvature. The detached water molecules can then freely
diffuse in the system and finally be captured by other droplets. As
a net result, water molecules diffused from smaller droplets to bigger
ones, yielding the same Ostwald ripening process observed in other
previous studies.[22,58]
Figure 8
Coalescence of two droplets. (a–d)
Whole coalescence shown
with the surfactant shell of the two droplets. (e–h) Coalescence
process shown by only the water cores of the two droplets.
Figure 9
Ostwald ripening among droplets in the system. Water cores of different
droplets are shown with different colors. The water molecules detached
from the droplets and diffused in the oil phase are highlighted by
circles. (a) Snapshot of the system at 0.2 ns, (b) snapshot of the
system at 0.5 ns, (c) snapshot of the system at 1 ns, and (d) snapshot
of the system at 1.8 ns.
Coalescence of two droplets. (a–d)
Whole coalescence shown
with the surfactant shell of the two droplets. (e–h) Coalescence
process shown by only the water cores of the two droplets.Ostwald ripening among droplets in the system. Water cores of different
droplets are shown with different colors. The water molecules detached
from the droplets and diffused in the oil phase are highlighted by
circles. (a) Snapshot of the system at 0.2 ns, (b) snapshot of the
system at 0.5 ns, (c) snapshot of the system at 1 ns, and (d) snapshot
of the system at 1.8 ns.The two mass transport
mechanisms contributed to the whole self-microemulsifying
process, with different probabilities at different stages. Namely,
droplet coalescence dominated the early stage of droplet size evolution,
which greatly drove the drastic increase of droplet sizes in the system.
In the simulations carried out in this work, the period of active
droplet coalescence was largely the first 5 ns. In comparison, Ostwald
ripening occurred in the whole process of the simulation and was the
dominating mass transport mechanism among droplets in the system close
to the equilibrium state. It is important to mention that with the
gradual growth of big droplets and shrinkage of small ones, the surfactant
molecule shell rearranged to accommodate the change of the water core
volume. Specifically, the surfactant shell became loosened on larger
droplets while tightened and compacted on smaller ones, which slowed
down mass transport and eliminated the variation of the droplet sizes.
Conclusions
In summary, a series of molecular
dynamics simulations were carried
out to explore the droplet size evolution and mass transport mechanisms
in the primary stage of the self-microemulsifying process. Thanks
to the coarse-grained models chosen, the simulations were able to
reveal the whole process of self-microemulsification, reaching stable
microemulsion systems. Surfactant-coated droplets were found to go
through two distinguished steps before the whole colloidal system
became a stable microemulsion, namely, a rapid droplet size growth
step at the beginning of mixing via active droplet coalescence and
a slow evolving step of droplet size stabilization by Ostwald ripening.
The fast droplet coalescence led to a wide distribution of the droplet
sizes in the system, while Ostwald ripening eliminated smaller droplets
in the system and narrowed the droplet size distribution in the final
stage of microemulsification. Furthermore, the temperature can impact
the speed of evaluation and final morphology of self-microemulsification.
Higher temperatures accelerated the whole process and resulted in
larger droplet sizes. It should be noted that the key parameters,
such as the length of the hydrophobic chain and the types of hydrophilic
head groups, influence the droplet size evolution and are worth further
study. The results provide a better understanding of droplet size
variation during self-microemulsification and can act as guidelines
for the design and fabrication of microemulsions with desired sizes
and configurations.