Aggregation in colloidal suspensions: Effect of colloidal forces and hydrodynamic interactions

The forces acting in colloidal suspensions and affecting their stability and aggregation kinetics are considered. The approximations used for these forces in numerical simulations and the importance of the balanced account for both colloidal forces and hydrodynamic interactions are discussed. As an example the results of direct numerical simulations of kinetics of aggregation either with account for hydrodynamic interaction between particles or without it are compared by varying the parameters of the interaction potential between particles and fraction of solid. Simulations are based on the Langevin equations with pairwise interaction between particles and take into account Brownian, hydrodynamic and colloidal forces. It is confirmed that the neglecting of hydrodynamic interaction results in an accelerated growth of aggregates. The results of numerical simulations of aggregation kinetics are compared with well known analytical solutions

Evaporation of sessile droplets

Recent developments in the studies of evaporation of liquid droplets placed on a solid substrate are reviewed for the droplet size typically larger than 1 μm, so that kinetics effects of evaporation are neglected. The attention is paid to the limits of applicability of classical diffusion model of evaporation, effect of substrate, evaporation of complex fluids and applicability for its description of the theory developed for pure liquids, and hydrothermal waves accompanying evaporation

Effect of aggregation on viscosity of colloidal suspension

This experimental study of viscosity of colloidal suspensions was performed using monodisperse polystyrene latex with particle diameter of 1.15 μm and a pH dependent negative zeta potential of up to 120 mV in aqueous solutions. The range of electrostatic repulsion between the particles was controlled by varying the concentration of potassium chloride. Suspensions under investigation were either in a stable, coagulated, or gelated, state depending on the salt concentration. Shear thinning behaviour was observed for all the samples studied. The dependence of viscosity on shear rate imposed was found to depend substantially on the salt concentration

Kinetic models of micelles formation

Four possible aggregation models in surfactant solutions are considered. It is shown that only the model taking into account interactions between clusters of sub-micellar size shows a transition to the micelles formation at a concentration above the CMC

Superspreading on hydrophobic substrates:effect of glycerol additive

The spreading of solutions of three trisiloxane surfactants on two hydrophobic substrates, polyethylene and polyvinylidenefluoride, was studied with the addition of 0–40 mass % of glycerol. It was found that all the surfactant solutions spread faster than silicone oil of the same viscosity, confirming the existence of a mechanism which accelerates the spreading of the surfactant solutions. For the non-superspreading surfactant, BT-233, addition of glycerol improved the spreading performance on polyvinylidenefluoride and resulted in a transition from partial to complete wetting on polyethylene. The fastest spreading was observed for BT-233 at a concentration of 2.5 g/L, independent of glycerol content. For the superspreading surfactants, BT-240 and BT-278, the concentration at which the fastest spreading occurs systematically increased with concentration of glycerol on both substrates from 1.25 g/L for solutions in water to 10 g/L for solutions in 40% glycerol/water mixture. Thus, the surfactant equilibration rate (and therefore formation of surface tension gradients) and Marangoni flow are important components of a superspreading mechanism. De-wetting of the solutions containing glycerol, once spread on the substrates, resulted in the formation of circular drop patterns. This is in contrast to the solely aqueous solutions where the spread film shrank due to evaporation, without any visible traces being left behind

Spreading of aqueous surfactant solutions on oil substrates: Superspreaders vs non-superspreaders

HypothesisThe question of why aqueous solutions of some surfactants demonstrate a rapid spreading (superspreading) over hydrophobic solid substrates, while solutions of other similar surfactants do not, has no definitive explanation despite numerous previous studies. The suggested hypothesis for this study assumes that once the spreading coefficient of surfactant is positive, there is a concentration range for solutions of any surfactant which demonstrates rapid spreading. As it is impossible to calculate spreading coefficients for solid substrates, we compare the spreading performance of known superspreaders and non-superspreaders on liquid (oil) substrate.ExperimentsThe kinetics of spreading of aqueous solutions of a series of branched ionic surfactants and non-ionic trisiloxane surfactants on two liquid substrates was studied and compared with the spreading of a surfactant-free liquid, silicone oil. Both dynamic and equilibrium spreading coefficients were calculated using measured surface and interfacial tensions.FindingsThere is no difference in spreading rate on liquid substrate between solutions of surfactants proven as superspreaders (while spreading on solid substrate) or non-superspreaders. A rapid spreading (superspreading) with the characteristic rate of spreading O(102–103) mm2/s occurs if the dynamic spreading coefficients exceeds the positive threshold value. If the dynamic spreading coefficient is negative or slightly positive, complete wetting still occurs, but the spreading is slow with the spreading rate is O(1) mm2/s. Spreading exponents for surfactant solutions in the rapid spreading regime are considerably larger than for the surfactant-free liquid. A number of spreading and dewetting patterns were observed depending on the surfactant type, its concentration and substrate