Recent theoretical studies have suggested a significant enhancement in electro-osmotic flows over hydrodynamically slipping surfaces, and experiments have indeed measured O(1) enhancements. In this paper, we investigate whether an equivalent effect occurs in the electrophoretic motion of a colloidal particle whose surface exhibits hydrodynamic slip. To this end, we compute the electrophoretic mobility of a uniformly charged spherical particle with slip length λ as a function of the zeta (or surface) potential of the particle ζ and diffuse-layer thickness κ1. In the case of a thick diffuse layer, κa1 (where a is the particle size), simple arguments show that slip does lead to an O(1) enhancement in the mobility, owing to the reduced viscous drag on the particle. On the other hand, for a thin-diffuse layer κa1, the situation is more complicated. A detailed asymptotic analysis, following the method of O’Brien [J. Colloid Interface Sci.92, 204 (1983)], reveals that an O(κλ) increase in the mobility occurs at low-to-moderate zeta potentials (with ζ measured on the scale of thermal voltage kBT/e25mV). However, as ζ is further increased, the mobility decreases and ultimately becomes independent of the slip length—the enhancement is lost—which is due to the importance of nonuniform surface conduction within the thin-diffuse layer, at large ζ and large, but finite, κa. Our asymptotic calculations for thick and thin-diffuse layers are corroborated and bridged by computation of the mobility from the numerical solution of the full electrokinetic equations (using the method of O’Brien and White [J. Chem. Soc., Faraday Trans. 274, 1607 (1978)]). In summary, then, we demonstrate that hydrodynamic slip can indeed produce an enhancement in the electrophoretic mobility; however, such enhancements will not be as dramatic as the previously studied κa limit would suggest. Importantly, this conclusion applies not only to electrophoresis but also to electro-osmosis over highly charged surfaces, wherein any inhomogeneities (e.g., due to curvature, roughness, charge patterning, or a variation in slip length) will drive nonuniform surface conduction, which prevents the significant slip-driven flow enhancements predicted for a uniform highly charged surface.

1.
R. B.
Schoch
,
J.
Han
, and
P.
Renaud
, “
Transport phenomena in nanofluidics
,”
Rev. Mod. Phys.
80
,
839
(
2008
).
2.
H. A.
Stone
,
A.
Stroock
, and
A.
Ajdari
, “
Engineering flows in small devices: Microfluidics toward a lab-on-a-chip
,”
Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech.
36
,
381
(
2004
).
3.
T. M.
Squires
and
S.
Quake
, “
Microfluidics: Fluid physics at the nanoliter scale
,”
Rev. Mod. Phys.
77
,
977
(
2005
).
4.
J.
Lyklema
,
Fundamentals of Interface and Colloid Science
,
Solid-Liquid Interfaces
Vol.
II
(
Academic
,
San Diego, CA
,
1995
).
5.
W. B.
Russel
,
D. A.
Saville
, and
W. R.
Schowalter
,
Colloidal Dispersions
(
Cambridge University Press
,
Cambridge, UK
,
1989
).
6.
S.
Ghosal
, “
Electrokinetic flow and dispersion in capillary electrophoresis
,”
Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech.
38
,
309
(
2006
).
7.
M.
von Smoluchowksi
, “
Contribution à la théorie de l’endosmose électrique et de quelques phenomènes corrélatifs
,”
Bull. Int. Acad. Sci. Cracovie
8
,
182
(
1903
).
8.
G. K.
Batchelor
,
An Introduction to Fluid Dynamics
(
Cambridge University Press
,
Cambridge, UK
,
2000
).
9.
H.
Lamb
,
Hydrodynamics
(
Dover
,
New York
,
1932
).
10.
E.
Lauga
,
M. P.
Brenner
, and
H. A.
Stone
, in
Handbook of Experimental Fluid Dynamics
, edited by
C.
Tropea
,
A.
Yarin
, and
J. F.
Foss
(
Springer
,
New York
,
2007
), pp.
1219
1240
.
11.
C.
Neto
,
D. R.
Evans
,
E.
Bonaccurso
,
H. -J.
Butt
, and
V. S. J.
Craig
, “
Boundary slip in Newtonian liquids: A review of experimental studies
,”
Rep. Prog. Phys.
68
,
2859
(
2005
).
12.
O.
Vinogradova
, “
Slippage of water over hydrophobic surfaces
,”
Int. J. Min. Process.
56
,
31
(
1999
).
13.
L.
Bocquet
and
J.
Barrat
, “
Flow boundary conditions from nano-to micro-scales
,”
Soft Matter
3
,
685
(
2007
).
14.
J.
Eijkel
, “
Liquid slip in micro- and nanofluidics: Recent research and its possible implications
,”
Lab Chip
7
,
299
(
2007
).
15.
N. V.
Churaev
,
J.
Ralston
,
I. P.
Sergeeva
, and
V. D.
Sobolev
, “
Electrokinetic properties of methylated quartz capillaries
,”
Adv. Colloid Interface Sci.
96
,
265
(
2002
).
16.
C. I.
Bouzigues
,
P.
Tabeling
, and
L.
Bocquet
, “
Nanofluidics in the Debye layer at hydrophilic and hydrophobic surfaces
,”
Phys. Rev. Lett.
101
,
114503
(
2008
).
17.
Y.
Almeras
,
J. L.
Barrat
, and
L.
Bocquet
, “
Influence of wetting properties on diffusion in a confined fluid
,”
J. Phys. IV
10
,
27
(
2000
).
18.
E.
Lauga
and
T.
Squires
, “
Brownian motion near a partial-slip boundary: A local probe of the no-slip condition
,”
Phys. Fluids
17
,
103102
(
2005
).
19.
L.
Joly
,
C.
Ybert
,
E.
Trizac
, and
L.
Bocquet
, “
Hydrodynamics within the electric double layer on slipping surfaces
,”
Phys. Rev. Lett.
93
,
257805
(
2004
).
20.
V. M.
Muller
,
I. P.
Sergeeva
,
V. D.
Sobolev
, and
N. V.
Churaev
, “
Boundary effects in the theory of electrokinetic phenomena
,”
Colloid J. USSR
48
,
606
(
1986
).
21.
B. A.
Grimes
and
A. I.
Liapis
, “
Expressions for evaluating the possibility of slip at the liquid-solid interface in open tube capillary electrochromatography
,”
J. Colloid Interface Sci.
263
,
113
(
2003
).
22.
Y.
Ren
and
D.
Stein
, “
Slip-enhanced electrokinetic energy conversion in nanofluidic channels
,”
Nanotechnology
19
,
195707
(
2008
).
23.
T. M.
Squires
, “
Electrokinetic flows over inhomogeneously slipping surfaces
,”
Phys. Fluids
20
,
092105
(
2008
).
24.
F.
Reuss
, “
Sur un nouvel effet de le electricite glavanique
,”
Mem. Soc. Imp. Nat. Mosc.
2
,
327
(
1809
).
25.
J.
Khandurina
and
A.
Guttman
, “
Microscale separation and analysis
,”
Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol.
7
,
595
(
2003
).
26.
J. -L.
Viovy
, “
Electrophoresis of DNA and other polyelectrolytes: Physical mechanisms
,”
Rev. Mod. Phys.
72
,
813
(
2000
).
27.
A.
Ajdari
and
L.
Bocquet
, “
Giant amplification of interfacially driven transport by hydrodynamic slip: Diffusio-osmosis and Beyond
,”
Phys. Rev. Lett.
96
,
186102
(
2006
).
28.
E.
Huckel
, “
Die Kataphorese der Kugel
,”
Phys. Z.
25
,
204
(
1924
).
29.
R. W.
O’Brien
and
L. R.
White
, “
Electrophoretic mobility of a spherical colloidal particle
,”
J. Chem. Soc., Faraday Trans. 2
74
,
1607
(
1978
).
30.
H.
Ohshima
,
T. W.
Healy
, and
L. R.
White
, “
Electrokinetic phenomena in a dilute suspension of charged mercury drops
,”
J. Chem. Soc., Faraday Trans.
80
,
1643
(
1984
).
31.
C. S.
Mangelsdorf
and
L. R.
White
, “
Effects of Stern-layer conductance on electrokinetic transport properties of colloidal particles
,”
J. Chem. Soc., Faraday Trans.
86
,
2859
(
1990
).
32.
Note, our use of the term “surface conduction” refers to the transport—via electromigration, diffusion, and electroconvection—of ions within the diffuse, or mobile, part of the double layer. This should not be confused with the (anomalous) conduction often attributed to an immobile (or Stern) monolayer of ions behind the “plane of shear.” Indeed, in the present work we consider the electrical double layer to be comprised of only a diffuse screening cloud and the particle itself; i.e. there is no Stern layer. Hence, the plane of shear coincides with the particle surface.
33.
S. S.
Dukhin
and
B. V.
Deryaguin
, in
Surface and Colloid Science
, edited by
E.
Matijevic
(
Wiley
,
New York
,
1974
), Vol.
7
.
34.
R. W.
O’Brien
, “
The solution of the electrokinetic equations for colloidal particles with thin double layers
,”
J. Colloid Interface Sci.
92
,
204
(
1983
).
35.
C. F.
Zukoski
and
D. A.
Saville
, “
An experimental test of electrokinetic theory using measurements of electrophoretic mobility and electrical conductivity
,”
J. Colloid Interface Sci.
107
,
322
(
1985
).
36.
R. S.
Chow
and
K.
Takamura
, “
Electrophoretic mobilities of Bitumen and conventional crude-in-water emulsions using the laser Doppler apparatus in the presence of multivalent cations
,”
J. Colloid Interface Sci.
125
,
212
(
1988
).
37.
A. B.
Basset
,
A Treatise on Hydrodynamics
(
Dover
,
New York, NY
,
1961
).
38.
Properly, for a spherical colloid an analysis of the thin-diffuse-layer limit must account for the variation of the electric field around the particle. In that case, in Eq. (7) the electric body force equals the charge density multiplied by the local tangential field, not the uniform applied field. As such, our expression for the velocity inside the diffuse layer (10) would represent an inner solution (in the matched asymptotic expansion sense), whose limiting value at the diffuse-layer-bulk interface (11) must be matched to the bulk (outer) velocity field. However, in the absence of surface conduction, the simple flat-plate analysis does indeed yield the exact same result for the mobility (14) as a rigorous calculation for a spherical particle (see, e.g., Ref. 5). This is not surprising, of course, and is merely an illustration of the well-known result that for κa and ζ1 (i.e. in the absence of surface conduction) the mobility of a uniformly charged “particle” does not depend on its shape or size.
39.
S. S.
Dukhin
and
V. N.
Shilov
, “
Theory of static polarization of diffuse part of thin electric double layer of spherical particles
,”
Colloid J. USSR
31
,
564
(
1969
).
40.
A. S.
Khair
and
T. M.
Squires
, “
Fundamental aspects of concentration polarization arising from non-uniform electrokinetic transport
,”
Phys. Fluids
20
,
087102
(
2008
).
41.
J. L.
Anderson
, “
Colloid transport by interfacial forces
,”
Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech.
21
,
61
(
1989
).
42.
B. V.
Deryaguin
,
S. S.
Dukhin
, and
A. A.
Korotkova
, “
Diffusiophoresis in electrolyte solutions and its role in the mechanism of film formation from rubber latexes by the method of ionic deposition
,”
Kolloidn. Zh.
23
,
53
(
1961
).
43.
D. C.
Prieve
,
J. L.
Anderson
,
J. P.
Ebel
, and
M. E.
Lowell
, “
Motion of a particle generated by chemical gradients. Part 2. Electrolytes
,”
J. Fluid Mech.
148
,
247
(
1984
).
44.
B. V.
Deryaguin
and
S. S.
Dukhin
, “
Theory of surface conductance
,”
Colloid J. USSR
31
,
277
(
1969
).
45.
S. S.
Dukhin
, “
Non-equilibrium electric surface phenomena
,”
Adv. Colloid Interface Sci.
44
,
1
(
1993
).
46.
To perform the integrations, we note that on the scale of y the particle appears flat, and hence the electric field may be approximated by that for a planar double layer, dϕ0/dy=2κsinh(ϕ0/2) (Ref. 5).
47.
K. T.
Chu
and
M. Z.
Bazant
, “
Surface conservation laws at microscopically diffuse interfaces
,”
J. Colloid Interface Sci.
315
,
319
(
2007
).
48.
J. S.
Newman
,
Electrochemical Systems
(
Prentice-Hall
,
Englewood Cliffs
,
1973
).
49.
H. A.
Stone
and
A. D. T.
Samuel
, “
Propulsion of microorganisms by surface distortions
,”
Phys. Rev. Lett.
77
,
4102
(
1996
).
50.
The value of m was chosen by matching the mobility maximum at κa=20 from O’Brien and White (Ref. 29) (see Figs. 4 and 5 in their paper) to our (full) numerical calculations. Specifically, they find a maximum mobility of μe4 occurring at ζ5, and using m=0.34 we have (to two decimal places) a maximum of μe=3.99 occurring at ζ=4.79.
51.
C.
Cottin-Bizonne
,
J. L.
Barrat
,
L.
Bocquet
, and
E.
Charlaix
, “
Low-friction flows of liquid at nanopatterned interfaces
,”
Nature Mater.
2
,
237
(
2003
).
52.
J. W. G.
Tyrrell
and
P.
Attard
, “
Images of nanobubbles on hydrophobic surfaces and their interactions
,”
Phys. Rev. Lett.
87
,
176104
(
2001
).
53.
A. B. D.
Cassie
and
S.
Baxter
, “
Wettability of porous surfaces
,”
Trans. Faraday Soc.
40
,
546
(
1944
).
54.
J.
Ou
and
J. P.
Rothstein
, “
Direct velocity measurements of the flow past drag-reducing ultrahydrophobic surfaces
,”
Phys. Fluids
17
,
103606
(
2005
).
You do not currently have access to this content.