- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine
Access Provided by Xinjiang University

Physical Review E

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Access by Xinjiang University

Nonlinear microrheology of wormlike micelle solutions using ferromagnetic nanowire probes

Nathan Cappallo, Clayton Lapointe, Daniel H. Reich, and Robert L. Leheny

  • Department of Physics and Astronomy, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland 21218, USA

PDF

Phys. Rev. E 76, 031505 – Published 27 September, 2007

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.76.031505

Abstract

Ferromagnetic nanowires were employed to investigate the microrheology of wormlike micelle solutions composed of equimolar cetylpyridinium chloride–sodium salicylate. For a wire rotated about a short axis, the drag at low rotation rate ωR is independent of ωR and strongly temperature dependent, consistent with the macroscopic shear viscosity. Above a critical rotation rate ωc, the drag is independent of temperature and decreases as a power law with increasing rate. The onset of nonlinear drag is characterized by a peak associated with contributions from extensional flow. Above ωc, the fluid generates an additional torque that tilts the wire out of regions of high shear flow and that is interpreted as a consequence of a shear-induced transition to nematic order among the micelles. Rotation of the wire in response to this torque reveals directly the anisotropy of the drag in the nonlinear state.

View figure in article

Article Text

References (37)

  1. R. G. Larson, The Structure and Rheology of Complex Fluids (Oxford University Press, New York, 1999).
  2. T. G. Mason and D. A. Weitz, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74, 1250 (1995).
  3. B. Schnurr, F. Gittes, F. C. MacKintosh, and C. F. Schmidt, Macromolecules 30, 7781 (1997).
  4. I. Y. Wong, M. L. Gardel, D. R. Reichman, E. R. Weeks, M. T. Valentine, A. R. Bausch, and D. A. Weitz, Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 178101 (2004).
  5. P. Habdas, D. Schaar, A. C. Levitt, and E. R. Weeks, Europhys. Lett. 67, 477 (2004).
  6. T. M. Squires and J. F. Brady, Phys. Fluids 17, 073101 (2005).
  7. A. Meyer, A. Marshall, B. G. Bush, and E. M. Furst, J. Rheol. 50, 77 (2006).
  8. M. E. Cates and S. M. Fielding, Adv. Phys. 55, 799 (2006).
  9. N. A. Spenley, M. E. Cates, and T. C. B. McLeish, Phys. Rev. Lett. 71, 939 (1993).
  10. H. Rehage and H. Hoffmann, Mol. Phys. 74, 933 (1991).
  11. J.-F. Berret, G. Porte, and J.-P. Decruppe, Phys. Rev. E 55, 1668 (1997).
  12. C. H. Liu and D. J. Pine, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 2121 (1996).
  13. R. Bandyopadhyay, G. Basappa, and A. K. Sood, Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 2022 (2000).
  14. R. Makhloufi, J.-P. Decruppe, A. Ait-Ali, and R. Cressely, Europhys. Lett. 32, 253 (1995).
  15. R. W. Mair and P. T. Callaghan, Europhys. Lett. 36, 719 (1996).
  16. J.-F. Berret, D. C. Roux, and G. Porte, J. Phys. II 4, 1261 (1994).
  17. L. Becu, S. Manneville, and A. Colin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 018301 (2004).
  18. E. Fischer and P. T. Callaghan, Phys. Rev. E 64, 011501 (2001).
  19. M. S. Turner and M. E. Cates, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 4, 3719 (1992).
  20. G. Porte, J. F. Berret, and J. L. Harden, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 4, 3719 (1992).
  21. P. D. Olmsted, Europhys. Lett. 48, 339 (1999).
  22. N. Z. Handzy and A. Belmonte, Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 124501 (2004).
  23. N. Z. Handzy, Ph.D. thesis, Pennsylvania State University, 2005.
  24. M. Tanase, L. A. Bauer, A. Hultgren, D. M. Silevitch, L. Sun, D. H. Reich, P. C. Searson, and G. J. Meyer, Nano Lett. 1, 155 (2001).
  25. C. Lapointe, A. Hultgren, D. M. Silevitch, E. J. Felton, D. H. Reich, and R. L. Leheny, Science 303, 652 (2004).
  26. C. Lapointe, N. Cappallo, D. H. Reich, and R. L. Leheny, J. Appl. Phys. 97, 10Q304 (2005).
  27. A. Anguelouch, R. L. Leheny, and D. H. Reich, Appl. Phys. Lett. 89, 111914 (2006).
  28. C. Wilhelm, J. Browaeys, A. Ponton, and J.-C. Bacri, Phys. Rev. E 67, 011504 (2003).
  29. Z. Cheng and T. G. Mason, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 018304 (2003).
  30. A. I. Bishop, T. A. Nieminen, N. R. Heckenberg, and H. Rubinsztein-Dunlop, Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 198104 (2004).
  31. A. Ortega and J. G. de la Torre, J. Chem. Phys. 119, 9914 (2003).
  32. D. T. Chen, E. R. Weeks, J. C. Crocker, M. F. Islam, R. Verma, J. Gruber, A. J. Levine, T. C. Lubensky, and A. G. Yodh, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 108301 (2003).

  33. While the rheometer performs stress-controlled measurements and the rotating nanowire corresponds effectively to strain-controlled conditions, studies of equimolar CPCl−NaSal using a strain-controlled rheometer report η(γ̇) that is essentially the same as that in Fig. 1(b) [23].

  34. A. J. Levine and T. C. Lubensky, Phys. Rev. E 63, 041510 (2001).
  35. H.-S. Dou and N. Phan-Thien, Rheol. Acta 42, 383 (2003).
  36. L. M. Walker, P. Moldenaers, and J.-F. Berret, Langmuir 12, 6309 (1996).
  37. M. L. Gardel, F. Nakamura, J. Hartwig, J. C. Crocker, T. P. Stossel, and D. A. Weitz, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 088102 (2006).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. E 76, 031505– Published 27 September, 2007
  • Received 10 April 2007

© 2007 American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation