Paper detail

Depletion potentials in highly size-asymmetric binary hard-sphere mixtures: Comparison of accurate simulation results with theory

We report a detailed study, using state-of-the-art simulation and theoretical methods, of the depletion potential between a pair of big hard spheres immersed in a reservoir of much smaller hard spheres, the size disparity being measured by the ratio of diameters q=σ_s/σ_b. Small particles are treated grand canonically, their influence being parameterized in terms of their packing fraction in the reservoir, η_s^r. Two specialized Monte Carlo simulation schemes --the geometrical cluster algorithm, and staged particle insertion-- are deployed to obtain accurate depletion potentials for a number of combinations of q\leq 0.1 and η_s^r. After applying corrections for simulation finite-size effects, the depletion potentials are compared with the prediction of new density functional theory (DFT) calculations based on the insertion trick using the Rosenfeld functional and several subsequent modifications. While agreement between the DFT and simulation is generally good, significant discrepancies are evident at the largest reservoir packing fraction accessible to our simulation methods, namely η_s^r=0.35. These discrepancies are, however, small compared to those between simulation and the much poorer predictions of the Derjaguin approximation at this η_s^r. The recently proposed morphometric approximation performs better than Derjaguin but is somewhat poorer than DFT for the size ratios and small sphere packing fractions that we consider. The effective potentials from simulation, DFT and the morphometric approximation were used to compute the second virial coefficient B_2 as a function of η_s^r. Comparison of the results enables an assessment of the extent to which DFT can be expected to correctly predict the propensity towards fluid fluid phase separation in additive binary hard sphere mixtures with q\leq 0.1.

preprint2011arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.