% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded.  This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.

@INPROCEEDINGS{Brito:874672,
      author       = {Brito, Mariano and Riest, Jonas and Denton, Alan and
                      Naegele, Gerhard},
      title        = {{C}omparison of {D}ifferent {M}ethods for {C}alculating
                      {E}ffective {I}nteractions and {P}ressure in
                      {C}harge-stabilized {D}ispersions},
      reportid     = {FZJ-2020-01588},
      year         = {2017},
      abstract     = {Charge-stabilized suspensions have interesting static and
                      dynamic features, reflected in properties such as the
                      suspension osmotic pressure, generalized sedimentation
                      coefficient and viscosity. These properties are determined
                      by electro-steric and (partially) by electro-hydrodynamic
                      interactions. Due to the large size asymmetry between the
                      colloidal macroions and the small microions, the degrees of
                      freedom of the latter can be integrated out, resulting in an
                      effective one-component interaction potential describing
                      microion-dressed colloidal quasi-particles. We present a
                      comparison, and partial extension, of various methods of
                      calculating effective colloidal interaction parameters
                      including effective charges and screening constants [1].
                      Additionally, we discuss osmotic suspension pressure
                      calculations for dispersions in Donnan equilibrium with a
                      salt ion reservoir. We discuss methods including cell-models
                      [2,3], renormalized jellium models [4], and
                      multi-colloid-centered mean-field models [5,6]. The pros and
                      cons of the various methods are assessed by comparison with
                      primitive model based computer simulations.References[1] M.
                      Brito, J. Riest, A. Denton and G. Nägele, to be submitted
                      (2017).[2] S. Alexander et al., J. Chem. Phys. 80, 5776
                      (1984).[3] E. Trizac et al., Langmuir 19, 4027 (2003).[4] S.
                      Pianegonda et al., J. Chem. Phys. 126, 014702 (2007).[5] A.
                      R, Denton, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 20, 494230 (2008).[6]
                      N. Boon et al., PNAS 112, 30, 9242, (2015).},
      month         = {Jul},
      date          = {2017-07-17},
      organization  = {10th Liquid Matter Conference,
                       Ljubljana (Slovenia), 17 Jul 2017 - 21
                       Mar 2020},
      subtyp        = {Other},
      cin          = {IBI-4},
      cid          = {I:(DE-Juel1)IBI-4-20200312},
      pnm          = {551 - Functional Macromolecules and Complexes (POF3-551)},
      pid          = {G:(DE-HGF)POF3-551},
      typ          = {PUB:(DE-HGF)24},
      url          = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/874672},
}