1. business and industrial
2. energy
3. oil

Electrical double layer: revisit based on boundary conditions
Jong U. Kim∗
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Texas A&M University
College Station, TX 77843-3128, USA
Abstract
The electrical double layer at infinite flat solid surface has been discussed with respect to
boundary conditions based on potential and electric displacement, respectively. It was shown that
the electrokinetic charge density is equal to the sum of the surface charge density and the charge
densities at the inner and the outer Helmholtz planes. The ratio of the charge density at the outer
Helmholtz plane to the surface charge density was evaluated, and a new relation between the
surface charge density and the zeta potential was derived.
Keywords: Electrical double layer; Surface charge; Zeta potential; Electrokinetic charge
∗
Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected]
1
1. Introduction
Understanding phenomena near the interface of solid and an electrolyte solution is of
importance in electrokinetics, microfluidics, colloidal dispersion, and electrochemistry. When
solid surface contacts an electrolyte solution, the solid surface becomes charged due to the
difference of electron (or ion) affinities between the solid surface and the solution or the
ionization of surface groups. In addition, the surface charges cause a special structure at the
interface, so called the electrical double layer (EDL) [1-5].
Usually Gouy-Chapman-Stern model (GCS) is widely used to describe the EDL. The GCS
model consists of two layers; Stern layer (or Helmholtz region) and diffuse layer. The Stern layer
is the region next to the surface where ions in the solution cannot move in the longitudinal
direction of the surface due to specially-adsorbing and Coulomb interactions [6]. The diffuse
layer is the region next to the Stern layer. In the diffuse layer, ions in the solution can move freely
in any direction. The Stern layer has two planes; the inner Helmholtz plane (IHP) and the outer
Helmholtz plane (OHP) as shown in Figure 1a. In general, the charge densities and the potentials
at the surface and the IHP are evaluated through equilibrium constants of surface reactions, and
they affect the charge density and the potential at the OHP. Since the equilibrium constants
involve ion concentrations in the solution, the charge densities and the potentials at the surface
and two planes depend on the ion concentrations in the solution [7-10].
From the electrokinetics point of view, potential related to the interface is named zeta
potential. The zeta potential is the potential at shear plane within which the motion of fluid is
stationary. However, the zeta potential is assumed to be the potential at the OHP since the shear
plane lies very close to the OHP [1]. The zeta potential is measured by electroosmotic mobility,
streaming potential, and electrophoresis [1,3]. These measurements are related directly to the
diffuse layer. The electrokinetic charge amount corresponds to total charge amount in the diffuse
layer [1], and it is expressed with respect to the zeta potential.
2
In this note, we will discuss the EDL with respect to boundary conditions and drive a new
relation between the surface charge density and the zeta potential.
2. Electrical double layer
Let’s consider infinite flat solid surface in contact with an electrolyte solution. Thus, physical
quantities such as potential, ion distribution, and electric displacement are dependent on only onedimensional coordinate. Figure 1a shows a detailed schematic diagram of the EDL. As mentioned
before, it consists of the Stern layer and the diffuse layer. To easily understand the structure of the
EDL, we introduce three types of ions in the solution; potential-determining, specificallyadsorbed and indifferent ions [6]. Potential-determining ions are adsorbed at the surface directly.
Their equilibrium distribution between the surface and the solution determines the surface
potential relative to potential in bulk solution. The adsorbed potential-determining ions form the
surface charge density σ 0 . Indifferent ions are affected by Coulomb force of the surface charge.
Thus, they are repelled by the same sign surface charges while they are attracted by the opposite
sign. Specifically-adsorbed ions are strongly interacted with the surface through all interactions
other than purely Coulomb force [6]. By the definition of ion types, the IHP is located at the
center of specifically-adsorbed ions and the OHP is located at the center of indifferent ions. As a
matter of fact, an ion can be indifferent or specifically-adsorbed since the definition of the types
does not depend on what it is but on where it is. It is commonly assumed that there is no charge
between the surface and the IHP and between the IHP and the OHP. Since the surface charge
density and the charge density at the IHP are determined by equilibrium constants of chemical
reactions [7-10] and we are interested in the relation between the charge density at the OHP and
the zeta potential, we merge the surface and the IHP into a surface [10]. Thus, simplified EDL
consists of the surface, the OHP and the diffuse layer as shown in Fig. 1b. Using Gauss’ law
gives a modified surface charge density
σ s = σ0 +σi ,
3
(1)
where σ i is the charge density at the IHP, and a modified surface potential is regarded as
ψ s =ψ i
.
(2)
where ψ i is the potential at the IHP. It is noted that this simplification does not affect our result.
Since there is no ion between the surface and the OHP, potential in the Stern layer satisfies
∂ 2ψ
=0 .
∂x 2
(3)
If we use the surface potential and the zeta potential as the potentials at the boundaries of the
Stern layer, the potential profile in the Stern layer is
ψ Stern ( x ) = ψ s + (ζ −ψ s ) x δ at 0 ≤ x ≤ δ ,
(4)
where δ is position of the OHP and ζ is the zeta potential. Here, it is assumed that the potential
at the OHP is the zeta potential ζ as mentioned before. To obtain potential profile in the diffuse
layer, we use Poisson-Boltzmann equation for a 1 – 1 electrolyte [11];
⎛ qψ ⎞
2q
∂ 2ψ
⎟⎟ ,
=
nb sinh ⎜⎜
2
ε0εb
∂x
⎝ kB T ⎠
(5)
where q is the elementary charge, nb is the concentration of bulk electrolyte solution, k B is the
Boltzmann constant, and T is the absolute temperature. Solving the Poisson-Boltzmann equation
with the zeta potential gives the potential profile in the diffuse layer [4]
ψ diffuse ( x ) = 2
k B T ⎡1 + exp(− κ ( x − δ ))tanh (qζ 4k B T ) ⎤
ln ⎢
⎥ ,
q
⎣1 − exp(− κ ( x − δ ))tanh (qζ 4k B T ) ⎦
(6)
where κ = 2 q 2 nb ε b ε 0 k B T , i.e., the inverse Debye length. Here, potential in bulk region is
zero. The potential profiles in the Stern layer and the diffuse layer are obtained through the
boundary condition based on potential. However, boundary condition based on electric
displacement can be used. The boundary conditions of the electric displacement at the surface and
at the OHP (refer to Figure 1b.) are given by
4
σ s = −ε 0 ε 1
∂ψ Stern
∂x
at x = 0 (the surface) ,
(7)
x =0
and
− ε 0 ε1
∂ψ Stern
∂x
+ σ d = −ε 0 ε b
x =δ
∂ψ diffuse
∂x
at x = δ (the OHP) ,
(8)
x =δ
where ψ Stern is the potential in the Stern layer, ψ diffuse is the potential in the diffuse layer, σ d is
the charge density at the OHP, ε 0 is the vacuum permittivity, and ε 1 and ε b are dielectric
constants in the Stern layer and in the diffuse layer, respectively. The dielectric constant in the
Stern layer is different from that in the diffuse layer, and the dielectric constant in the diffuse
layer is thought of as the dielectric constant of bulk water (77.78 at 300K). Combining Eq. (4)
with Eqs. (7) and (8) gives
σ s + σ d = −ε 0 ε b
∂ψ diffuse
∂x
.
(9)
x =δ
It is worthy noting that Eq. (9) is different from relations in literatures [1-4, 6-10]. The term on
the left hand side of Eq. (9) in the literatures is only the charge density at the OHP or only the
negative surface charge density instead of the sum of the surface charge density and the charge
density at the OHP.
In addition, Eq. (9) is not compatible with electroneutrality condition [6]:
σ s +σ d = σ0 +σi +σ d = 0 .
(10)
That is to say, if the electroneutrality condition is right, the electric displacement at the OHP is
zero, which is not zero experimentally. Although the electroneutrality condition is commonly
used, it is not appropriate for the EDL since the electric displacement at the OHP in the diffuse
layer is not zero. To assure Eq. (9), we derive it again with Gauss’ law;
∂Dx
= ρ (x ) ,
∂x
5
(11)
where D x is the electric displacement and ρ ( x ) is charge density per unit volume. Integrating
Eq. (11) from a point a to a point b ( > a ) gives
Dx (b ) − Dx (a ) = ∫ ρ ( x ′) dx ′ .
b
(12)
a
If a = 0 and b = δ in Eq. (12), then
δ
D x (δ ) = ∫ ρ ( x ′) dx ′ = σ s + σ d .
(13)
0
Eq. (13) is exactly the same as Eq. (9). In both of Eq. (9) and Eq. (13), we assume that electric
displacement inside solid is zero. As well, when a = 0 and b is infinite, i.e., in bulk region, Eq.
(12) becomes
σ s + σ d − σ ek = 0 or σ ek = σ s + σ d ,
where σ ek is the electrokinetic charge density, i.e., σ ek = −
(14)
∞
∫δ ρ (x′) dx′ .
Eq. (14) is global
electrical neutrality condition. However, this global electrical neutrality condition needs
modifying when charges exist inside the solid.
3. Charge density at the outer Helmhotz plane
If the sign of the surface charge is the same as that of the zeta potential, the charge amount at
the OHP is equal to or less than the surface charge amount, i.e., σ d ≤ σ s [12]. Let’s use a new
notation, σ d = −γ σ s where 0 < γ ≤ 1 . Using the new notation, Eq. (9) is rewritten as
(1 − γ )σ s
= −ε 0 ε b
∂ψ diffuse
∂x
.
(13)
x =δ
Since the OHP is not movable in the normal direction of the surface, the sum of Coulomb force
per area between the surface charges and the charges at the OHP, electrostriction pressure of the
fluid in the Stern layer and pressure of the fluid in the diffuse layer is zero. The Coulomb force
between the surface charge and the charge at the OHP is
6
γ σ s2
δ i + ( y − y ′ )j + ( z − z ′ ) k
,
FC = −
dy ′dz ′∫∫ dy dz
3 2
∫∫
4π ε 0 ε 1
δ 2 + ( y − y′)2 + ( z − z ′)2
[
]
(14)
where i , j and k are the unit vectors in x, y and z directions, respectively. Integrating the right
hand side of Eq. (14) yields
FC
γ σ s2
=−
.
A
2ε 0 ε1
(15)
This force acts on the charges at the OHP in the negative x direction.
Electrostriction pressure of the fluid in the Stern layer is [13]
P = P0 −
⎤
ε 0 ⎡ ⎛ ∂ε 1 ⎞
⎟⎟ − (ε 1 − 1)⎥ E12 ,
⎢ ρ ⎜⎜
2 ⎣ ⎝ ∂ρ ⎠T
⎦
(16)
where P0 is field-free pressure in the Stern layer, ρ is density, and E1 is electric field in the
Stern layer. From Eq. (7), E1 = σ s ε 0 ε 1 . Under strong electric field, the dielectric constant of
water is a function of electric field strength E as [14]
ε = n2 +
(
)
(
7 ρ µ 2 n 2 + 2 ⎛ 73 E µ n 2 + 2
L⎜⎜
6 kB T
3ε 0 73 E
⎝
) ⎞⎟
⎟ ,
⎠
(17)
where µ is electric dipole of a single water molecule (2.02 Debye units), n is the optical
refractive index of water (1.33 at 300K), and L(x ) is the Langevin function give by
L(x ) = coth (x ) − 1 x . Differentiating Eq. (17) with respect to density and then multiplying it
with density gives
⎛ ∂ε 1 ⎞
⎟⎟ = ε 1 − n 2 .
∂
ρ
⎝
⎠T
ρ ⎜⎜
(18)
Thus, combining Eqs. (16) and (18) with E1 = σ s ε 0 ε 1 , the electrostriction pressure of the
fluid in the Stern layer is rewritten by
7
(n
P=P +
2
− 1)σ s2
2 ε 0 ε 12
0
(19)
Since there is no pressure-driven flow in the diffusion layer, the pressure in the diffusion
layer is constant and it is field-free pressure in bulk region. Thus we assume that the pressure in
the diffusion layer is equal to the field-free pressure P0 .
In order that the OHP does not move in the normal direction of the surface, the pressure of
the fluid in the Stern layer, Eq. (20), is equal to the sum of the Coulomb force per area, Eq. (15)
and the field-free pressure in the diffusion layer;
P0 +
(n
2
− 1)σ s2
2 ε 0 ε 12
γ=
or
=
γ σ s2
+ P0 ,
2ε 0 ε1
n2 −1
ε1
.
(20a)
(20b)
Figure 2 shows the dielectric constant in the Stern layer as a function of the surface charge
density. The dielectric constant of water is numerically calculated by using Eq. (17) and
E1 = σ s ε 0 ε 1 . It is shown in Fig. 2 that the dielectric constant in the Stern layer decreases
rapidly in 10 – 20 µm/cm2 surface charge density range. Figure 3 shows the dependence of the
ratio γ of the charge amount at OHP to the surface charge amount on the surface charge density.
It shows clearly that the ratio is less than unity and it increases with the surface charge density.
Finally, The ratio γ is also experimentally determined by the zeta potential and the surface
charge measurements [6,15]. Combining Eqs. (6) and (13) yields
(1 − γ )σ s = 2
⎛ qζ ⎞
⎟⎟
2 ε b ε 0 k B T nb sinh ⎜⎜
⎝ 2 kB T ⎠
(24)
Equation (24) is a relation between the surface charge density and the zeta potential. As
mentioned before, the term on the right hand side is the electrokinetic charge density. The
8
difference between the surface charge density and the electrokinetic charge density gets bigger
with increasing the ratio γ .
4. Summary
The boundary conditions based on electric displacement was taken into consideration in the
discussion of the electrical double layer. It was shown that the electrokinetic charge density is the
sum of the surface charge density and the charge density at the outer Helmholtz plane in the
simplified electrical double layer. A new relation between the surface charge density and the zeta
potential was derived.
Acknowledgement
The author would like to acknowledge the support of Ebensbeger/Fouraker Graduate Fellowship.
9
Reference
1. R. J. Hunter, Zeta potential in colloid science, Academic, New York, 1981.
2. D. Li, Electrokinetics in microfluidics, Elsevier, London, 2004.
3. B. J. Kirby, E. F. Hasselbrink Jr, Electrophoresis 25 (2004) 187.
4. W. B. Russel, D. A. Saville and W. R. Schowalter, Colloidal dispersions, Cambridge
University, Cambridge, 1989.
5. S. R. Morrison, Electrochemistry at semiconductor and oxidized metal electrodes,
Plenum, New York, 1980.
6. J. Lyklema, Pure Appl. Chem. 63 (1991) 895.
7. A. Revil, P. A. Pezard and P. W. J. Glover, J. Geophys. Res. 94 (1999) 20021.
8. D. E. Yates, S. Levine and T. W. Healy, J. Chem. Soc. Faraday I 70 (1974) 1807.
9. D. A. Sverjensky, Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 69 (2005) 225.
10. I. Larson and P. Attard, J. Colloid Interface Sci. 227, (2000) 152.
11. In principle, our approach is applicable to any type of electrolytes.
12. Meanwhile, since the charges at the OHP are induced by the surface charge through
Coulomb force, the absolute value of the charge density at the OHP should be smaller
than that at the surface.
13. H. S. Frank, J. Chem. Phys. 23 (1955) 2023.
14. In-Chul Yeh and M. L. Berkowitz, J. Chem. Phys. 110 (1999) 7935.
15. A. Foissy and J. Persello, The surface properties of Silicas, Ed. A. P. Legrand, John wiley
and Sons, New York, 1998.
10
Figure Captions
Fig. 1. Schematic diagrams of (a) detailed and (b) simplified electrical double layers. The surface
and the inner Helmholtz plane in the detailed electrical double layer are merged into the surface
in the simplified electrical double layer.
Fig. 2. Dielectric constant as a function of the absolute value of the surface charge density.
Fig. 3. Ratio of the charge density at the OHP to the surface charge as a function of the absolute
value of the surface charge density.
11
Fig. 1
12
Fig. 2
13
Fig. 3
14