Probing Anisotropic Surface Properties and Interaction Forces of Chrysotile Rods by Atomic Force Microscopy and Rheology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding the surface properties and interactions of nonspherical particles is of both fundamental and practical importance in the rheology of complex fluids in various engineering applications. In this work, natural chrysotile, a phyllosilicate composed of 1:1 stacked silica and brucite layers which coil into cylindrical structure, was chosen as a model rod-shaped particle. The interactions of chrysotile brucite-like basal or bilayered edge planes and a silicon nitride tip were measured using an atomic force microscope (AFM). The force-distance profiles were fitted using the classical Derjaguin-Landau-Verwey-Overbeek (DLVO) theory, which demonstrates anisotropic and pH-dependent surface charge properties of brucite-like basal plane and bilayered edge surface. The points of zero charge (PZC) of the basal and edge planes were estimated to be around pH 10-11 and 6-7, respectively. Rheology measurements of 7 vol % chrysotile (with an aspect ratio of 14.5) in 10 mM NaCl solution showed pH-dependent yield stress with a local maximum around pH 7-9, which falls between the two PZC values of the edge and basal planes of the rod particles. On the basis of the surface potentials of the edge and basal planes obtained from AFM measurements, theoretical analysis of the surface interactions of edge-edge, basal-edge, and basal-basal planes of the chrysotile rods suggests the yield stress maximum observed could be mainly attributed to the basal-edge attractions. Our results indicate that the anisotropic surface properties (e.g., charges) of chrysotile rods play an important role in the particle-particle interaction and rheological behavior, which also provides insight into the basic understanding of the colloidal interactions and rheology of nonspherical particles.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".