* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Supplementary materials
Condensed matter physics wikipedia , lookup
Perturbation theory wikipedia , lookup
Introduction to gauge theory wikipedia , lookup
Electrostatics wikipedia , lookup
Superconductivity wikipedia , lookup
Lorentz force wikipedia , lookup
Anti-gravity wikipedia , lookup
Electromagnetism wikipedia , lookup
Speed of gravity wikipedia , lookup
Renormalization wikipedia , lookup
Mathematical formulation of the Standard Model wikipedia , lookup
Casimir effect wikipedia , lookup
Fundamental interaction wikipedia , lookup
Aharonov–Bohm effect wikipedia , lookup
Nordström's theory of gravitation wikipedia , lookup
Yang–Mills theory wikipedia , lookup
Supplementary materials Journal: Applied Physics Letters Authors: Y. J. Lo and U. Lei Title: Experimental validation of the theory of wall effect on dielectrophoresis Appendix I: Analytical expressions for the approximate electric fields in the test sections In order to apply Eqs. (1) and (3) to calculate the DEP forces, we need expressions for the electric fields. For the present approximate uniform field in Fig. 1(a) and the approximate radial field in Fig. 2(a), the analytic expressions are derived as follows. (A) The approximate uniform field Consider the rectangular channel in Fig. 1(a). When H is much less than L and Le , the field in the test section is approximate uniform except near the inlet and the outlet, and can be expressed as Eu E0e jt x . The magnitude E0 is 2V0 / L if the potentials V e jt 0 are applied at the inlet (x 0) and the outlet (x L) planes of the test section instead of at the electrodes. In practice, the magnitude of the potential at the inlet (also the outlet) plane is slight less than V0 . The field near the inlet and the outlet are two-dimensional (under the condition H << w), and is a function of x and y. In order to account for such an inlet/outlet effect, we modified the field magnitude as E0 CEU 2V0 / L, (S1) where CEU is a modified factor, which can be obtained through a successive approximation as discussed below. As H L and Le in Fig. 1(a), we may replace Le by for problem solving if our goal is to find an approximate uniform field inside the test section. The problem was solved by separating it into three parts: (i) a two-dimensional potential problem in the xy-plane from x 0 , called I x, y , (ii) a one dimensional potential problem along x from 0 x L , called II x , and (iii) a two-dimensional potential problem in the xy-plane from L x , called III x, y . A successive approximation procedure is adopted for 1 obtaining the solution as follows. (a) Solve the one-dimensional Laplace equation for II x with specified potential Vin and Vout at x = 0 and L, respectively. (b) Solve the two-dimensional Laplace equation for I x, y with I V0 at y 0, I / y 0 at y H , I / x d II / dx at x 0, and finite I as x . (c) Solve III x, y with III V0 y 0, at III / y 0 at y H, III / x d II / dx at x L, and finite III as x . (d) Calculate the average values of I 0, y and III L, y at the inlet and outlet planes of the test section, and take them as the updated values for Vin and Vout , respectively. (e) Repeat procedures (a) – (d) until convergent result is obtained. The modified factor CEU in Eq. (S1) is Vin Vout / 2V0 . We started the above iteration with Vin V0 and Vout V0 . The i approximation was obtained as th i i 1 CEU 1 DCEU , (S2) 1 1 and with CEU D 32 / 3 H / L 2n 1 1.0855 H / L . 3 n 1 (S3) D is a parameter of the length ratio, H/L. It generally takes three to four iterations for a converged result. (B) The approximate radial field Similar idea and method as above were applied to obtain the approximate radial field, E r e jt r , in the test section of Fig. 2(a). The field magnitude E r is E r E 0 r 2V0 1 , ln r2 / r1 r (S4) if the applied potentials are applied at the inlet and the outlet planes of the test section. Here we modify it as E r CER 2V0 1 , ln r2 / r1 r (S5) by taking into account the inlet/outlet effect. The modified factor CER for the radial field was obtained through a successive approximation similar to that for the 2 uniform field, except that the x-coordinate is replaced by the r-coordinate, and the xy-plane is replaced by the ry-plane. The result is i i 1 CER 1 BCER , (S6) 1 1 and where C ER B 1 8/ 2 ln r2 / r1 n 1 2n 1 2 1 I 0 kn r1 1 K 0 kn r2 , kn r1 I1 kn r1 kn r2 K1 k n r2 (S7) with I 0 kn r1 and I1 kn r1 the modified Bessel functions of the first kind, K0 kn r2 and K1 kn r2 the modified Bessel functions of the second kind, and kn 2n 1 / 2H . The parameter B depends on the length ratios r2 / r1 , r2 / H and r1 / H . It generally takes three to four iterations for a converged result. The validity of both the analytical modified uniform and radial fields in Eqs. (S1) and (S5) above were checked against numerical simulations. Figure S1 compares the analytical and numerical results for the radial field. The numerical calculation was performed with the aid of a commerical software, COSMOL. The paremeters for the simulation are r1 300m , r2 700m , H 30m and V0 10 V . The numerical result was calculated by solving the Laplace equation in the ry-plane in Fig. 1(a) from r = 0 to r4 , with r2 r4 r3 and r4 r2 H , subject to specified potentials on the electrodes and vanishing normal potential gradients at all other boundaries. Figure S1 shows contours of the normalized gradient of the square of the field magnitude, which is directly proportional to the DEP force parallel to the wall at y = 0 in Fig. 2(a) as shown in Eq. (3a). The numerical result in Fig. S1(b) shows that the distribution is approximately radial (with vertical contour lines in the figure) between 0.2 r r1 / r2 r1 0.8 , which supports that we indeed can generate an approximate radial field in the test section of Fig. (2a) where it is not too close to both ends. However, there is a substantial shift of the contour patterns between the zeroth order theory based on Eq. (S4) in Fig. S1(a) and the numerical result in Fig. S1(b), which indicates that there exists certain error if the zeroth order theory of the electric field is employed for the evaluation of the DEP force. On the other hand, Fig. S1(c) shows that the result using the present modified theory in Eq. (S5) agrees much better with the numerical solution. Thus Eq. (S5) is 3 adequate for describing the approximate radial field generated in the test section of Fig. 2(a) between 0.2 r r1 / r2 r1 0.8 . Our experimental data in Fig. 2(c) agrees nicely with the theory for 400 m < r < 600 m, which corresponds to 0.25 r r1 / r2 r1 0.75 in Fig. S1. FIG. S1. The contour lines for the normalized result of the gradient of the square of the field magnitude, V02 r2 r1 E 2 / 2 / r , using (a) the zeroth 3 order theory in Eq. (S4), (b) the numerical calculation, and (c) the modified theory in Eq. (S5). 4 Appendix II: More results for the DEP force parallel to the wall Figure S2 shows further experimental results for the validation of the DEP force parallel to the wall using Eqs. (4a) and (5). There are four tests with different combinations for two channel heights (H) and two electric frequencies (f). The result for H 21 m and f 10 kHz was shown in Fig. 2(c) before, and is also presented here for comparison. The results for different cases are similar, and the discussion of Fig. 2(c) is also applied here. Table SI compares the experiment and the theory via the wall effect coefficient, Cd , of the Stokes’ drag. Cdt is the theoretical value calculated using Eq. (5), Cde is calculated using Eq. (4a) with the experimental values of U, Cde is the mean value of Cde , and is the standard deviation of Cde . Note that Cde Cdt / Cdt is the discrepancy between the experiment and the DEP theory without wall effect, as only F(t ) is employed in Eq. (4a). The discrepancies are within 8.1%, which implies that DEP theory in an infinite medium (without wall effect) can be employed for predicting the DEP force parallel to the wall in the vicinity of the wall. The wall effect is Fr in Eq. (3b), and its contribution is within the discrepancy for all the cases in Fig. S2. Table SI: Comparison between the theory and the experiment for the DEP force parallel to the wall. C H f C Cde 21 μm 1 kHz 2.16 2.21 0.17 2.3% 21 μm 10 kHz 2.16 2.23 0.21 3.2% 28 μm 1 kHz 1.86 1.95 0.12 4.8% 28 μm 10 kHz 1.86 1.71 0.11 8.1% t d 5 e d Cdt / Cdt FIG. S2. Experimental results for the validation of the DEP force parallel to the wall. 6