Role of slip between a probe particle and a gel in microrheology.

In the technique of microrheology, macroscopic rheological parameters as well as information about local structure are deduced from the behavior of microscopic probe particles under thermal or active forcing. Microrheology requires knowledge of the relation between macroscopic parameters and the force felt by a particle in response to displacements. We investigate this response function for a spherical particle using the two-fluid model, in which the gel is represented by a polymer network coupled to a surrounding solvent via a drag force. We obtain an analytic solution for the response function in the limit of small volume fraction of the polymer network, and neglecting inertial effects. We use no-slip boundary conditions for the solvent at the surface of the sphere. The boundary condition for the network at the surface of the sphere is a kinetic friction law, for which the tangential stress of the network is proportional to relative velocity of the network and the sphere. This boundary condition encompasses both no-slip and frictionless boundary conditions as limits. Far from the sphere there is no relative motion between the solvent and network due to the coupling between them. However, the different boundary conditions on the solvent and network tend to produce different far-field motions. We show that the far-field motion and the force on the sphere are controlled by the solvent boundary conditions at high frequency and by the network boundary conditions at low frequency. At low frequencies compression of the network can also affect the force on the sphere. We find the crossover frequencies at which the effects of sliding of the sphere past the polymer network and compression of the gel become important. The effects of sliding alone can lead to an underestimation of moduli by up to 33%, while the effects of compression alone can lead to an underestimation of moduli by up to 20%, and the effects of sliding and compression combined can lead to an underestimation of moduli by up to 43%.