VOLUME 89, N UMBER 28 PHYSICA L R EVIEW LET T ERS 31 DECEMBER 2002

One-Dimensional Optically Bound Arrays of Microscopic Particles

S. A. Tatarkova,* A. E. Carruthers, and K. Dholakia
School of Physics and Astronomy, University of St. Andrews, St. Andrews KY16 9SS, United Kingdom
(Received 9 August 2002; published 27 December 2002)
A one-dimensional optically coupled array of colloidal particles is created in a potential well formed
by two counterpropagating Gaussian light beams. This array has analogies to linear chains of trapped
atomic ions. Breathing modes and oscillations of the center of mass are observed. The stability of the
array is in accordance with the Kramers model.

DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.89.283901 PACS numbers: 42.60.–v, 45.50.Jf

Introduction.—The organization and manipulation of the creation and dynamics of the chain. We infer directly
colloidal and biological matter at the microscopic level from our results quantitative information about the opti-
can be achieved using light forces. Gradients of the opti- cal trap potential and trap oscillation frequency. Stability
cal field can induce dielectric spheres of higher refractive of the array is also investigated.
index than their surrounding medium to be trapped in Atomic ion chains are deemed strong candidates for
three dimensions in the light field maxima [1,2]. Such quantum computing. Chain dynamics can affect decoher-
‘‘optical tweezers’’ allow physicists to test several funda- ence in these systems. Thus creating an analogous model
mental phenomena. Examples include thermally activated with microscopic particles may offer valuable insights
escape from a potential well [3], stochastic resonance into similar dynamics at the atomic scale. Though our
phenomena [4], and various studies in colloid physics array separation is determined by light forces, it shows
[5]. Recently the predetermined creation of arrays of analogous behavior to a system of linear atomic ions
microscopic particles, using light forces, has resulted in where electrostatic forces dominate [14]. As particles in
intense world-wide interest. Holographic methods [6], the our optical trap can be considered harmonically bound,
phase contrast technique [7], the use of nonzero order such systems can exhibit excitations, similar to those
light modes [8], and spatial light modulator technology of atomic ions, including a center-of-mass motion
[9] have successfully been used to create particle arrays in and breathing modes. We observe such behavior in our
two and three dimensions. In 2D the light potential experiments.
allows predesignated trap sites to be occupied by the Experiment.—A continuous wave Ti-sapphire laser op-
particles of interest. Such tailored optical landscapes erating at 780 nm provides the trapping laser light. The
can give insights into mechanisms at the atomic level beam was expanded and split into two equal (
25 mW)
or, for example, the pinning of magnetic flux lines in counterpropagating components which were then focused
type-II superconductivity [10]. into a rectangular glass cell with their respective beam
Light forces may wholly dictate the assembly of a waists approximately 150
m apart along the common
microscopic system and create analogs to atomic systems axis far from walls. The focal length of the focusing
[10 –12]. There have been a few observations of such lenses was 50 mm, the waist sizes were approximately
‘‘optical binding’’ notably by Golovchenko and co- 3:5
m, and the cell outer dimensions were 5 mm 
workers [11,12]. They investigated systems where the 5 mm  20 mm. The cell was filled with uniform silica
interaction of coherently induced dipole moments of the monodispersed colloidal microspheres in water of diam-
spheres were said to interact to bind matter. Light forces eters 2.3 and 3
m (Bangs Laboratories, Inc.). A micro-
may act to optically bind matter. These forces can organ- scope objective (  20, NA  0:4, Newport) placed
ize microscopic particles with the prospects of studying orthogonally to the laser beam propagation direction
‘‘optical molecules’’ or systems in soft condensed matter projected scattered light onto a charge-coupled device
physics. This topic has been controversial but potentially camera.
offers an important mechanism to self-assemble matter. The separation of the beam waists in this counterpro-
In this Letter we demonstrate the creation of one- pagating geometry allows a single sphere to be trapped in
dimensional coupled arrays of microscopic colloidal par- the potential well between them (see Fig. 1); there is
ticles. An important distinction in our work is that the already tight confinement in directions transverse to the
light forces that confine the particles also dictate the beam axis. Blocking one of the beams turns this geom-
interparticle spacing due to light refocusing and may be etry into one for optical guiding [1,13]. Theoretically, we
deemed a form of optical binding [11,12]. Buican et al. consider the interaction of dielectric spheres of radius a
[13] have studied optical guiding in a Gaussian beam and with a Gaussian beam of wavelength  when the relation
indicated the potential for creation of such regularly a   is satisfied. Our calculations of the axial force
spaced particles. We provide a physical explanation of follow those elsewhere [15–17] with the sphere radius

283901-1 0031-9007=02=89(28)=283901(4)$20.00  2002 The American Physical Society 283901-1

VOLUME 89, N UMBER 28 PHYSICA L R EVIEW LET T ERS 31 DECEMBER 2002

3.0
10 -13 N
2.5

2.0
Axial force/

1.5
∆F
1.0
F1
0.5 -F2

0 100 200 300 400 500

Z, µm FIG. 2. Experimental data for arrays of (a) two, (b) three,
and (c) seven spheres (each 3
m in size). The diagrams on the
FIG. 1 (color online). Axial forces for the counterpropagating right elucidate how we fill up the approximately harmonic
beam geometry. The peak point for each curve corresponds to potential well created by the two counterpropagating beams.
the beam waist position. Forces from both beams (F1 and F2 )
are drawn as positive. The resultant axial force F is the
difference of two forces drawn. The inset shows how particles The mechanism for formation of this array is purely
reside in the resulting potential well. due to light refocusing and subsequent balancing of ra-
diation pressure. Any given irradiated sphere refracts the
exceeding the trapping laser wavelength. The model majority of incident light thus acting like a lens. This
allows us to calculate the variation of axial force along creates a secondary light radiation pressure force on an
the beam propagation for our experimental param- adjacent sphere, that in combination with the light radia-
eters (Fig. 1). For collinear beams with slightly displaced tion pressure from the focused input beams, creates a new
waists (along the optic axis), a near parabolic optical equilibrium in which the array of spheres can reside. Each
potential results with the single equilibrium position at sphere in the array is ‘‘optically’’ coupled to each of the
the minimum at the intersection of the curves in Fig. 1. other spheres. We have adapted a numerical ray optics ray
In the counterpropagating geometry, when a second model [17] to calculate the equilibrium position for two
sphere moves into the same trap the first (trapped) sphere spheres subject to beam waists as in the experiments
(Fig. 2) is pushed from its equilibrium point. The new separated by 150
m. The model takes into account
equilibrium position of two spheres in trap is above the the fraction of incident light focused by the sphere to
bottom of the potential well with a separation between calculate the interparticle forces. The optical force on
them as shown. Each sphere will experience the same the second sphere due to the first is calculated to be
value of differential force F (Fig. 1) which can be
0:175 pN. The calculations of the model verify to
calculated from the model. This process repeats each within 10% the experimentally observed spacing
time a new sphere drifts into the trap region (Fig. 2). (48
m) and thus confirm the physical process respon-
This behavior is observed with both 3
m diameter and sible for the array generation. We also note that this
2:3
m diameter spheres. We stress at this point that the explains earlier observations on two guided particles
array length and importantly the interparticle spacing we [13]. In terms of our model, spheres in the array reside
observe is extremely long in comparison with typical in their own potential well. As an example, consider two
distances over which electrostatic interactions occur in spheres where each of the spheres focuses the light at a
optical traps [5]. For two 3
m particles we observe an position approximately midway between the two spheres.
interparticle separation of 48
m [Fig. 2(a)]. In this instance this creates a situation where each of the
For typical experimental conditions the maximum spheres resides in one well of a double well light potential.
number of particles in a stable trapped array was seven. For a greater number of spheres the idea is similar, with
The overall array length was
150
m in this instance. each sphere acting to create a new potential well within
Very occasionally, we observed trapping of eight or even the system, forcing the particles farther up the well
nine spheres though this was rather unstable with the created by the counterpropagating beams in order to
outer spheres of the array leaving the trap region very balance the forces and reach an equilibrium position. A
quickly. This instability is due to thermally activated loss detailed analysis will be presented elsewhere.
as the outer particles within the chain have relatively Electrostatic interactions could potentially play a role
weak optical potential barriers to overcome to escape in the array formation. The interaction between charged
the potential well. Thermal fluctuations also caused a spheres is based on the Derjaguin, Landau, Verwey, and
variation in overall array length for greater than seven Overbeek theory [5,18] which is limited by the screening
spheres for these trap parameters. length due to the atomic ions present in solution. For our

283901-2 283901-2
VOLUME 89, N UMBER 28 PHYSICA L R EVIEW LET T ERS 31 DECEMBER 2002

experimental parameters the screening length is very the trapped particle array. One of the lenses was mounted
short ( < 100 nm) and the electrostatic interaction re- on the precision motorized z translation stage, to vary the
stricted to a length scale of less than a micron, an order focal position of one trapping beam. In Fig. 4 we see the
of magnitude lower than the interparticle spacing we corresponding breathing behavior of a long particle chain
observe. We dispersed the spheres in 1 M NaCl for some (of 2:3
m particles) on the z displacement of one of the
experimental runs and observed no discernible change in lenses. The reduced light pressure force on the one side of
the interparticle spacing for our arrays, thus validating the potential well resulted in increases in interparticle
our premise that the array is created solely by light forces. spacing. As the lens returns to its original position, the
We have measured experimentally the equilibrium po- chain self-restores. The time scale of the motion is very
sitions of the spheres for arrays from one to seven par- slow as the system is heavily overdamped. The dynamics
ticles in length (Fig. 3). The form of these data is are similar to center-of-mass and breathing modes in
reminiscent of that for trapped atomic ions in a linear chains of linear trapped ions [14].
Paul trap [14]. We are able to extract detailed quantitative In the majority of research related to optical tweezing,
information from these experimental data such as the little attention has been devoted to the temporal stability
exact form of the trap potential and calculate the actual of the trap. Factors such as local temperature fluctuations
axial trap frequency. We have fitted the data in Fig. 3 in caused by light heating and local convective microflows
this way to a parabolic potential, determining the axial might affect the stability of the trap. Activated escape
trap frequency to be approximately 300 Hz from our from such a trap underpins several physical and biological
theory (Fig. 1) and our experimental parameters. processes. We loaded spheres into our trap and measured
The lowest mode of oscillation corresponds to the their temporal stability. A quantitative description of
center-of-mass motion of the particle chain. All of the diffusion activated escape from a one-dimensional poten-
particles move to and fro in unison in this mode. We tial well was given by Kramers [19]. It states that average
observed center-of-mass motion of this array. When a residence time is a function of potential well parameters
chain of a given number of spheres was created, one of and obeys the equation h K i  0 expU=kB T, where U is
the trapping beams was blocked and the whole chain was potential well depth, T is temperature, and 0 is the time
observed to accelerate against the direction of propaga- scale responsible for restoring relaxation dynamics
tion of the blocked light beam. Reintroducing the ob- within the well and can be expressed, for spheres far
structed beam (within a few seconds) caused the chain from walls and each other, as [3,4] 0  6a=m!2 ,
to restore its initial position with a time scale determined where a is sphere radius and m is the mass,  is water
by differential force at the current array position. viscosity, and ! is the associated frequency of the trap.
Altering the laser power equivalently in both beams (no Experimentally we measured the residence time as a
change in differential force; see Fig. 1) did not alter the function of number of spheres in the trap (Fig. 5). Each
sphere positions but did result in higher light scattering escape event is random and has a low probability in
from the spheres. We also observed a breathing mode of agreement with Poisson statistics.

7
Number of spheres

6
5
4
3
2
1
0
-80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80

z position (µ m)
FIG. 3 (color online). Equilibrium positions for particles in
the array. The parabolic fit shows the harmonic form (as FIG. 4. Observation of a breathing mode. In (a) and (c) we see
expected) of the light beam potential. Notably, this allows us the displacement of the chain as a whole from the center with
to extract important quantitative data about the trap (frequency, the interparticle spacing increasing as one goes farther from
light potential). the center of the array.

283901-3 283901-3
VOLUME 89, N UMBER 28 PHYSICA L R EVIEW LET T ERS 31 DECEMBER 2002

[1] A. Ashkin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 24, 156 (1970).

[2] A. Ashkin, J. M. Dziedzic, J. E. Bjorkholm, and S. Chu,
Opt. Lett. 11, 288 (1986).
[3] L. I. McCann, M. Dykman, and B. Golding, Nature
(London) 402, 785 (1999).
[4] A. Simon and A. Libchaber, Phys. Rev. Lett. 68, 3375
(1992).
[5] For example, D. G. Grier, Curr. Opin. Colloid Interface
Sci. 2, 264 (1997); J. C. Crocker and D. G. Grier, Phys.
Rev. Lett. 77, 1897 (1996).
[6] E. R. Dufresne, G. C. Spalding, M. T. Dearing, S. A.
Sheets, and D. G. Grier, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 72, 1810
(2001).
[7] R. L. Eriksen, P. C. Mogensen, and J. Glückstad, Opt.
Lett. 27, 267 (2002).
[8] M. P. MacDonald et al., Science 296, 1101 (2002).
FIG. 5. Kramers transition time for the array. The main [9] J. E. Curtis, B. A. Koss, and D. G. Grier, Opt. Commun.
features of the observed residence times are supported by a 207, 169 (2002); R. L. Eriksen, V. R. Daria, and
general statistical theory showing exponential decay. The fit is J. Gluckstad, Opt. Express 10, 597 (2002).
appropriately described by an exponential function of the form [10] P. Korda, G. C. Spalding, and D. Grier, Phys. Rev. B 66,
U
h K i  0 exp n
ck BT
 and has the magnitude of the potential 024504 (2002).
barrier U=kB T varied from 4.1 to 5.8 and 0  1, c  16 for [11] M. M. Burns, J.-M. Fournier, and J. A. Golovchenko,
particle number n  1; 2; . . . 7. Phys. Rev. Lett. 63, 1233 (1989).
[12] M. M. Burns, J.-M. Fournier, and J. A. Golovchenko,
Science 249, 749 (1990).
In conclusion, we have presented experimental obser- [13] T. N. Buican et al., Appl. Opt. 26, 5311 (1987).
vation and modes of oscillation of a one-dimensional [14] H. C. Nagerl et al., Appl. Phys. B 66, 603 (1998); A. M.
optically bound system of colloidal particles that is akin Steane, Appl. Phys. B 64, 623 (1998); D. F.V. James,
to an extended line of coupled oscillators. Appl. Phys. B 66, 181 (1998).
We thank D. Tatarkov for help with the figures. K. D. [15] T. C. B. Schut, G. Hesselink, B. G. de Grooth, and
thanks R. C. Thompson, D. McGloin, and G. C. Spalding J. Greve, Cytometry 12, 479 (1991).
for useful discussions. This work is supported by the UK [16] S. Nemoto and H. Togo, Appl. Opt. 37, 6386 (1998).
Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council. [17] R. Gussgard, T. Lindmo, and T. Brevik, J. Opt. Soc. Am.
B 9, 1922 (1992).
[18] B.V. Derjaguin and L. Landau, Acta Physicochim. URSS
14, 633 (1941); E. J. Verwey and J. Th. G. Overbeek,
*Corresponding author. Theory of the Stability of Lyophobic Colloids (Elsevier,
Electronic addresses: [email protected]; sat3@ Amsterdam, 1948).
st-andrews.ac.uk [19] H. A. Kramers, Physica (Amsterdam) 7, 284 (1940).

283901-4 283901-4