An ellipsometry study of ionic surfactant adsorption on chromium surfaces

doi:10.1016/0021-9797(89)90344-5

Journal of Colloid and Interface Science

Volume 128, Issue 2, 15 March 1989, Pages 303-312

https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9797(89)90344-5 Get rights and content

Abstract

The adsorption of dodecyl sulfate and cetyltrimethylammonium surfactant on chromium was studied by in situ ellipsometry. Two types of chromium surfaces were used: clean hydrophilic surfaces and hydrophobized surfaces. The amounts adsorbed are constant at concentrations exceeding the critical micelle concentration (CMC). In general, less surfactant is adsorbed on the hydrophilic surface than on the hydrophobized surface. No adsorption of surfactant molecules can be observed on the clean hydrophilic surface, unless the surfactant carries an opposite charge in relation to the surface. The amounts of surfactant adsorbed increase as the initial charge of the oppositely charged surface increases. The adsorption on the hydrophobic surface was found to be less pH dependent and surfactant molecules are adsorbed even if the surface and the surfactant have the same charge. An increase in the ionic strength generally leads to larger amounts adsorbed. The adsorption of cetyltrimethylammonium surfactant was found to be dependent on the type of counterion present. As opposed to bromide counterions, the hydroxide and chloride counterions lower the amount of surfactant adsorbed.

References (41)

B.H Bijsterbosch
J. Colloid Interface Sci.
(1974)
T Arnebrant et al.
J. Colloid Interface Sci.
(1986)
T Arnebrant et al.
J. Colloid Interface Sci.
(1987)
P.A Cuypers et al.
J. Biol. Chem.
(1983)
K Besocke
Surf. Sci.
(1987)
J.F Scamehorn et al.
J. Colloid Interface Sci.
(1982)
S Abrahamsson et al.
Chem. Phys. Lipids
(1972)
R.M Pashley et al.
Colloids and Surfaces
(1981)
P Connor et al.
J. Colloid Interface Sci.
(1971)
B.R Vijayendran
J. Colloid Interface Sci.
(1977)

P.H Elworthy et al.

J. Colloid Interface Sci.

(1966)

G Czichocki et al.

J. Colloid Interface Sci.

(1983)

J.E Gebhardt et al.

J. Colloid Interface Sci.

(1984)

F.J Trogus et al.

J. Colloid Interface Sci.

(1979)

J Westall et al.

Adv. Colloid Interface Sci.

(1980)

B Jönsson et al.

J. Colloid Interface Sci.

(1981)

V Athanassakis et al.

Chem. Phys. Lett.

(1985)

G Lindblom et al.

J. Colloid Interface Sci.

(1973)

J Ulmius et al.

J. Colloid Interface Sci.

(1978)

J Weiss et al.

J. Pharm. Sci.

(1974)

Cited by (55)

Nanocomposite Co-nSiC coatings electrodeposited from cobalt-gluconate bath via pulse reverse plating technique with anionic surfactant
2023, Materials Chemistry and Physics
The co-deposition of silicon carbide nanoparticles (50 ± 5 nm diameter) in an electrodeposited metallic cobalt matrix has been investigated under pulse reverse plating (PRP) conditions with the inclusion of an anionic surfactant. The effect of variable anionic surfactant content in the plating solution with a particle content of 5 g L⁻¹ was evaluated using both direct current (DC) plating and PRP. The particle content of the coatings was investigated by varying the cathodic cycle during PRP by varying the cathodic cycle time between 30 and 240 s per pulse whilst maintaining a fixed anodic charge. The coatings were assessed by SEM and EDX in cross section to determine the effect of PRP parameters and anionic surfactant content on the particle content of. With no anionic surfactant, all coatings produced contained a similar particle content. Addition of anionic surfactant affected the SiC content of DC and PRP coatings. PRP combined with anionic surfactant to produce an electrophoretic nanoparticle delivery mechanism increasing the SiC content of coatings compared to DC coatings. Higher SiC content was observed at shorter cathodic cycle times.
A review on surfactant retention on rocks: mechanisms, measurements, and influencing factors
2021, Fuel
Citation Excerpt :
These alterations are effected by the adsorbed layer on the reflecting surface [112]. Less than 1 cm2 surface area is required to determine the adsorption, and this technique allows in-situ measurement of the adsorption isotherm [112,113]. Adsorption isotherms are constructed by measuring the concentration of surfactant either in the supernatant liquid (floating liquid on the surface) from the static adsorption experiments or in the effluent liquid (discharged) from the dynamic adsorption experiment (core flooding) [10].
Surfactants play a vital role in chemical enhanced oil recovery (cEOR). The amount of surfactant loss caused by retention during flooding through reservoir rock is still a challenge in surfactant-based cEOR techniques, and directly impacts the economics of a cEOR project. This review focuses on the mechanisms behind the retention of several surfactants on different rock/mineral types such as sandstone, carbonates, quartz, kaolinite, calcite, etc. Measurement techniques of surfactant retention reported in the literature are also presented. Lastly, this review illustrates retention minimization strategies for different types of surfactants. Alkalis have been widely examined in minimizing surfactant retention, mostly in sandstones. Other chemicals such as ammonia, nano-particles, ionic liquids, polymers, and sacrificial agents have also been used to reduce surfactant retention. This review also discusses the influencing factors that can significantly impact the strategy to minimize surfactant retention.
Neutron reflectometry of anionic surfactants on sapphire: A strong maximum in the adsorption near the critical micelle concentration
2016, Journal of Colloid and Interface Science
Citation Excerpt :
The use of a flat surface would greatly reduce the chance of such interference from the surface. Thus, Arnebrant et al. studied adsorption at a flat surface, using ellipsometry [6] and concluded that there was no maximum for hexadecyltrimethylammonium bromide (C16TAB) or sodium dodecylsulfate (SDS) at either the hydrophobically modified or the hydrophilic chromia–aqueous interface, although they had earlier observed a sharp maximum for SDS at the hydrophobically modified chromia surface. Just like the air–aqueous interface, a hydrophobic surface is highly vulnerable to the main impurity of SDS, i.e. dodecanol, and Arnebrant et al. showed that the maximum was completely removed by purification of the surfactant.
The adsorption of the anionic surfactants, lithium, sodium and cesium dodecylsulfates, and sodium decylsulfonate, on the positively charged C-plane (0 0 0 1) of sapphire (alumina) has been measured using neutron reflection. For each of the four surfactants there is a strong maximum in the adsorption at about the critical micelle concentration. The maximum becomes more marked from lithium to cesium. The measurements were reproduced over a range of different physical conditions and could not be accounted for in terms of impurities. The maximum is explained quantitatively by using the combination of a mass action model to calculate the mean activity of the surfactant, and a cooperative model of the adsorption (Frumkin), in which saturation of the layer is not attained until well above the critical micelle concentration.
Adsorption of delmopinol at the solid/liquid interface - The role of the acid-base equilibrium
2010, Journal of Colloid and Interface Science
Delmopinol is a tertiary amine surfactant that is used to counteract dental plaque formation. As it is of interest to understand the interfacial behavior from both fundamental and applied perspectives the adsorption of delmopinol to model surfaces was investigated. Adsorption on Teflon, titanium and stainless steel was studied by radioactive labeling and adsorption on silica was studied by quartz crystal microbalance (QCM), ellipsometry and particle electrophoresis.
It was shown that the adsorption of delmopinol was complex and strongly influenced by pH and concentration. Pronounced peak values were detected in the adsorption curves (adsorbed amount versus concentration) exceeding the expected value for a bilayer type of structure. To account for this behavior two surface active component were assumed to be present. Accordingly, the high amounts result from the deposition of the component with lower solubility and the decrease at the critical micelle concentration can be explained by solubilization of this component. Based on data from several experimental methods and the pH dependence of the effect we propose an explanation in which the protonated and non-protonated forms of delmopinol represent the two components. However, it cannot be excluded that the component with the lower solubility could be a compound chemically different from delmopinol in the sample.
Chemical modification of chromium oxide surfaces using organosilanes
2009, Journal of Colloid and Interface Science
Citation Excerpt :
Several groups have studied the formation of organic thin films on chromium surfaces using different modifying reagents. These include the assembly of the surfactants myristic acid [26] and dodecylsulfate [27], deposition of Langmuir–Blodgett films of phthalocyanines [28] and polyimides [29] and the adsorption of electroactive species containing isonitrile and thiol functional groups [30]. Reactions of octadecylsilane [16] and octadecyltriethoxysilane [31] with chromium oxide have been reported, however sparse data are provided and comparisons between these monolayers have not been made.
Alkylsiloxane layers that were prepared by reaction of alkyltrichlorosilanes, alkyltriethoxysilanes, and mono-, di- and trihydridoalkylsilanes with chromium oxide surfaces were assessed in terms of their hydrophobicity. Two general conditions were studied, in the vapor phase at elevated temperatures (70 °C) and in solution at 70 °C. The surfaces were characterized by contact angle analysis and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS). The kinetics of the solution phase reactions of n-octadecylsilane and n-octadecyltrichlorosilane were also studied. Hydrophobic monolayers were achieved in all cases, but subtle differences in structure were found.
Approximate prediction of adhesion between two solids immersed in surfactant solution based on adsorption to an isolated solid
2008, Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochemical and Engineering Aspects
A thermodynamic argument is used to predict the adhesion between two solid surfaces in surfactant solutions from the adsorption to a single (isolated) solid. The model is based on the concept that the difference in energy of the two solids in contact and separated states can be predicted from the difference in adsorption in the contact and separated states. To make quantitative predictions, we assume that the adsorption of surfactant in ‘contact’, $Γ_{s_{0}}$ , is approximately equal to the adsorbed surfactant on an isolated surface when the net charge is zero (at the charge compensation point). Changes in the adhesion are determined from the changes in adsorption required to reach $Γ_{s_{0}}$ from the adsorption at infinite separation, Γ_∞. Experimental measurements of the adhesion using colloidal probe atomic force microscopy (AFM) are in reasonable agreement with our method.

View all citing articles on Scopus

View full text

An ellipsometry study of ionic surfactant adsorption on chromium surfaces

Abstract

J. Colloid Interface Sci.

J. Colloid Interface Sci.

J. Colloid Interface Sci.

J. Biol. Chem.

Surf. Sci.

J. Colloid Interface Sci.

Chem. Phys. Lipids

Colloids and Surfaces

J. Colloid Interface Sci.

J. Colloid Interface Sci.

J. Colloid Interface Sci.

J. Colloid Interface Sci.

J. Colloid Interface Sci.

J. Colloid Interface Sci.

Adv. Colloid Interface Sci.

J. Colloid Interface Sci.

Chem. Phys. Lett.

J. Colloid Interface Sci.

J. Colloid Interface Sci.

J. Pharm. Sci.