4.7 Article

Comparison of different methods to measure contact angles of soil colloids

Journal

JOURNAL OF COLLOID AND INTERFACE SCIENCE
Volume 328, Issue 2, Pages 299-307

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcis.2008.09.039

Keywords

Colloids; Contact angle; Silicates; Clay; Wilhelmy plate; Thin-layer wicking; Sessile drop

Funding

  1. Office of Science (BER)
  2. US Department of Energy [DE-FG02-08ER64660]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We compared five different methods, static sessile drop, dynamic sessile drop, Wilhelmy plate, thin-layer wicking, and column wicking, to determine the contact angle of colloids typical for soils and sediments. The colloids (smectite, kaolinite, illite, goethite, hematite) were chosen to represent 1:1 and 2:1 layered aluminosilicate clays and sesquioxides, and were either obtained in pure form or synthesized in our laboratory. Colloids were deposited as thin films on glass slides, and then used for contact angle measurements using three different test liquids (water, formamide, diiodomethane). The colloidal films could be categorized into three types: (1) films without pores and with polar-liquid interactions (smectite), (2) films with pores and with polar-liquid interactions (kaolinite, illite, goethite), and (3) films without pores and no polar-liquid interactions (hematite). The static and dynamic sessile drop methods yielded the most consistent contact angles. For porous films, the contact angles decreased with time, and we consider the initial contact angle to be the most accurate. The differences in contact angles among the different methods were large and varied considerably: the most consistent contact angles were obtained for kaolinite with water, and illite with diiodomethane (contact angles were within 3 degrees); but mostly the differences ranged from 10 degrees to 40 degrees among the different methods. The thin-layer and column wicking methods were the least consistent methods. (C) 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available