4.4 Article

Mixed micellization of an anionic gemini surfactant (GA) with conventional polyethoxylated nonionic surfactants in brine solution at pH 5 and 298 K

Journal

COLLOID AND POLYMER SCIENCE
Volume 285, Issue 15, Pages 1665-1673

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00396-007-1738-1

Keywords

gemini surfactant; POE; surface tension; regular solution theory

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The micellization behavior of an anionic gemini surfactant, GA with nonionic surfactants C(1)2E(8) and C12E5 in presence of 0.1 M NaCl at 298 K temperature, has been studied tensiometrically in pure and mixed states, and the related physicochemical parameters (cmc,gamma(cmc), pC(20), Gamma(max), and A(min)) have been evaluated. Tensiometric profile (gamma vs log [surfactant]), for conventional surfactants, generally consists of a single point of intersection; a gradually decreasing line (normally linear, or with slight curvature) ultimately saturates in gamma at a particular [surfactant], corresponding to complete monolayer saturation. The gemini, in this report, led to two unequivocal breaks in the tensiometric isotherm. An attempt to the interpretation of the two breaks from molecular point of view is provided, depending solely on the chemical structure of the surfactant. The gemini, even in mixed state with the conventional nonionic surfactants C12E5 and C12E8, manifested the dual breaks; of course, the dominance of the feature decreases with increasing mole fraction of the nonionics in the mixture. Theories of Clint, Rosen, Rubingh, Motomura, Georgiev, Maeda, and Nagarajan have been used to determine the interaction between surfactants at the interface and micellar state of aggregation, the composition of the aggregates, the theoretical cmc in pure and mixed states, and the structural parameters according to Tanford and Israelachvili. Several thermodynamic parameters have also been predicted from those theories.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available