4.7 Article

Potentiometric Study of Carbon Nanotube/Surfactant Interactions by Ion-Selective Electrodes. Driving Forces in the Adsorption and Dispersion Processes

期刊

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijms22020826

关键词

carbon nanotubes; ionic surfactants; potentiometric technique; ion-selective electrodes; adsorption and dispersion

资金

  1. Ayudas a Consolidacion de Grupos de la Junta de Andalucia [2019/FQM-206, 2019/FQM-274]
  2. European Union (FEDER Funds)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study showed that the adsorption process of carbon nanotubes with surfactants is cooperative, with hydrophobic interactions being crucial. Electrostatic interactions mainly influence the dispersion of CNTs, while hydrophobic interactions also play a role.
The interaction (adsorption process) of commercial ionic surfactants with non-functionalized and functionalized carbon nanotubes (CNTs) has been studied by potentiometric measurements based on the use of ion-selective electrodes. The goal of this work was to investigate the role of the CNTs' charge and structure in the CNT/surfactant interactions. Non-functionalized single- (SWCNT) and multi-walled carbon nanotubes (MWCNT), and amine functionalized SWCNT were used. The influence of the surfactant architecture on the CNT/surfactant interactions was also studied. Surfactants with different charge and hydrophobic tail length (sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS), octyltrimethyl ammonium bromide (OTAB), dodecyltrimethyl ammonium bromide (DoTAB) and hexadecyltrimethyl ammonium bromide (CTAB)) were studied. According to the results, the adsorption process shows a cooperative character, with the hydrophobic interaction contribution playing a key role. This is made evident by the correlation between the free surfactant concentration (at a fixed [CNT]) and the critical micellar concentration, cmc, found for all the CNTs and surfactants investigated. The electrostatic interactions mainly determine the CNT dispersion, although hydrophobic interactions also contribute to this process.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据