4.6 Article

When Bulk Matters: Disentanglement of the Role of Polyelectrolyte/ Surfactant Complexes at Surfaces and in the Bulk of Foam Films

期刊

LANGMUIR
卷 39, 期 1, 页码 111-118

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.langmuir.2c02260

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Foam films play a crucial role in determining the performance of macroscopic foams and can be used to study surface forces. This study investigates the effects of salt on the stability of foam films formed by mixtures of oppositely charged polyelectrolyte and surfactant. It is found that a small amount of salt weakens the electrostatic repulsion and decreases the film stability, while a large amount of salt unexpectedly increases the film stability due to additional steric stabilization provided by the polyelectrolyte/surfactant complexes in the film bulk.
Foam films display exciting systems as on one hand they dictate the performance of macroscopic foams and on the other hand they allow studies of surface forces. With regard to surface forces, we attempt to disentangle the effect of the foam film surfaces and the foam film bulk. For that, we study the influence of salt (LiBr) on foam films formed by mixtures of oppositely charged polyelectrolyte and surfactant: anionic monosulfonated polyphenylene sulfone (sPSO2-220) and cationic tetradecyltrimethylammonium bromide (C14TAB). Adding a small amount of salt (<= 10-3 M) decreases the foam film stability due to a weakened electrostatic net repulsion. In contrast, a large amount of salt (10-2 M) unexpectedly increases the foam film stability. Disjoining pressure isotherms reveal that the increased stability is due to an additional steric stabilization, which is attributed to sPSO2-220/C14TAB complexes in the film bulk. These bulk complexes also contribute to the measured apparent surface potential between the two air/water interfaces. We find, for the first time, the formation of Newton black films for mixtures of anionic polyelectrolytes and cationic surfactants.

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

4.6
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