1985
DOI: 10.1021/bk-1985-0272.ch007
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effect of Chain Length Compatibility on Monolayers, Foams, and Macro- and Microemulsions

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

1991
1991
2012
2012

Publication Types

Select...
3
2

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 0 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The area per lecithin molecule was altered (in 5-Å 2 stages) over the range 50 to 75 Å 2 because the estimates in the literature for the minimal area per molecule of lecithin generally fall within this region (15,20,21). For the cosurfactants studied, a much larger area per molecule of 30 Å 2 was used because there is at least one report in the literature that short-chain alcohols, when present in a mismatched monolayer (ie shortchain alcohols in combination with longer chain molecules), exhibit a larger area per molecule because of thermal motions of the chain (22). Although log P was experimentally determined in the present study, its value was altered to see what effect it had on the results, with values of ±10% of the experimentally determined figure being used.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The area per lecithin molecule was altered (in 5-Å 2 stages) over the range 50 to 75 Å 2 because the estimates in the literature for the minimal area per molecule of lecithin generally fall within this region (15,20,21). For the cosurfactants studied, a much larger area per molecule of 30 Å 2 was used because there is at least one report in the literature that short-chain alcohols, when present in a mismatched monolayer (ie shortchain alcohols in combination with longer chain molecules), exhibit a larger area per molecule because of thermal motions of the chain (22). Although log P was experimentally determined in the present study, its value was altered to see what effect it had on the results, with values of ±10% of the experimentally determined figure being used.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%