Small-Molecule Surfactant Adsorption, Polymer Surfactant Adsorption, and Surface Solubilization: An Overview

Comparison of surfactant mass transfer with drop formation times from dynamic interfacial tension measurements in microchannels

“…As discussed above, adsorption times are significant in the case of TX100 for all surfactant concentrations and for SDS and DTAB for c > CMC. In addition, by considering low concentrations (below CMC) and high flowrates, we show that even with smallmolecule surfactants [63], such as SDS and DTAB, equilibrium interfacial tension may not be reached during the drop formation time. Wang et al [19] reported that SDS is in equilibrium within the whole range of 80 < t=t s < 4000 at concentrations above CMC, while we found that at concentrations below CMC there is a DIT for 35 < t=t s < 213.…”

In situnon-linear spectroscopic approaches to understanding adsorption at mineral–water interfaces

“…Apart from the adsorption of inorganic (metal) ions at interfaces [62], a topic beyond the scope of this paper and only rarely [77][78][79] investigated by non-linear optical methods, surfactants and carboxylates are arguably the most widely studied classes of adsorbates [41,[80][81][82]. VSFS studies were performed on some of their typical representatives like sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) [49] and n-alkyl carboxylates [29,49,51,83].…”

Effects of Surfactant Sorption on the Equilibrium Distribution of Organic Pollutants in Contaminated Subsurface Environments

“…1). This observation is consistent with some previous studies (e.g., Pennell et al, 1993;Edwards et al, 1994;Sharma, 1995) that found nonionic surfactant sorption occurring well above the CMC but contrasts with other studies (e.g., Liu et al, 1992;Brownawell et al, 1997) that found the sorption of nonionic surfactants to plateau near their CMC values. It generally has been thought that surfactant sorption should reach a limiting maximum value at the CMC if the sorbing species are surfactant monomers because the concentration of monomers is constant above the CMC.…”

“…For both SDS and Tween 80, the average values calculated for phenanthrene and naphthalene were always larger than the values at equivalent HOC concentrations (Table 3). When all values in Table 3 are considered, only one (i.e., Tween 80 for a phenanthrene concentration of is larger than the corresponding Previous studies have also reported sorbed surfactant partition coefficients that were generally larger than the micellar partition coefficients (Nayyar et al, 1994;Mukerjee et al, 1995;O'Haver and Harwell, 1995;Sharma, 1995;Sun and Jaffé, 1996). No convincing explanation for this observation has yet been advanced; presumably it results from geometric differences between sorbed and micellar surfactant aggregate structures.…”