Thermodynamics of micellization of ionic surfactant/alkoxyethanol mixed micelles as a function of temperature

Flynn, D. Justin; Kutay, S.M.; Hawrylak, Brent; Kennedy, Christopher; Alexander, Edward; Howard, Jane A.; Marangoni, D. Gerrard

doi:10.1007/s00396-002-0693-0

Cited by 13 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the case of the interactions of these glymes with anionic surfactant, it appears the hydrophobic effects dominate the micelle formation process and initially stabilize the surfactant micelles until the hydrophobic effect is dampened at higher glyme concentrations. This is in excellent agreement with the literature on the interactions of monosubstituted glycol ethers with anionic surfactants systems (Flynn et al, 2002; Gjerde et al, 1996; Huang and Verrall, 1997a, b; Marangoni et al, 1992, 1993; Marangoni and Kwak, 1991; Mullally and Marangoni, 2004). At higher concentrations of added glymes, the significant interactions between the glymes and the water molecules leads to substantial changes in the hydrogen‐bonded structure of water.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 91%

“…Monosubstituted glymes (e.g., ethoxylated alcohols) have been studied in the literature in mixed micellar systems consisting of the glyme/water mixture as a solvent and anionic, cationic, and zwitterionic surfactants (Flynn et al, 2002; Huang and Verrall, 1997a; Marangoni and Kwak, 1991; Mullally and Marangoni, 2004). Diglymes differ from monoglymes in that both ends are capped with short alkyl groups, where monoglymes (e.g., 2‐butoxyethanol) are capped on one end by an alkyl group and on the other end with a hydroxyl group.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For pure surfactants, the concentration at which micelles will form in solution is influenced by the length of the hydrocarbon tail, the structure of the hydrophobic groups, and the structure and charge of the head group (Lindman and Wennerstrom, 1980;Mukerjee et al, 1971;Rosenholm, 2020;Zana, 2002). However, the CMC values of micellar forming surfactants are influenced by the nature and concentration of various additives in the system (Dharaiya et al, 2013;Flynn et al, 2002;Huang and Verrall, 1997a;Kennedy et al, 2001;Manabe and Koda, 1978;Marangoni and Kwak, 1991;Mullally and Marangoni, 2004;Tominaga et al, 1980;Zana, 1995). Cosurfactants can generally be regarded as surface-active materials that do not form micelles by themselves due to their limited solubility in a particular solvent or their weak hydrophobic interaction.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Interaction of Glymes with Surfactant Micelles

Petropolis¹,

Petropolis²,

MacNeil³

et al. 2020

J Surfact & Detergents

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The critical micelle concentrations (CMC) values and counterion dissociation (α values) have been determined for a number of mixed micellar systems consisting of two typical ionic surfactants and glycol ethers (glymes) as cosurfactants, namely diethylene glycol dimethyl ether, diethylene glycol diethyl ether, triethylene glycol dimethyl ether, and tetraethylene glycol dimethyl ether. Conductance experiments were used to determine the CMC and α values of the mixed micelles as a function of glyme concentration in the aqueous mixed solvent. Favorable interactions between sodium dodecyl sulfate micelles and glyme cosurfactants were deduced from the decreases in the CMC values and the large increase in the α values of these systems as a function of increasing glyme concentration in the mixed solvents. In contrast to the anionic surfactant/glyme systems, in general, there appeared to be little favorable interactions between the surfactant and glymes when micelles of the cationic surfactant dodecyltrimethylammonium bromide were formed in water/ glyme solvent systems containing an increasing amount of the glymes. The interaction of glymes with the surfactant micelles was examined closely via 13 C nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) chemical shifts for both surfactant and glyme carbons; these chemical shifts changes were interpreted in terms of the distribution and the localization of the glymes in the aggregates. Finally, partition constants, determined from two-dimensional diffusion-oriented spectroscopy (2D-DOSY) experiments, were used to calculate thermodynamic quantities of transfer of the glymes between the bulk phase and the self-assembled aggregates. All these results are interpreted in terms of the key contributions that both the glyme ethoxylated groups and alkyl endgroups make to the hydrophobic interactions.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Interaction of Glymes with Surfactant Micelles

Petropolis¹,

Petropolis²,

MacNeil³

et al. 2020

J Surfact & Detergents

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…At higher concentrations, C 6 EO 2 penetrates into the palisade layer which results in a micellar transition. Previous studies on the effect of alkoxyethanol on ionic surfactant have shown a similar effect on micellization [37][38][39]. Figure 7 represents the effect of TBCP molecules which are insoluble in water due to their highly hydrophobic nature.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 83%

Dynamic Light Scattering Studies on the Effect of 1‐Alkanols, Alkanediols and Alkoxyethanols on the Micelles of a Moderately Hydrophobic/Hydrophilic PEO‐PPO‐PEO Triblock Copolymer

Parekh

Bahadur

2011

J Surfact & Detergents

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The results on changes in the apparent hydrodynamic diameter (D h ) of micelles in a solution containing 5% of a moderately hydrophobic/hydrophilic triblock PEO-PPO-PEO copolymer in the presence of several hydroxyl compounds at 23°C from dynamic light scattering (DLS) are reported. Distribution plots show micelles with hydrodynamic diameter *17 nm and low polydispersity (\0.1) except at low concentrations where a unimer peak (* 4 nm) was also noticed. These additives increase/ decrease the micelle size and show micellar transition depending upon their hydrophilicity/hydrophobicity. The results are discussed in terms of the effect of the additives on altering water structure and their partitioning in micelle. Short chain alcohols (C 1 -C 3 ) increase solvation of PEO and thus increase micelle hydrodynamic size while higher alcohols, initially reduce D h due shrinkage of PEO followed by micellar growth at higher concentrations. Among ax-alkanediols, C 2 and C 4 diols increase micelle size by immobilizing water sphere around the micelles whereas higher diols form wicket like structures and reside in palisade layer. Isomeric hexanediols (1,2; 1,5; 2,5 and 1,6) alter micelle size in different ways depending on their hydrophobicity. In C 6 EO m (m = 0, 1, 2), as the number of EO group increases, it becomes more hydrophilic and increases D h at higher concentration. Addition of a hydrophobic triblock copolymer leads to unfavorable mixing with a moderately hydrophobic/hydrophilic triblock copolymer which results in increase in size, while the addition of a hydrophilic counterpart increases the average hydrodynamic size and follows appearance of unimer peak.

show abstract

“…CMCs, partition coefficients, size, and shape, as well as many other micellar properties have been investigated as a function of both the additive concentration and the nature of the additive. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17] Alcohols are known to play important roles as cosurfactants in a number of industrial and research applications including the addition of alcohol to surfactant and oil systems in order to form microemulsions. [1,[18][19][20][21][22][23][24] Microemulsions are added to oil reservoirs to enhance recovery by mobilizing some of the residual oil that remains after extraction.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Thermodynamics of Mixed Micellization of Isomeric Hexanediols in Sodium Dodecyl Sulfate

Comeau

McLachlan

Marangoni

2009

Journal of Dispersion Science and Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The thermodynamic parameters of mixed micelle formation (D mic G , D mic H , D mic S ) have been determined for a series of mixed micelles consisting of two isomeric hexanediols (1,2-hexanediol and 1,6-hexanediol) in sodium dodecylsulfate micellar solutions. The enthalpies of micellization were determined directly from isoperibol solution calorimetry. Gibbs energies and entropies of micelle formation were obtained from the application of the charged pseudo-phase model of micelle formation to the calorimetric critical micelle concentration values. The location of the alcohols in the micellar palisade layer has been determined from two-dimensional nuclear Overhauser enhancement spectroscopy (NOESY) experiments. The calorimetric titration data indicates that the placement of the hydroxyl groups on the six carbon backbone greatly affects the energetics of the micelle formation process. From the NMR data, the location of the cosurfactant in the micelle has been determined. These results indicate that the locus of solubilization affects the subtle balance of forces responsible for the formation of the mixed aggregates.

show abstract

Thermodynamics of micellization of ionic surfactant/alkoxyethanol mixed micelles as a function of temperature

Cited by 13 publications

References 0 publications

The Interaction of Glymes with Surfactant Micelles

The Interaction of Glymes with Surfactant Micelles

Dynamic Light Scattering Studies on the Effect of 1‐Alkanols, Alkanediols and Alkoxyethanols on the Micelles of a Moderately Hydrophobic/Hydrophilic PEO‐PPO‐PEO Triblock Copolymer

Thermodynamics of Mixed Micellization of Isomeric Hexanediols in Sodium Dodecyl Sulfate

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About