Lecture6 PDF
Lecture6 PDF
Lecture6 PDF
Table of Contents
Most of the cationic surfactants have good stability in a wide range of pH. The
relatively less use of cationic surfactants in industry is due to their rather poor
detergency, lack of suspending power for carbon, and higher cost.
Some well known cationic surfactants are, long chain amines (RNH3+ X),
quaternary ammonium salts [RN(CH3)3+ X] and quaternary salts of polyethylene
oxide-amine derivatives [RN(CH3){(C2H4O)xH}2+ Cl].
Some nonionic surfactants are virtually insoluble in water, but soluble in organic
solvents. However, some nonionics are soluble both in water and organic liquids,
although the extent of solubility differs. The solubility depends on the structure of
the surfactant molecules.
The alkyl phenol ethoxylate [RC6H4(OC2H4)xOH] category of surfactants is
widely used in emulsions, paints and cosmetics. The alcohol ethoxylates
[R(OC2H4)xOH] are biodegradable. They are quite resistant to hard water.
Therefore, in the applications involving saline media where the anionic
surfactants are salted out of the solution, these surfactants find extensive use.
The polyoxypropylene glycols are used in a wide range of molecular weights
(e.g., 1000 30000). They are mainly used as dispersing agents for pigments in
paints, foam-control agents and for removing scales of boilers. The
polyoxyethylene mercaptants [RS(C2H4O)xH] are stable in hot and alkaline
solutions. They are used in textile detergents, metal cleaning and shampoos. They
are also used with quaternary ammonium-type of cationic surfactants to enhance
the effectiveness of the latter.
The long chain esters of carboxylic acids have very good emulsifying properties.
However, they are unstable to acid and alkali, especially under hot conditions.
The edible sorbitol esters are used in food products such as ice creams, beverages,
desserts and various confectionary products. These surfactants are also used in
pharmaceutical products.
The alkanolamines have good stability in the alkaline media. They are mainly
used as laundry detergents, thickeners for liquid detergents, shampoos, rust
inhibitors and fuel oil additives. The polyoxyethylene silicones are used as
wetting agents.
1.6.1.6 Biosurfactants
Gramicidens
Polymyxins
Ornithinelipid
Cerilipin
Lysinlipid
Surfactin, subtilysin
Peptidelipid
(v) Polymeric surfactants
Lipoheteropolysaccharide
Heteropolysaccharide
Polysaccharideprotein
Manno-protein
Carbohydrateprotein
Mannanlipid complex
Mannose/erythroselipid
Carbohydrateproteinlipid complex
(vi) Particulate biosurfactants
Membrane vesicles
Fimbriae
Whole cells
These variations can be explained as follows. Near the CMC, the surface is
almost saturated by the adsorption of the surfactant molecules. Therefore, the
surface tension ceases to decrease when the surfactant concentration is increased
beyond the CMC. The equivalent conductivity of the solution decreases at the
CMC owing to the lower mobility of the micelles as compared to the surfactant
molecules. When the critical micelle concentration is approached, the slope of the
osmotic pressure curve decreases and the slope of the turbidity curve increases
due to the increase in the average molecular weight of the solute.
The size and shape of the micelles depend on the properties of the solution such
as the concentration of electrolyte and the pH of the solution. To illustrate, the
aggregation number of sodium dodecyl sulfate micelle is ~80, which increases to
~130 in 0.4 mol/m3 NaCl solution. With the addition of electrolyte (such as
NaCl), the critical micelle concentration of ionic surfactants decreases. The
electrolytes mask the electrostatic repulsion between the ionic head-groups of the
surfactant molecules. This favors more adsorption of the surfactant molecules at
the interface, which causes the reduction in CMC. Sometimes, increase in pH
favors ionization. If the charge density increases by changing the pH, the CMC
may increase.
The aggregation number increases with increasing length of the hydrocarbon
chains of the surfactant molecules. For example, the aggregation number of
to increase and the other tends to decrease the head-group area. This is shown in
Fig. 1.6.4.
The optimal area is the area corresponding to the intersection of the two energy
curves. When the surfactant molecules pack together to assume a geometrical
structure, the relative size of the head-group and hydrophobic chain determines
the size and shape of the micelle. The effects of hydration, repulsion between the
ions and the effects of the counterion are also important in the packing of the
molecules.
core (i.e., the chain volume), l is the length of the hydrophobic group in the
micellar core and a is the optimal (cross-sectional) area occupied by the
hydrophilic group at the micelle-solution interface. These quantities are shown in
Fig. 1.6.5.
must not exceed l in order to maintain the liquid-like core of the micelle.
of the chains extends beyond this limit significantly, their aggregation may not be
considered liquid-like.
The optimal area occupied by the hydrophilic group at the surface of the micelle
a depends on the structure of the group, electrolyte concentration, pH and the
presence of any additive (such as alcohol) in the solution. For ionic surfactants,
addition of electrolyte causes the value of a to reduce.
The variation of the structure of the micelles with the packing parameter is
illustrated in Table 1.6.2.
0 1 3 Spherical
1 3 1 2 Cylindrical
1 2 1 Lamellar
1 Reverse micelles
Example 1.6.1: The aggregation number of sodium dodecyl sulfate micelle in water is
80. Calculate the packing parameter, and predict the shape of the SDS micelles.
Solution: For SDS, the number of carbon atoms in the hydrophobic chain (n) is 12. From
Eqs. (1.6.1) and (1.6.2) we get,
v 0.3502 nm3
lmax 0.154 0.1265n 1.672 nm
Given, N 80
The aggregation number is defined as,
4 r 3
N (assuming the micelle to be spherical)
3v
13 13
3vN 3 0.3502 80
r 1.884 nm
4 4
r lmax
2
4 r 2 4 1.884
a 0.558 nm2
N 80
v 0.3502
0.375
al 0.558 1.672
This value is slightly higher than the upper limit of v al for the structure of the micelle
Example 1.6.2: The light scattering data from aqueous solutions of the cationic
surfactant, dodecyltrimethylammonium bromide, are presented below.
of the micelle and the aggregation number from these data. Given: cCMC 4.4 kg/m3.
Solution: The turbidity below the CMC is essentially the same as that for the solvent.
The light scattering centers are the micelles of the surfactant. Let us write the Debye
equation as,
H c cCMC 1
2 B c cCMC
M
where M is the weight-average molecular weight of the micelle and B is the second
virial coefficient. The surfactant solution of concentration c is considered to consist of
monomers of concentration cCMC, and micelles of concentration c cCMC . The
solution at the CMC is designated as the solvent. The plot is shown in Fig. 1.6.6. The
intercept is,
1
6.93 105 kmol/kg
M
Therefore, the molecular weight is,
M 14430 kg/kmol
The molecular formula of dodecyltrimethylammonium bromide is C12H25(CH3)3NBr.
The molecular weight, therefore, is 308. Therefore, the aggregation number of the
micelle is 47.
The aggregation number in reverse micelles is usually much smaller than the
aggregation number in the aqueous micelles. The negative enthalpy change
during micellization is believed to be an important stabilizing factor for the
reverse micelles.
Surfactants soluble in organic liquids can form reverse micelles. There are some
surfactants, such as Aerosol OT, which can form normal as well as reverse
micelles.
Biologists have used the vesicles as models for the cell membranes. It is believed
that the vesicles represent the prototypes of early living cells. It has been
demonstrated that certain lipids as well as synthetic surfactants can spontaneously
self-assemble to form vesicles.
reaction.
NS S N (1.6.3)
where N is the aggregation number. The aggregation number actually has a
statistical distribution rather than a single value as used here.
The reaction represented by Eq. (1.6.3) is reversible. The equilibrium constant for
this reaction is given by,
a
K micelle (1.6.4)
aSN
where a represents activity in Eq. (1.6.4), expressed in terms of mole fraction.
The standard Gibbs free energy change for micelle formation per mole of
surfactant is given by,
RT ln K RT
G 0 ln amicelle RT ln aS (1.6.5)
N N
At the critical micelle concentration, aS aCMC . Since N is large, Eq. (1.6.5)
becomes,
G 0 RT ln aCMC (1.6.6)
The standard Gibbs free energy change due to micellization can be calculated
from Eq. (1.6.6). The activity is expressed as the product of mole fraction and
activity coefficient. For most surfactants, the critical micelle concentration is
small (< 1 mol/m3). Setting the activity coefficient to unity under the assumption
of ideal behavior of the surfactant solution at CMC, Eq. (1.6.6) becomes,
G 0 RT ln xCMC (1.6.7)
where xCMC is the mole fraction of surfactant in the solution at CMC. The
experimentally determined value of CMC (expressed as mole fraction) can be put
These surfactants are quite soluble at the low temperatures (273–278 K).
However, they come out of solution upon heating.
These surfactants dissolve in water by hydrogen bonding. With increasing
temperature, the hydrogen bonds disrupt. This causes reduction in solubility.
Cloud point decreases with the increasing chain length of the hydrophobic part.
The variation of cloud point with the number of oxyethylene units is depicted in
Fig. 1.6.9 (b).
(a) (b)
Fig. 1.6.9 (a) Variation of Krafft point with the number of carbon atoms in the
alkyl chain, and (b) variation of cloud point with the number of oxyethylene units
(source: T. Gu and J. Sjöblom, Colloids Surf., 64, 39, 1992; adapted by
permission from Elsevier Ltd., 1992).
The liquid crystals are ordered like solid crystals, but they are mobile like liquids.
The spherical micelles pack into cubic liquid crystals, cylindrical micelles form
hexagonal liquid crystals, and lamellar micelles form lamellar liquid crystals.
With increasing surfactant concentration, some cylindrical micelles become
branched and interconnected leading to the formation of a bicontinuous liquid
crystalline phase (see Fig. 1.6.10). The hexagonal phase appears at a lower
surfactant concentration than that for the lamellar phase. The usual sequence of
the phases is: micellar hexagonal lamellar.
In between the changes from one phase to another, cubic phases can be detected.
The hexagonal and lamellar phases are optically anisotropic. They can be
detected under polarizing microscope. The cubic phase is isotropic. It can be
identified by using dyes.
Because of the ordered arrangement of the molecules in the liquid crystals, the
viscosity of the solution increases considerably. The hexagonal phases are more
viscous than the lamellar phases. The cubic liquid crystalline phases formed from
bicontinuous structures and spherical micelles at high surfactant concentrations
are high-viscosity gels. They are useful in cosmetic and pharmaceutical
industries.
As the name suggests, the balance between the hydrophilic and lipophilic parts of
the surfactant molecule is important in this method. Values have been assigned to
Exercise
Exercise 1.6.1: Using the Tanford equations, calculate the minimum cross-sectional area
for a hydrocarbon chain.
Exercise 1.6.2: The aggregation number of the surfactant C10H21N(CH3)3Br has been
reported to be 36. Can its micelle be spherical?
Exercise 1.6.4: Calculate the HLB value of n-propanol using the appropriate group-
numbers.
(j) Explain what you understand by cloud point. How does the cloud point of a
surfactant vary with its chain length?
(k) Explain the HLB concept of classification of surfactants.
(l) If a surfactant has HLB = 3, what type of emulsion would you expect it to form?
Suggested reading
Textbooks
D. J. Shaw, Introduction to Colloid and Surface Chemistry, Butterworth-
Heinemann, Oxford, 1992, Chapter 4.
M. J. Rosen, Surfactants and Interfacial Phenomena, John Wiley, New Jersey,
2004, Chapters 1 & 3.
P. Ghosh, Colloid and Interface Science, PHI Learning, New Delhi, 2009,
Chapter 3.
Reference books
G. J. M. Koper, An Introduction to Interfacial Engineering, VSSD, Delft, 2009,
Chapter 3.
J. C. Berg, An Introduction to Interfaces and Colloids: The Bridge to
Nanoscience, World Scientific, Singapore, 2010, Chapter 3.
J. N. Israelachvili, Intermolecular and Surface Forces, Academic Press, London,
1997, Chapters 16 & 17.
R. J. Stokes and D. F. Evans, Fundamentals of Interfacial Engineering, Wiley-
VCH, New York, 1997, Chapter 5.
Journal articles
H. Kunieda, K. Aramaki, T. Izawa, M. H. Kabir, K. Sakamoto and K. Watanabe,
J. Oleo Sci., 52, 429 (2003).
J. N. Israelachvili, D. J. Mitchell and B. W. Ninham, J. Chem. Soc. Faraday
Trans. II, 72, 1525 (1976).
K. Fontell, Adv. Colloid Interface Sci., 41, 127 (1992).
K. Giribabu, M. L. N. Reddy, and P. Ghosh, Chem. Eng. Commun., 195, 336
(2008).
T. Gu and J. Sjöblom, Colloids Surf., 64, 39 (1992).
W. C. Griffin, J. Soc. Cosmetic Chem., 1, 311 (1949).