Ethanol-water interactions

There is much evidence that there are many cases in which the interaction between liquids and solids cannot be described in terms of dispersion forces alone. For example, Dann [75] found significant non-dispersion-force contributions to the work of adhesion between ethanol/water mixtures, mixed glycols, and polyglycols and a mixture of formamide and 2-ethoxyethanol against a variety of solids. The nature of these other interactions , however, were at first the subject of some dispute. We may account for them in a general way with a term /sl inserted into Eq. 11 ... 

When we perform experiment in such way that there is no interference of H-bonds or these bonds are stable and structure of solvent also does not varies essentially, solvatochromic plot demonstrates very good linearity as shown, for example, for some naphthylamine derivatives in ethanol-water mixtures. The linearity of solvatochromic plots is often regarded as an evidence for the dominant importance of nonspecific universal intermolecular interaction in the spectral shifts. Specific solvent effects lead to essential deviation of measured points from this linear plot. 

In a subsequent communication, Elliott and coworkers found that uniaxially oriented membranes swollen with ethanol/water mixtures could relax back to an almost isotropic state. In contrast, morphological relaxation was not observed for membranes swollen in water alone. While this relaxation behavior was attributed to the plasticization effect of ethanol on the fluorocarbon matrix of Nafion, no evidence of interaction between ethanol and the fluorocarbon backbone is presented. In light of the previous thermal relaxation studies of Moore and co-workers, an alternative explanation for this solvent induced relaxation may be that ethanol is more effective than water in weakening the electrostatic interactions and mobilizing the side chain elements. Clearly, a more detailed analysis of this phenomenon involving a dynamic mechanical and/ or spectroscopic analysis is needed to gain a detailed molecular level understanding of this relaxation process. 

The potential of ILs in fhe field of exfracfive distillation was shown in Refs 126 and 146 for the separation of THF-wafer and ethanol-water azeotropes using [C2Qlm][BFJ. This IL easily breaks the azeotropic ethanol-water phase behavior by interacting selectively with water. 

The salt effects of potassium bromide and a series office symmetrical tetraalkylammonium bromides on vapor-liquid equilibrium at constant pressure in various ethanol-water mixtures were determined. For these systems, the composition of the binary solvent was held constant while the dependence of the equilibrium vapor composition on salt concentration was investigated these studies were done at various fixed compositions of the mixed solvent. Good agreement with the equation of Furter and Johnson was observed for the salts exhibiting either mainly electrostrictive or mainly hydrophobic behavior however, the correlation was unsatisfactory in the case of the one salt (tetraethylammonium bromide) where these two types of solute-solvent interactions were in close competition. The transition from salting out of the ethanol to salting in, observed as the tetraalkylammonium salt series is ascended, was interpreted in terms of the solute-solvent interactions as related to physical properties of the system components, particularly solubilities and surface tensions. 

Luttrull et al. assessed the extent of dye interaction in a series of rationally synthesized dimeric Rose Bengals (Figure 14). Based on extensive studies of the spectra of these compounds in ethanol and ethanol-water, these workers concluded that the compounds exist in an open conformation in EtOH, but that the extent of dye/dye interaction increases as the solution becomes more aqueous. Thus the extinction coefficient at the maximum decreases as the amount of ethanol in the solution decreases. The more hydrophobic the groups at C-6 (changing, for example, from Na to tributylammonium), the more changing the solvent toward an increasing water content decreases the extinction coefficient, that is, enforces aggregation. 

All adsorption processes result from the attraction between like and unlike molecules. For the ethanol-water example given above, the attraction between water molecules is greater than between molecules of water and ethanol As a consequence, there is a tendency for the ethanol molecules to be expelled from the bulk of the solution and to concentrate at die surface. This tendency increases with the hydrocarhon chain-length of the alcohol. Gas molecules adsorb on a solid surface because of die attraction between unlike molecules. The attraction between like and unlike molecules arises from a variety of intermolecular forces. London dispersion forces exist in all types of matter and always act as an attractive force between adjacent atoms and molecules, no matter how dissimilar they are. Many oilier attractive forces depend upon die specific chemical nature of the neighboring molecules. These include dipole interactions, the hydrogen bond and the metallic bond. 

The mobile phases used in normal-phase chromatography are based on nonpolar hydrocarbons, such as hexane, heptane, or octane, to which is added a small amount of a more polar solvent, such as 2-propanol.5 Solvent selectivity is controlled by the nature of the added solvent. Additives with large dipole moments, such as methylene chloride and 1,2-dichlor-oethane, interact preferentially with solutes that have large dipole moments, such as nitro- compounds, nitriles, amines, and sulfoxides. Good proton donors such as chloroform, m-cresol, and water interact preferentially with basic solutes such as amines and sulfoxides, whereas good proton acceptors such as alcohols, ethers, and amines tend to interact best with hydroxylated molecules such as acids and phenols. A variety of solvents used as mobile phases in normal-phase chromatography are listed in Table 2.2, some of which may need to be stabilized by addition of an antioxidant, such as 3-5% ethanol, because of the propensity for peroxide formation. 

Other frequent phenomena are strong interactions between the plastic sample and the simulant. For example, the additive with Mr = 587 shows a 20-fold enhanced migration from PBT into 50 % ethanol/water at 40 °C compared to olive oil. The interaction effect is dramatic with PA, as can be seen from the migration of the same additive into 50 % ethanol (mp.t = 12.6 mg dm-2) compared to olive oil (mFt = 0.077 mg dm-2) after 10 days at 49 °C. 

The giant clusters could be reproducibly formed starting from Pd561 nanocrystals in water, ethanol and ethanol-water mixtures and from sols with very different concentrations of the nanocrystals. It is possible that the formation of the giant clusters is facilitated by the polymer shell that encases them. Unlike Pd nanocrystals coated with alkanethiols, which self-assemble to form ordered arrays, the polymer shell effectively magnifies the facets of the metallic core, thereby aiding a giant assembly of the nanocrystals. The surface properties of the polymer-coated nanocrystals are clearly more favorable in that the interparticle interaction becomes sufficiently attractive. 

LSPR-based sensitivity enhancement using surface-relief nanostructures has been confirmed experimentally in a few smdies to date. In the experiments conducted by Byun et al. [26], ethanol-water mixture at varied ethanol concentration was used to estimate the sensitivity enhancement by periodic nanowires atA = 200 nm and 500 nm respectively as 44% and 31% over conventional structures, as shown in Fig. 7. Note that the sensitivity enhancement for bulk index measurement is relatively limited compared to layered bio-molecular interactions, because of reduced index contrast against ambience. It was also found that surface roughness can degrade sensitivity performance [27]. Measurement of the DNA hybridization process was performed using nanoposts at A = 110 run and presented more than fivefold sensitivity improvement, as shown in Fig. 8 [28]. 

---