Surfactant Migration

Here we also consider sorption kinetics as the mass-transfer barrier to surfactant migration to and from the interface, and we follow the Levich framework. However, our analysis does not confine all surface-tension gradients to the constant thickness film. Rather, we treat the bubble shape and the surfactant distribution along the interface in a consistent fashion. 

When conventional surfactants are used in emulsion polymerization, difficulties are encountered which are inherent in their use. Conventional surfactants are held on the particle surface by physical forces thus adsorption/des-orption equilibria always exist, which may not be desirable. They can interfere with adhesion to a substrate and may be leached out upon contact with water. Surfactant migration affects film formation and their lateral motion during particle-particle interactions can cause destabilization of the colloidal dispersion. 

In some instances, it has been observed that the addition of electrolyte and sugars into water increases the interface tension. The adsorbed surfactants migrate away from the interface into the bulk phase (i.e., negative adsorption). 

On the other hand, tests with sodium dodecylbenzene sulfonate showed that PAH desorption could be accomplished by electromigration of anionic micelles in the direction of the anode the surfactant was injected at the cathodic side of the electrokinetic cell. PAH removal of 90% was seen in the cathodic region (Pamukcu, 1994). Consequently, it is apparent that anionic surfactants migrate against the electroosmotic flow, and hence, are less useful in EK than are nonionic surfactants, even though the anionic surfactants are less adsorbed onto soil than are nonionic materials. 

The model described above was verified and validated with regard to column experiments at the laboratory scale (Finkel, 1999 Finkel et al., 1998). The results provide evidence that the conceptual model of processes (Fig. 7.7) is appropriate to represent all relevant processes and interactions occurring when PAH and surfactants migrate in the groimdwater (Finkel et al., 1998). 

The salinity at which the middle phase microemulsion contains equal volumes of oil and brine is defined as the optimal salinity. The oil recovery is found to be maximum at or near the optimal salinity (8,10). At optimal salinity, the phase separation time or coalescence time of emulsions and the apparent viscosity of these emulsions in porous media are found to be minimum (11,12). Therefore, it appears that upon increasing the salinity, the surfactant migrates from the lower phase to middle phase to upper phase in an oil/brine/surfactant/alcohol system. The -> m u transition can be achieved by also changing any of the following variables Temperature, Alcohol Chain Length, Oil/Brine Ratio, Surfactant Solution/Oil Ratio, Surfactant Concentration and Molecular Weight of Surfactant. The present paper summarizes our extensive studies on the low and high surfactant concentration systems and related phenomena necessary to achieve ultralow interfacial tension in oil/brine/surfactant/alcohol systems. 

By the addition of the surfactant, such as phosphate ester, into the adhesive, the peel strength decreased with time and at the wide range of rates. The surfactant migrated to the interface after bonding by the amount for monolayer formation and the excess remained in the adhesive. 

The addition of surfactants to the processing fluid usually increases its viscosity and modifies the interaction with the soil particle surface. It results in a reduction of the electroosmotic flow, which is the main transportation mechanism. The use of neutral surfactants has been preferred for low toxicity, which is a very important property to consider in the selection of the surfactant. Anionic surfactants have a great solubilizing potential and do not interact with soil, so the retention of the surfactant in the soil is very low. However, anionic surfactants migrate in the opposite direction of electroosmotic flow. Besides, they are much more toxic, especially for aquatic organisms. Cationic surfactants have not been used in soil electrokinetics. 

What is the composition of both interfaces Do the surfactants migrate from one to the other (Pays et al., 2000) ... 

This section will describe RAFT polymerisations carried out under miniemulsion conditions. The first detailed study of the use of SDS or for that matter any ionic stabiliser with a hydrophobe led to destabilisation of the miniemulsion for polymerisations of styrene or ethyl hexyl methacrylate (EHMA) (Tsavalas et al, 2001). However, a linear increase in Mn was found with conversion with polydispersities as high as 2. Conductivity measurements were also carried out to study the extent of surfactant migration into the aqueous phase. The results showed that SDS did migrate, but only after polymerisation was initiated. The destabilisation mechanism is still unknown. Lansalot et al. (2002) showed that they could find conditions where colloidal stability was observed when using SDS. However, the polydispersity found in their experiments ranged between 1.7 and 2, suggesting that these systems gave non-ideal RAFT polymerisation. 

In practice, spontaneous emulsification can be combined with emulsion inversion. For instance, if a water phase is poured little by little into an oil phase containing a dissolved hydrophilic surfactant and/or alcohol, the first dispersion to occur is a W/O emulsion because there is very little water. As the number of water drops increases, the surfactant migrates from the oil to the water phase and the dynamic interfacial tension can be close to zero. A multiple emulsion often occurs as an intermediate situation. Then an O/W emulsion appears after some time when the kinetic phenomena finally prevail. This caimot be interpreted straightforwardly from the bidimensional map unless the formulation is assumed to change as the surfactant migrates from oil to water. In such a view, the trajectory of change moves from to A , crossing the inversion line somewhere. 

---