effects of nonionic surfactants on the interactions of
TRANSCRIPT
Effects of Nonionic Surfactantson the Interactions of DifferentNanoparticle Materials on Glass
Surfaces
vorgelegt von
Diplom-Chemikerin
Alejandra I. Lopez Trosell
aus Venezuela
der Fakultat II - Mathematik und Naturwissenschaften
der Technischen Universitat Berlin
zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades
Doktor der Naturwissenschaften
-Dr.rer.nat.-
genehmigte Dissertation
Promotionsausschluss:
Vorsitzender: Prof. Dr. M. Lerch
Berichter: Prof. Dr. R. Schomacker
Berichter: Prof. Dr. G. Findenegg
Tag der mundlichen Prufung: 30.03.2005
Berlin-Marz, 2005
D 83
Abstract
Adhesion or detachment of fine particles from a surface is of interest in several industrial appli-
cations such as detergency, particle filtration and oil production. Recently, adhesion on semi-
conductor surfaces and in biological systems such as cells or viruses has been center of many
researches. However, efficient particle detachment is extremely difficult because of the strong ad-
hesion forces and the nature of the particulate. Particle removal methods are generally classified
into three categories, wet chemical methods, mechanical techniques and dry processes. Unfortu-
nately, all these methods do not work effectively when the particles have a size of nanometers.
Therefore, the advantages of the first two techniques were combined to improve the removal
by applying an external force “Hydrodynamic force” and by employing a solution of “Nonionic
surfactant” to modify the interactions between the solids “particle-substrate”.
The aim of this research was to study the effects of nonionic surfactants on the interactions
between nanoparticles and glass surfaces. To reach this objective, nanoparticles of different
materials were synthesized in w/o microemulsions. This procedure has been employed in several
experiments to obtain fine particles with a good control of their sizes in nanometer ranges. A
method to coat glass surfaces with the particles was developed. The method is based on coating
the surfaces with the nanoparticles inside the micelles. Afterwards, the micellar structure is
destroyed by heat treatment. The developed method allowed to obtain coated samples with
homogenous monolayer of nanoparticles. The use of the reverse micelles for this purpose resulted
a suitable medium for controlled deposition.
In order to test the detachment of the fine particles from the surfaces a device was designed,
which was based on the application of a hydrodynamic force. The motion of a fluid inside a
cylinder causes this force. The variation in the velocity of the fluid and changes in the properties
of the surfactant solutions acts to debilitate the adhesion force between the particles and the
substrate. Finally, measurement of U.V. absorption and calculating of the attenuation coefficient
allowed the quantification of the particle detachment.
The results were discussed in terms of the physicochemical interactions that keep the parti-
cles attached on the surfaces (DLVO-Theory), the hydrodynamic force acting on the attached
particles at the glass surfaces and the influence of the surfactant on the interactions particle-
glass.
Zusammenfassung
Die Haftung feiner Partikel an Oberflachen und deren Abtrennung ist fur einige Anwendun-
gen in der Industrie von wesentlicher Bedeutung. Beispiele hierfur sind Reinigungsprozesse,
die Partikelfiltrationen und die Erdolgewinnung. Seit kurzem ist Adhasion auf Halbleiter-
oberflachen und in den biologischen Systemen wie Zellen oder Viren Mittelpunkt von vielen
Forschungsprojekten gewesen. Die dabei verwendeten Methoden zur Partikelentfernung lassen
sich in drei Gruppen einteilen: nasse chemische Methoden, mechanische Techniken und trockene
Prozesse. Bei den Untersuchungen stellte sich jedoch heraus, dass diese Methoden bei Nanopar-
tikeln nicht effektiv arbeiten, weil starke Adhasionskrafte auf die Partikel wirken und auch die
Partikelbeschaffenheit der Trennung entgegenwirkt. In dieser Arbeit sollten daher die Vorteile
der ersten beiden Techniken kombiniert werden, indem man einerseits eine hydrodynamische
Kraft auf die Partikel ausubt und anderseits nichtionische Tenside verwendet, um die Partikel
leichter von der Oberflache zu losen.
Ein weiteres Ziel war es, die Effekte der nichtionischen Tenside auf die Wechselwirkungen
zwischen Nanopartikeln und Glasoberflachen zu studieren. Hierzu wurden zunachst Nanopar-
tikel unterschiedlicher Materialien in w/o-Mikroemulsionen synthetisiert. Dieses Verfahren hat
die Herstellung von Nanopartikeln mit geringer Großenstreuung ermoglicht. Zudem wurde eine
Methode zur Beschichtung von Glasoberflachen mit Nanopartikeln entwickelt. Bei dieser Meth-
ode wurden die Nanopartikel in reversen Micellen hergestellt und auf die Oberflachen aufgetra-
gen. Anschließend wurde die mizellare Struktur durch Warmebehandlung zerstort. Es bildete
sich eine monomolekulare Schicht aus Partikeln aus. Bei Versuchen stellte sich heraus, dass das
Verfahren gut zur Abscheidung von Partikeln auf Oberflachen geeignet ist.
Um die Abtrennung der Partikel von den Oberflachen zu untersuchen, wurde außerdem eine
Vorrichtung entwickelt, mit der durch Flussigkeitsbewegung eine hydrodynamische Kraft auf die
Partikel ausgeubt werden kann. Zudem lasst sich die Tensidkonzentration variieren. Das Aus-
maßder Partikelabtrennung wurde mit Hilfe von UV-Absorption und der Berechnung des Extink-
tionskoeffizienten bestimmt. Es stellte sich heraus, dass bei Zunahme von Fließgeschwindigkeit
und Tensidkonzentration eine verstarkte Ablosung der Partikel stattfindet.
Diese Ergebnisse der Untersuchungen wurden diskutiert, indem die theoretischen Grundlagen
fur Wechselwirkungen von Partikeln und Oberflachen (DLVO-Theorie) und der hydrodynamis-
chen Kraft herangezogen wurden. Zudem wurde der Einfluss der Tenside auf die Wechselwirkung
erlautert.
iii
Acknowledgments
I would like to thank to all those who gave me the possibility to complete this thesis.
First of all I would like to express my gratitude to Prof. Dr. R. Schomacker. He has always
been extremely generous with his time and knowledge, and allowed me great freedom in this
research. It was a great pleasure for me to conduct this thesis under his supervision. I also
acknowledge Prof. Dr. G. Findenegg, who as my second supervisor provided helpful discussions
on the preliminary version of this thesis, as well as for the “Gutachtent” to extend my scolarship
each year. I wish to express my sincere thanks to Prof. Dr. M. Lerch for helping me with
the discussions concerning perovskites, and for accepting to be the “Vortsitzender” during the
examination.
I would like to give thanks to the staff of technicians at the Technical Institut of Chemistry
in TU Berlin, specially, Mr. Grimm and Mr. Knuth, without whose help this work would not
have been possible.
I am in debt to Ing. Ulrich Gernert from ZELMI (Zentraleinrichtung Elektronenmikroskopie).
Thank you kindly for your time and help with the SEM.
Specials thanks to Dr. Gerald Bode and Dr. Herry Purnama, for the great time in our
common office.
I am grateful to all of my colleagues who have collaborated with me at the TC 8. Some
of them became in valuable and close friends during this thesis Ing. Negi Devender, Dr. Ada
Chirinos, Dr. Lourdes Rodriguez and -Ing. Farhad Hafezi I appreciate for your support at all
time-.
Not only is the academic support important to conclude a thesis but also the emotional
support specially when you are so far from home. I am deeply grateful to my Venezuelan team
Ing. Camilo Cardenas, MSc. Marx Caballero, Ing. Irisay Carmona and Ing. Alejandro Arrieta
and to my german team Kirten Frank, Nicolais Wefter and George Mayer for making me feel at
home.
There are no words to thank my family for their love and support despite their the distance
from me. Thank you for your prayers that always accompany me.
I would like to thanks Ing. Vicente Mujica for being my mate of dreams, hopefulness and
striving. Thanks also for your help and unconditional support.
Finally but certainly not least important, I am infinitely grateful to my God for being my
fortitude and refuge.
Contents
1 Motivation 1
2 Surfactants 3
2.1 Physical State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.2 Critical Micelle Concentration (CMC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.2.1 The Hydrophobic Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.2.2 The Hydrophilic Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.2.3 Temperature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.2.4 Salts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.3 Solubility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.4 Microemulsions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.4.1 Discrete Microemulsions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.4.2 Bicontinuous Microemulsions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.5 Adsorption from Solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.5.1 Adsorption at the Liquid-Solid Interface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.5.2 Langmuir Adsorption Isotherm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.5.3 Frumkin Adsorption Isotherm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.6 State of Adsorbed Surfactant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.7 Hydrophile Lipophile Balance (HLB) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
3 Nanoparticles Synthesis 17
3.1 Overview of the Principal Nanoparticle Synthesis Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
3.2 Synthesis of Nanoparticles in Reverse Micelles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.3 Model of Precipitation in Homogeneous Phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
3.3.1 Nucleation Stage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
iv
CONTENTS v
3.3.2 Growth Stage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
3.4 Reverse Micelles Synthesis Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
3.4.1 Precipitation Model of Towey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
3.4.2 Precipitation Model of Hirai . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
4 DLVO-Theory 29
4.1 London-van der Waals Forces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
4.2 Structural Force . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
4.3 Born Force . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
4.4 Electrostatic Forces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
5 Detachment Mechanism 38
5.1 Removal Mechanisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
6 Experimental Part 44
6.1 Chemical Materials Employed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
6.2 The Reactor for the Synthesis of Nanoparticles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
6.3 Synthesis of Perovskite Nanoparticles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
6.4 Synthesis of Palladium Nanoparticles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
6.5 Synthesis of YIG Nanoparticles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
6.6 Synthesis of Zirconia Nanoparticles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
6.7 Characterization Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
6.7.1 BET Adsorption Characterization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
6.7.2 SEM Characterization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
6.7.3 X-Ray Diffraction Characterization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
6.8 Surface Cleaning Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
6.9 Coating of the Surface with the Nanoparticles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
6.10 Design of the Detachment Device . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
6.11 Test Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
7 Results and Discussion 62
7.1 Characterization of the Samples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
7.1.1 Perovskite Nanoparticles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
7.1.2 Palladium Nanoparticles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
CONTENTS vi
7.1.3 Zirconia Nanoparticles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
7.1.4 Yttrium Iron Garnet Nanoparticles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
7.2 Coating of the Surfaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
7.3 Effect of the Time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
7.4 Effect of the Surfactant Concentration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
7.5 Effect of the Ethoxylation Degree . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
7.6 Effect of the Temperature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
7.7 Effect of the Hydrophobic Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
7.8 Effect of the Particle Size . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
7.9 Effect of Different Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
7.10 Effect of the Hydrodynamic Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
7.11 Detachment Mechanism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
8 Conclusions 89
List of Figures
2.1 Schematic Representation of a Binary Phase Diagram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.2 Schematic Representation of a Ternary Phase Diagram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.3 Schematic Representation of a Ternary Phase Diagram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.4 Schematic Representation of Surfactant Adsorption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
3.1 Schematic Representation of a Microemulsion Reaction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.2 Free Energy of the Nucleation Stages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
3.3 Formation of the Nanoparticles in Reverse Microemulsions . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
3.4 Formation of a Particle in a Homogeneous System and Microemulsion . . . . . . 28
4.1 Impact of the Particle Size in the London-van der Waals Forces. . . . . . . . . . 30
4.2 Model Gouy-Chapman-Stern. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
4.3 Comparison of the van der Waals and Electrostatic Forces . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
4.4 Total Potential Energy Curve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
5.1 Hydrodynamic Flow Acting on a Attached Particle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
5.2 Scheme of Forces Acting on a Particle (A) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
5.3 Scheme of Forces acting in a Particle (B) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
5.4 Graphic of the Shear Stress vs. Particle Radius . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
6.1 Scheme of the Reactor to Achieve the Synthesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
6.2 Scheme of the SEM Instrument . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
6.3 Schematic Representation of the Reflection in a lattice plane. . . . . . . . . . . . 54
6.4 Diagram of the Cleaning Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
6.5 Diagram of the Coating Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
6.6 Schematic Diagram of the Adhesion Device . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
vii
LIST OF FIGURES viii
6.7 Profiles of Laminar and Turbulent Flows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
6.8 Schematic Representation of the Test Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
7.1 Binary Phase Diagram of the Microemulsion Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
7.2 SEM of the Perovskite Particles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
7.3 XRD of the Perovskite Particles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
7.4 XRD of the Palladium Particles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
7.5 SEM of the Palladium Particles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
7.6 XRD of the Zirconia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
7.7 SEM of the Zirconia Nanoparticles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
7.8 XRD of the Yttrium Iron Garnet Nanoparticles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
7.9 SEM of the Yttrium Iron Garnet Nanoparticles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
7.10 SEM of Pd Nanoparticles Attached to a Glass Surface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
7.11 XRD of Pd Nanoparticles Attached to a Glass Surface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
7.12 Scheme of the Coating Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
7.13 Effect of the Time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
7.14 Effect of the Surfactant Concentration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
7.15 Effect of the Ethoxylation Degree (0.024 mol/l) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
7.16 Effect of the Ethoxylation Degree (0.036 mol/l) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
7.17 Effect of the Temperature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
7.18 Effect of the Hydrophobic Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
7.19 Effect of the Particle Size (Dependence of the Volumetric Flow) . . . . . . . . . . 81
7.20 The Behavior between Flow Rate and Particle Size . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
7.21 Effect of the Particle Size (Dependence of the Hydrodynamical Force) . . . . . . 83
7.22 The Behavior between Hydrodynamical Force and Particle Size . . . . . . . . . . 83
7.23 Effect of Different Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
7.24 Lifshitz-van der Waals Constant (A′) for different Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
7.25 Shear stress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
7.26 The Total Removal Mechanism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
List of Tables
2.1 Hydrophile Lipophile Balance Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
6.1 List of the employed Surfactants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
6.2 List of Physicochemical Properties of distilled Water at 20 oC . . . . . . . . . . . 44
6.3 List of the Chemical Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
6.4 Physico-chemical Properties of the employed Surfactants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
6.5 Composition of the Microemulsions for the Perovskite . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
6.6 Composition of the Microemulsions for the Palladium Nanoparticles . . . . . . . 48
6.7 Composition of the microemulsion for the Yttrium Iron Garnet . . . . . . . . . . 50
6.8 Composition of the microemulsion for the Zirconia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
7.1 Lattice Parameters of the Perovskite . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
7.2 Specific Surface Area SBET for Perovskite Particles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
7.3 Lattice Parameters of the Palladium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
7.4 Palladium Average Diameter and Specific Surface Area SBET . . . . . . . . . . . 67
7.5 Lattice Parameters of the Zirconia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
7.6 Zirconia Average Diameter and Specific Surface Area SBET . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
7.7 Lattice Parameters of the Yttrium Iron Garnet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
7.8 Yttrium Iron Garnet Average Diameter and N2 Adsorption Values. . . . . . . . . 69
7.9 Average Diameter of the Particles from different Materials on Glass surface. . . . 72
ix
Chapter 1
MotivationAdhesion or detachment of fine particles from a surface is of interest in several industrial appli-
cations such as detergency [1], particle filtration [2] and oil production [3]. Recently, adhesions
on semiconductor surfaces [4] and in biological systems such as cells or viruses have been the
center of many researches [5].
There are two aspects that must be addressed in order to understand the behavior of two
solids across a fluid medium. First, the physicochemical interactions that keep the particle
attached on the surface, in other words, the nature and strength of the adhesive bond between
the particles and the surface. The major effects acting on the physicochemical interactions
are the attractive forces, which come from the dispersion of London-van der Waals and the
repulsive part or electrostatic interactions. These forces are usually comprised of electrostatic
double layer interactions, solvation and Born forces. The physicochemical interactions can be
explained in terms of the Derjaguin Landau Verwey Overbeek theory, named by its abbreviation
as DLVO-Theory, and are quite pronounced at distances of ten nanometers between solids.
The other important aspect is the hydrodynamic force acting on the attached particle to a
surface. Goldman et al. (1966) [6, 7], one of the first to study the motion of a sphere parallel
to a plane wall, developed a mathematical solution to predict the behavior between a particle
next to a wall in a laminar flow. Based on the Goldman results, O’Neill (1968) [8] found an
exact solution of the hydrodynamic force acting on a particle in contact with a plane wall
considering a laminar flow. Afterwards, Visser (1970) [9] and Claver et al (1972) [10] analyzed a
mathematical solution taking into account a similar particle-substrate system in a turbulent flow.
The theoretical works of these pioneers led to improvements and developments in investigations
in the areas of detergency, particle filtration and oil production. However, all the studies that
can be found in the literature treat with particles bigger than 0.1 µm (10−7 m), while this study
1
2
is focused in particles with a dimension in nanometers (10−9 m).
In order to compare the experimental and theoretical results, it is necessary to employ
particles with a defined form (spheres) and with a narrow average diameter. The detachment
of fine particles from a surface has several limitations. For example, there is not a variety of
available materials and the costs of such particles are considerably high. In addition, there exists
a lack of efficient techniques to coat the substrates as well as to quantify the detachment of these
particles. Therefore, one of the goals of this work is the implementation of a technique, which
permits to carry out studies of the removal of nanoparticles in a systematic way.
Efficient particle detachment is extremely difficult because of the strong adhesion forces and
the nature of the particulate. Particle removal methods are generally classified into three cate-
gories, wet chemical methods, mechanical techniques and dry processes (See chapter 5). Unfor-
tunately, all these methods do not work effectively when the particles have a size of nanometers.
Therefore, the advantages of the first two techniques were combined to improve the removal
by applying an external force “Hydrodynamic force” and by employing a solution of “Nonionic
surfactant” to modify the interactions between the solids “particle-substrate”.
To conduct this investigation, nanoparticles of different materials such as palladium, zir-
conium oxide, yttrium iron garnet and perovskite of manganese were synthesized in w/o-
microemulsion. Such reverse micelles are a suitable medium for producing nanoparticles with a
narrow average size and defined morphology.
In this work, a methodology was developed to coat cleaned surfaces with the particles.
Additionally, a device was designed to test the detachment of the particles. The instrument
is fed with a solution of nonionic surfactant, which generates the hydrodynamic force needed
to detach the particles from the surface, while the surfactant acts to modify the interactions
between the solids (particle-substrate) to favor the removal. Finally, the quantification of the
particles detachment was followed by U.V.-spectroscopy.
Chapter 2
Surfactants
Amphiphiles are molecules with a characteristic molecular structure, They consist of a lyophobic
group together with a lyophilic group. The first, has a very little attraction for the solvent,
while the last presents strong attraction for it. When the solvent is an aqueous medium the
lyophilic group is named hydrophilic and the lyophobic group is known as hydrophobic. The
term surfactant was adopted to point out those amphiphile substances that have the property
of adsorbing onto the surfaces of a system modifying their interface free energies.
Industrial surfactant applications are extremely varied and their contribution to industrial
processes cannot be left out. Some of the principal applications of surfactants are in the pa-
per industry, commercial laundering, industrial hard surface cleaning, inhibitor of corrosion,
enhanced of oil recovery, asphalt emulsion, coal transport, ore flotation between others [11],[12].
Surfactants can be classified according to their physicals properties or functionalities. The
following is the most common classification and it is based on the nature of the hydrophilic
group.
Anionic The surface-active portion of the molecule exhibits a negative charged, like as alkyl-
benzene sulfonate (RC6H4SO−3 Na
+).
Cationic The surface-active portion bears positive charge, for example a salts of a long-chain
amine, like as quaternary ammonium chloride (RN(CH3)+3 Cl
−).
Zwitterionic Both, positive and negative charges are presented in the surface-active portion,
for example a long-chain amino acid, like as sulfobetaine (RN+(CH3)2CH2CH2SO−3 ).
3
2.1. PHYSICAL STATE 4
Nonionic The surface-active portion bears no apparent ionic charge, like as polyoxyethylenated
alcohols (R(OC2H4)xOH).
Some of the most important physicochemical features of the surfactants are summarized in the
following sections. A mayor emphasis is given in those characteristics of the nonionic surfactants,
that are relevant for this investigation.
2.1 Physical State
The ionic surfactants are generally amorphous or crystalline solids and the nonionic surfactants
are liquid or pastes. Crystalline surfactants can be prepared relatively purely. They can be
polymorphic, if their structures have different unit cell, or polytypic if their structures have
one dimensional polymorphism. Amorphous solids are surfactants that have one or more chiral
centres and exist in multiple optical isomers. Liquid crystalline surfactants exhibit properties
common to crystalline and to liquid physical state. Liquid Surfactants are fundamentally amor-
phous with no long range order and are typically isotropics.
2.2 Critical Micelle Concentration (CMC)
Micelle formation or micellization is an important parameter due to a number of important
interfacial phenomena, such as detergency and solubilization, depend on the existence of micelles
in solution. Furthemore, micelles have become a subject of great interest to the organic chemistry
and the biochemistry because of their unusual catalysis of organic reactions and their similarity
to biological membranes and globular proteins [12].
The concentration of surfactant at which micellization beginns is called the critical micelle
concentration (CMC). This parameter can be determined by many different techniques. The
most popular techniques include surface tension, turbidity, self diffusion, conductivity, osmotic
pressure and solubilization. All of these methods involve plotting a measure as a function of the
logarithm of surfactant concentration. The breakpoint in the plot represents the CMC.
Several investigators have developed empirical relationships between the CMC and the struc-
tural features of surfactants. Becher [13] calculated the coefficients for the linear relationship
between the logarithm of the CMC, the number of ethylene oxide (EO) and the number of
2.2. CRITICAL MICELLE CONCENTRATION (CMC) 5
carbon atoms (C) for homologous series of linear alkyl hexaethoxylates (CnEOm)
log10 CMC = a− b C + d EO (2.1)
with a = (1.646 ± 0.082), b = (0.496 ± 0.08) and d = (0.0437 ± 0.0094).
The CMC is affected by several factors like as hydrophobic group, hydrophilic group, tem-
perature, connection of the group in the structure and addition of salts and organic solvents
[12],[14].
2.2.1 The Hydrophobic Group
In aqueous medium, the CMC decreases linearly with the increase of the carbon number in the
alkyl chain length of polyoxyethylene n-alkylalcohols. When the hydrophobic group is branched,
the carbon atoms on the branches appear to have about one-half the effect of carbon atoms on
a straight chain [12].
2.2.2 The Hydrophilic Group
In aqueous medium, ionic surfactants have much higher CMC than nonionic surfactants con-
taining equivalent hydrophobic groups. For the usual type of polyoxyethylene (in which the
hydrophobic group is a hydrocarbon residue), the CMC in aqueous medium increases with the
increment of the number of oxyethylene units in the polyoxyethylene chain.
Due to the fact that commercial polyoxyethylene (POE) nonionics are mixtures contain-
ing POE chains with different numbers of oxyethylene units, which are clustered about some
mean value, their CMCs are sightly lower than those of the single species containing the same
hydrophobic group and with oxyethylenen content corresponding to that mean value. This
is probably because the component with low oxyethylene content in the commercial material
reduces the CMC more than it is raised by those with high oxyethylene content [15].
2.2.3 Temperature
The effect of temperature on the CMC of surfactants in aqueous medium is complex Rosen [12]
pointed out that the value appearing first to decrease with the temperature to some minimum
and then to increase with further increase in temperature.
2.3. SOLUBILITY 6
The increase of the temperature causes decrease of the hydratation of the hydrophilic group,
which favors the micellization. However temperature increase also causes disruption of the
structured water surrounding of the hydrophobic group, an effect that disfavors micellization.
The relative magnitude of these two opposing effects, therefore, determines whether the CMC
increases or decreases over a particular temperature range.
From the data available in the literature, the minimum in the CMC temperature curve
appears to be around 25 oC for ionic surfactants [16] and around 50 oC for nonionic [15].
2.2.4 Salts
Addition of inert salts to an aqueous solution of surfactant usually decreases the CMC of
ionic surfactants. This effect is less pronounced when the surfactants is nonionic. Salts tent
to screen electrostatic repulsions between headgroups and make the surfactant effectively more
hydrophobic. This increases hydrophobic interactions among the surfactants cause them to
aggregate a lower concentration, thereby the CMC decreases [11].
2.3 Solubility
Nonionic surfactants which are polar covalent compounds are very good soluble in polar sol-
vents like alcohol and ketone, but less soluble in solvents of lower dielectric constant such as
hydrocarbons.
The study of the structure of aggregates of nonionic surfactants in apolar solvents has a
great interest because the application of such aggregated structures in ternary oil recovery [17],
as catalyst for chemical reactions and in the synthesis of fine colloidal particles [18]. In order
to understand the aggregation of nonionic surfactants, it is important to know their physical
properties (e.g. detergency, solubility, micelle formation and solubilization of substance) in
nonaqueous solutions.
A prediction of the solubility of nonionic surfactants in apolar solvents can be very useful to
explain their effectiveness as emulsifier. However information on nonionic surfactants solutions
is scarce, probably because of the difficulty of obtaining homogeneous samples as well as, their
relatively limited solubility in various apolar solvents. Shinoda and Arai [19] examined different
binary system (surfactant-hydrocarbon) and found that the solubility increases as function of
2.4. MICROEMULSIONS 7
decreasing the ethoxyethylene chain length of the surfactant.
An important tool to characterize ionic and nonionic surfactants are the phase diagrams, in
which the formation of micelle and other aggregated are represented. It is possible to plot three
different phases diagrams increasing the complexity of the systems.
Binary phase diagrams is a two dimensional maps of the phase domains as a function of
temperature and surfactant/solvent mole fraction (or weigh fraction). Figure 2.1 shows a
typical binary diagram.
Ternary phase diagrams represents the behavior of a water-oil-surfactants system. It shows
the domains of each aggregated structure. The figure 2.2 is a schematic representation of a
ternary phase diagram at constant temperature corresponding to a typical water/nonionic
surfactant/oil-ternary system.
Ternary phase diagrams vs. temperature is an extention of the ternary phase diagram as
a function of temperature. As it is shown in figure 2.3
2.4 Microemulsions
An important property of micelles is that they can promote solubility of compounds inside a
solvent, where they are normally insoluble, through the formation of microemulsions.
Microemulsions are defined as thermodynamically stable isotropic dispersions of two im-
miscible liquids consisting in microdomains of one of both liquids in the other. These dispersions
are stabilized by an interfacial film of surface-active molecules. The microemulsion presents a
phase that changes with temperature and it is reversible. The composition of the system is
specified by the weight fraction of oil in the mixture of oil and water α, and the weight fraction
of surfactant in the ternary mixture (γ), equations 2.2 and 2.3, respectively.
α =mo
mo +mw(2.2)
γ =ms
mo +mw +ms(2.3)
2.4. MICROEMULSIONS 8
Figure 2.1: Schematic representation of a binary phase diagram. L1, L2 and L3 denote
isotropic liquid solutions, H1 is a normal hexagonal phase and Lα represents a lamellar
liquid crystalline phase.
Figure 2.2: Schematic representation of a ternary phase diagram at constant temperature.
2.4. MICROEMULSIONS 9
Figure 2.3: Schematic representation of a ternary phase diagram. W , O and S represent
the water, oil and surfactant, respectively. 1, 2 and 3 are the number of co-existing phases
in the region and T is the temperature.
where mo, ms and mw represent the weight of oil, surfactant and water, respectively.
Two main general structures for the discrete microemulsion have been accepted as follows.
2.4.1 Discrete Microemulsions
They are poor in either water or oil and presenting a micellar structure. They are classified into
two categories.
Water in oil microemulsion (w/o-microemulsion) Surfactant (S) dissolved in organic sol-
vents form spheroidal aggregates called reverse micelles. They can be formed both in
the presence and in the absence of water. However if the medium is completely free of
water, the aggregates are very small and polydisperse. The presence of water is necessary
to form large surfactant aggregates. Water is readily solubilized in polar cores, forming
reverse micelles, in which the hydrophilic heads of the surfactant are absorbed in the water
microdroplets while the hydrophobic tails are oriented toward the oil.
Oil in water microemulsion (o/w-microemulsion) in which the lipophilic tails of the sur-
factant is absorbed in the oil microdroplets while the lyophobic part is oriented toward
the water.
2.4. MICROEMULSIONS 10
An important parameter to describe the droplet size is the so-called “water pool”, char-
acterized by W0. This parameter is the water-surfactant molar ratio (equation 2.4), which is
considered to be proportional to the radius R of the droplet as was shown by Pileni [20].
W0 =nw
ns(2.4)
Where nw is the water mole and ns is the surfactant mole. The aggregates containing a small
amount of water (below W = 15) are reverse micelles whereas microemulsions correspond to
droplets containing a larger amount of water (above W = 15).
The spontaneous curvature of the surfactant films of reverse micelles corresponds to the ener-
getically favorable packing configuration of the surfactant molecules at the interface. Assuming
that water-in-oil droplets are spherical, the radius of the sphere is expressed as
R =3 V
S(2.5)
where R, V and S are the radius, the volume and the surface of sphere. If the volume and the
surface of the droplets are governed by the volume of the water molecules (Vw) and by the area
of surfactant molecules at the interface (σ). The water pool radius (R = Rw) can be expressed
as
Rw =3 Vw nw
σ ns(2.6)
2.4.2 Bicontinuous Microemulsions
The bicontinuous microemulsions contain similar amounts of oil and water and relatively high
amounts of surfactant and show a sponge-like structure. The figure 2.2 shows the different
domains.
Due to their physicochemical properties, microemulsions have enormous applications in pro-
cesses such as: lubrication, biotechnology (enzymatic reactions in microemulsions), pharmaceu-
2.5. ADSORPTION FROM SOLUTION 11
tics, oil recovery and extraction processes, detergency as well as in the synthesis of nanoparticles
of a desired size [21].
2.5 Adsorption from Solution
Surfactants have the property to aggregate in solution or at interfaces forming micelles in aqueous
solutions and structured films at the liquid-gas interface. This property is known as adsorption
and results in an increase in the surfactant concentration at the solid-liquid or liquid-gas interface
in comparison to the bulk concentration.
Soluble surfactants absorb to interfaces in equilibrium with their bulk. The study of such
adsorption permits to determine the energy changes (∆G), (∆H) and (∆S) in the system.
These properties provide information on the type and mechanism of any interaction between
the surfactant and the interface. The amount of adsorbed surfactant is determined as a function
of solution concentration. It can give information to deduce the mechanism from the adsorption
isotherm. Increment of bulk concentration rises the surface adsorption. The region approaching
the CMC is the zone in which increasing bulk surfactant concentration yields increasing surface
excess concentration.
At the liquid-water interface the surface excess surfactant concentration (Γ) can be calculated
using the Gibbs adsorption equation
(
∂ γ
∂ ln(c)
)
T
= − R T Γ (2.7)
The surface excess surfactant concentration Γ, can be graphically calculated from the variation
of surface tension γ with the logarithmic change in bulk concentration (C).
2.5.1 Adsorption at the Liquid-Solid Interface
The hydrophobic forces, which control surfactants aggregation at air-water interfaces, are essen-
tially the same forces that drive surfactant adsorption onto solid surfaces. However, liquid-solid
interfaces significantly differ in that the solid surface can be the source of additional chemical
forces such as electrostatic force from ionized surface groups, hydrogen bonding force between
surfactant and surface functional groups, and finally, dispersion forces between portions of the
2.5. ADSORPTION FROM SOLUTION 12
surface and hydrophobic portion of the surfactant. In the case of nonionic surfactants, hydrogen
bonding and dispersion forces are less significantly.
The adsorption of surfactants at solid-liquid interfaces is strongly influenced by a number
of factors such as, the surface properties (particle size, porosity and chemical composition), the
molecular structure of the surfactant being adsorbed (it is a mixture or a single component
other it is ionic or nonionic, the hydrophobic group is straight or branched, long or short etc.)
and the environment of the aqueous phase (its pH, electrolyte content, etc.). All theses factors
together determine the mechanism by which adsortion of surfactant onto solid from aqueous
solution occurs, as well as, the efficiency and effectiveness of the surfactant adsortion. Rosen
[12] classified the adsorption mechanisms of ionic and nonionic surfactants as follows
Ion exchange This mechanism involves the replacement of counterions adsorbed onto the sub-
strate from solution by similarly charged surfactant ions.
Ion pairing Adsorption takes place from solution onto oppositely charged sites unoccupied by
counterions.
Hydrogen bonding Adsorption occurs by hydrogen bounding between substrate and adsor-
bate.
Adsorption by polarization of π electrons Adsorption onto solid surfaces is the result of
attractive interaction forces between electron-rich aromatic nuclei of the adsorbate and
positive sites located on the substrate.
Adsorption by van der Waals dispersion forces Adsortion by this mechanism generally
increases with the increment of the molecular weight of the adsorbate. this mechanism
may acts as a supplementary mechanism to all other types of adsorption mechanism.
Adsorption by altering hydrophobic bonding Adsorption occurs when the attractive forces
become large enough to permit them adsorb onto the solid surface by chain aggregation.
The concentration of the surface-active agent at the interface can be described by Langmuir
and Frumkin isotherms.
2.5. ADSORPTION FROM SOLUTION 13
2.5.2 Langmuir Adsorption Isotherm
Surfactant adsorption at the liquid-solid interfaces may be driven by various combinations of the
above forces. In the limit of noninteracting adsorption (i.e, where adsorbed surfactant molecules
do not interact with each other), the adsorption may be modelled by the Langmuir Adsorption
Isotherm as follows.
Γ =b c Γs
b c + 1(2.8)
Where (Γ) is the adsorbed amount (typically µ mol/m2), (Γs) represents the saturation mono-
layer coverage, (c) is the equilibrium surfactant concentration in the solution phase, and the
equilibrium constant (b), which describes the adsorption process as
b = exp
(
−∆Gads
R T
)
(2.9)
The free energy of adsorption is assigned to (∆Gads), (R) is the gas constant, and (T ) is the
temperature. In addition, an alternative representation of the Langmuir Adsorption Isotherm
is given by
c
Γ=
1
b Γs+
c
Γs(2.10)
In this case, a plot of (c/Γ) as function of (c) yields a straight line, in which the slope repre-
sents the saturation coverage. Afterwards, the equilibrium constant can be calculated from the
interception between this line and the X axis (C).
2.5.3 Frumkin Adsorption Isotherm
The Frumkin Adsorption Isotherm considers a generalization of the Langmuir Adsorption ap-
proach. Basically, Frumkin Adsorption theory models the interaction between absorbed species
based on the interaction parameter α using the following equation.
Γ/Γs
1 − Γ/Γs= b c exp
[
2 α
(
Γ
Γs
)]
(2.11)
2.6. STATE OF ADSORBED SURFACTANT 14
It is important to note that the Langmuir Adsorption equation (eqn. 2.8) can be obtained from
the above equation when the interaction parameter ((α = 0)) is zero.
2.6 State of Adsorbed Surfactant
Sharma [22] edited a complete summary about the resolution of the molecular packing of surfac-
tant adsorbed at liquid-solid interfaces. This overview has not been confirmed by experimentally.
However, a variety of working models has been presented which have met with varied responses.
The unequivocal identification of how isolated surfactant molecules adsorb has less theoretical
support, but in this case, only several possibilities need to be postulated to cover the range of
material behavior. The end-on Adsorption Model is commonly utilized to study the isolated
adsorption. Basically, an electrostatic or chemical (bond) force aims the headgroup structure
of the surfactant towards the surface whereas the hydrophobic group adopts an axisymmetric
orientation. According to details of the headgroup structure and the type of specific interaction
with the surface, the adsoption could be end-on (a) or skewed (b) as shown figure 2.4 [11].
Straight chain cationic surfactants typically are shown as binding (fig.2.4 (a)). Figures 2.4 (c)
and (d) illustrate the molecular orientantions when the hydrophobic forces lead the adsorption
as for example the interaction between the surfactant tail portion and the hydrophobic portion
of the surface. In addition, structures such as (e) and (f) are expected when both the headgroup
and the tail interact strongly with the surface.
The situation in the case of polymeric surfactants is even more sophisticated. Many theories
have postulated in order to investigate the means by which the individual molecules surfactants
coalesce to form aggregates on surfaces. Two distinct pictures of hemimicelles are plotted in
figure 2.4 (g) and (h). The structure is a hemimicelles (fig. 2.4 (g)). It is a region of a close-
packed monolayer. A strong electrostatic interaction between the headgroup and the surface
produces the formation of such structures [11]. It would be tempting to belive that there is
hydrophobic bonding among the tail groups as an additional driving for such force adsorption,
were it is not for the fact that such configurations tend to create a high energy interface between
the tail groups and the solvent phase. More than 20 years ago, the alternative hemimicellar
structure shown in fig. 2.4 (h) was generally accepted in reasonable analogy to the model of
2.6. STATE OF ADSORBED SURFACTANT 15
Figure 2.4: Schematic representation of surfactant adsorption at the liquid-solid interface
[11]. (a-f) Isolated surfactants molecules modes of adsorption, (g-j) Two dimensional
cross-sections. (g-h) hemimicelles, (i) admicelle and (j) adsorbed micelle.
spherical micelles. In this case, the surfactant in contact with the solid surface adopts a statically
weighted variety of structures such as those illustrated in figures (a-f) and then a hemispherical
structures is completed to satisfy packing parameter constraints. Such a structure does not
create high-energy surfactant tail solvent interactions.
The admicelle structure is plotted in fig. 2.4 (i). It appears to form a bilayer showing a
topologically indistinguishable form with respect to the hemimicellar structure of figure (h), in
which an “end-cap” structure is imposed and then lateral dimension is similar to the surfactant
length. Finally, adsorbed micelles (fig. 2.4 (j)) may suffer relatively minor perturbations to their
overall molecular packing and can interact with surfaces in specific way through headgroups
without “spreading”.
2.7. HYDROPHILE LIPOPHILE BALANCE (HLB) 16
2.7 Hydrophile Lipophile Balance (HLB)
The hydrophilic lipophilic balance number (HLB) was introduced by Griffin [23], [24]. This
number is an empirical expression for the relationship of the hydrophilic and hydrophobic groups
of a surfactant. The HLB number provides a semiquantitative description of the efficacy of
surfactants with respect to emulsification of water and oil systems. This scale was introduced
to characterize nonionic surfactants using oxyethylene oligomer as hydrophilic group. The HLB
number for nonionic surfactants can be calculated through the following equation
HLB = 20
(
1 − ML
MT
)
(2.12)
where ML is the formula weight of the hydrophobic portion of the molecule and MT is the total
formula weight of the surfactant molecule. The table 2.1 lists HLB values along with typical
performance.
Table 2.1: Hydrophile Lipophile Balance (HLB) and their typical properties
HLB Property
< 10 Oil soluble
> 10 Water Soluble
4-8 Antifoaming agent
7-11 w/o-Emulsifier
12-16 o/w-Emulsifier
11-14 Wetting agent
12-15 Detergent
16-20 Stabilizer
Chapter 3
Nanoparticles Synthesis
Ultrafine particles normally present a physical dimension between 1-100 nm (such a grain size)
and a significant amount of surfaces and interfaces. Thereby, they are frequently called nanopar-
ticles. Such particles have gained a considerable interest due to their remarkable physical prop-
erties with respect to reaction bulk material.
Nanoparticles have important technological applications, such as in catalysis [25], micro-
electronic devices [26], high-performance ceramic materials [27], and more recently they have
been used in cancer treatment [28]. Therefore, the efforts to develop synthetical methods, which
permit to obtain ultrafine particles have been increased.
Section 3.1 contains a survey of the major nanoparticles synthesis methods. Afterwards,
section 3.2 presents a review about microemulsions and particle synthesis in reverse micelles.
Synthesis in w/o-microemulsion is treated with emphasis due to the nanoparticles, which were
employed in this work, were prepared using this method.
In order to understand the particle formation mechanisms, models of precipitation in homo-
geneous phase and in reverse micelles are explained in section 3.3 and section 3.4 respectively.
The mechanism in homogeneous solution is presented because of is the key to understand the
microemulsion precipitation.
17
3.1. OVERVIEW OF THE PRINCIPAL NANOPARTICLE SYNTHESIS METHODS 18
3.1 Overview of the Principal Nanoparticle Synthesis
Methods
Several techniques have been reported in the literature for the synthesis of nanoparticles to
laboratory-scale. Chemical reactions for materials synthesis can be carried out in the solid, liquid
or gaseous state (Gas-Phase Techniques [29, 30, 31, 32],Vacuum synthesis Techniques [33, 34, 35]
and Liquid-Phase Techniques [36, 37]).
The conventional solid-state synthesis is to bring the solid precursor into close contact by
grinding and mixing, and to subsequently heat treatment this mixture at high temperature to
facilitate diffusion of atoms or ions in the chemical reaction. The diffusion of atoms depends
on the temperature of the reaction and grain boundary contacts. The transport across grain
boundaries is also affected by impurities and defects located there, grain growth during high
temperature reactions leads to solids with large grain size [38].
In comparison with the to solid-state synthesis, the faster diffusion of matter in liquid or
gas phase offers several advantages with respect to solid phase. For example, the synthesis of
nanostructured materials can be achieved at lower temperatures preventing the grain growth.
Many materials can be synthesized in aqueous or nonaqueous solutions. There are three
general classes of aqueous reactions: acid/base reaction, precipitation, and reduction/oxidation
(redox). The reactants can be solids, liquids, or gases in any combination, in the form of single
elements or multi-component compounds (usually called precursor). However, due to the fact
that many advanced materials are hybrids and are prepared using multidisciplinary techniques,
clear distinction is not always possible. A brief description of the more common liquid phase
methods are presented as follows.
Aqueous Methods uses water as solvent for polar or ionic compounds. Therefore, many
chemical reactions take place in aqueous media. For example, metal powders for electronic
applications can be prepared by adding liquid reducing agents to aqueous solutions of
respective salts at adjusted pH [39].
Nonaqueous Methods are applying in the same way that aqueous methods. Many reactants
and reducing agents used in aqueous synthesis of nanoscale metal particles can also be
employed in nonaqueous solvent for the same purpose. In this method, precursor com-
pounds are dissolved or suspended in ethylene glycol or diethylene glycol. The mixture
3.1. OVERVIEW OF THE PRINCIPAL NANOPARTICLE SYNTHESIS METHODS 19
is heated to reflux. During the reaction, the precursors are reduced and metal particles
precipitate out of the solution. This synthesis is also known as the polyol process [40, 41]
Sonochemical Methods has also been used in chemical synthesis of nanostructured materials.
High energy sonochemical reactions, without any molecular coupling of the ultrasound
with the chemical species, are driven by the formation, growth and collapse of bubbles in
a liquid. This acoustic cavitation involves a localized hot spot of temperature up to 5000
K, a pressure around 1800 atm. and a subsequent cooling rate about 109K/sec, due to
implosive collapse of a bubble in the liquid. Generally, volatile precursors in low vapor
pressure solvents are used to optimized the yield [42, 43].
Hydrolysis involves the formation of an insoluble hydroxide which can then be converted to
its oxide by heat-assisted dehydration [44].
Hydrothermal uses vapor of water to achieve the reaction. The reaction mixture is heated
above the boiling point of water in an autoclave or other closed system and the sample is
exposed to steam at high pressures [45].
Sol-Gel Methods is not a new method. As early as the mid 1800s, it was reported that
silicon tetrachloride, when left standing in an open container, hydrolyzed and turned into
a gel [46]. After this time, biologists did much of their work with gels and colloid. In the
early 1930s, aerogels were discovered [47]. Since the 1950s, sol-gel techniques have been
used for phase equilibrium studies which opened up the field of ceramics [48]. Traditionally,
Sol-Gel process involves hydrolysis and condensation of metal alkoxide.
Factors that need to be considered in this method are solvent, temperature, precursors,
catalyst, pH, additives and mechanical agitation. They can influence the kinetics of hy-
drolysis and condensation in the reaction as well as the particle growth [49].
Non-Hydrolytic Sol-Gel Methods: the traditional hydrolysis and condensation reactions
are replaced by direct condensation or transesterification reactions. Non-hydrolytic re-
actions do not involve water or polar solvent. In the traditional sol-gel methods, the
condensation reaction can be reversible and special efforts are required to completely
remove water or polar solvents [50, 51].
Host-Derived Hybrid Materials: porous or layered ceramics can be used as host materials
in which nanoparticles are synthesized. The resulting hybrids may have novel properties
3.2. SYNTHESIS OF NANOPARTICLES IN REVERSE MICELLES 20
Figure 3.1: Schematic representation of a microemulsion reaction
due to the microstructure of the host. Minerals such as silicate or aluminosilicate (Zeolite)
can be used in this way [52].
3.2 Synthesis of Nanoparticles in Reverse Micelles
The microemulsion technique is based on the use of micelles as microreactors, in which chemical
reactions can be carried out , in particulate for synthesis of nanomaterials.
The method consists of mixing two microemulsion systems with the same amount of aqueous
solution, oil and surfactant but with different aqueous solution composition. For example,
figure 3.1 shows a microemulsion called “A” with a salt dissolved in the aqueous solution and a
microemulsion named “B” with the appropriate reducing agent to achieve the reaction.
w/o-Microemulsion synthesis presents some advantages over the processes mentioned in the
section 3.1, such as:
Nanoparticles control by adjusting of the microemulsion parameters like than “Wo” can be
controlled the narrow size distribution and shape.
Variability of the chemical procedure by changing of the type of reaction. It is possible
to achieve reactions via oxidation, reduction, sol-gel, etc.
Variability of the processing by changing synthesis conditions. For example, surfactants
system, temperature, concentration, addition rate, etc. This allows a control over the
reaction.
3.3. MODEL OF PRECIPITATION IN HOMOGENEOUS PHASE 21
3.3 Model of Precipitation in Homogeneous Phase
Generation of a solid-phase can be achieved by crystallization and precipitation.
Crystallization the solid is formed from a supersaturated solution, which can be controlled
by adjusting the solubility of a unreactive solute (for example temperature, evaporation
and presion) or by adding another component.
Precipitation the insoluble species are obtained by a chemical rection. In this process ag-
glomeration becomes an important growth mechanism, due to the high number density of
nuclei produced, leading to either polycrystalline or amorphous particles [53].
In general both of these methods involve the stages of nucleation and growth. After these
stages, other secondary process as agglomeration takes place. A model to explain the formation
of particles in solutions was proposed by La Mer and Dinegar [54, 55]. This model is presented
briefly in this section, because it is considered the key to understanding the process inside the
micelles.
3.3.1 Nucleation Stage
When a substance is transformed from one phase to another, the change in the molar Gibbs free
energy of the transformation (∆G), at a constant pressure and temperature, can be expressed
in terms of chemical potentials of phase 1 (µ1) and phase 2 (µ2), or in terms of saturation (S)
as shows equation 3.1.
∆G = −R T ln
(
C
Ceq
)
= −R T ln S (3.1)
The above equation assumes activity coefficients of one. R is the universal gas constant, T is the
absolute temperature, C represent the solute concentration, Ceq is the equilibrium concentration
and S denotes the supersaturation of the solute at the temperature and pressure of the system.
These thermodynamic considerations describe a driving force for crystallization, however, in
most cases nucleation and growth are controlled by kinetic.
The rate of nucleation (J) plays an important role in controlling the final particle size
distribution. Dikersen [53] broke down the nucleation process into the following three categories
Primary Homogeneous Nucleation: it occurs in absence of a solid interfaces. If it is as-
sumed that for supersaturated solutions, the solute molecules are combined by molecular
3.3. MODEL OF PRECIPITATION IN HOMOGENEOUS PHASE 22
addition to produce embryos [54] (according to the equation 3.2)
mA1 Bx
Bx +A1 Bx+1
...
B(i−1) +A1 Bi (3.2)
Then the free energy of the embryo is the sum of two terms: the free energy due to the
formation of a new volume and the free energy due to the new created surface (equation
3.3).
∆G = −(
βv r3
ϑ
)
kB T ln S + γ βa r2 (3.3)
where (βv r3) is the volume and (βa r2) is the surface area of the aggregate, ϑ is the
molecular volume of the precipitated embryos, kB is Boltzmann constant and γ is the
surface free energy per unit area.
Considering the definition of the radius of a sphere and placing within equation 3.3, the
total energy of a particle size with radius r is given by
∆G = −(
(4/3) π r3
ϑ
)
kB T ln S + 4 π r2 γ (3.4)
If S ≤ 1, ∆G is positive and the formation of a new phase is not spontaneous. If S ≥ 1,
∆G has a positive maximum at a critical nuclei size r∗ as shown in the figure 3.2, this
maximum corresponds to the activation energy for nucleation. When embryos are large
than r∗, their free energy decreases and they become “stable nuclei”, which grow to form
macroscopic particles.
In physical chemistry, the term nucleus is applied to the minimum-size embryo, which is
capable of initiating spontaneous growth to produce a new phase.
In self nucleation process the critical nuclei size can be obtained by setting (d∆Gr/dr = 0)
in equation 3.3
r∗ =2 βa γ ϑ
3 βv kB T ln S(3.5)
3.3. MODEL OF PRECIPITATION IN HOMOGENEOUS PHASE 23
Figure 3.2: Free energy of the nucleation stages. ∆G vs. particle radius, r∗ represents
the critical nuclei size.
This critical size corresponds to the maximum of the free energy, (∆Gmax), or the activa-
tion energy as
∆Gmax =γ βa (r∗)2
3(3.6)
Dikersen and Ring [53] found an approximation to estimate the nucleation rate (J), in
terms of the diffusion coefficient of the solute (D), the molecular diameter (d), and the
activation energy ∆Gmax as follows.
J =
(
2 D
d5
)
exp (−∆Gmax/kB T ) (3.7)
Primary Heterogeneous occurs in the presence of a solid interface of a foreign seed.
Secondary Nucleation occurs in presence of a solute-particle interface.
3.3.2 Growth Stage
In order to grow a crystal in a solution, the solute must be transported through the solution up to
the crystal surface, and arranged in conformity with the crystal structure. If it is the transport
3.3. MODEL OF PRECIPITATION IN HOMOGENEOUS PHASE 24
through the solution that controls the growth velocity, both diffusion and convection may be
important. When the crystals are smaller than about 10 µm, convection can be neglected,
because the velocity of the crystal through the solution in the normal gravity field or at normal
stirring rates is very low [56].
Kinetic is discussed in terms of purely diffusion controlled growth. The mathematical for-
mulation of the diffusion problem has been treated by Reiss [57]. Chiang and Donohue [58]
compared the theory of crystal growth with experimental findings. They employed several sur-
face reaction models to explain experimentally observed growth rates by the following equation
Jgrowth = kgrowth Sp (3.8)
Where S is the saturation ratio and p is the growth rate order. Many experiments involving
spontaneous crystallization have been conducted to measure the order of the growth rate. Mc
Cabe [59], among the first to measure the crystal growth rate for copper sulfate, found p = 1. It
suggests that the diffusion was the controlling step. On the other hand, Davies and Jones [60]
found p = 2 for the growth of silver chloride.
Other experiments indicated that the over-all growth rate order is within a range between
1 and 2. The final size, to which the particles will grow and the rate at which they will grow,
depends upon three variables. The first is the number of nuclei which grow. This number is
assumed constant through the growth and equal to the number of particles present at any time.
The second variable is the total amount of diffusible solute (normally there is no other sources
of solute). This value is given by the difference between the amount of solute originally in
the mixture and the solubility of the solute in the medium. The third variable is the diffusion
coefficient (D) of solute in the medium.
In 1917 Smoluchowski [61] deduced the following theoretical equation for the diffusion coef-
ficient in a bimolecular reaction (B + C → P ) with B 6= C, kgrowth is given by
kgrowth = 4 π NA(rB + rC)(DB +DC) (3.9)
Where NA is the Number of Avogadro, rB and rC are the radius of B and C, which are considered
spheres by simplifying the equation, DB and DC are the diffusion coefficients.
The last expression can be simplified by incorporating the Stokes-Einstein relation between
the diffusion coefficient (D), and the viscosity (η) of the medium.
3.4. REVERSE MICELLES SYNTHESIS MODEL 25
DB =k T
6 π η rB; DC =
k T
6 π η rC(3.10)
By substitution of 3.10 in equation 3.9
kgrowth =
(
2 R T
3 η
)
(rB + rC)2
rB rC=
2 R T
3 η
(
2 +rBrC
+rCrB
)
(3.11)
If rB ' rC equation 3.11 is approximated as
kgrowth =8 R T
3η(3.12)
The process of particle formation can be shown schematically as in figure 3.4, which represents
the variation of the solute concentration with the time. The concentration of reactant C increases
until a critical concentration or critical supersaturation, [C]c. After this concentration the
embryos are formed and the system becomes heterogeneous by a process of self-nucleation. The
nuclei grow giving place to a descent of the critical concentration.
3.4 Reverse Micelles Synthesis Model
Several models have been proposed to explain the formation process of ultrafine particles in
reverse micelles [62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67]. On the one hand, there are some authors as Tanori and
Pileni [68], who suggest that micelles act as “nanoreactors”, inside which the reaction take place.
They found experimentally that the particles size and form can be controlled using colloidal
assemblies as template. However this mechanism seems to be contradicted by experiments that
yielded particles large than the droplets. On the other hand, authors like Towey [64] and Hirai
[65] proposed models based on different stages of the precipitation reaction to explain the particle
formation.
3.4.1 Precipitation Model of Towey
Towey [64] studied the kinetics and mechanism of formation of cadmium sulphide particles in
w/o-microemulsions using the stopped-flow method. The author was the first in proposing a
model to explain the particles formation in reverse micelles taking into account different stages.
3.4. REVERSE MICELLES SYNTHESIS MODEL 26
Droplet exchange stage occurs inside of the water cores of two microemulsions. The reac-
tants are solubilized separately and are distributed among the droplets according to a
Poisson distribution. All the reactants are inside the cores, so the reaction can only occur
on exchange between the droplets.
Figure 3.3: Schematic representation of the mechanism for formation of nanoparticles in
w/o-microemulsion proposed by Towey [64].
Reaction stage occurs on a faster time scale than droplet exchange. Therefore, Towey [64]
considered that the communication between the droplets becomes in the limiting step of
the reaction.
Nucleation stage must occur at much smaller size than in homogeneous solution, because the
prepared particles in microemulsions have a size 1− 2 nm while in homogeneous solution
the nucleation occurs in the size range 1 − 10 nm [64]. This can be explained by the
low Ksp of the product. So it is expected that the critical supersaturation inside the
microemulsion is far exceeded than in homogeneous solution.
Growth stage may occurs by a Smoluchowski rapid-coagulation mechanism. Towey [64] as-
3.4. REVERSE MICELLES SYNTHESIS MODEL 27
sumed a bimolecular reaction between unchanged spheres which make contact as a result
of Brownian motion. So the nuclei grow by aggregation of monomers units to form dimers.
3.4.2 Precipitation Model of Hirai
Hirai [65] proposed an quantitative model to explain the particle formation of titanium dioxide
by hydrolysis of tetrabutoxide in AOT. In this model the reaction rate is considered to be the
limiting step of the reaction.
Droplet exchange stage occurs inside the water cores via coalition and redispersion pro-
cesses. The exchange rate is constant and reported as 106−108 M−1s−1 for the AOT/isooctane
system [69].
Reaction stage is slower than the exchange of reactants. The reactants are distributed among
the micelles according to a Poisson distribution. Thus, the reaction rate is independent
of the exchange rate of the micelles.
Nucleation stage is considered to be proportional to the number of micelles containing a
sufficient number of hydrolyzed molecules for the nucleation.
Growth stage can occur in micelles containing a nucleus or a particle, in addition to hy-
drolyzed molecules.
In order to control the particle growth and size distribution, Schmidt [67], suggested that the
micellar structure, the synthesis conditions and the kinetics of the elementary steps are important
and proposed a three-steps model (reaction, nucleation and growth) based on a combination of
Hirai and Towey [64],[65].
Reaction stage is the step determining of the reaction and occurs in a slower time scale than
the droplet exchange (like than the model of Hirai [65]). The distribution of the reactant
inside the micelles follows a Poisson distribution and the reaction rate is considered to be
independent of the exchange rate of the micelles.
Nucleation stage is described similar to the Hirai model.
Growth stage is reported to be analog to the growth by the model of Towey. This means that
nuclei growth by bimolecular reaction.
3.4. REVERSE MICELLES SYNTHESIS MODEL 28
Figure 3.3 shows the possible kinetic scheme for the formation of the nanoparticles in reverse
microemulsion. It is based on the model of Towey [64] and figure 3.4 is a plot of the monomer
concentration versus time to compare the formation of a particle in a homogeneous system
and in a microemulsion, which is based on the model proposed by Schmidt [67]. This model
considers that the diffusion occurs at a slower rate than in homogeneous aqueous system, due to
the micellar structure. In this fashion, the period of nucleation is longer and the critical value
of concentration is exceeded more than in a homogeneous system. This yields a higher number
of particles with smaller diameter in comparison with aqueous solution.
Time
[C]
[C] c
Homogeneous system
Microemulsion
Nucleation
Particle growth
Critical saturation
Super saturation
Figure 3.4: Formation scheme of a particle in a homogeneous system and microemulsion.
Course of concentration of the formed monomer C vs. time in a microemulsion compared
to a homogeneous system.
Chapter 4
DLVO-Theory
Adhesion or detachment of fine particles from a surface is of interest in several industrial appli-
cations, such as detergency [1], particle filtration [2], oil production [3]. During the last years
adhesion on semiconductor surfaces [4] and in biological systems such as cells or viruses have
been center of a lot of research [5].
There are two aspects that must be addressed in order to understand the behavior of two
solids across a fluid medium. First, the physicochemical interactions that keep the particle at-
tached to the surface. In other words, the nature and strength of the adhesive forces between the
particles and the surface. Second, the hydrodynamic interactions due to the flowing fluid, which
tend to break the adhesive bond between the surfaces and detach the particle. The major effects
acting on the physicochemical interactions are the attractive forces, like than London-van der
Waals and dispersion forces or electrostatic interactions that is usually composed of electrostatic
double layer interactions, solvation or structural forces and Born forces. These interactions can
be explained in terms of the Derjaguin Landau Verwey Overbeek theory named by its abbrevi-
ation as DLVO-Theory and are quite pronounced at distances around ten manometers between
solids. These issues will be treated in this chapter and the hydrodynamic interaction in chapter
5.
Derjaguin and Landau, as well as Verwey and Overbeek developed independently a theory
(DLVO-Theory) to explain the stability of colloid. They calculated the total potential energy
based on the sum of the potential energy due to electrical double layer repulsion (DLR) and
London van der Waals attraction (LW).
29
4.1. LONDON-VAN DER WAALS FORCES 30
4.1 London-van der Waals Forces
The interaction energy per unit area of van der Waals forces for a flat-flat system is calculated
by the followed equation 4.1 [70].
VLW =−A12
12 π h2(4.1)
Where A12 is the Hamaker constant, and h is the distance of separation between surfaces. Under
some conditions A may be related to the Lifshitz-van der Waals constant A′ = (4/3) π A. In
the case of a spherical particle-flat surface system, h is a function of the radius, as was shown
by Das [71].
Sometimes the force per unit area is tremendous, and particles or surfaces can be deformed
by such forces. The additional van der Waals force due to deformation FLWdeform is a function
of the increased contact area caused by the deformation and is given by
FLWdeform =A δ2
8 π h3(4.2)
Where δ is the radius of the adhesion surfaces area.
Figure 4.1: Impact of the particle size in the London-van der Waals forces. Comparison
between FLW and FLWdeform versus particle diameter [70].
Figure 4.1 shows a comparison between FLW and FLWdeform versus particle diameter and
surface materials, which have a Lifshiftz-van der Waals constants of 8 eV and 4 eV, respectively.
4.2. STRUCTURAL FORCE 31
This constant (A’) have ranges of 0.6 eV for polymers to about 9 eV for metals such silver and
gold and is proportional to the van der Waals forces [70]. It clearly shows that deformations
around 1-5% can add tremendously to the total force of adhesion. A first look at this plot could
be incorrectly interpreted in the way that the forces of adhesion simply decrease with decreasing
particle diameter. In fact the force per unit area increases with decreasing particle size, and the
force of adhesion also increases relative to the gravitational forces acting on the particle.
4.2 Structural Force
The origin of structural forces lies in the interaction between surfaces and the fluid molecules.
This interaction may take the form of orientation of dipoles or rearrangement of the molecular
packing. Due to these effects there exists a solvation zone up to a few molecular diameters
away from the solids surfaces where the fluid density oscillates around the bulk value. As the
separation between two solids surfaces becomes less than 1 nm, their solvation zones overlap
and as a result, the mean density of the intervening medium is not longer equal to the bulk
density and depend on the molecular characteristics of the confined fluid [72].
4.3 Born Force
When the distance of separation between the solid surfaces becomes extremely small the electron
of their surface atoms tend to overlap giving rise to very repulsive forces for separation distances
of the order of the hard sphere diameter of the atoms. This repulsive force named Born repulsion
(FBorn), is derived from the 12 part of the Lennard-Jones potential and is given by
FBorn =A σ6
45 h9(4.3)
Where σ is called the collision diameter.
4.4 Electrostatic Forces
Two types of electrostatic forces may act to hold particles at surfaces. The first is due to
bulk excess charge presents at the surface and/or particles which produces a classical coulombic
4.4. ELECTROSTATIC FORCES 32
attraction known as an electrostatic image force Fi.
Fi =q2
4 π ε0 κ l2(4.4)
Where κ represents the dielectric constant of the medium between the particle and surface, ε0
is the permittivity of free space, q denotes the charge and l is the distance between charged
centres [70].
The other electrostatic force is known as electrostatic double layer force FDLR and it can be
calculated (in dyne) as
FDLR =π ε0 r ψ
2
h(4.5)
Where ψ represent the electrostatic potential. Most solid materials acquire a charge due to
preferential absorption of ions or dissociation of surface groups when immersed in a liquid
medium. These surface charges are balanced by a diffuse layer of oppositely charged counterions
present in the liquid giving rice to an electrical double layer. The repulsive force between these
two charged surfaces arises due to the mutual repulsion between counterions.
The importance of the electrostatic double layer has led to numerous studies, and many
models were proposed in the past to explain it. The earliest model of the electrical double layer
is usually attributed to Helmholtz (1879). Helmholtz treated the double layer mathematically
as a simple capacitor based on a physical model, in which a single layer of ions is adsorbed at
the surface.
Later (1910-1913) Gouy and Chapman made significant improvements by introducing a
diffuse model of the electrical double layer, in which the potential at a surface decreases expo-
nentially due to adsorbed counterions from the solution.
The charge at the surface influences the ion distribution in nearby layers of electrolyte.
The electrostatic potential (ψ) and the volume charge density (ρ) are related by the Poisson
equation 4.6, in which ρ represents the excess of charge of one type over the other.
d2ψ
dx2= − ρ
ε0 κ(4.6)
The ion distribution in the charged surface region is determined by temperature and the required
4.4. ELECTROSTATIC FORCES 33
energy (Wi) to bring the ion from an infinite distance away (where ψ = 0) to the region, where
the electrostatic potential is ψ. This distribution is given by a Boltzmann equation as follows.
ni = n0i exp
( −Wi
kB T
)
(4.7)
Where n0i is the number of ions of type i per unit volume of bulk solution, Wi = Zieψ and Zi
is the valency of ion species i.
The volume charge density at electrostatic potential (ψ) is expressed as
ρ =∑
i
ni Zi e =∑
i
n0i Zi e exp
(−Zi e ψ
kB T
)
(4.8)
Thus the combination of equation 4.8 and 4.6 gives the Poisson-Boltzmann equation
d2ψ
dx2= − 1
ε0 κ
∑
i
n0i Zi e exp
(−Zi e ψ
kB T
)
(4.9)
When kB � |(Zieψ)|, the exponential can be expanded and only the two first terms are retained.
This is called the Debye-Huckel approximation
exp(x) = 1 + x+x2
2!+x3
3!+x4
4!+ .... (4.10)
henced2ψ
dx2= − 1
ε0 κ
[
∑
i
Zi e n0i −
∑
i
Z2i e
2 n0i ψ
kB T
]
(4.11)
applying the preservation of electroneutrality∑
i Zi e n0i = 0 the equation 4.11 can be written
asd2ψ
dx2=
∑
(
Z2i e
2 n0i
ε0 κ kB T
)
ψ (4.12)
d2ψ
dx2=
ψ
λ2(4.13)
ψ = ψ0 exp(−h/λ) (4.14)
4.4. ELECTROSTATIC FORCES 34
Where ψ0 is the potential at the surface and λ is the Debye length or (1/λ) the Debye-Huckel
parameter (d), which are related to the double layer thickness, F is the Faraday’s constant and
Ci represents the concentration of ions.
λ2 =ε0 R T
F 2∑
Ci Z2i
(4.15)
The Gouy-Chapman model has several limitations. For example, it supposes a low potential
and a low ionic concentration. This leads to extremely low λ − values (less than the atomic
diameter). On the other hand, an ion of the diffuse layer can not approach to the surface
at a distance smaller than its ratio (as solvated ion). Under this condition the Boltzmann
distribution can not be used. Finally, this model supposes that the dielectric constant of the
bulk is the dielectric constant of the solvent, but in fact, this parameter varies with the electrolyte
concentration.
Stern modified the model by suggesting the existence of an adsorbed ions layer of thickness
X1. The mathematical treatment is essentially the same than with Gouy and Chapman but
changing the reference. In this way, the equation 4.14 can be written as 4.16.
ψ = ψ1 exp[−(x− x1)/λ] (4.16)
Figure 4.2 shows all the possible cases. The first case corresponds to the solid interface with a
Stern adsorbed layer charged negatively, which is not enough to guarantee the electroneutrality.
Therefore the diffuse layer possesses the negative charge necessary. The second case shows an
excess of negative charges at the solid surface. In this case the diffuse layer has the positive
charge. The third case, the solid interface is charged negatively, the adsorbed layer has a positive
charge, which is not enough to counteract the negative charge and the diffuse layer provides the
rest of the positive charge. The last case represent the opposite possibility than the second
case [73].
The electrostatic potential can not be measured directly. Therefore it is necessary to carry
out electrokinetic experiments that allow the calculation of the electrokinetic potential (ζ), which
is situated to a distance X2 outside of the Stern layer. Normally the value of this electrokinetic
potential, known as zeta potential, is very similar than the potential of the Stern layer.
4.4. ELECTROSTATIC FORCES 35
Figure 4.2: Model Gouy-Chapman-Stern.
Figure 4.3 presents a comparison of the van der Waals forces described in previous section 4.1
and electrostatic forces of particles adhesion versus particle diameter. It is clear, at least for
these ideal calculations that the van der Waals forces dominate over electrostatic forces for very
small particles. Double layer electrostatic force also generally dominates over electrostatic image
forces for small particles [70].
When a fine particle-plate system is immersed in water, the energy of adhesion is greatly
altered, decreasing to about one-fourth of the original [74]. This diminishing effect can be
explained by a new Hamaker constant A123 for interaction of the surface 1 with the particle 2 in
the water molecules 3, which was developed by Lifshiftz [75] on the basis of certain macroscopic
properties of the interacting materials and of the fluid medium. The van der Waals forces are
too strong for such system to be counteracted by hydrodynamic forces alone. However, in order
to predict the behavior in a system of two solids immersed in a liquid, it is necessary to know
the magnitude of these forces (van der Waals and electrostatic).
Hogg et al. [76] calculated the potential energy of the interaction between dissimilar flat
double layers using Debye-Huckel or linearized approximation. The energy of interaction per
unit area is given by
VDLR =κ d
2{(ψ2
1 + ψ22)[1 − coth(d h)] + 2 ψ1 ψ2cosech(d h)} (4.17)
4.4. ELECTROSTATIC FORCES 36
Figure 4.3: Van der Waals forces in comparison to electrostatic forces of adhesion as
function of particle diameter [70].
where ψ1 and ψ2 are the zeta potentials of the plate 1 and 2, respectively, h the separation
distance between the plates, κ is the dielectric constant of the solution, and d is the Debye-
Huckel parameter. The sum of the van der Waals attraction and the double layer repulsion
constitutes the classical DLVO-theory of colloid stability. This theory has been used to predict
the effect of various factors such as, ionic strength, valence of counterions, solution pH and the
stability of colloidal dispersion.
Typical plot of the total interaction energy for a surfaces-soil system (VT ) as a function of
the separation distance h, looks as shown in figure 4.4. The total interaction energy is given by
the sum of the interaction energy of van der Waals (equation 4.1) and the interaction energy of
dissimilar double layer (equation 4.17).
When the surface potentials have the same sign, it is expected to reach a maximum at a
certain distance. High zeta potentials lead to higher VTmax. Therefore, high zeta potential should
aid in the particle detachment.
4.4. ELECTROSTATIC FORCES 37
Figure 4.4: Total potential energy curve for superposition of van der Waals and electro-
static force.
Chapter 5
Detachment Mechanism
As already mentioned, understanding particle removal is important for many industrial pro-
cesses. Hydrodynamic particle removal involves the application of an external force to a particle
to overcome its force of adhesion. Efficient particle detachment is extremely difficult because
of the strong adhesion forces and the nature of the particulate. Particle removal methods are
generally classified into three categories.
Wet chemical methods consists in a treatment with chemical solutions, which is carried out
in order to remove the particles. For example via surface etching.
Mechanical techniques are related to the application of a physical force, such as contact with
a brush or hydrodynamic force to remove the particle.
Dry processes include treatments with gas/vapor and plasma techniques to cause the removal
of the particle.
Improvement of the already existing removal techniques and development of other more efficient
methods requires the understanding of the force acting on a particle. The DLVO-theory predicts
the force of adhesion in a small scale taking into account the van der Waals forces and the
electrostatic forces. This issue was discussed in the previous chapter 4. However, additionally
to these forces, there are other forces, which are generated when a hydrodynamic flow acts on a
particle. These forces depend on the flow condition near the attached particle and they act to
remove the particle from the surface.
Figure 5.1 shows a general model for a particle attached to a surface in a hydrodynamic
flow. There are three forces, adhesion (FA), drag or hydrodynamic (FH) and lifting (Fl) forces.
38
5.1. REMOVAL MECHANISMS 39
In addition, there exists a torque (T ) acting on the particle in this model. Hydrodynamic
detachment experiment provides an indirect method to determine the force of adhesion since it is
proportional to the hydrodynamic force as showed by Visser [9]. However, the exact relationship
between these two quantities can only be established once the mechanism of detachment has
been identified.
Figure 5.1: Diagram of forces acting on a particle. FH is the hydrodynamic force applied
to the particle by the fluid; FA is the adhesion force, Fl and T represent the lifting force
and torque, respectively.
5.1 Removal Mechanisms
Based on the above model (see figure ) there are three potential particle removal mechanisms
lifting, sliding and rolling . The criteria for removal by the different mechanisms are derived
from force and torque balance.
Lifting criterion is derived from a force balance in the vertical direction.
FL ≥ FA (5.1)
Sliding criterion is derived from a force balance in the horizontal direction, where µf is the
static friction coefficient.
FH ≥ µf (FA + FL) (5.2)
Rolling criterion is derived from a torque balance and may be modeled most simply according
to the scheme of figure 5.2, where l is the distance between the adhesion force vector and
5.1. REMOVAL MECHANISMS 40
the point around which rolling occurs and h represent the height of roughness.
T ≥ FA l (5.3)
Figure 5.2: Scheme of forces acting on a particle (A). Diagram of forces acting on a
particle FH is the force applied to the particle by the fluid; FA is the adhesion force, FH
is the hydrodynamic force, Fl and T represent the lifting force and torque respectively. A
length l serves as a lever arm and h represent the height of roughness.
If the particle, and/or the substrate are soft the treatment becomes more complicate because
is necessary to take into account the effects of the deformation of the system. Figure 5.3 shows
the forces acting on a particle under such conditions, where l1 is the distance between the
adhesion force vector and the point around which rolling occurs, while l2 is the distance between
the lift and adhesion forces vectors and the point around which rolling occurs. In this case the
criterion must take account the deformation according to the equation 5.4. This deformation
can increase the force of adhesion such as was shown in the figure 4.1.
T + FH l1 + FL l2 ≥ FA l2 (5.4)
Hubbe [77] found a way to relate the mechanism of incipient motion and the particle radius.
He pointed out that each mode of incipient motion imply different exponential dependency of the
shear stress required for particle removal. This dependency is related to the radius of spherical
particles.
In order to understand the hydrodynamic force acting on the particle it is necessary to
distinguish between laminar and turbulent conditions. Goldman et al. described a method to
determine the force and torque acting on a fixed sphere of radius R at a distance h > R from
5.1. REMOVAL MECHANISMS 41
Figure 5.3: Scheme of forces acting in a particle (B). Diagram of forces acting on a particle
FH is the force applied to the particle by the fluid; FA is the adhesion force, FH is the
hydrodynamic force, Fl and T represent the lifting force and torque respectively. l1 is the
distance between the adhesion force vector and the point around which rolling occurs,
while l2 is the distance between the lift and adhesion forces vectors and the point around
which rolling occurs.
a plane wall in a viscous fluid, whose motion in absence of the sphere would be uniform linear
shear flow. They found an exact mathematical solution of the Stokes equation for this case [6, 7].
O’Neill based on the Goldman results presented an exact solution of the linearized Stokes flow
equation for the case when h = R [8]. These relations are given by
FH = 1.701 (6π) ηR Vx (5.5)
T = 0.944 (4π) ηR2 Vx (5.6)
where R is the particle radius, η is the fluid viscosity, T is the torque and Vx is the fluid velocity
in the x direction. Visser [9] expressed this tangential force in terms of the shear stress acting
on the wall as
FH = 32 R2 τ (5.7)
where τ is the shear stress at the wall. From hydrodynamic it is known that the shear stress is
proportional to the velocity gradient in the x-direction (dv/dx).
τ = η
(
dv
dx
)
(5.8)
5.1. REMOVAL MECHANISMS 42
For a laminar flow the velocity gradient is constant; consequently equation, 5.8 can be directly
integrated as
Vx =
(
τ
η
)
R (5.9)
Introducing equation 5.9 into equations 5.5 and 5.6 permits to obtain the relationship between
the hydrodynamic force or the torque and the shear stress, respectively.
FH = 32.06 R2 τ (5.10)
T = 11.86 R3 τ (5.11)
Cleaver and Yates [10] shown that a lift force exist due to the unsteady nature of the viscous
sublayer in the turbulent boundary layer, and proposed an equation to calculate this force.
Experiments on the latter [78] suggested that the results should be
FL = (0.304) ρ ν1/2 τ3/2 R3 (5.12)
The mechanism of incipient motion for an ideal smooth sphere attached to a substrate and
exposed to a flow can be identified from the relationship between the particle radius (R) and the
shear stress (τ). If the mechanism is sliding, the force is proportional to the force of adhesion
as follows
Fsliding = α FA (5.13)
Substitution of equation 5.7 into equation 5.13 (with FH = FA) and taking into account that
FA ∝ R as was shown by Hubbe [77] yield
τsliding =α FA
32 R2∝
R
R2∝ R−1 (5.14)
If the mechanism is assumed to be rolling then, taking the equation 5.9 and inserting it into
the equation for the torque 5.6 yield
T = 11.86 R3 τ = FA l (5.15)
the above relationship between the parameter R and l depend on the characteristics of the
experimental system (See figure 5.2). Hubbe [77] found that the relationship for smooth surface
is given by
l = b√R (5.16)
5.1. REMOVAL MECHANISMS 43
1
1E03
1E06
1E09
1E-08 1E-06 1E-04 1E-02 1
She
ar S
tres
s
Radius (m)
Rolling (soft) and LiftingRolling (hard)
Sliding
Figure 5.4: Graphic of the shear stress vs. particle radius for the different mechanisms of
incipient motion.
where b is an empirical constant and the relationship for hard surfaces is
l ∝ R3 (5.17)
The relationship between the shear stress and the particle radius for smooth and hard surfaces
is given by substituting equations 5.16 and 5.17 into equation 5.15 as follows
τhardrolling =
Fd l
11.86 R3∝
R R1/2
R3∝ R−3/2 (5.18)
τ softrolling =
Fd l
11.86 R3∝
R R2/3
R3∝ R−4/3 (5.19)
If the mechanism is assumed to be lifting, the same treatment for equation 5.12 give the rela-
tionship for the lifting shear stress and the particle radius 5.20. Figure 5.4 is a graphic of the
shear stress versus the particle radius for the different mechanisms.
τlifting ∝F
2/3d
c2/3 R2∝
R2/3
R2∝ R−4/3 (5.20)
Chapter 6
Experimental Part
6.1 Chemical Materials Employed
In order to achieve the experimental part, table 6.1 contains the employed surfactants and table
6.2 lists the principal physicochemical properties of the distilled water used in all experiments.
Table 6.1: List of the employed Surfactants
Surfactants Supplier
Marlipal O13/40 Sasol
Marlipal O13/60 Sasol
Marlipal O13/70 Sasol
Marlipal O13/80 Sasol
Marlipal O13/100 Sasol
Igepal CA-520 Aldrich
Table 6.2: List of Physicochemical Properties of distilled Water at 20 oC
η (dynes.s/cm2) ρ (g/ml) γ (dynes/cm)
water 10.09 × 10−3 0.998 71.9
In addition, the applied chemicals for the experiments are shown in table 6.3. The glass sub-
strates to be coated were supplied by Mezel-Glaser. Plexiglass was used to build the equipment
in order to test the particle detachment.
44
6.1. CHEMICAL MATERIALS EMPLOYED 45
Table 6.3: List of the Chemical MaterialsChemical Substance Formula Purity Supplier
Ammonium NH3 · H2O 25% FlukaPeroxide H2O2 30% Fluka
cyclohexane C6H6 > 99% RothStrontium acetate monohydrate Sr(CH3COO)2 · H2O > 99% FlukaCalcium acetate monohydrate Ca(CH3COO)2 · H2O > 99% FlukaMangan acetate tetrahydrate Mn(CH3COO)2 · 4H2O > 99% Fluka
Sodium hydroxide NaOH > 98% MerckPalladium(II) Chloride PdCl2 > 99% Chempure
Sodium Chloride NaCl > 99% FlukaSodium hypophosphite monohydrate NaH2PO2 · H2O > 99% Fluka
Ethanol CH3CH2OH > 99% FlukaIron(III) nitrate nonahydrate Fe(NO3)3 · 9H2O > 99% FlukaYttrium nitrate hexahydrate Y (NO3)3 · 6H2O > 99% Fluka
Ammonium carbonate (NH4)2CO3 > 99% FlukaHeptane C7H16 > 99% MerckOctane C8H18 > 99% Merck
Zirconium(IV) oxide chloride ZrOCl2 · 8H2O 99% Merckn-Butanol C4H9OH > 99% Merck
Sulfuric acid H2SO4 97% FlukaNitric acid HNO3 65% Merck
Hydrochloric acid fuming HCl 37% Fluka
Distilled water and nonionic surfactants of the alkyl poliglycolether type were employed as
eluent fluids. The commercial surfactant name is Marlipal and was supplied by Sasol Germany
GmbH. The number of carbons in the aliphatic chain as well as the ethoxylation degree are
indicated by the label after name, e.g. Marlipal O13/04. This means that the surfactant has 13
carbons in the lipophilic chain and an average ethoxylation degree of four. The physicochemical
properties of the fluids are summarized in the table 6.4. It is important to emphasize that due to
the production process, the resulting surfactants have a distribution of their ethoxylations degree
and the name only reflects an average of their ethoxylation degree. In the rest of the work, these
homologous series of surfactants are called as CnEOm, where n represents the number of carbons
in the hydrophobic chain and m is the number of oxyethylene groups (EO). The abbreviation
for the previous example is C13EO4.
6.2. THE REACTOR FOR THE SYNTHESIS OF NANOPARTICLES 46
6.2 The Reactor for the Synthesis of Nanoparticles
In order to perform the synthesis of nanoparticles, a semi-batch reactor was used. Figure 6.1
shows a scheme of the employed reactor, which consists of a tank with four baffles, it can contain
up to 200 ml of reaction mixture. The agitator is a four pitched blade turbine impeller, the feed
input was located near to the agitator and above of the liquid level. The stirring rate U (min−1)
and feed rate q (ml/s) were chosen according to the procedure shown by Schmidt [67].
Figure 6.1: Scheme of the reactor to achieve the synthesis.
The synthesis was achieved by loading 100 ml of one microemulsion “A” to 100 ml to
the reactor and adding 100 ml of microemulsion “B” at a constant feed rate of 0.30 (ml/s).
Temperature was controlled using a ultrathermostat K6 suppled by Colora Messtechnik. A
peristaltic pump (Besta E100) was utilized to the addition of one microemulsion to the other
one.
Table 6.4: Physico-chemical Properties of the employed Surfactants†Calculated using the parameters given by P. Huibers [79]
Marlipal Abreviation HLB † cmccal (M) Concentration (M)O13/40 C13EO4 9.7 2.36 × 10−5 0.002 / 0.012 / 0.024O13/60 C13EO6 12.1 2.89 × 10−5 0.002 / 0.012 / 0.024O13/70 C13EO7 12.7 3.19 × 10−5 0.002 / 0.012 / 0.024O24/70 C24EO7 9.8 1.12 × 10−10 0.002 / 0.012 / 0.024
6.3. SYNTHESIS OF PEROVSKITE NANOPARTICLES 47
6.3 Synthesis of Perovskite Nanoparticles
The synthesis of Perovskite Ca0.5Sr0.5MnO3 was carried out via co-precipitation in microemul-
sion according to the procedure shown by Lopez [80]. The reaction was carried out using sodium
hydroxide (NaOH) and peroxide (H2O2) as oxidizing agent. Two microemulsions, “A” and “B”,
with identical composition but with different aqueous phases were prepared. In microemulsion
“A” the aqueous phase was a solution of calcium acetate Ca(CH3COO)2 · H2O, strontium ac-
etate Sr(CH3COO)2 · H2O, and manganese acetate Ma(CH3COO)2 · 4H2O in stoichiometric
ratio whereas the microemulsion B was a solution containing the oxidizing agent. The reaction
can be written as the following equation
4 NaOH + Mn+2 + H2O2 � MnO+23 + 3 H2O (6.1)
The composition of the microemulsions is shown in the table 6.5. Cyclohexane and Mar-
lipal O13/70 were used as oil phase and surfactant, respectively. In order to find the best
microemulsion composition for preparing the precursor of Perovskite, the phase behavior of dif-
ferent systems were determined applying the procedure described in [81]. The detailled study
was shown in [80], where was also to synthesize the perovskite via oxidation with ammonium.
Table 6.5: Composition of the microemulsions for the perovskite nanoparticles. Mi-
croemulsion A (µEA) and microemulsion B containing the salts and oxidation agent,
respectively. Ac denotes the acetate (CH3COO−).
Surfactant Oil phase Aqueous phase
µEA Marlipal O13/70 cyclohexane Ca(Ac)2 + Sr(Ac)2 [0.12] mol/l
+ Mn(Ac)2 [0.24] mol/l
Weight (g) 15 74.38 10.62
µEB Marlipal O13/70 cyclohexane NaOH [0.96] mol/l + H2O2 [0.12] mol/l
Weight (g) 15 74.38 10.62
The reaction was carried out in the semi-batch reactor described above with a stirring rate
(1000 min−1). The precipitation was performed by adding the microemulsion containing the
salts to the microemulsion containing the oxidant such as was suggested in the reference [67].
The feed rate was 0.05 ml/s at 27oC. The amount of precharged solution in the reactor was
100 ml. The overall amount of added microemulsion was 100 ml. The reaction mixture was
6.4. SYNTHESIS OF PALLADIUM NANOPARTICLES 48
stirred for another 30 minutes. Subsequently, the particles were separated with a centrifuge at
5000 rpm for 10 min. Precipitated particles were washed three times with methanol/water and
dried at (110oC) for (10 h). Size and the morphology of the precursor particles were studied
using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Finally, the precursor was calcined to Perovskite at
different temperatures and analyzed by X-ray diffraction.
6.4 Synthesis of Palladium Nanoparticles
The synthesis of palladium nanoparticles was carried out following the process described by
Schmidt [67]. Two microemulsions with identical composition (W0 = 9, α = 0.94 and γ = 0.175)
but with different aqueous phases were prepared. In the microemulsion A (µEA) the aqueous
phase was a solution of palladium salt and in the microemulsion B (µEB) the aqueous phase
was a solution of the reducing agent. The oil phase was cyclohexane and the surfactant Marlipal
O13/60.
Table 6.6: Composition of the microemulsion for the palladium nanoparticles. Microemul-
sions A (µEA) and B (µEB) containing the complex salts and the reduction agent.
Surfactant Oil phase Aqueous phase Wo
µEA Marlipal O13/60 cyclohexane Na2PdCl4 · 2 NaCl[0.2] mol/l 11
Weight (g) 17.5 76.54 5.96
µEB Marlipal O13/60 cyclohexane Na2H2PO2 · H2O[0.6] mol/l 11
Weight (g) 17.5 76.54 5.96
µEA Marlipal O13/60 cyclohexane Na2PdCl4 · 2 NaCl[0.2] mol/l 9
Weight (g) 17.5 79.19 3.31
µEB Marlipal O13/60 cyclohexane Na2H2PO2 · H2O[0.6] mol/l 9
Weight (g) 17.5 79.19 3.31
µEA Marlipal O13/60 cyclohexane Na2PdCl4 · 2 NaCl[0.2] mol/l 3
Weight (g) 17.5 80.51 1.99
µEB Marlipal O13/60 cyclohexane Na2H2PO2 · H2O[0.6] mol/l 3
Weight (g) 17.5 80.51 1.99
6.5. SYNTHESIS OF YIG NANOPARTICLES 49
The reaction was performed at constant temperature (27 oC), stirring rate (1200 min−1)
and feed rate (0.5 ml/s). The microemulsion composition was varied in the reaction in order to
obtain particles with different average diameter. The compositions are shown in table 6.6 for
W0 = 11, W0 = 9 and W0 = 3, respectively.
Palladium (II) chloride was employed as reactant, but due to the fact that the solubility of
this palladium salt is low in water, the reaction was achieved starting from a complex salt of
sodium tetrachloropalladate (Na2PdCl4 ·NaCl) according to the following reaction
PdCl2 + 4 NaCl −→ Na2PdCl4 · 2 NaCl (6.2)
The reduction was achieved using sodium hypophosphite monohydrate (NaH2PO2 ·H2O), which
has a potential of 0.499 V for acidic solutions and −1.565 V for alkaline solutions as shown
equations 6.3 and 6.4, respectively.
H3PO2(ac) + H2O � H3PO3(ac) + 2 H+ + 2 e− 0.499 V (6.3)
HPO2−3 + 2 H2O + 2 e− � H2PO
−2 + 3 OH− − 1.565 V (6.4)
The reaction for the palladium has a potential of 0.987 V and can be written as follows
Pd+2 + 2 e− � Pd 0.987 V (6.5)
The total reaction is given by
Pd+2 + H3PO2 + H2O � Pd + H3PO3 + 2H+ (6.6)
6.5 Synthesis of YIG Nanoparticles
Yttrium iron garnet (YIG) is a material used widely in electronic devices for the microwave
generation as well as for digital memories, which require particles with a strict control of com-
position, homogeneity, size and shape. Therefore the technique to produce such particles of YIG
is important. Vaqueiro et al. [82] synthesized YIG with the above mentioned features, which
are also desirable to study the adhesion of nanoparticles to glass surface. The method is based
on a co-precipitation of the precursors in a microemulsion according to the following reaction
5 Fe(NO3)3 + 3 Y (NO3)3 + 15 (NH4)2CO3 + 27 H2O −→
Y3Fe5O12 + 30 NH4OH + 15 CO2 + 24 HNO3 (6.7)
6.6. SYNTHESIS OF ZIRCONIA NANOPARTICLES 50
In order to achieve the reaction, a solution containing the salts of iron (III) nitrate nonahydrate
(Fe(NO3)3 · 9H2O) and yttrium (III) nitrate hexahydrate (Y (NO3)3 · 6H2O) were prepared
with a concentration of 0.2 mol/l and 0.12 mol/l, respectively. The solution containing the
precipitating agent ammonium carbonate (NH4)2CO3)) was prepared with a concentration of
0.6 mol/l. Igepal CA-520 (pentaethyleneglycol monoisonyl phenylether) was employed as surfac-
tant and heptane as oil phase to prepare the microemulsions. Table 6.7 shows the composition
of the microemulsion with W0 = 5, α = 0.87 and γ = 0.38 calculated from equations 2.2, 2.3,
and 2.4. The precipitation was carried out in the semi-batch reactor (see figure 6.1) at a constant
rate (0.05 ml/s) and stirring rate (1600 min−1).
Table 6.7: Composition of the microemulsion for YIG. Microemulsions A (µEA) and B
(µEB) containing the salts and the precipitant agent, respectively.
Surfactant Oil phase Aqueous phase
µEA Igepal CA-520 heptane Fe(NO3)3[0.2] mol/l + Y (NO3)3[0.12] mol/l
Weight (g) 38.13 53.87 8
µEB Igepal CA-520 heptane (NH4)2CO3[0.6] mol/l
Weight (g) 38.13 53.87 8
6.6 Synthesis of Zirconia Nanoparticles
Nanoparticles of zirconia (ZrO2) were prepared by a modification of the method developed by
Guo et al. [83]. The method described in [83] uses a mixture of AEO9 (C14EO9) surfactant and
n-butanol in a 3:2 proportion, which has a HLB of 11.2.
In the present work a mixture of Marlipal O13/80, which has a HLB around 12,5 calculated
with the equation 2.12, and n-butanol in a 3:2 ratio was used. In order to achieve the reaction,
two identical microemulsions were prepared, one containing the aqueous zirconium (IV) oxide
chloride (ZrOCl2) solution and the other one containing the aqueous precipitant ammonium
(NH3 ·H2O). Octane was used as oil phase. The composition of the microemulsions is shown
in table 6.8.
The reaction 6.8 was carried out adding the microemulion containing the precipitant to the
microemulsion containing the salt of zirconium. The temperature was kept constant (28 oC),
6.7. CHARACTERIZATION METHODS 51
the feed rate was 0.05 ml/s and the stirring rate was 1000 min−1.
ZrOCl2 · 8H2O + NH4OH −→ Zr(OH)4 + NH+4 + 2 Cl− + H+ + 6 H2O
Zr(OH)4 −→ ZrO2 + 2 H2O ↑ (6.8)
Table 6.8: Composition of the microemulsion for Zirconia. Microemulsions A (µEA) and
B (µEB) containing the zirconium salt and the reduction agent, respectively.
Surfactant Oil phase Aqueous phase
µEA Marlipal O13/80:n-butanol (3:2) octane ZrOCl4 · 8 H2O[0.5] mol/l
Weight (g) 30 64.83 5.17
µEB Marlipal O13/80:n-butanol (3:2) octane NH4OH[0.5] mol/l
Weight (g) 30 64.83 5.17
6.7 Characterization Methods
The received samples were characterized in this investigation by Scanning Electron Microscopy
(SEM), X-Ray Diffraction (XRD) and BET-adsorption. A brief description of these techniques
is given in further subsections.
6.7.1 BET Adsorption Characterization
Powders of the samples were analyzed by nitrogen adsortion using BET technique (Brunauer-
Emmett-Teller) to obtain their specific surface areas. In general, gas adsorption techniques
may be employed to measure the specific surface area and pore size distribution of powders
or solid materials. In order to realize the measurement, all gas has to be evacuated from a
dry sample by applying a vacuum and elevated temperature. Afterwards, the sample is cooled
to a temperature of 77K, which is the temperature of liquid nitrogen. At this temperature,
inert gases like nitrogen, argon and krypton are adsorbed on the surface of the sample. This
process can be considered to be a reversible condensation or layering of molecules on the surface,
which involves heat. In this analysis, nitrogen N2 was used as gas for measuring the surface
area in a Micromeritics Gemini with an analysis mode in equilibration, evacuation time of
6.7. CHARACTERIZATION METHODS 52
1 min, equilibrium interval of 5 sec, and saturation pressure of 781 mmHg. The output of
the instrument is an isotherm, which is a plot of the volume of gas adsorbed (v cm3/g) versus
the relative pressure (i.e., sample pressure/saturation vapor pressure, P/P0). Using relative
pressure to construct the isotherm eliminates the effect of changes in pressure for small change
in temperature [84]. The relative pressure is scaled from 0 to 1. When all of the available surface
is filled with the gas (i.e. a monolayer of adsorbed gas on the surface is formed), the slope of
the isotherm becomes much smaller as a second layer is formed on the top of the first layer.
The surface area determination is carried out taking one or more data points of the adsorption
isotherm. The BET equation 6.9 is employed to obtain the volume of gas needed to form a
monolayer on the surface of the sample. The actual surface area is calculated from the size and
number of the adsorbed gas molecules, in this case N2 to 77 K has a size of 16 A2.
P
v (P0 − P )=
1
vm c+
c − 1
vm c
P
P0(6.9)
Here P0 is the vapor pressure of the adsorbed gas at the experimental temperature, vm represents
the adsorbed volume of monolayer an c is a constant. The parameter c and vm can be obtained
from the slope and the Y interception, respectively.
6.7.2 SEM Characterization
Powders of the samples and coated surfaces were characterized to obtain information about
the size and morphology, using a Hitachi S-520 Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM), which
provides topographical and elemental information about the samples.
The mean components of the device are depicted in figure 6.2 (left) while the optical system
is described in the right hand. The basic idea behind scanning electron microscopy is the
generation of a electron beam by an electron gun at the top of the column (See figure 6.2). This
beam is focused by two magnetic lenses inside the column and is directed to the sample in a
very small spot. When the electrons hit the sample, several processes take place. For example,
some of them can be absorbed, some are scattered out of the sample, etc. These processes can
be used to obtain information about the sample, if they are collected by a suitable detector.
The electron beam is not stationary, it can scan across a certain area in a raster pattern as in a
TV screen. The signal from the detector is selected to modulate the intensity on a view screen,
which is synchronously scanned with the beam in the column. Thereby an image is generated
6.7. CHARACTERIZATION METHODS 53
on the viewing screen. A high brightness in the image corresponds to the areas with a strong
signal of electrons while a dark image is obtained in zones with weaker signal [85].
Vacuum System
Electron gun
Column
Sample Chanber
Power Supplies and electronics
Controllers
Screen Photo- screen
Electron gun
Condenser lens
Condenser aperture
Electron beam
Objective lens
Sample
Detectors
Figure 6.2: Scheme of the SEM instrument.
6.7.3 X-Ray Diffraction Characterization
Polycrystalline powders of the samples and coated surface were characterized using an X-ray
diffractometer Siemens D500 with Cu anode (radiation Kα of λ = 0.154 nm).
The wavelength of the X − rays (0.1 A) to (100 A) has sufficient energy to penetrate solids.
This feature permits to analyse the internal structure of solids. XRD can be used to identify
bulk phases, to monitor the kinetics of bulk transformation and to estimate particle size [86].
The instrument consists of a X − ray source, which contains a target that is bombarded
with high-energy electrons. When the target is hit by the electrons, they emit a continuous
background spectrum, which has two sharp peaks superimposed. These peaks are very narrow,
and their wavelengths are characteristic for the used target metal (for example, Cu has a Kα1
with a λ = 0.154 nm) [87].
When the X-rays incident on a crystal, the crystal can act as a lattice capable of diffracting
the radiation. The X-rays scattered by atoms in an ordered lattice interfere constructively in
directions given by Bragg’s law. Figure 6.3 illustrates how the lattice spacing can be derived
from the X-ray diffraction using the Bragg’s relation as
n λ = 2 dhkl Sinθ n = 1, 2, 3, ... (6.10)
6.8. SURFACE CLEANING PROCESS 54
where λ is the wavelength of the X-ray, dhkl is the distance between two lattice planes, θ
represents the angle between the incoming X-ray and the normal to the reflecting lattice plane,
and n is called the order of the reflexion.
The detector collects the intensity of the diffracted radiation as a function of the angle θ
between the incoming and refracted beams, which permits to calculate the distance between a
family of planes identifying the respective structure. Furthermore, the patterns can be compared
with a data base (Eva program) to identify the material. Additionally, the fitting program of
the diffrac− AT “profile V1.1” approximates the peaks to the better mathematical function
(Gauss, Lorentz, etc.) and defines the parameters of the peaks (location, height and width).
The program calculates the Full Width at the Half Maximum (FWHM) in 2θ degrees. If this
value is transformed into radians it is possible to calculate an average crystallite size < L >
applying the Debye-Scherrer’s equation 6.11.
〈 L 〉 =K λ
β Cosθ(6.11)
Where K is a constant (often taken as 1), λ represents the X-ray wavelength, β and θ are the
full width at the half maximum (in rad.) and the Bragg angle, respectively.
Figure 6.3: Schematic representation of the reflection in a lattice plane.
6.8 Surface Cleaning Process
The glass surfaces were cleaned employing the process described by Lopez [88]. This process is
based on cleaning the glass surfaces with different solutions. First, a mixture sulfuric acid and
6.8. SURFACE CLEANING PROCESS 55
Immersion of the surfaces in a solution of H 2 SO 4 (95%) and H 2 O 2 (30%) 50% v/v
during 3 days
Rinsing of the surfaces with distilled water until the pH of the solution is stable
Immersion of the surfaces in a solution of HNO 3 (5 mol/l) during 3 days
Immersion of the surfaces in a solution KOH or NaOH (4 mol/l) during 3 min. with
heating at 55˚C
Removal of the excess of KOH with distilled water Immersion of the surfaces in a solution of HNO3
(5 mol/l) during 3 days
Rinsing of the surfaces with distilled water until the pH of the solution is stable
Drying in a furnace at 60˚C for 8 h.
Figure 6.4: Diagram of the cleaning process.
hydrogen peroxide (50% v/v) followed by rinsing the surfaces with sufficient amount of distilled
water to reach a constant pH of the solution. Second a solution of nitric acid and rinsing the glass
surfaces with distilled water. Immersion of the surfaces in a solution of potassium hydroxide or
sodium hydroxide, rinsing the surface with distilled water. Third, Immersion in a solution of
nitric acid and rinsig with sufficient distilled water. Afterwards a drying process in a furnace at
60 oC for eight hours takes place. Flow Chart of the cleaning process is giving in figure 6.4.
6.9. COATING OF THE SURFACE WITH THE NANOPARTICLES 56
6.9 Coating of the Surface with the Nanoparticles
Nanostructured coatings on solid substrates have a significant importance due to the possibility
of synthesis of materials with specific physical-chemical properties such as magnetic, catalytic,
electronic, mechanical etc. These properties are attractive for several industrial applications,
therefore the efforts to prepare coated surfaces have been increased.
Coated Surface
XRD, SEM and BET Analyses
Synthesis of the Particles in w/o- microemulsions
Surface Cleaning
Coating of the Surface with the microemulsion
Centrifugation 2500 rpm for 5 min.
Drying at 110 ˚C for 10 h.
Washing with water:methanol (3:1)
Heat Treatment
Fine powders
Immersion in water:methanol (3:1)
Procedure to obtain fine powders
Procedure to obtain coated surfaces
Figure 6.5: Diagram of the coating process.
The particles for coating the surfaces were prepared according to the synthesis described in
6.10. DESIGN OF THE DETACHMENT DEVICE 57
previous sections. The method reported by Lopez et al. [89] was applied to coat the glass surfaces
with the different synthesized materials. This method used the properties of the microemulsions
to improve the deposition of the fine particles on the surfaces. The laboratory scale-method
involved five basic steps. Cleaning of the glass surfaces [88], synthesis of the nanoparticles in
w/o-microemulsions, coating, drying and calcination).
The glass surfaces were coated with a defined volume of microemulsion (0.2 ml/cm2). Af-
terwards, the surfaces were dried in a furnace at 100oC for 10 hours. The surfaces were briefly
immersed in a mixture of water methanol (3:1) to remove the excess of particles. Figure 6.5
shows an scheme of the employed procedure. The process permits to obtain powder of the
samples as well as coated surface with nanoparticles depend on the followed way.
6.10 Design of the Detachment Device
As was already mentioned in chapter 5 the particle removal methods are classified into three
categories wet chemical methods, mechanical techniques and dry processes. In this
work, a combination of the wet chemical methods and mechanical techniques was developed to
carried out the detachment of the nanoparticles from the glass surfaces. The fusion of these
two methods permit to obtain the benefits of both techniques. By controlling the chemical
composition of the cleaning solution and applying a hydrodynamic force.
It is well known that attraction between particles and surfaces are generally lower in liquids
compared to gases [90, 74]. On the other hand, particulate soil in the size range of 0.1-1 µm
is frequently unremovable by water alone, but it is removable by detergent solution. Therefore
a device was designed to test the detachment of fine particles from glass surfaces taking into
account both fluid motion and surfactant addition. A schematic diagram of the apparatus is
shown in figure 6.6. It consists of a cylinder of plexiglass with inner diameters of 3.0 cm and
length of 30 cm. The sample holder was placed in the center of the cylinder in order to avoid
the boundary conditions at the beginning and the end of the tube as well as near the walls.
Eluent flow through the cylinder was pumped from the reservoir using a submerged pump,
Neptuno TK 260. The volumetric flow Q was monitored by two flowmeter. One rotameter
measures low volumetric flows 30 (l/h) < Q < 200 (l/h), this means laminar condition with a
Reynolds number below 2300, which provides a force about 58 dyne. The other one monitors
high volumetric flows with turbulent conditions, that means 210 (l/h) < Q < 800 (l/h), 2329 <
6.10. DESIGN OF THE DETACHMENT DEVICE 58
Figure 6.6: Schematic diagram of the adhesion device. (1) Reservoir, (2) submerged
pump, (3) flowmeter for laminar conditions, (4) flowmeter for turbulent conditions and
(5) cylinder of plexiglass with sample holder.
Re < 9700 and a maximal force around 1120 dyne.
Figure 6.7 shows profiles of laminar and turbulent conditions. From the equations of volu-
metric flow 6.12 and continuity eqn. 6.13, it is known that the volumetric flow is the same at
the beginning Q0, the middle Q1 and the end of the cylinder Q2
Q =
∫
Av dA (6.12)
Q0 = Q1 = Q2 ⇒ v0 A0 = v1 A1 (6.13)
where v is the velocity and A the area of the cylinder. The velocity in laminar conditions is given
by the Stokes equation 6.14 and depends on the variation of the pressure, viscosity η length of
the cylinder L and the radius R.
v =P0 − P2
4 η L(R2 − r2) (6.14)
With introduction of equation 6.14 into equation 6.12, we obtain a relationship between the
cylinder parameters and the volumetric flow known as Poiseuilles equation 6.15 which allows
the calculation of the applied force under laminar conditions (eqn. 6.16).
Q =π (P0 − P2) R
4
8 η L(6.15)
6.10. DESIGN OF THE DETACHMENT DEVICE 59
Figure 6.7: Profiles of laminar(a) and turbulent (b) flows
∆ P =−8 Q η L
R4(6.16)
Poiseuilles equation is not valid in turbulent conditions, 2320 < Re < 10−5. Therefore, for
calculating the force acting in the cylinder under these conditions, it is necessary to use the
Darcy-Weisbach equation 6.17
∆ P =f L ρ v∗2
4 R(6.17)
where v∗2 is the mean velocity and f is a parameter that depends on the drag in the cylinder
and is given by the equation 6.18 [91]
f = 0, 3164 (Re)−1/4 (6.18)
Detachment of fine particles was carried out inside the designed device depicted in figure 6.6
and using different solutions of nonionic surfactants of the alkylpolyglycolether type as fluids.
The solutions were prepared from distilled water as solvent and commercial surfactants listed
in table 6.1 as solute. It is important to emphasize that due to the production process, the
resulting surfactants have a distribution of their ethoxylations degree and the name only reflects
an average of their ethoxylation degree. In the rest of the work, these homologous series of
surfactants are called as CnEOm, where n represents the number of carbons in the hydrophobic
chain and m is the number of oxyethylene groups (EO). The abbreviation for the previous
example is C13EO4.
6.11. TEST PROCEDURE 60
6.11 Test Procedure
It is well known that the light is attenuated by absorbed materials according to
IT = Ii exp (−α b)
T =ITIi
(6.19)
where IT and Ii are the incident and transmitted light, respectively. The sample thickness is
denoted by b. The attenuation coefficient (α) is given in equation 6.20.
Figure 6.8: Schematic representation of the test process.
α = N Cext = N Ca + N Cs (6.20)
This equation take into account the number of particles N, as well as, the extinction coeffi-
cient due to absorption Ca and the extinction coefficient due to scattering Cs. The attenuation
coefficient could be also described in terms of extinction coefficient per unit particle volume v
[92]. It is known as volume attenuation coefficient αv
αv =Cext
v(6.21)
Equation 6.19 allows to calculate the attenuation coefficient which is proportional to the
particle number N. Here particle number was not calculated but the percentage of the particles
on the substrate is given by
% Particles on Surface =αx
α0100 (6.22)
6.11. TEST PROCEDURE 61
Absorption of the coated surface was measured employing an U.V. spectrophotometer Uvicon
810. From the Transmission measurements it was possible the calculation of the attenuation
coefficient (αo), which corresponds to 100 per cent of particles at the surface. Afterwards,
the first detachment test was carried out with the lowest force that can be applied by the
device. The substrate was left inside the apparatus during a fixed period of time. After this
time, the transmition was measured again and the corresponding attenuation coefficient α1 was
determined. This process is repeated until the particles were completely removed or until the
maximum force, which can be applied with the device, is reached. Figure 6.8 shows an scheme
with the detachment test procedure.
Chapter 7
Results and Discussion
The detachment test explained in the previous chapter was carried out in order to study the
influence of the different experimental parameters (concentration, time, temperature, etc.) on
the release of fine particles from glass surfaces. The evaluation and discussion of the results are
presented in this chapter, which has been organized as follows. Section 7.1 contains the results of
the characterization of the utilized nanoparticles to investigate the detachment. Measurements
and discussions corresponding to the variation of the experimental parameters are shown between
the sections 7.3 and 7.8 as time, surfactant concentration, ethoxylation degree, temperature,
hydrophobic group, and particle size. Additionally, section 7.9 analyses the influence of the
kind of material on the detachment from the glass surface. Afterwards, section 7.10 presents
experimental results related to the hydrodynamic parameters. And finally, section 7.11 provides
a discussion about the proposed release mechanism.
7.1 Characterization of the Samples
7.1.1 Perovskite Nanoparticles
The figure 7.1 shows the behavior of the system water-oil-surfactant versus temperature. It is a
typical ternary phase diagram at a constant surfactant mass fraction (γ) (Compare with vertical
section at constant γ in fig. 2.3). The one phase region appears as a a channel extended from
the oil-rich region to the water-rich side of the phase diagram. In this region, the system is
a thermodynamically stable dispersion, which is optically transparent and has a low viscosity.
62
7.1. CHARACTERIZATION OF THE SAMPLES 63
This one-phase region is surrounded by two phase regions.
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0.84 0.86 0.88 0.9 0.92 0.94 0.96
Tem
pera
ture
(ce
ntig
rade
)
alpha
CH/S/MCH/O/M
Figure 7.1: Binary phase diagram of the microemulsion systems. (CH) cyclohexane, (M)
Marlipal O13/70, (S) solution with the salts and (O) Solution with NaOH and peroxide
The cyclohexane was chosen as oil component to prepare the system due to its high solu-
bilization capacity for water in microemulsions compared to other oils such as hexane, octane
and iso-octane. As observed by Schmidt in [67]. The results offer a broad working range for
temperature and composition of the microemulsions.
It is important to emphasize that the synthesis of the perovskite is extremely affected by
the washing and drying processes, due to the wide range of oxidation states of the manganese.
Therefore it is advisable to remove the excess of hydroxide before calcination. In addition, the
calcination process does not have to exceed the temperature of 600 oC, which is an advantage in
preventing the sintering of the particles. Figure 7.2 illustrates the resulting powder of perovskite
with a mean diameter of 40 nm.
This result (40 nm) is in accordance to the measurements obtained using the equation
6.11. In figure 7.3, the diffractogram shows the peaks corresponding to the perovskite with a
pseudo-cubic structure comparable to those of the primitive perovskites. In this diffractogram
appear some peaks related to the other oxide of manganese. Table 7.1 lists the parameters of
the structure of a powder sample of perovskite. Note that the obtained distances between the
family of planes for the sample d∗hkl is in a good agreement with those for the typical perovskite
structure of the “Eva” program dᵀ
hkt.
7.1. CHARACTERIZATION OF THE SAMPLES 64
Figure 7.2: SEM of the perovskite particles.
Figure 7.3: XRD of the perovskite particles.
It is important to note that longer calcination periods or higher temperatures result in a
higher content of an manganese oxide (MnO2) within the perovskite sample. The particles
exhibit a specific surface area in accordances with the areas reported in [93] for manganese
perovskites with a size of 35 nm (21.8m2/g). Table 7.2 summarizes the results obtained from
BET adsorption, scanning electron microscopy and XRD, as well as the “water pool” (Wo) used
to synthesize the nanoparticles of perovskite.
7.1. CHARACTERIZATION OF THE SAMPLES 65
Table 7.1: Family of planes (hkl) in the perovskite structure and the corresponding dis-
tance between two lattice planes dhkl. (∗):experimental and (ᵀ):Theoretical. The theoret-
ical parameter are from the data base “Eva” for a typical perovskite.
hkl d∗hkl(A) dᵀ
hkl(A)
100 3.86 3.82
110 2.69 2.70
011 2.20 2.19
200 1.87 1.91
210 no obs. 1.70
211 1.55 1.55
220 1.35 1.35
Table 7.2: Specific surface area SBET Adsorption values for perovskite particles. Where
Wo is the water pool parameter, SBET is the surface area, DXRD represents the particle
diameter from XRD measurements and DSEM is particle diameter from SEM.
Wo SBET (m2/g) DXRD DSEM(nm)
20 23.11 40 40
7.1.2 Palladium Nanoparticles
Palladium particles from microemulsion with different “water pools” (Wo) were prepared in
order to obtain particle with different average diameters.
Figure 7.4 shows a typical diffractogram, which corresponds to powder of palladium with a
face-centered cubic structure. Table 7.3 lists the parameters of the mean peaks for palladium
samples and the corresponding theoretical family of planes from “Eva” program. It can be noted
the good agreement between both values.
Figure 7.5 presents a Scanning Electron Micrograph (SEM) for a powder sample of Pd
from a microemulsion with Wo = 9. Particle sizes are consistent with those obtained from the
diffractogram (See figure 7.4) using the determined parameters for the mean peak (100) in the
Scherrer‘s equation (6.11). These parameters were estimated using the profile fitting program
of the Diffrac-AT.
Additional to this, table 7.4 resumes the obtained particle size and specific surface areas for
7.1. CHARACTERIZATION OF THE SAMPLES 66
Figure 7.4: XRD of the palladium particles.
Table 7.3: Family of planes (hkl) in the palladium structure and the corresponding dis-
tance between two lattice planes dhkl. (∗):experimental and (ᵀ):Theoretical.
hkl d∗hkl (A) dᵀ
hkl (A)
111 2.24 2.25
200 1.94 1.94
220 1.37 1.38
Figure 7.5: SEM of the palladium particles.
7.1. CHARACTERIZATION OF THE SAMPLES 67
the different samples of Palladium comparing the SEM measurement (dSEM ) and the calculated
value from Scherrer’s equation (dScherrer). It can be observed from the data that small particles
have a bigger surface area per gram of sample, as expected.
Table 7.4: Average diameter of palladium particles calculated using Scherrer’s equation,
diameter values obtained by SEM and specific surface areas.
Wo dScherrer(nm) dSEM(nm) SBET (m2/g)
3 30 35 64,32
9 41 45 24,20
11 48 50 28,24
7.1.3 Zirconia Nanoparticles
Figure 7.6 shows the diffractogram of the synthesized zirconia nanoparticles. These particles
presented a monoclinic structure (a 6= b 6= c; α = γ = 90o; β > 90o). Table 7.5 lists the param-
eters of the principal peaks in the diffractogram for a powder sample, which are in accordance
to the theoretically expected values.
Figure 7.6: XRD of the zirconia.
From the analysis of the peaks and applying the Scherrer’s equation (eqn. 6.11) an average
particle diameter of 47 nm was calculated. This value is in concordance with the size estimated
7.1. CHARACTERIZATION OF THE SAMPLES 68
by SEM as shown in figure 7.7. In addition, table 7.6 resumes the analysis by nitrogen adsorption
for the powder sample, as well as the particle diameters obtained by XRD and SEM.
Table 7.5: Family of planes (hkl) in the zirconia structure and the corresponding distance
between two lattice planes dhkl,∗=experimental and ᵀ=Theoretical.
hkl d∗hkl(A) dᵀ
hkl(A)
111 2.83 2.84
002 2.53 2.54
220 1.84 1.84
022 1.81 1.81
Figure 7.7: SEM of the zirconia nanoparticles.
Table 7.6: Average diameter of zirconia particles calculated using Scherrer’s equation,
diameter values obtained by SEM and specific surface areas.
W0 dScherrer (nm) dSEM (nm) SBET (m2/g)
5 47 30 64.32
7.1. CHARACTERIZATION OF THE SAMPLES 69
7.1.4 Yttrium Iron Garnet Nanoparticles
The structure of the yttrium iron garnet was confirmed by X-ray diffraction of a powder sample,
as can be observed in figure 7.8. The table 7.7 list the principal peaks of the structure, which is
in good agreement with the values obtained by “Eva” program.
Table 7.7: Family of planes (hkl) in the yttrium iron garnet structure and the correspond-
ing distance between two lattice planes dhkl,∗=experimental and ᵀ=Theoretical.
hkl d∗hkl(A) dᵀ
hkl(A)
400 3.07 3.09
420 2.83 2.84
422 1.52 2.51
640 1.69 1.69
642 1.64 1.65
The average diameter of the crystallite size was determined from the values of the mean
peak (420), which were provided by the fitting program Diffrac-AT, and applying the Scherrer‘s
equation (eqn. 6.11). The average size of the powder sample are in concordance with the
value estimate by scanning electron microscopy. The SEM analysis (figure 7.9) shows that
nanoparticles of yttrium iron garnet (YIG) synthesized in w/o-microemulsion have uniform
size and morphology. Finally, table 7.8 lists the particle size estimated by X-ray diffraction
(dScherrer), scanning electron microscopy (dSEM ), the specific surface area (SBET ) and the
employed Wo for the synthesis of the particles in w/o-microemulsions.
Table 7.8: Average diameter of yttrium iron garnet nanoparticles calculated using Scher-
rer’s equation, diameter values obtained by SEM and specific surface areas.
W0 dScherrer (nm) dSEM (nm) SBET (m2/g)
5 20 22 4.21
7.2. COATING OF THE SURFACES 70
Figure 7.8: XRD of the yttrium iron garnet nanoparticles.
Figure 7.9: SEM of the yttrium iron garnet nanoparticles.
7.2 Coating of the Surfaces
The coating process permitted to obtain a monolayer of particles of different materials. Figure
7.10 shows a typical employed surfaces to to test the detachment. In the case of the micrograph
(7.10) the particles were palladium with an average diameter of 35 nm. The particles shown
similar morphology. This result can be compared with those calculated using Scherrer’s equation
(eqn. 6.11) and with the data from the X-ray diffractogram (30 nm) (See figure 7.11) for the
attached particles at the glass surfaces. The peaks significant smaller due to the quantity of
the particles on the substrate is lower compared with the measurements of the powder samples.
This means, that the possibility to obey the the Bragg’s (equation 6.10) law decrease.
Furthermore, they show that oxidation state of the particles are not affected by the coating
7.2. COATING OF THE SURFACES 71
Figure 7.10: SEM of Pd nanoparticles attached to a glass surface.
Figure 7.11: XRD of Pd nanoparticles attached to a glass surface.
process. The microemulsion also appears to help in the uniform deposition of the particles
preventing agglomeration that normally takes place when the microemulsion is destroyed and
the particles are deposited from a dispersion free of surfactants. In addition, the developed
coating method appears to avoid the sintering process, because the needed heat treatment is
not very strong (compare the size of the powder sample and the size of the deposited particles
on glass surfaces).
Table 7.9 resumes the average diameter for the different monolayer of particles, which were
obtained by x-ray diffraction and scanning electron microscopy.
Figure 7.12 shows the proposed deposition mechanism. The particles inside the microemul-
sion droplets are spread on the substrate. The reverse micellar structure permits that the
particles approaches or absorb to the surfaces but keeping the particles separated. Afterwards,
when each particle has its position, the micellar structure is destroyed and the surfactant is
7.2. COATING OF THE SURFACES 72
Table 7.9: Average diameter of the particles from different materials calculated using
Scherrer’s equation and the values obtained by SEM.
Material dScherrer (nm) dSEM (nm)
Palladium W0 = 3 30 45
Palladium W0 = 9 41 45
Palladium W0 = 11 48 50
Zirconia 27 28
Yttrium iron garnet 20 21
Perovskite 20 22
removed by heat treatment. The particle monolayer is obtained when the micelle structure is
eliminated by heat treatment at low temperature (110 oC) but the surfactant remains as a film
on the surface. Then, the substrate is briefly submerged in a water-methanol solution follows
by a calcination process to eliminate the surfactant. The short treatment in the water-methanol
solution appears to remove those particles that are not in direct contact with the substrate. It is
assumed that the force of adhesion of the particle-particle system with the absorbed surfactant
is much weaker than the force of adhesion between particle and substrate.
Figure 7.12: Scheme showing the possible mechanism of the particles deposition.
The detachment procedure from section 6.10 was carried out with different times interval
(5 min, 15 min and 25 min) changing the surfactant and its concentration in aqueous solution.
This series of experiment allowed to study the influence of time in the release of particles.
7.3. EFFECT OF THE TIME 73
7.3 Effect of the Time
Figure 7.13 shows the results of the different experiments studying Palladium particles with
a mean diameter of 41 nm. The percentage of the adhering particles were plotted versus the
applied flow rate for distinct analysis times (5 min, 15 min and 25 min). Diagram (A) presents
the measurements using distilled water as fluid, while graphs (B), (C) and (D) contain the results
for solutions with a concentration of [0.036] mol/l using Marlipal O13/40, O13/60 and O13/70,
respectively. The major particle detachment is observed with a low flow rate (< 100 l/h).
30
50
70
90
110
0 200 400 600 800
Per
cent
age
Adh
erin
g
Flow Rate (l/h)
(A)
30
50
70
90
110
0 200 400 600 800
Per
cent
age
Adh
erin
g
Flow Rate (l/h)
(B)
30
50
70
90
110
0 200 400 600 800
Per
cent
age
Adh
erin
g
Flow Rate (l/h)
(C)
5 min15 min25 min
30
50
70
90
110
0 200 400 600 800
Per
cent
age
Adh
erin
g
Flow Rate (l/h)
(D)
Figure 7.13: Effect of the time on the release of 41 nm Pd spheres from glass surfaces, at
20oC. Employed fluids: (A) distilled water, (B) [0.036]M Marlipal O13/40, (C) [0.036]M
Marlipal O13/60 and (D)[0.036]M Marlipal O13/70.
Afterwards, further increments of the flow (i.e. increase of the applied force) do not detach
more particles from the surface. The systems seem to reach a threshold of detachable particles.
This effect can be compared to competitive adsorption of different molecules from liquid on
surfaces. The threshold or plateau corresponds to the situation when there are no more sites
7.4. EFFECT OF THE SURFACTANT CONCENTRATION 74
available at the surfaces to adsorb more molecules of one kind. At this point the detachment
does not depend on the applied force or time, at least for the analysis conditions utilized in this
experiment. Based on this experiment the time analysis for future studies was 5 min per applied
flow and force. Another important observation is the fact that the surfactant solutions help in
the detachment of the particles. Therefore the influence of the surfactant was studied in the
following section. It is important to mention that a complete test takes a lot of time, therefore
measurement at longer times than 25 min per applied force caould be carried out.
7.4 Effect of the Surfactant Concentration
The detachment procedure was carried out using solutions of the surfactants as fluid. The
particles were palladium spheres with average diameter of 41 nm. The concentrations of the
surfactant solutions were varied between 0.002 mol/l and 0.036 mol/l. This means a surfactant
concentration above the critical micelle concentration (CMC).
Figure 7.14 shows the graphs of percentage of adhering particles versus flow rate using
aqueous solutions of Marlipal O13/40 (A), O13/60 (B) and O13/70 (C). Results using pure
water as fluid are also presented as pattern of comparison. In all cases, the percentage of the
particles on the substrate falls faster when the concentration of the surfactant is increased.
However, the major detachment is reached at low flow rates (< 100 l/h) At higher flow rates,
the detachment does not change further significantly. When distilled water without surfactant
is applied, the particles can not be removed from the glass surface.
This behavior can be explained with the observations reported in [1, 12, 14]. The authors
suggested that the forces of interaction between two surfaces are significatively affected by the
presence of surfactant molecules in the fluid.
Adsorption of surfactant monolayer at a hydrophilic surface transforms the surface into
hydrophobic (hydrophobic effect) which increases the attractive forces. This effect seems to be
opposite to the results found in this study, but this behavior takes in account only the presence
of a adsorbed monolayer at surfactant concentrations lower than the CMC. However, authors
pointed also out that if the surfactant concentration is increased, it is expected that the attractive
force again decreases due to the formation of bilayers and other complex aggregates. This
effect was confirmed by Kyraly et al. in [94]. In this case, authors studied the adsorption and
aggregation of n−octyl β−D−monoglucoside (C8G1) nonionic surfactant solution on hydrophilic
7.5. EFFECT OF THE ETHOXYLATION DEGREE 75
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 200 400 600 800
Flow Rate (l/h)
(A)
75 secs of Transition Time
0
20
40
60
80
100
Per
cent
age
Adh
erin
g
(B)
H2O[0.002]M[0.012]M[0.024]M[0.036]M
0
20
40
60
80
100
(C)
Figure 7.14: Effect of the surfactant concentration on the particle detachment of 41 nm Pd
spheres, tested under the following conditions: 20oC and 5 min. for each flow rate applied.
Fluids were (A) Marlipal O13/40, (B) Marlipal O13/60 and (C) Marlipal O13/70.
silica (CPG). They found that the adsorption isotherm is sigmoidal in shape (indicating a
cooperative adsorption mechanism), below the CMC, isolated surfactant molecules are adsorbed
weakly on polar surface sites for example by hydrogen bonding to surface silanol groups.
7.5 Effect of the Ethoxylation Degree
The effect of ethoxylation degree (EO) of the hydrophilic group on the particle detachment was
investigated considering a series of surfactants as Marlipal O13/40, O13/60 and O13/70. The
percentage of adhered palladium particles (41 nm) versus the flow rate is plotted in figures 7.15
and 7.16.
These figures show the observed results for concentrations of different surfactants solutions
[0.024] mol/l and [0.036] mol/l, respectively. These measurements demonstrated that an incre-
7.5. EFFECT OF THE ETHOXYLATION DEGREE 76
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 200 400 600 800
Per
cent
age
Adh
erin
g
Flow Rate (l/h)
H2OM-O13/40M-O13/60M-O13/70
Figure 7.15: Effect of the ethoxylation degree on the particle detachment of 41 nm Pd
spheres, tested under the following conditions: 20oC and 5 min. for each applied flow
rate, [0.024]M Marlipal.
ment of the ethoxylation degree enhances the remotion of the particles.
The above results are in accordance with those presented by Harris et al. [95] and Ballun
et al. [96]. Both groups studied a series of homologous polyoxyethylen alcohols, where the
removal of protein, steric acid and fatty soils from glass surfaces improved when the number of
EO units is increased from 4 to 8 in [96] and from 5 to 10 in [95, 97], respectively. However,
the detachment decreases for ethoxylation degree higher than ten again. Jelinek et al. reported
similar results in [98] considering soil removal from cotton by polyoxyethylene alkylphenols. The
best soil removal was obtained for 10 EO units in analogy with the polyoxyethylene alcohols
followed by a decline with further increasing ethoxylation degree.
The adsorption of the surfactant onto the surface can be the key to explain these results.
Furlong et. al [99] determined the effect of the ethoxylation degree on the adsorption isotherm
for a series of homologous nonionic surfactants. Authors found S−sharped adsorption isotherms
for hydrophilic SiO2 surfaces. The initial rise of the isotherm was larger for surfactants with
higher number of oxyethylene groups. They found also an adsorption of the surfactant by
7.6. EFFECT OF THE TEMPERATURE 77
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 200 400 600 800
Per
cent
age
Adh
erin
g
Flow Rate (l/h)
M-O13/40M-O13/60M-O13/70
Figure 7.16: Effect of the ethoxylation degree on the particle detachment of 41 nm Pd
spheres, tested under the following conditions: 20oC and 5 min. for each applied flow
rate, [0.036]M Marlipal.
their oxyethylene chains. Partyka et al. [100] demonstrated that the adsorption of nonionic
surfactants on silica gel increases with the increment of the oxyethylene chain length, which
demonstrate that the adsorption of the surfactant on the surface occurs by the head group.
7.6 Effect of the Temperature
The removal of palladium particles with the average diameter of 41 nm was tested at different
temperatures (20 oC, 25 oC and 35 oC) with Marlipal O13/70. Results are presented in figure
7.17.
These measurements do not show a pronounced difference between the temperatures. How-
ever, higher temperatures seem to support in in the detachment. Thompson [101] determined
the optimum removal conditions for a series of surfactants (ionic, nonionic and the mixtures
of ionic-nonionic). The author found a relationship between the removal and the interfacial
tension versus temperature. Results for nonionic surfactants type C12EO4 and C12EO5 showed
7.6. EFFECT OF THE TEMPERATURE 78
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 20 40 60
Per
cent
age
Adh
erin
g
Flow Rate (l/h)
20´°C35´°C
Figure 7.17: Effect of the temperature on the particle detachment of 41 nm Pd spheres.
Conditions: 5 min for each applied flow rate and [0.036]M Marlipal O13/70.
an increment in the removal of oily soil from polyester and cotton fabric when the temperature
was increased. While interfacial tension between the fabric and the surfactant solutions for the
studied system with C12EO4 and oil had a minimum at this maximal removal. The maximum in
detachment was reached at 30 oC for C12EO4 and 45 oC for C12EO5. A similar trend is observed
in this study. However, Thompson found that further increment in the temperature above the
optimal value (30 oC for C12EO4 and 45 oC for C12EO5) again decreases the detachment and
increases the interfacial tension, as expected according to the theory described in chapter 2.
This is due to the fact that increments in temperature cause also disruption of the structured
water surrounding of the hydrophobic groups, which disfavor the micellization. These two effect
caused by the increment in temperature are competitive.
The first effect can be attributed to the decreasing water surfactant interaction due to
dehydration of the polyoxyethylene group when the temperature is raised such as in [102, 100].
The dehydration causes the adsorption and aggregation of these types of surfactants on to the
surfaces. Such adsorption decreases the van der Waals attraction between the solids.
As was pointed out in chapter 4, the DLVO-theory predicts that the total potential energy
7.7. EFFECT OF THE HYDROPHOBIC GROUP 79
of interaction VT is the sum of the potential energy of attraction (equation 4.1) and repulsion
(equation 4.5). In the expression for potential energy of attraction, which is considered to be
the more important factor for smaller particles, the Hamaker constant A must be replaced by
an effective Hamaker constant Aeff to take into account the interaction between the surfactant
solution and the solids. This new Hamaker constants is given by equation 7.1 [103].
Aeff =(
√
AP −√
AS
)2(7.1)
Where AP and AS are the Hamaker constant for the particles and solution, respectively. As
particles and solutions become more similar in nature, AP and AS come closer in magnitude and
Aeff become smaller, which results in a smaller attractive potential energy between the particle
and substrate. Furthemore, the decrease of the interfacial tension decrease also the required
work to remove the particles. This effect will be explained in section 7.11.
7.7 Effect of the Hydrophobic Group
In order to investigate the effect of the hydrophobic group on the detachment of palladium
particles (average diameter 41 nm) from glass surfaces, two surfactants, which contain the same
ethoxylation degree and concentration but different hydrophobic chains, were compared at the
same concentration as shown figure 7.18.
Since the adsorption of the surfactants onto polar surfaces (like than glass) occurs via hy-
drophilic groups [14, 100], it is expected that the hydrophobic chains have less effect on the
modification of the surfactant adsorption onto the surfaces. Therefore, the difference between
the detachment produced for both type of surfactants was not pronounced. However, in cases
where the surfactant adsorbs with the hydrophobic group to the surface, this will be the case
for Pd particles, change in the chain length cause more pronounced differences in the behavior
of the system.
7.8. EFFECT OF THE PARTICLE SIZE 80
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
Per
cent
age
Adh
erin
g
Flow Rate (l/h)
M-O13/70M-O24/70
Figure 7.18: Effect of the hydrophobic group on the particle detachment of 41 nm Pd
spheres, tested at 20oC, 5 min, and [0.036]M Marlipal O13/70 and O24/70.
7.8 Effect of the Particle Size
The effect of the particle size on the detachment, process was studied with palladium particles
of different average diameters (30 nm, 41 nm and 48 nm) and considering Marlipal O13/70 as
surfactant, with a concentration of [0.036] mol/l.
The graphs in figure 7.19 represent the effect of the flow rate on the removal of palladium
particles with different sizes. Results show that small particles are more difficult to remove than
the bigger ones. This phenomenon is due to fact that the true contact area of the particles with
the substrate increases for smaller particles. This contact area represented by the parameter h
in the equation 4.1, increases as result the force of adhesion. Figure 7.20 is a plot of the particle
radius versus the flow rate necessary to reach 50% of the particle detachment. It was estimated
from the graphic 7.19 for the different particle sizes. This plot shows that the flow rate required
to obtain 50% of particle detachment decrease with increasing particle radius. This effect is the
expected behavior, as described in chapter 4.
Figure 7.21 presents a graphic of the percentage of adhered particles versus hydrodynamic
forces. The forces were calculated using the equations 6.16 for laminar conditions and 6.17 for
turbulent conditions. Figure 7.22 represents the hydrodynamic force required to remove 50%
7.8. EFFECT OF THE PARTICLE SIZE 81
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 20 40 60
Per
cent
age
Adh
erin
g
Flow Rate (l/h)
30 nm41 nm48 nm
Figure 7.19: Effect of the particle size on the removal Pd spheres of different diameters.
Conditions: 20oC and 5 min for each applied flow rate, [0.036]M Marlipal O13/70.
of the particles from the surfaces. A first look at these plots (7.21 and 7.22) should not be
interpreted incorrectly in the way that the force of adhesion simply falls with decreasing particle
diameter. In fact this observed effect corresponds to a tremendous force per unit area as was
demonstrated in [70]. This study represents a similar case than figures 4.1 and 4.3. The fluid
velocity resulting from hydrodynamic flow approaches zero near the surfaces of the substrate
[6, 7, 8, 104]. Therefore small particles are only reached by the smaller velocities, which produce
not enough force to detach them, as explained in section 6.10. The hydrodynamic force for
particle detachment is calculated according to equation (5.5)
In this study was found that the force necessary to reach 50% of particle detachment was
around 1 × 10−6 dynes for palladium with an average diameter of 40 nm. If the forces of
attraction are assumed to be the most important forces keeping the particles attached to the
surfaces (according to [70]), then equation 7.2 is used for a dry system with the Hamaker constant
A = 1 × 10−19 J distance of separation h = 4 A and the particle radius (Rp) as suggested in
[70]. The adhesion force yields 0.2 m dynes ( 2 × 10−4 dynes) for a dry system.
FLW =A Rp
6 h2(7.2)
7.8. EFFECT OF THE PARTICLE SIZE 82
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
1.6e-06 1.8e-06 2e-06 2.2e-06 2.4e-06
Flo
w R
ate
(l/h)
Particle Radius (cm)
Figure 7.20: Flow rate vs. particle radius at 50% of the detachment for Pd spheres.
Conditions: 20oC and 5 min for each applied flow rate, [0.036]M Marlipal O13/70.
Batra [1] found a Hamaker constant of about 2.3 × 10−20 J for a system particle-substrate-
surfactant solution without hydrodynamic force. If the force of adhesion for palladium-glass
is calculated using this value, the result is 0.04 mdynes ( 4 × 10−5 dynes). This means a
decrease by a factor of about 1 × 101 dynes with respect to the dried system. The measured
value is ten time smaller than the expected value using the condition of Batra. However, the
calculation did not take into account the distance of separation between the particles and the
substrate h, which is expected to be bigger because of the adsorbed layer of surfactants. This
increasing in the separation h will produce a new decrease of the van der Waals interaction
particle-substrate. Assuming an adsorbed monolayer of thickness 2 nm the new h = 2.4 nm
and taking into account a Hamaker constant of A = 2.3 × 10−20 J . This yields a van der Waals
interaction of 1 × 10−3 mdynes, which is in good agreement with the experimental value. In
spite the values found in this study are in good agreement with the expected theoretical values.
We can not forget the fact that Hamaker constant and the separation between the particle and
the substrate are specific for each studied system and the obtaining of the true value will depend
on the particle-substrate-fluid system.
7.8. EFFECT OF THE PARTICLE SIZE 83
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 5e-07 1e-06 1.5e-06 2e-06 2.5e-06 3e-06
Per
cent
age
Adh
erin
g
Hydrodynamic Force (dynes)
30 nm41 nm48 nm
Figure 7.21: Effect of the particle size on the removal of Pd spheres. Conditions: 20oC
and 5 min for each applied flow rate, [0.036]M Marlipal O13/70.
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
1.1
1.2
1.5E-06 2E-06 2.5E-06
Hyd
rody
nam
ic F
orce
(m
icro
dyn
es)
Particle Radius (cm)
Figure 7.22: Hydrodynamic force vs. particle radius at 50% of the detachment for Pd
spheres. Conditions: 20oC and 5 min for each applied flow rate, [0.036]M Marlipal O13/70.
7.9. EFFECT OF DIFFERENT MATERIALS 84
7.9 Effect of Different Materials
Nanoparticles of Yttrium iron garnet (20 nm), Perovskite (20 nm), Zirconia (27 nm) and Pal-
ladium (30 nm) were tested in order to study the influence of the material on the detachment
from glass surfaces.
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 40 80 120 160 200 240
Per
cent
age
Adh
erin
g
Flow Rate (l/h)
YIGPerovskite
ZirconiaPalladium
Figure 7.23: Effect of different materials on the particle detachment tested with the
same conditions. [0.036]M Marlipal O13/70 at 20oC. YIG (Y3Fe5O12), perovskite
(Ca0.5Sr0.5MnO3), zirconia (ZrO2) and (Pd)
Figure 7.23 is a plot of the percentage of particles adhering versus the flow rate (Q l/h). A
first look at on the results indicates that the removal of the particles decreases with the increase
of oxygen content in the material. This means that the adhesion forces between the glass surfaces
and particles are increasing within this series of oxides, because the number of hydrogen bonds
that can be formed between the particles and the substrate.
Unfortunately, it was impossible to obtain particles with exactly average diameter. There-
fore, an additional effect is included due to the sizes. Therefore particles of palladium (30 nm)
as well as Zirconia (27 nm) can be detached easier than particles of YIG (20 nm) and Perovskite
(20 nm), which can not be removed significatively.
Allen found that the Lifshitz-van der Waals constant A′, which is related to the Hamaker
7.9. EFFECT OF DIFFERENT MATERIALS 85
constant by A′ = (4/3) π A, has ranges from about 0.6 eV (1 eV = 1.6 × 10−19 J) for polymers
to about 9.0 eV for metals as silver and gold [70]. He found also that a system Ag-Ag (particle-
substrate) has 9.0 eV while a combination SiO2−SiO2 (glass-glass) has between 6.8-7.2 eV and
Au − SiO2 around 5.4 eV. The combination SiO2 − SiO2 can be related to the systems oxide
particles-glass (perovskite-glass, YIG-glass and zirconia-glass) and the combination Au− SiO2
to the system Pd-glass. The above consideration allows to estimate that the system palladium-
glass have a lower van der Waals force than the other systems. Therefore, palladium particles
on glass were easier to removes than YIG, zirconia or perovskite on glass. Figure 7.24 shows the
Lifshitz-van der Waals constant for the different systems.
0
2
4
6
8
10
A B C D E
A’ (
eV)
Materials
Figure 7.24: Lifshitz-van der Waals constant (A′) for different materials. (A) polymer −polymer, (B) Au − SiO2, (C) SiO2 − SiO2, (D) Ag − Ag and (E) Au − Au
It can be observed from the equation of Lifshitz-van der Waals constant, that the relationship
between the materials of the different systems and the Hamaker constant is the same. In this way,
it is expected that the attractive forces between particle and surface is higher for the system oxide
substrate-oxide particle (combination glass-YIG, glass-zirconia and glass-perovskite) than for
oxide substrate-metal particle system (combination glass-palladium). The above considerations
are in good qualitative agreement with the obtained results. The differences in the detachment
7.10. EFFECT OF THE HYDRODYNAMIC PARAMETERS 86
for the glass-YIG particles, glass-perovskite and glass-zirconia can be related to particle size
effects as well as, the oxygen content in the different materials.
7.10 Effect of the Hydrodynamic Parameters
Figure 7.25 plots the wall shear stress versus particle radius considering 50% of the detachment
of the palladium particles with average diameter of 41 nm. The shear stresses were calculated
using the equation 5.8. A power trend of this plot permits to identify the mechanism acting to
detach the particle as was pointed out by Hubbe [77]. These relationships have been discussed
in the chapter 5.
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
1.6e−06 1.8e−06 2e−06 2.2e−06 2.4e−06
Wal
l She
ar S
tres
s (d
ynes
/cm
2)
Particle Radius (cm)
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
1.6e−06 1.8e−06 2e−06 2.2e−06 2.4e−06
Wal
l She
ar S
tres
s (d
ynes
/cm
2)
Particle Radius (cm)
Figure 7.25: Shear stress vs. particle size at 50% of the detachment of 41 nm Pd spheres,
tested under the following conditions: 20oC and 5 min for each applied flow rate, [0.036]M
Marlipal O13/70.
The power trend was τ = 3x10−9 R−1.352p (R2 = 0.9984). This means a radius dependency
around R−4/3, which indicates that the mechanism acting to remove the particles is lifting. It
is expected that palladium particles are hard spheres.
These results seem to be contradictory with those presented in [104, 105, 106], where authors
7.11. DETACHMENT MECHANISM 87
indicate that the principal mechanism acting to detach the particles could be due to rolling
instead of lifting. However, in all these studies, the fluids were water and solutions with low
concentrations of ions. In these cases, there was no other source of vertical forces. When a
solution of surfactant is employed, we expect that its contribution is due to the adsorption of
the surfactant onto the surfaces. This should modify the van der Waals forces by increasing the
distance between the solids. Additionally, it is well know from cleaning processes that the solid
can be suspended in the bath solutions by adsorption of surfactant preventing the redeposition
by producing a steric barrier [12]. This factor acts opposite to the force of adhesion (in a diagram
of force).
7.11 Detachment Mechanism
In summary, the removal of fine particles occurs in two stages. First, the diffusion and adsorption
of the surfactant onto the surfaces, which depend on the hydrophobicity of the substrates.
The particle and the substrates can be both hydrophobic, both hydrophilic or a combination
hydrophobic-hydrophilic. The adsorption of the surfactant molecules onto the surfaces can be
improved by changing the concentration, temperature, ethoxylation, etc, as well as employing
another surfactant type (anionic-cationic) depending on the characteristics of the system.
The adsorption of surfactants onto the surfaces decreases the work required to remove the
particle, since van der Waals force is modified. The free energy per unit area involved in this
process is the work of adhesion (Wa). This work can be written as follows.
Wa = γSF + γFP + γSP (7.3)
Where γSF represents the surface tension substrate-fluid, γFP is the surface tension fluid-
particle and γSP denotes the surface tension substrate-particle. The adsorption of surfactant at
these interfaces decreases γSF and γFP producing a consequent decrease of the work required
to remove the particle.
Second, the detachment of the particles occurs by fluid action, which is referred as “hydrody-
namic detachment”. The fluid motion generates two additional forces (lifting and hydrodynamic
forces) and a torque. In this study, the major contribution on the detachment was due to the
lifting force in contrast to the suggestion in [105, 106, 104].
7.11. DETACHMENT MECHANISM 88
The impact of the hydrodynamic force seem to be less relevant than the diffusion and ad-
sorption of the surfactant onto the surface. However the application of the hydrodynamic forces
completes the detachment process. Figure 7.26 represents a scheme of the proposted mechanism.
Diffusion and adsorption of the surfactant molecules on the surfaces follows by the action of the
hydrodynamic force, which complets the removal.
Figure 7.26: The total removal mechanism acting to detach the particles from de surface.
(A) Pd on glass, (B) YIG on glass, zirconia on glass and perovskite on glass.
Chapter 8
Conclusions
The aim of this research was to study the effects of nonionic surfactants on the interactions
between nanoparticles and glass surfaces. To reach this objective, the research followed a fourfold
strategy:
Synthesis of nanoparticles Particles with a defined size and morphology were synthesized
using w/o-microemulsion. This procedure has been employed in several experiments to
obtain fine particles with a good control of their sizes in nanometer ranges.
Development of a method to coat glass substrates This method allowed to obtain coated
samples with homogenous monolayer of nanoparticles. The use of the reverse micelles
for this purpose resulted a suitable medium for controlled deposition. Additionally, the
method presented some advantage over other methods. For example the wide variety of
materials that can be synthesized in microemulsions as well as the possibility to change
the composition in order to control the deposition. The method is inexpensive and does
not require special equipment.
Design and construction of a device to test the detachment The device was based on
the application of a hydrodynamic force, which is caused by the motion of a fluid inside
the cylinder, and variation in the properties of the fluids (in this case the aqueous solutions
of surfactants), which acts to debilitate the adhesion force between the particles and the
substrate.
Implementation of a technique to quantify the detachement Quantification of the par-
ticle detachment was followed by measurements of U.V. absorption and calculating of the
89
90
attenuation coefficient. However, this method has some disadvantages. For example, the
substrates have to be transparent, which limited the study only to glass substrates and
the calculation of the attenuation coefficient does not take into account the percentage of
light that is scattered by the particles.
The effects of the time on the detachment shows that an increment of the time of analysis does
not have significant influence on the detachment of the particles, at least for the employed periods
of time. The major particle detachment is observed with a low flow velocity (< 2.3×10−1 m/s).
At higher velocities, the systems reached a threshold with no further detachment of particles.
Increments in the concentration of the surfactants caused an increment in the detachment
of the particles. This effect seems to be related to the formation of adsorbed bilayers or other
aggregates at the surface of the particles and substrates. The formation of these bilayers can
produce an increment in the distance of separation between the particles and glass surfaces,
which decreases the attractive force between the two solids.
Detachment was improved by increasing of the ethoxylation degrees of the surfactants.
Higher ethoxylation degrees increase the adsorption of the surfactants at the surface, which
can cause the formation of aggregates. This behavior is in accordance with those found in other
references [95, 96, 97] . However, it is important to emphasize that in these references it was also
found that for ethoxylations degree higher than ten the detachment again decreases. Changes
of the lipophilic chains of the surfactant have no effect on the forces of adhesion, since the
adsorption of the surfactants onto polar surfaces occurs via hydrophilic groups.
Variations in the kind of nanoparticle materials showed that the attractive forces between a
particle and surface is higher for the oxide substrate oxide particle system (combination glass-
YIG, glass-zirconia and glass-perovskite) than for oxide substrate metal particle system (com-
bination glass-palladium). This behavior is related to the Hamaker constant, which is higher
for the oxide surface oxide particles systems than for oxide surface metal particle system. The
differences in the detachment for the glass-YIG particles, glass-perovskite and glass-zirconia can
be related to particle size effects as well as the oxygen content in the different materials.
The mechanism of incipient motion was estimated from a plot of the shear stress versus the
particle radius following the procedure described by Hubbe [77]. From the radius dependence
the mechanism was assumed to be lifting. This means that the major contribution to the
detachment of the nanoparticles is a vertical force opposed to the forces of adhesion. In the
studied case there is no other source of vertical forces, so that the lifting forces were generated
91
by the adsorption of the surfactants on the surface, which modify van der Waals forces and
electrostatic forces.
The adsorption of surfactant onto the surface decrease also the work required to remove the
particles by modifying the surface tensions in the system substrate-particle-fluid. The detach-
ment occurs by diffusion and adsorption of the surfactants onto the surfaces, which debilitates
the particle-substrate adhesion, followed by the action of the hydrodynamic force.
Bibliography
[1] A. Batra, S. Paria, and K. C. Khilar. Removal of surface adhered particles by surfactants
and fluid motion. AIChE, 47(11):2557–2565, 2001.
[2] K. Arulanandan, P. Loganathan, and R. B. Krone. Pore and eroding fluid influences on
surfaces erosion of soil. J. Geotechnol. Eng. Div. Am. Soc. Civ. Eng, 101(1):51–56, 1975.
[3] A. Venkitaraman, P. M. Reberts, and M. M. Sharma. Ultrasonic removal of near wellbore
damage caused by fines and mud solids. SPE, (27388), 1995.
[4] R. A. Boulin. J. Electrochem. Soc., 12:151, 1984.
[5] R. F. Romo and M. M. Pitts. Application of electrotechnology for removal and prevention
of reverse osmosis biofouling. Environmental Progress, 28(2):107–112, 1999.
[6] A. J. Goldmand, R. G. Cox, and H. Brenner. Slow viscous motion of a sphere parallel to a
plane wall−I motion through a quiescent fluid. Chemical Engineerig Science, 22:637–651,
1967.
[7] A. J. Goldmand, R. G. Cox, and H. Brenner. Slow viscous motion of a sphere parallel to
a plane wall − II couette flow. Chemical Engineerig Science, 22:653–660, 1967.
[8] M. E. ONeill. A sphere in contact with a plane wall in a slow linear shear flow. Chemical
Engineerig Science, 23:1293–1298, 1968.
[9] J. Visser. Measurement of the force of adhesion between submicrom carbon-black particles
and cellulose film in aqueous solution. J. of Colloid and Interface Science, 34(1):26–31,
1970.
[10] J. W. Cleaver and B. Yates. Mechanism of detachment of collidal particles from a flat
substrate in turbulent flow. J. of Colloid Interface Science, 44(3):464–474, 1973.
92
BIBLIOGRAPHY 93
[11] K. R. Lange. Surfactant: A Practical Handbook. Hanser Gardner Publications, Inc., 6915
Valley Avenue, Cincinnati, Ohio 45244-3029, 1999.
[12] M. J. Rosen. Surfactants and Interfacial Phenomena. Wiley-Intrscience, 111 River Street,
Hoboken, New Jersey 07030, third edition edition, 2004.
[13] P. Becher. J. Dispersion Sci. Technol., 5:81, 1984.
[14] M. J Schick, editor. Nonionic Surfactants, Physical Chemistry, volume 23. Marcel Dekker.
Inc., 270 Madison Avenue, New York 10016, 1987.
[15] E. H. Crook, D. B. Fordyce, and G. F. Trebbi. Molecular weight distribution of nonionic
surfactants i. J. Phys. Chem., 67:1987–1963, 1963.
[16] B. D. Flockhart. The effect of temperature on the critical micelle concentration of some
paraffin-chain salts. J. Colloid Sci., 16:484–492, 1961.
[17] N. R. Morrow, editor. Interfacial Phenomena in Petroleum Recovery, volume 36 of Sur-
factant Science Series. Marcel Dekker, Inc., 270 Madison Avenue, New York 10016, 1991.
[18] P. Vaqueiro, M. A. Lopez-Quintela, and J. Rivas. Synthesis of yttrium iron garnet nanopar-
ticles via copresipitation in microemulsion. J. Mater. Chem, 7(3):501–504, 1997.
[19] K. Shinoda and H. Arai. Solubility of nonionic surface-active agents in hydrocarbons. J.
Coll. Sci., 20:93–97, 1965.
[20] M. P. Pileni. Reverse micelle as microreactors. J. Phys. Chem., (97):6961–6973, 1993.
[21] C. Solans and H. Kunieda. Industrial Applications of Microemulsions, Surfactant Science
Series 66. Marcel Dekker, INC., 270 Madinson Avenue, NY, 1997.
[22] M.M. Sharma. Surfactant adsorption and surface solubilization. Ame. Chem. Soc., 1995.
[23] W. C. Griffin. Classification of surface-active agent by HLB. J. Soc. Cosmetic Chem.,
1:311, 1949.
[24] W. C. Griffin. Calculation of HLB values of non-ionic surfactants. J. Soc. Cosmetic
Chem., 5:259, 1954.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 94
[25] P. Waszczuk, J. Solla-Gullon, H.-S. Kim, Y.Y. Tong, V. Montiel, A. Aldaz, and A. Wieck-
owski. Methanol electrooxidation on platinum/rhutenium nanoparticles catalysts. J.
Catal., 203:1–6, October 2001.
[26] P.E. Dunn and S.H. Carr. A perspective on the ocurrence of pizoelectry materials. MRS
Bull, 14:22–31, February 1989.
[27] R.W. Siegel. Nanophase materials assembled from clusters. MRS Bull, 15:60–69, October
1990.
[28] F. Grotelschen. Nanotechnologie gegen krebs. Start, 3:17, August 2003.
[29] F.E. Kruis, K. Nielsch, H. Fissan, B. Rellinghaus, and E.F. Wassermann. Preparation
of size-classified PbS nanoparticles in the gas phase. J. Appl. Phys., 73(4):547–549, July
1998.
[30] I.W. Lenggoro, F. Iskandar, H Mizushima, B. Xia, K. Okuyama, and N. Kijima. One-step
synthesis for Zn2SiO4:Mn particles 0-3- 1,3 µm in size with spherical morfology and non
aggregation. Jpn. J. Appl. Phys., 39(10B):L1051–L1053, October 2000.
[31] S. Abbet, K. Kudai, L. Klinger, and U. Heiz. Synthesis of monodispersed model catalyst
using softlanding cluster deposition. Pure. Appl. Chem., 74:1527–1535, September 2002.
[32] D. Sarigianis, J. D. Peck, T.J. Mountziaris, G. Kiseoglou, and A. Petrou. Vapor phase
synthesis of II − V I semiconductor nanoparticles in counter flow jet reactor. MRS Pro-
ceedings, 616:41–46, August 2000.
[33] P. Fayet and L. Woste. Z. Phys. B, 3:6792–6797, August 1986.
[34] W.D. Reents, A.M. Mujsce, V.E. Bondybey, and M.L. Mandich. Reactions of cationic
silicon clusters with xenon difluoride. J. Chem. Phys., 80:5568–5577, January 1987.
[35] T. Takagi. Z. Phys. D, 3:272, August 1986.
[36] E. Matijevic. Monodispersed colloids: Art and science. Lagmuir, 2:12–20, October 1986.
[37] T. Sugimoto. Deposition. Adv. Colloid Interface Sci., 28:65, August 1987.
[38] Carl C. Koch. Nanostructured Materials- Processing Properties and Potential Appcations.
Carl C. Koch., NY, 2002.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 95
[39] K.C. Yang and B.D. Rowan. Produccion of gold, platinun and palladium powders. Amer.
Soc. for Met., 7:148–151, August 1984.
[40] L.K. Kurihara, G.M. Chow, and P.E. Schoen. Nanocrystalline metallic powders and films
produced by the polyol method. Nanostructured Materials, 5:607–613, August 1995.
[41] G.M. Chow, L.K. Kurihara, L.K. Kemner, P.E. Schoen, W.T. Elam, A. Ervin, S. Keller,
Y.D. Zhang, J. Budnick, and T. Ambrose. Structural, morfological and magnetic study of
nanocrystalline cobalt-copper powders synthesized by the polyol method. J. Mater. Res.,
10:1546–1554, June 1995.
[42] K.S. Suslik. Ultrasound: Its Chemical, Physical and Biological Effects. CVH, Weinheim,
1998.
[43] K.S. Suslik, T. Hyeon, M. Fang, and A.A. Cichowlas. Sonochemical synthesis of nanos-
tructured catalysts. Materials Science and Engineering A, 204:193–196, August 1995.
[44] E. Matijevic. Production of monodispersed colloidal particles. Ann. Rev. Mater. Sci.,
15:483–516, August 1985.
[45] C. Li, I. Yamai, Y. Murase, and E. Kato. Formation of acicular monoclinic zirconia
particles under hydrotermal conditions. J. Am. Ceram. Soc., 72:1479–1482, August 1989.
[46] T. Graham. On the properties of silicic acid and other analogous colloidal substances. J.
Chem. Soc. London, 17:318–327, October 1990.
[47] S.S. Kistler. Coherent expanded aerogels and jellies. Nature, 127:741, October 1931.
[48] R. Roy and E.F. Osborn. The system Al2O3-SiO2-H2O. American Mineralogist, 39:853–
885, October 1954.
[49] E.A. Barriger and H.K. Bowen. Formation packing and sintering of monodisperse T iO2
powders. Comunications of the Am. Ceram. Soc., C:199–201, October 1982.
[50] R. Corriu, D. Leclerq, P. Lefevre, P.H. Mutin, and A. Vioux. Preparation of monolithic
binary oxide gels by a non-hydrolytic sol-gel process. Chem. Materials, 4:961–963, October
1992.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 96
[51] M. Jansen and E. Guenther. Oxide gels and ceramics prepared by a non-hydrolytic sol-gel
process. Chem. Materials, 7:2110–2114, October 1995.
[52] Silvia Papp, Anna Szucs, and I. Dekany. Colloid synthesis of monodisperse Pd nanopar-
ticles in layered silicates. Solid State Ionics, 141:169–176, October 2001.
[53] J.A. Dikersen and T.A. Ring. Fundamentals of crystallization: kinetic effects on particle
size distribution and morphology. J. Chem. Engng. Sci., 46 (10):2389–2427, 1991.
[54] V.K. La Mer and R.H. Dinegar. Theory, prodution and mechanism of formation of
monodispersed hydrosols. J. Am. Chem. Soc., 72 (11):4847–4854, November 1950.
[55] V.K. La Mer. Nucleation in phase transitions. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, 44
(6):1270–1277, June 1952.
[56] A. E. Nilsen. Kinetics of Precipitation. Pergamon Press LTD-Oxford, Headington Hill
Hall, Oxford, 4 and 5. Fitzroy Square, London W.1, 1964.
[57] H. Reiss. An approximate solution of certain diffusion problems. Trans. N. Y. Acad. of
Sciences, 11(7):236–239, 1949.
[58] P. Chiang and M. D. Donohue. Crystallization from ionic solution. In American Institute
of Chemical Engineers, editor, Fundamental Aspects of Crystallization and Precipitation
Processes, volume 83, pages 8–18, 345 East 47 Street, New York 10017, 1987. AIche
Symposium Series.
[59] W. L. McCabe and R. P. Stevens. Measure of the growth rate for copper sulfate. Chem.
Eng. Prog., 47:168–174, 1951.
[60] C. W. Davies and A. L. Jones. The precipitation of silver chloride from aqueous solution
part 2- kinetics of growth of seed crystals. Trans. Faraday Soc., 51:812–817, 1955.
[61] M. v. Smoluchowski. Versuch einer mathematischen Theorie der Koagulationskinetik
kolloider Loesungen. Zeitschrift f. physik Chemie, pages 129–168, 1917.
[62] I. Ravet, J.B. Nagy, and E.G. Derouane. On the mechanism of formation of colloidal
monodisperse metal boride particles from reverse micelles composed of CTAB-1-hexanol-
water. Stud. Surf. Sci. Catal., 31:505–516, August 1987.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 97
[63] K. Osseo-Asare and F. Arriagada. Synthesis of nanosize particles in reversed microemul-
sions. Ceram. Trans., 12:3–16, August 1990.
[64] T.F. Towey, A. Khan-Lodhi, and B.H. Robinson. Kinetics and mechanism of formation in
water-aerosol-OT-oil microemulsions. J. Chem. Soc. Faraday Trans., 86:3757–3762, May
1990.
[65] T. Hirai, H. Sato, and I. Komasawa. Mechamism of formation of titanium dioxide ultrafine
particles in reverse micelles by hydrolysis of titanium tetrabutoxide. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res.,
32:3014–3019, August 1993.
[66] R. Bandoyopadhyaya, R. Kumar, and K.S. Gandhi. Modeling of precipitation in revese
micellar systems. Langmuir, 13:3610–3620, March 1997.
[67] J. Schmidt, Christine Guesdon, and R. Schomaecker. Engineering aspects of preparation
of nanocrystalline particles in microemulsion. J. Nanoparticle Reserch, 1:267–276, March
1999.
[68] J. Tanori and P. Pileni. Control of the shape of copper metallic particles by using a
colloidal system as template. Langmuir, 13:639–646, 1997.
[69] P. D. Fletcher and D. I. Horsup. Tamano de la gota. J. chem. Soc. Faraday Trans.,
6(88):855–864, 1992.
[70] R. Allen. A theoretical review of particle adhesion. In K. L. Mittal, editor, Particles on
Surfaces: Detection adhesion and Removal, chapter 2, pages 129–141. Plenum Press, 233
Spring Street, 1 edition, 1988.
[71] Das S., R. Schechter, and M. Sharma. The role of surface rougness and contact deforma-
tion on the hydrodynamic detachment of particles from surface. Journal of Colloid and
Interface Science, 164:63–77, 1994.
[72] R. M. Pashley and J. N. Israelachvili. DLV O-theory and hydratation forces between mica
surfaces in Mg+2, Ca+2, Sr+2 and Ba+2 cloride solution. J. Colloid Interface Sci., 97:446,
1984.
[73] J. L. Salager. Doble capa electrica interfacial. In Cuadernos FIRP, volume 2. FIRP-ULA,
1998.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 98
[74] H. Lange. Physical chemestry of cleaning action. In Marcel Dekker, editor, Solvent Prop-
erties of Surfactant Solutions, page 117. Dekker, New York, 1967.
[75] E. M. Lifshitz. Sov. Phys. JETP, 2:73, 1956.
[76] R. Hogg, T. W. Healy, and D. W. Fuerstenau. Mutual coagulation of colloidal dispersions.
Trans. Faraday Soc., (62):1638–1651, 1966.
[77] M. A. Hubbe. Theory of detachment of colloidal particles from flat surfaces exposed to
flow. J. of Colloids and Surfaces, 12:151–178, 1984.
[78] D. S. Finnicum and T. J. Hanratty. Turbulent normal velocity fluctuations close to a wall.
J. phys. Fluids, 28:1654–1658, 1985.
[79] P. Huibers, V. Lobanov, A. Katritzky, D. Shah, and M. Karelson. Prediction of critical
micelle concentration using a quantitative structure-property relationship approach. 1.
nonionic surfactants. Langmuir, 12:1462–1470, 1996.
[80] A. Lopez-Trosell and R. Schomaeker. Synthesis and characterization of perovskite man-
ganite ca0.5sr0.5mno3 nanoparticles in w/o-microemulsions. Material Research Bulletin,
submitted.
[81] M. Lade, H. Mays, J. Schmidt, R. Willumeit, and R. Schomaecker. On the nanoparticle
synthesis in microemulsions: detailed characterization of an applied reaction mixture.
Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects, 163:3–15, 2000.
[82] P. Vaqueiro, M. A. Lopez, and J. Rivas. Synthesis of yttrium iron garnet nanoparticles
via coprecipitation in microemulsions. J. Mater. Chem., 7(3):501–504, 1997.
[83] R. Guo, H. Qi, Y. Chen, and Z. Yang. Reverse microemulsion region and composition
optimization of the aeo9/alcohol/alcane/water system. Material Research Bulleting, (9),
2003.
[84] J. Fraissard, editor. Physical adsorption: Experiment, Theory and Applications. NATO
ASI Serie C. Kluwer Academic Publisher, 3300AH Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1997.
[85] K. Kristiansen. Scanning electron microscope with energy- and wavelenght-dispersive spec-
trometry, chapter 6. Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH, D-69469 Weinheim, 1997.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 99
[86] J. W. Niemantsverdriet. Spectroscopy in Catalysis, An Introdution. Wiley-VCH Verlag
GmbH, second edition edition, 2000.
[87] C. Whiston. X-ray Methods: Analytical Chemistry by Open Learnig. John Wiley and
Sons, 1987.
[88] A. Lopez-Trosell and Y. C. Araujo. Metodologıa experimental para la determinacion de
coeficientes de esparcido en sistemas lıquido/lıquido/solido. Technical Report INT-6226,
PDVSA-Intevep, 1999.
[89] A. Lopez-Trosell and R. Schomaeker. Coating of glass surfaces with nanoparticles of
different materials synthesized in microemulsions. NSTI Nanotech 2005, 2005.
[90] M. B. Ranade, V. B. Menon, M. E. Mullins, and V. L. Debler. Adhesion and removal of
particles: Effect of the medium. In K. L. Mittal, editor, Particles on Surfaces: Detection
adhesion and Removal, chapter 2, pages 145–155. Plenum Press, 233 Spring Street, 1988.
[91] Willi Bohl. Technische Stroemungslehre, chapter 4. Vogel, 9 edition, 1991.
[92] C. F. Bohren and D. R. Huffman. Absorption and Scattering of Light by Small Particles.
Wiley-Intercience, 1999.
[93] Y. Liu, H. Zheng, J. Liu, and T. Zhang. Preparation of high surface area
La1-xAxMnO3 (A = Ba, Sr or Ca) ultra fine particles used for CH4 oxidation. Chemical
Eng. Journal, (89):213–221, 2002.
[94] Z. Kiraly, R. H. K. Borner, and G. H. Findenegg. Adsorption and aggregation of c8e4
and c8g1 nonionic surfactants on hydrophilic silica studied by calorimetry. Langmuir,
13(13):3308–3315, 1997.
[95] J. C. Harris, R. M. Anderson, and J. Satanek. Removal of radio-tagged protein and stearic
acid soil from glass. J. Am. Oil Chemist. Soc., 38:169–172, 1961.
[96] A. T. Bullen, J. N. Schumaker, G. E. Kapella, and J. V. Karabinos. Comparative de-
tergency of several built polyethenoxy alkanoates. J. Am. Oil Chemists Soc., (31):20–26,
1954.
[97] J. C. Harris, R. M. Anderson, and J. Satanek. Removal of fatty soil from glass by surfac-
tants and surfactant-builder compositions. J. Am. Oil Chemist. Soc., 38:123–127, 1961.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 100
[98] C. F. Jelinek and R. L. Mayhew. Nonionic detergents. Ind. Eng. Chem., (46):1930–1934,
1954.
[99] F. Fourlong. J. Am. Oil Chemists Soc., (47):1930–1938, 1962.
[100] S. Partyka, S. Zaini, M. Lindheimer, and B. Brund. The adsorption of non-ionic surfactants
on silical gel. J. Coll. Surf., 12:255, 1984.
[101] L. Thompsom. The role of oil detachment mechanisms in determining optimum detergency
conditions. J. Colloid and Interface Sci., (163):61–73, 1994.
[102] A. Corkill. J. Am. Oil Chemists Soc., (47):1930–1938, 1962.
[103] M. J. Vold. J. Colloid Sci., (16):1, 1961.
[104] S. G. Yiantsios and A. J. Karabelas. Detachment of spherical microparticles adhering on
flat surfaces by hydrodynamic forces. J. of Collid and Interface Science, 176:74–85, 1995.
[105] S. K. Das and M. M. Sharma. Adhesion and hydrdynamic removal of colloidal particles
from surface. Particulate Science and Technology, 13:227–247, 1995.
[106] M.M. Sharma, H. Chamoun, D. S. Sarma, and R. S. Schechter. Factors controlling the hy-
drodynamic detachment of particles from surfces. J. Colloid and Interface Sci., 149(1):121–
134, 1992.
Erklarung
Hiermit erklare ich, dass weder fruher noch gleichzeitig eine Anmeldung der Promotion-
sabsicht oder ein Promotionsverfahren bei einer anderen Hochschule oder bei einem anderen
Fachbereich erfolg ist.
Berlin, Marz 2005
Teilen der Dissertation sind in Form von Zeitschriftenartikeln und Vortragen veroffentlicht
worden. Die folgende Liste gibt daruber Aufschluss:
Artikel in Zeitschriften:
• A. Lopez-Trosell, R. Schomacker.“Synthesis of manganese perovskite in w/o-microemulsion”,
Materials Research Bulletin (submitted).
Vortragen:
• A. Lopez-Trosell, R. Schomacker. 2005 NSTI Nanotechnology Conference, May 8-12, Ana-
heim California, U.S.A. “Coating of glass surfaces with nanoparticles of different materials
synthesized in microemulsions” (accepted)
• A. Lopez-Trosell, R. Schomacker. 2005 NSTI Nanotechnology Conference, May 8-12, Ana-
heim California, U.S.A. “Synthesis and characterization of perovskite Ca0.5 Sr0.5MnO3
nanoparticles in w/o-microemulsion” (accepted)
Eidesstattliche Versicherung
Die Arbeit wurde in der Zeit von Oktober 2001 bis Januar 2004 unter Anleitung von Herrn
Prof. Dr. R. Schomacker am Institut fur Technische Chemie an der TU Berlin angefertigt.
Hiermit versichere ich an Eides Statt, dass ich die von mir vorgelegte Dissertation selbstandig
und ohne unzulassige Hilfe angefertigt, die benutzten Quellen und Hilfsmittel vollstandig angegeben
und die Stellen der Arbeit, die anderen Werken in Wortlaut und Sinn nach entnommen sind, in
jedem Einzelfall als Entlehnung kenntlich gemacht habe.
Berlin, Marz 2005
Curriculum Vitae
B.Sc. (Chemistry). Lopez Trosell Alejandra I.
Personal details
Place of Birth Valencia- Carabobo
Nationality Venezuelan
Marital status single
Academic History
10/2001- Present Working towards the degree of Doctor in Sciences
Technische Universitat Berlin
Faculty II, Institute of Chemistry
Thesis: “Effects of Nonionic Surfactants on the Interactions of
Different Nanoparticle Materials on Glass Surfaces”
Supervisor: Dr. Schomacker Reinhard
1992-1999 Bachelor of Science (Chemistry)
Faculty of Science and Department of Physical Chemistry
Universidad Central de Venezuela
Thesis: “Experimental and Numerical Determination of Spreading
Coefficients in Silica Surfaces with Controlled Wettability”
Supervisor: Dr. Araujo Y. Carolina (PDVSA-Intevep)
Dr. Prof. Castillo Jimmy (UCV)
Department of Reservoir Exploration and Production
PDVSA-Intevep
Research Experience
05/98-02/99 Petroleum of Venezuela (PDVSA-Intevep)
Department of Reservoir Exploration and Production
El Tambor - Los Teques, 1070-A, Caracas -Venezuela
08/96-09/96 Colgate-Palmolive C.A.
Department of Development of New Products.
Av. Uslar, Zona Industrial Michelena,
Valencia -Edo. Carabobo - Venezuela.
03/94-11/97 Department of Organic Chemistry, Laboratory of
Synthesis of Natural Products,
Universidad Central de Venezuela.
Los Chaguaramos 1020-A Caracas-Venezuela
Teaching Experience
12/97-08/99 Academic Assistant Laboratory of Instrumental Analysis
(UV, IR, Chromatography and Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy)
Academic Honours
09/2000-Present Scholarship Program of German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD)
and Gran Mariscal de Ayacucho Foundation (FGMA).
07/2002 Selected by AVINA-Foundation to participate in
the 52nd. Nobel Prize Winners Meetings with Young Scientists
in Lindau on Lake Constance. 1-5 July 2002.
Publications
• A.Lopez-Trosell and R. Schomacker.“Synthesis of manganese perovskite in w/o-microemulsion”.
Materials Research Bulletin, (submitted).
• A.Lopez-Trosell and R. Schomacker, 2005 NSTI Nanotechnology Conference, May 8-12,
Anaheim California, U.S.A. “Coating of glass surfaces with nanoparticles of different ma-
terials synthesized in microemulsions” (accepted)
• A.Lopez-Trosell and R. Schomacker, 2005 NSTI Nanotechnology Conference, May 8-12,
Anaheim California, U.S.A. “Synthesis and characterization of perovskite Ca0.5 Sr0.5MnO3
nanoparticles in w/o- microemulsion” (accepted)
• A. Lopez and Y. Araujo. “Sistemas Lıquido/Lıquido/Solido”. Informe Tecnico, INT-
6226,1999. PDVSA, Intevep, 1999.
• A. Lopez and Y. Araujo. “Coeficientes de Spreading en Sistemas Lıquido/Lıquido/Solido”
2nd Congress of Physics, Cumana-Venezuela, March 2000.