Mixed Adsorption of Cetyltrimethylammonium Bromide and Triton X-100 Surfactants on Carbon Black

Abstract

Adsorption of cationic cetyltrimethylammonium bromide (CTAB) and nonionic Triton X100 surfactants from their mixed aqueous solutions on graphitized carbon black (CB) have been studied. The adsorption isotherms of CTAB or Triton X100 from single solutions on CB surface shown to be of the Langmuir type. In the mixed solutions of CTAB and Triton X100 surfactants, the adsorption of CTAB or Triton X100 on CB decreased in the presence of the other surfactant due to competitive adsorption of the components. It was shown that the mole fraction of Triton X-100 on CB surface has been essentialy changed depending on total concentration of the surfactants mixture. At mixture concentration corresponding to the unsaturated monolayer, a strong synergetic effect was found when the surface excess concentration Triton X100 at the CB surface in the presence of CTAB is higher than that for Triton X-100 in the absence of CTAB.

Features of adsorption of binary mixtures of cationic and non-ionic surfactants by non-porous carbon sorbent

“…This means that adsorption of cationic surfactant is increased in the presence of the molecules of the non-ionic surfactant. A similar effect was observed for the cetyltrimethylammonium bromide-Triton X-100 system at the mixture concentration, which corresponds to an unsaturated monolayer [28].…”

Kinetic and thermodynamic investigations of surfactants adsorption from water by carbide-derived carbon

“…It might also be assumed that interactions between the positively charged HDPB þ ions and p electrons of the graphite lattice of the CDC surface also contribute to the adsorption of the cationic surfactant, similarly as it was suggested previously for the adsorption of cationic surfactants on the carbon black particles in aqueous solutions. [29,64] At pH 6.7, for the asprepared TX-100 solution, the adsorption capacity of TX-100 was 578 mg/g followed by 467 mg/g for HDPB and 450 mg/g for SDBS, confirming the strong hydrophobic interactions between the nonionic surfactant TX-100 and CDC. However, the trend between adsorbed amounts of SDBS and HDPB was highly dependent on the electrostatic interactions where the adsorption capacity of SDBS was higher than the adsorption capacity at pH < 6.7 and vice versa.…”

“…The As such, it can be summarized that the adsorption process of all surfactants is a physical adsorption process. MWCNT [31] 233 6.2 Brouers-Sotolongo 100 min 5 -150 359 pH 6, 25 C MWCNTs [32] -6.5 Langmuir 48 h 0 -2000 375 at pH 6.5 -7, 20 C Carbon black [29] 105 --24 h 3.8 -768.9 175 at pH 6.5, 20 C SDBS CDC 1,120 9.9 Sips 3 days 139.4 -697 442 at pH 7.7, 22 C MWCNT [31] 233 6.2 Brouers-Sotolongo 100 min 5 -150 313 pH 2, 25 s C Activated carbon [8] 1201 -Redlich-Peterson 120 min 10 -125 146 at pH 3, 25 C Activated carbon þ bacteria [28] Carbon black [29] 105 --24 h 3.8 -768.9 177 at pH 6.5, 20 C…”

“…[15][16][17][18] Different adsorbents such as chitosan, [19] fly ash-based geopolymer, [6] silica, [20] zero-valent iron nanoparticles, [21] bentonite, [22] cellulosic surface, [23] alumina, [24] zeolites [25] and chromium leather waste [26] were utilized for the adsorption of surfactants from aqueous solutions. Carbon-based adsorbents such as activated carbon, [8,27,28] carbon black, [29,30] multi-wall carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs) [31][32][33] and graphene oxide [34,35] have been suggested for pollutants removal. However, the search for novel adsorbents that are sustainable, cost-effective and possessing a high adsorption capacity toward surfactants is still an ongoing process.…”