Synthesis and study of the surface properties of alkylnaphthalene and alkylphenanthrene sulfonates

Article abstract of DOI:10.1007/s11743-010-1197-4

Some alkylnaphthalene and alkylphenanthrene sulfonates were synthesized by means of a Wurtz-Fittig reaction. The HLB values for the prepared compounds were calculated, and the basic properties were studied in water at different temperatures, namely, 25, 35 and 45 °C. Through surface tension measurements, the following values were determined: the critical micelle concentration (CMC) and the surface tension at the CMC (γ_CMC). The following values were calculated: area per molecule at the CMC (A _CMC), standard free energy change of micellization (ΔG _mic), standard free energy of adsorption (ΔG _ad), and the efficiency of a surfactant in reducing surface tension (pC20). Furthermore, the partition coefficients of the synthesized compounds were also measured. The results show that n-alkylnaphthalene and n-alkylphenanthrene surfactants studied exhibit desirable properties that may be of value in some fields such as detergency. To confirm the detergency power of the prepared surfactants, some foam studies were performed.

Full text of DOI:10.1007/s11743-010-1197-4

J Surfact Deterg (2011) 14:23–30
DOI 10.1007/s11743-010-1197-4
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Synthesis and Study of the Surface Properties of Alkylnaphthalene
and Alkylphenanthrene Sulfonates
•
M. E. Abdel-Raouf N. E. Maysour
•
•
•
A. M. Abdul-Raheim Sh. M. El-Saeed
R. K. Farag
Received: 28 December 2009 / Accepted: 17 March 2010 / Published online: 28 April 2010
Ó AOCS 2010
Abstract Some alkylnaphthalene and alkylphenanthrene
sulfonates were synthesized by means of a Wurtz–Fittig
reaction. The HLB values for the prepared compounds were
calculated, and the basic properties were studied in water at
different temperatures, namely, 25, 35 and 45 °C. Through
surface tension measurements, the following values were
determined: the critical micelle concentration (CMC) and
the surface tension at the CMC (cCMC). The following values
were calculated: area per molecule at the CMC (ACMC),
standard free energy change of micellization (DGmic), stan-
dard free energy of adsorption (DGad), and the efficiency of a
surfactant in reducing surface tension (pC20). Furthermore,
the partition coefficients of the synthesized compounds were
also measured. The results show that n-alkylnaphthalene and
n-alkylphenanthrene surfactants studied exhibit desirable
properties that may be of value in some fields such as
detergency. To confirm the detergency power of the prepared
surfactants, some foam studies were performed.
many applications in the petroleum industry. They can be
applied at all stages in petroleum recovery and processing,
from oil well drilling up to transportation of petroleum
emulsions [1–3]. Short-chain alkylnaphthalene sulfonates
have been extensively applied in the printing, dyeing, and
oil extraction industries [4, 5].
There are some reported researches on the surface and
interfacial properties of long and short-chain alkylnaph-
thalene sulfonates [6–8].
The hydrotropic properties of a novel alkylnaphthalene
sulfonate were investigated for a novel sodium diisopro-
pylnaphthalene sulfonate (SDIPNS) which is both a hydro-
trope and a surfactant [9].
Until now, some papers concerning alkylnaphthalene
surfactants have been published. However, the reports
about alkylphenanthrene surfactants are very few. There-
fore, it is meaningful for this paper to describe the syn-
thesis of sulfonate type anionic alkylnaphthalene and
alkylphenanthrene surfactants.
Keywords CMC ꢀ Micelle aggregation number ꢀ
Sodium a-(n-C6–C10) naphthalene sulfonate ꢀ
Sodium (n-C6–C10) phenanthrene sulfonate
Experimental Procedures
Reagents
Introduction
Reagents were as following: twice distilled water,
a-bromo naphthalene, n-hexyl bromide, n-octyl bromide,
n-decylbromide, n-hexyl phenanthrene bromide, n-octyl
phenanthrene bromide, n-decyl phenanthrene bromide,
which were all of analytical reagent grade and supplied
from Sigma–Aldrich for chemicals. The sodium metal was
highly pure (C99.5%) and also supplied by Sigma–Aldrich
for chemicals. The solvents used throughout this work such
as chloroform, ethanol, methanol, petroleum ether were
purchased from the Acros Organics Company as ultra pure
Surfactants are widely used and find a very large number of
applications because of their remarkable ability to influ-
ence the properties of surfaces and interfaces. They find
M. E. Abdel-Raouf (&) ꢀ N. E. Maysour ꢀ
A. M. Abdul-Raheim ꢀ Sh. M. El-Saeed ꢀ R. K. Farag
Egyptian Petroleum Research Institute, Nasr City,
Cairo, Egypt
e-mail: me_raouf@yahoo.com
123

24
J Surfact Deterg (2011) 14:23–30
solvents and used as received. Anhydrous MgSO4 (AR),
sodium hydroxide NaOH (AR) were also from Acros.
owing to heat of the reaction and was held as near 5 °C as
possible. The reaction was continued for 2 h and then
neutralized by adding 30% NaOH (AR). The crude product
was recrystallized twice in an ethanol/water mixture
(50:50, vol/vol) and then dried for 36 h under vacuum at
80 °C.
The equations of the sulfonation reaction are given in
Fig. 2a, b. The designations of the prepared compounds
together with some of their characteristics are listed in
Table 1.
Synthesis Procedures
Synthesis of Sodium a-(n-alkyl)Naphthalene Sulfonates
and a-(n-alkyl)Phenanthrene Sulfonates
A dry, 250-mL, three-necked, round-bottomed flask was
fitted with a reflux condenser, a drying tube, and a ther-
mometer, which dipped into the reaction mixture. The flask
was set up so that it could be cooled in an external cooling
bath. In the flask was placed 4 g of sodium pellets dis-
persed in 50 mL ether. A mixture of 21.0 mL of a-bro-
monaphthalene and 25 mL of n-alkyl bromide was added
to the flask. The flask was then placed in an ice bath to keep
the reaction temperature as near to 40 °C as possible. The
reaction started within 5 min. The mass acquired a yellow
color. After 0.5 h, the mixture was boiled gently and was
kept boiling gently for 2.5 h and then was held for a day at
room temperature with continuous shaking. The liquid was
decanted and washed several times with ether. The ether
extract was dried over 4 g of anhydrous MgSO4. The ether
was then removed by rotary evaporation, The final product
was a yellow liquid [about 6 g of n-alkyl C10H7].
Characterization of the Prepared Compounds
Gel Permeation Chromatography (GPC)
The molecular weights of the prepared surfactants were
measured by GPC Water model 600 E. The mobile phase
was toluene HPLC grade. The measured and calculated
molecular weights are provided in Table 1.
Spectral Data of Alkylnaphthalene and Alkylphenanthrene
Sulfonates
The chemical structure of the investigated sulfonates was
confirmed via both NMR and IR spectral techniques. The
NMR spectral results were obtained on a Shimadzu-400
NMR spectrograph (D2O as solvent and TMS as the
internal standard), the assignments of the protons of n-alkyl
naphthalene and n-alkyl phenanthrene are given in Fig. 3a,
b. For brevity, NMR spectra of SN6 and SP6 are supplied.
Infrared (IR) spectra were obtained using a Perkin-Elmer
FT-IR spectrometer. The data are shown in Tables 2 and 3.
The same procedures were applied for the preparation of
n-alkylphenathrene.
The equations of the reactions are shown in Fig. 1a, b.
Sulfonation Reaction
A mixture of 6 g of n-alkyl naphthalene and 12 mL of
chloroform was added to a 50-mL three-necked, round-
bottomed flask and cooled to between -10 and -5 °C in
an ice bath. Chlorosulfonic acid (2 mL) was added slowly
from a dropping funnel over a period of about 30 min. The
temperature of the reaction increased slowly to ?5 °C
Determination of the Partition Coefficient (PC)
The partition coefficient is the ratio of the solubility of a
surfactant in the aqueous phase to its solubility in the oil
CH2-R
CH2-R
Br
(a)
CH2-R
ClSO3H
NaOH
Na metal
2 NaBr
R-CH2Br
+
+
+
SO Na
3
Ether
CH2-R
CH2-R
CH2-R
Br
(b)
Na metal
Ether
2 NaBr
ClSO3H
NaOH
R-CH2Br
+
SO Na
3
Fig. 1 a, b The alkylation reactions of bromonaphthalene and
bromophenanthrene
Fig. 2 a, b The sulfonation reactions of alkylnaphthalene and
alkylphenanthrene
123

J Surfact Deterg (2011) 14:23–30
25
Table 1 Designations, M.Wt. and HLB values for the prepared compounds
The compound
Designation
Yield (%)
M.Wt. (gmol-1
)
HLB
PC
Cal.
Det.
Sodium n-hexyl naphthalene sulfonate
Sodium n-octyl naphthalene sulfonate
Sodium n-decyl naphthalene sulfonate
Sodium n-hexyl phenanthrene sulfonate
Sodium n-octyl phenanthrene sulfonate
Sodium n-decyl phenanthrene sulfonate
SN6
SN8
SN10
SP6
65
67
60
68
75
71
328
360
392
350
382
414
330
363
393
351
384
417
23.19
22.24
21.29
21.53
20.58
19.63
5.02
4.22
3.92
3.87
3.21
2.11
SP8
SP10
(m, 8H, 12H or 16H)
(t, 2H)
(a)
(d, 3H)
(t, 2H)
(m, 8H, 12H or 16H)
(b)
(d, 3H)
g
j
l
j
h
i
(d, 1H)
(s, 1H)
h
CH - (CH )n - CH - CH
3
CH -(CH )n-CH -CH
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
k
f
i
(m, 2H)
(m, 2H)
(d, 1H)
c
(d, 1H)
g
(t, 2H)
(t, 2H)
(d, 1H)
d
c
b
f
(t, 1H)
a
(d, 1H)
a (d, 1H)
d
b
(t, 1H)
e
e
(d, 1H)
SO Na
3
(d, 1H)
(d, 1H)
SO Na
3
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
200
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
PPM
PPM
1
Fig. 3 a and b H NMR and 13C NMR for SN6 and SP6
phase [10]. The procedure was carried out by dissolving
0.25 g of the surfactant sample in 25 ml benzene which
represents the oil phase; 25 ml of distilled water was
added, and the mixture was shaken by an automatic flask
shaker for 0.5 h. The flask was tightly stoppered and left in
a water bath at 25 °C to separate into two layers. The upper
layer (benzene) was taken off, and its UV absorbance was
determined. The concentration of the dissolved surfactant
in the benzene was then estimated from a calibration curve
representing the intensity of the absorbance as a function of
concentration. By knowing the concentration of the sur-
factant in the benzene phase, the concentration of the
surfactant in the aqueous phase was computed from the
initial concentration.
123

26
J Surfact Deterg (2011) 14:23–30
Table 2 NMR and IR data for the SN series
Compound
SN6
NMR, dppm
IR cm-1
IR (KBr)
1H NMR The aromatic ring protons: a 8.01–7.9(d,1H), b
7.84–7.72(d,1H), c 7.51–7.49 (t, 1H) and d 7.47–
7.44(t, 1H), e&f 7.19–7.12(d, 2H)
[3030(C–H ar)] [2928, 2852(C–H aliph.)], 1465(CH2)],
[1450 and 1375(CH3)1512(C = C), [1201, 1163,
1071(S=O)], [758(oop C–H ar.)]
The methylenes protons: g 2.47–2.45(t, 2H), h 1.70–
1.40(m, 8H), I 1.2–0.9(m,2H)
The methyl protons: J 0.70–0.60(t,3H)
13C NMR at 105–140 aromatic rings carbons, at 182 C–
SO3Na, at 31 CH3, at 20–25 CH2 carbons and at 15
CH2–C=C
SN8
The aromatic protons: a 8.58–8.42(d,1H), b 7.84–
7.81(d,1H), c 7.48–7.44,(t,1H), d 7.20–7.17(t,1H),
e&f 6.78–6.74(d, 2H)
IR (KBr)
[3070(C–H ar)] [2924, 2852 (C–H aliph.)], 1470(CH2)],
[1445 and 1375(CH3)1512(C=C), [1218, 1198, 1071
(S=O)], [757(oop C–H ar.)]
The methylenes protons: g 2.49–2.46(t, 2H), h 1.80–
1.70(m, 12H), I 1.40–1.10(m, 2H),
The methyl protons: J 0.90–0.80(t, 3H)
SN10
The aromatic protons: a 8.80–8.70(d, 1H), b 8.12–
8.11(d,1H), 8.07–8.04(d,1H), 7.58–7.54(m, 2H), 7.34–
7.31(d,1H)
IR (KBr)
[3090(C–H ar)] [2921, 2851 (C–H aliph.)], 1475(CH2)],
[1460 and 1370(CH3)1511(C=C), [, 1201, 1164, 1072
(S=O)], [761(oop C–H ar.)]
The methylenes protons:
3.11–3.07(t,2H), 1.80–1.70(m,2H), 1.4–1.1(m,16H)
The methyl protons:
0.88–0.80(t, 3H)
Table 3 NMR and IR data for the SP series
Compound
SP6
NMR, dppm
IR cm-1
IR (KBr)
1H NMR The aromatic ring protons: a 9.51–9.5(d,1H), b
8.88–8.84(d,1H), c 8.52–8.50(d,1H), d 8.42–8.4
(d,1H), e&f 8.2–8.1(t, 1H), g 7.90–7.88(d,1H), h
6.5(s,1H)
[3100(C–H ar)] [2923 2850 (C–H aliph.)], 1475(CH2)],
[1455 and 1365(CH3)1516(C=C), [1209, 1168,1077
(S=O)], [758,661,640 (oop C–H ar.)]
The methylenes protons: I 3.01–2.91(t, 2H), j 1.40–
1.20(m, 8H), k 1.1–0.9(m,2H)
The methyl protons: 0.70–0.60(t,3H)
13C NMR at 120–140 aromatic rings carbons, at 142 C–
SO3Na, at 35 CH3, at 20–33CH2 carbons and at 17
CH2–C=C
SP8
The aromatic ring protons: a 9.2–8.91(d,1H), b 8.88–
8.78(d,1H), c 8.64–8.41 (d,1H), d 7.94–7.88(d,1H), e
& f 7.66–7.57(t, 1H) and 7.41–7.35 (t, 1H), g 7.22-
7.19(d,1H), h 6.83–6.75 (s,1H)
IR (KBr)
[3050(C–H ar)] [2929 2859 (C–H aliph.)], 1520(CH2)],
[1450 and 1375(CH3)1516(C=C), [1212, 1170,1080,
(S=O)], [760,665,644 (oop C–H ar.)]
The methylenes protons: I 2.54–2.50(t, 2H), j 1.70–
1.40(m, 12H), k 1.1–0.9(m,2H)
The methyl protons: 0.81–0.75(t,3H)
SP10
The aromatic ring protons: a 9.3–8.1(d,1H), b 8.98–
8.84(d,1H), c 8.74–8.63 (d,1H), d 7.55–7.50(d,1H),
e&f 7.47–7.43(t, 1H) and 7.23–7.20(t, 1H), g 7.17–
7.13(d,1H), h 6.83–6.75 (s,1H)
IR (KBr)
[3070(C–H ar)] 2930 2855, (C–H aliph.)], 1518(CH2)],
[1460 and 1375(CH3)1516(C=C), [1214, 1171,1082,
(S=O)], [761,664,645 (oop C–H ar.)]
The methylenes protons: I 2.33–2.21(t, 2H), j 1.50–
1.30(m, 16H), k 0.9–0.7(m,2H)
The methyl protons: 0.60–0.40 (t,3H)
123

J Surfact Deterg (2011) 14:23–30
27
Fig. 4 a S.T. conc. isotherm of SN6 at different temperatures, b S.T. conc. isotherm of SN8 at different temperatures, c S.T. conc. isotherm of
SN10 at different temperatures
Partition coefficient = Solubility in an aqueous phase/
solubility in an oil phase
A calibration curve was obtained for each surfactant by
measuring the UV absorbance of a series of concentrations
of the surfactant dissolved in benzene. The following
concentrations were prepared: 1, 0.8, 0.6, 0.4, 0.2, and
0.1%. The absorbance was measured by a Shimadzu UV
spectrophotometer, model 120.02, adjusted at 355 nm
representing maximum absorbance. The values of the
partition coefficient of the prepared compounds are given
in Table 1.
Measurement of Surface Tension
Tensiometric measurements were carried out using ring
method on Kruss K11 tensiometer. All surface-tension
measurements were conducted at 25, 35and 45 °C. The
results are shown in Fig. 4a–c for SN group and Fig. 5a–c
for SP group, whereas the surface properties of the pre-
pared compounds are supplied in Table 4.
Foaming Technique
The apparatus and procedure used were those of ASTM
method Dl173-53 [11, 12], with the exception that the
assembly used in the ASTM method at the top of the
column to hold the pipet in place was replaced by ordinary
flask clamps, and positioning of the pipet was accom-
plished with a spirit level. The foam was made for 0.1%
Fig. 5 a S.T. conc. isotherm of SP6 at different temperatures,
b S.T. conc. isotherm of SP8 at different temperatures, c S.T. conc.
isotherm of SP10 at different temperatures
aqueous solution of the prepared samples. The foam cyl-
inder used had an internal diameter of 5 cm. All tests were
123

28
J Surfact Deterg (2011) 14:23–30
Hydrophilic–Lipophilic Balance (HLB) Values
Table 4 CMC and cCMC of sulfonated surfactants at 298, 308 and
318 K
Surfactants are often characterized by their hydrophilic/
lipophilic balance or HLB. High HLB values indicate good
water, or polar solvent solubility, of the surfactant while
low HLB values are indicative of good solubility in non-
polar systems, such as oil. It is a well-known fact that
surfactant properties are greatly influenced by the nature of
the hydrophilic and hydrophobic moieties. HLB values of
individual surfactant molecules can be calculated applying
the Davies formula [13]. These values serve as a guide to
surfactant properties at room temperature, e.g., aqueous
solubility, and they can be used as a first suggestion for
potential applications [14]. The HLB values of the prepared
sulfonates are given in Table 1.
The compound CMC (mmol/L)
cCMC(mN/m)
298 K 308 K 318 K 298 K 308 K 318 K
SN6
SN8
SN10
SP6
27
13.6
10.2
9.3
6.7
4.1
1.4
5.5
3.5
0.54
36.3
33.4
30.5
34.7
30.2
27.4
32.4
30.8
28.9
31.4
27.1
24.6
30.2
28.3
22.4
28.7
25.4
22.4
20.7
15.4
25.6
18.3
12.2
11.4
9.1
SP8
SP10
5.3
conducted at 49 °C. Glassware was cleaned by immersion
in a hot 1:9 HNO3–H2SO4 mixture for 30 min., followed
by rinsing with distilled water, redistilled acetone, and
finally with quartz-distilled water. The data for the foaming
test are given in Table 7.
The data reveal that HLB values are decreased by
increasing the length of the alkyl chain and the HLB values
for SP (based on phenanthrene) are less than those for SN
(based on naphthalene).
The initial foam height was taken as the height of the
foam 60 s after the last drop of solution had drained from
the pipet. This interval was selected because rapid drainage
of liquid from the foam had ceased by this time. Four runs
were made with each solution; final foam heights are
averages of values from these runs. The foam height tab-
ulated is the difference between initial and final heights.
Surface Properties of the Prepared Sulfonates
Some of the surface properties of the prepared surfactants
at three temperatures are given in Tables 4 and 5. It was
observed that both the CMC and cCMC values show a
regular decrease with an increase in the number of meth-
ylene groups in the alkyl chain, as would be expected from
the increase in hydrophobicity [15, 16]. This usually hap-
pens in a homologous series of cationic [16], anionic [17],
and nonionic [18] surfactants. It is observed that the
increase in temperature has a reducing effect on CMC and
cCMC values.
Table 5 includes the values of pC20 which is a suitable
measure of the efficiency of a surfactant in reducing sur-
face tension and can be calculated from surface tension at
the air–water solution versus log C. The larger the value of
pC20, the more efficiently the surfactant is adsorbed at the
interface and the more efficiently it reduces surface or
interfacial tension. This means that a smaller bulk liquid
phase concentration will be required either to attain
Results and Discussion
Synthesis and Characterization
Surfactants SN and SP were obtained in good yields as
white crystalline solids that were highly water soluble as it
can be seen from the values of the partition coefficient
listed in Table 1. Other physical data are also summarized
in Table 1.
1
The H-NMR spectra are in accordance with the pro-
posed structures and contain all expected chemical shifts
for both the aromatic and alkyl moieties as it can be seen in
Tables 2, 3 and Fig. 3a, b.
Table 5 Some surface properties of sulfated surfactants
The compound
pC20
U
max1010 (mol cm-2
)
Amin (nm2/molecule)
298 K
308 K
318 K
298 K
308 K
318 K
298 K
308 K
318 K
SN6
SN8
SN10
SP6
5.4
6.2
7
0.78
0.82
0.9
0.76
0.67
0.99
1.2
0.75
0.75
1.1
0.213
0.2
0.215
0.24
0.16
0.13
0.20
0.42
0.218
0.22
0.15
0.21
0.24
0.218
7.08
8.2
7.73
8.4
9.3
9.7
7.00
9.33
9.77
0.18
0.12
0.21
0.29
6.30
7.08
9.7
6.73
7.73
8.25
1.3
0.74
0.99
0.76
SP8
0.77
0.57
0.80
0.39
SP10
123

J Surfact Deterg (2011) 14:23–30
29
Table 6 DGmic and DGads of the sulfated alkyl naphthalene and phenanthrene at different temperatures
The compound
DGmic (kJ/mol)
DGads (kJ/mol)
298 K
308 K
318 K
298 K
308 K
318 K
SN6
SN8
SN10
SP6
-23.145
-25.010
-26.339
-22.225
-24.102
-26.067
-21.421
-22.891
-23.367
-18.223
-21.317
-22.449
-20.779
-20.460
-20.057
-15.258
-19.154
-20.014
-21.813
-22.420
-24.833
-19.359
-20.419
-25.979
-19.957
-20.124
-21.397
-17.070
-19129
-23.432
-16.376
-18.085
-19.962
-15.442
-17.107
-21.136
SP8
SP10
Table 7 Some foam properties of the prepared surfactants at 49 °C
saturation, adsorption, or to reduce the surface or interfa-
cial tension by 20 dyn/cm. In Table 5, the order of pC20
values is decyl [ octyl [ hexyl. This agrees with the
findings of Xiaoli et al. and it is also higher than that of
sodium n-alkylbenzene sulfonate [15]. Thus, the most
efficient surfactant structure for detergency must be the one
with decyl group.
The compound
Foam height (cm)
Foam stability (min)
SN6
SN8
SN10
SP6
2.7
3.5
4.1
2.3
2.6
2.9
11
12.5
15.2
9
SP8
10.3
11.4
The surface excess concentration Cmax is calculated by
means of the Gibbs equation,
SP10
ꢀ
ꢁ
1
ꢁoc
Cmax
¼
ð1Þ
RT o ln c
greater than those for sulfated phenanthrenes which indi-
cates that the naphthalene-based surfactants are better than
the phenanthrene surfactants in detergency formulations.
T
where the derivative is the slope of the plot of c versus ln c
at a constant temperature (T), and R is the gas constant in
Jmol-1 K-1
.
Foaming Studies of the Prepared Sulfonates
In Table 5, one can see that the increase in the alkyl
chain length increases the area occupied by the molecule at
the interface, ACMC which can be calculated from the
equation,
Foaming tests were carried out as described in the exper-
imental section to investigate the detergency power of the
prepared sulfonates. Two parameters were considered,
namely, foam height and foam stability. The data are
summarized in Table 7. It can be seen that the foams
produced from sulfonated naphthalenes (with higher HLB
values) are somewhat higher and more stable than the
foams produced from sulfonated phenathrenes. The data
obtained confirm the higher detergency power of sulfo-
nated naphthalenes over sulfonated phenanthrenes.
Our findings run in harmony with those of Rosen et al.
[22] who concluded that, the higher the HLB values of
linear decyldiphenylether sulfonates, the more stable the
foam.
1016
Amin
¼
ð2Þ
NCmax
The standard free energy of micellization is calculated
from the equation
DGmic ¼ 2 RT ln CMC
The standard free energy of adsorption (DGad) is calculated
according to the following equation [12]:
ð3Þ
DGad ¼ ꢁð2:303 RTÞpC20 ꢁ 6:023 ꢂ 20 ACMC
ꢁ 2:303 RT log x
ð4Þ
where x is the number of moles of water per liter of water
(=55.5)
From the data in Table 6, it can be seen that DGmic
become significantly more negative with increasing alkyl
chain length. It is clear also that the values of DGmic are all
negative whereas those of DGad are all positives which
leads to the speculation that the prepared surfactants prefer
micellization than adsorption so that they are effective in
detergent formulations [19–21]. It is also obvious that
DGmic for the sulfonated naphthalenes are somewhat
References
1. Bailey FE, Koleske JK (1992) Ullmann’s encyclopedia of
industrial chemistry, vol A21, 5th edn. VCH, Weinheim
2. Hornof V (1990) Application of lignosulphonate in EOR. Cel-
lulose Chem Technol 24:407–415
3. Zaki NN, Abdel-Raouf ME, Abdel Azim AAA (1996) Propylene
oxide–ethylene oxide block copolymers as demulsifiers for water-
in-oil emulsions, II [1]. Effects of temperature, salinity, pH-value,
123

30
J Surfact Deterg (2011) 14:23–30
and solvents on the demulsification efficiency. Monatsh Chem
127:1239–1245
20. Rosen MJ (1978) Surfactants and interfacial phenomena. Wiley,
NY, pp 94–95
4. Burns RL, Duliba EP (2000) Hydrotropic and surfactant prop-
erties of novel diisopropyl naphthalene sulfonates. J Surfact
Deterg 3:3–9
5. Burns RL (1999) Hydrotropic properties of some short-chain
alkylbenzene- and alkylnaphthalene sulfonates. J Surfact Deterg
2:483–488
6. Lianos P, Lang J (1983) Static and dynamic properties of sodium
p-(1-propylnonyl) benzenesulfonate micelles. J Colloid Interface
Sci 96:222–227
21. Van Os NMR, Daane GJ, Bolsman TABM (1987) The effect of
chemical structure upon the thermodynamics of micellization of
model alkylarenesulphonates. I. Sodium p-decyl benzenesulfo-
nate isomers. J Colloid Interface Sci 115:40–46
22. Rosen M, Huo Zhu Z, Yuan Hua X (1992) Relationship of
structure to properties of surfactants: linear decyldiphenylether
sulfonates. J Am Oil Chem Soc 69:134–139
7. Valint PL, Bock J, Kim MW, Robbins ML, Steyn A (1990)
Presented at the 200th American Chemical Society National
Meeting, Washington, DC
Author Biographies
M. E. Abdel-Raouf received her M.Sc. in organic chemistry at the
Faculty of Science, Ain Shams University 1995 and her Ph.D. in
applied organic chemistry at the same faculty in 2000. She has been
Associate Professor at the Egyptian Petroleum Research Institute
(Petroleum Application Department) since 2006. She has published
research papers in international journals on the synthesis and
application of new surface active agents. She has supervised some
M.Sc. and Ph.D. students working on applied surfactants and
recycling of different wastes.
8. Yong G, Zhiping L, Jingyi A (2005) The surface properties of
short-chain alkylnaphthalene sulfonate. J Dispers Sci Technol
26:139–143
9. Robert LB (1999) Hydrotropic properties of a novel alkylnaph-
thalene sulfonate. J Surfact Deterg 2:135–138
10. Zaki NN, Abdel-Raouf ME, Abdel-Azim AAA (1996) Propylene
oxide–ethylene oxide block copolymers as demulsifiers for water-
in-oil emulsions, effect of molecular weight and hydrophilic–
lipophylic balance on the demulsification efficiency. Monatsh
Chem 127:621–629
N. E. Maysour received her Ph.D. in organic chemistry at the
University College for Women, Ain Shams University 2000. She has
been Associate Professor at the Egyptian Petroleum Research Institute
(Petroleum Application Department) since 2007. She has published
research papers in international journals on the synthesis and
applications of surfactants materials.
11. Rosen M, Solash J (1986) Factors affecting foam height in initial
the ross-miles foam test. J Am Oil Chem Soc 46:172–177
12. American Society for Testing and Materials (1953) Method
Dl173-53, Philadelphia
13. Davies JT (1961) Interfacial phenomena. Academic Press, NY
14. Porter MR (1991) Handbook of surfactants. Blackie, London
15. Xiaoli T, Zhang L, Zhao S, Yu J, An J (2004) Synthesis and study
of the surface properties of long-chain alkylnaphthalene sulfo-
nates. J Surfact Deterg 7:135–139
16. Kim TS, Kida T, Nakatsuji Y, Hirao T, Ikeda I (1996) Surface-
active properties of novel cationic surfactants with two alkyl
chains and two ammonio groups. J Am Oil Chem Soc 73:907–
913
17. Hall DG, Tiddy GJT (1981) Surfactant solutions: dilute and
concentration. In: Lucassen-Reynders EH (ed) Anionic surfac-
tants: physical chemistry of surfactants. Marcel Dekker, NY
18. Infante MR, Perez L, Pinazo A (1998) Novel cationic surfactants
from arginine. In: Holmberg K (ed) Novel surfactants. Marcel
Dekker, NY
A. M. Abdul-Raheim received his Ph.D. from the Ain Shams
University in 2007. He is a researcher in the Egyptian Petroleum
Research Institute, Petroleum Application Department.
Sh. M. El-Saeed received her Ph.D. from the Ain Shams University
in 2005. She is a researcher in the Egyptian Petroleum Research
Institute, Petroleum Application Department.
R. K. Farag received her Ph.D. from the Ain Shams University in
2005. She is a researcher in the Egyptian Petroleum Research
Institute, Petroleum Application Department.
19. Attwood D, Florence AT (1983) Surfactant systems: their
chemistry, pharmacy, and biology. Chapman and Hall, NY
123