DataVXJournal of Nanoparticle ResearchPaper
journal article·2025-04

Air–liquid interfacial tension and foamability of ionic surfactant solutions containing TiO2 nanoparticles

Farzaneh Hajirasouliha, Daniela Placha, Yong-Qing Fu, Dominika Zabiegaj

Journal of Nanoparticle Research· Volume 27· Issue 4
Publisher page
Bibliographic record

Abstract

No abstract is available for this record. The assistant can identify its topic from the title, but cannot infer the study’s results.

Source: Not provided · Quality: missing

Research context

Nanomaterials

OpenAlex topics: Pickering emulsions and particle stabilization · Surfactants and Colloidal Systems · Enhanced Oil Recovery Techniques

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

References (90)

Show source-provided references
1. Bikerman JJ (1973) Mechanical properties of foams. In Foams. Springer, pp 184–21310.1007/978-3-642-86734-7_7 ↗
2. Ashrafizadeh SN, Ganjizade A (2024) Liquid foams: properties, structures, prevailing phenomena and their applications in chemical/biochemical processes. Adv Colloid Interface Sci 325:103109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cis.2024.10310910.1016/j.cis.2024.103109 ↗
3. Sun L et al (2019) Recent advances of surfactant-stabilized N2/CO2 foams in enhanced oil recovery. Fuel 241:83–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2018.12.01610.1016/j.fuel.2018.12.016 ↗
4. Singh R, Panthi K, Weerasooriya U, Mohanty KK (2018) Multistimuli-responsive foams using an anionic surfactant. Langmuir 34(37):11010–11020. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.langmuir.8b0179610.1021/acs.langmuir.8b01796 ↗
5. Majeed T, Kamal MS, Zhou X, Solling T (2021) A review on foam stabilizers for enhanced oil recovery. Energy Fuels 35(7):5594–5612. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.energyfuels.1c0003510.1021/acs.energyfuels.1c00035 ↗
6. Bhatt S, Saraf S, Bera A (2023) Perspectives of foam generation techniques and future directions of nanoparticle-stabilized CO2 foam for enhanced oil recovery. Energy Fuels 37(3):1472–1494. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.energyfuels.2c0298810.1021/acs.energyfuels.2c02988 ↗
7. Houtz E, Wang M, Park J-S (2018) Identification and fate of aqueous film forming foam derived per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances in a wastewater treatment plant. Environ Sci Technol 52(22):13212–13221. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.8b0402810.1021/acs.est.8b04028 ↗
8. Collivignarelli MC et al (2020) Foams in wastewater treatment plants: from causes to control methods. Appl Sci 10(8):2716. https://doi.org/10.3390/app1008271610.3390/app10082716 ↗
9. Smith SJ, Keane C, Ahrens L, Wiberg K (2023) Integrated treatment of per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances in existing wastewater treatment plants─ scoping the potential of foam partitioning. ACS ES&t Eng 3(9):1276–1285. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsestengg.3c0009110.1021/acsestengg.3c00091 ↗
10. Gonzalez PJ, Sörensen PM (2020) Characterization of saponin foam from Saponaria officinalis for food applications. Food Hydrocoll 101:105541. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodhyd.2019.10554110.1016/j.foodhyd.2019.105541 ↗
11. Deotale SM, Dutta S, Moses JA, Anandharamakrishnan C (2023) Foaming and defoaming–concepts and their significance in food and allied industries: a review. Discov Chem Eng 3(1):9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43938-023-00025-610.1007/s43938-023-00025-6 ↗
12. Janssen F, Monterde V, Wouters AGB (2023) Relevance of the air–water interfacial and foaming properties of (modified) wheat proteins for food systems. Compr Rev Food Sci Food Saf 22(3):1517–1554. https://doi.org/10.1111/1541-4337.1312010.1111/1541-4337.13120 ↗
13. Lee S, Lee J, Yu H, Lim J (2018) Synthesis of environment friendly biosurfactants and characterization of interfacial properties for cosmetic and household products formulations. Colloids Surf A Physicochem Eng Asp 536:224–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.colsurfa.2017.05.00110.1016/j.colsurfa.2017.05.001 ↗
14. Torres A, Almeida IF, Oliveira R (2024) An overview of proprietary vehicles/bases for topical compounding medicines and cosmetics. Cosmetics 11(1):16. https://doi.org/10.3390/cosmetics1101001610.3390/cosmetics11010016 ↗
15. Parsa M, Trybala A, Malik DJ, Starov V (2019) Foam in pharmaceutical and medical applications. Curr Opin Colloid Interface Sci 44:153–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cocis.2019.10.00710.1016/j.cocis.2019.10.007 ↗
16. Farkas D, Kállai-Szabó N, Antal I (Apr.2019) Foams as carrier systems for pharmaceuticals and cosmetics. Acta Pharm Hung 89(1):5–15. https://doi.org/10.33892/aph.2019.89.5-1510.33892/aph.2019.89.5-15 ↗
17. Farkas D et al (2021) Investigation of propellant-free aqueous foams as pharmaceutical carrier systems. Pharm Dev Technol 26(3):253–261. https://doi.org/10.1080/10837450.2020.186342610.1080/10837450.2020.1863426 ↗
18. Guo F, Aryana S (2016) An experimental investigation of nanoparticle-stabilized CO2 foam used in enhanced oil recovery. Fuel 186:430–442. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2016.08.05810.1016/j.fuel.2016.08.058 ↗
19. Emrani AS, Nasr-El-Din HA (2017) An experimental study of nanoparticle-polymer-stabilized CO2 foam. Colloids Surf A Physicochem Eng Asp 524:17–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.colsurfa.2017.04.02310.1016/j.colsurfa.2017.04.023 ↗
20. Peng D et al (2018) Foaming and surface properties of gliadin nanoparticles: influence of pH and heating temperature. Food Hydrocoll 77:107–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodhyd.2017.09.02610.1016/j.foodhyd.2017.09.026 ↗
21. Nazari N, Tsau J-S, Barati R (2017) CO2 foam stability improvement using polyelectrolyte complex nanoparticles prepared in produced water. Energies (Basel) 10(4):516. https://doi.org/10.3390/en1004051610.3390/en10040516 ↗
22. Yekeen N, Idris AK, Manan MA, Samin AM, Risal AR, Kun TX (2017) Bulk and bubble-scale experimental studies of influence of nanoparticles on foam stability. Chin J Chem Eng 25(3):347–357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cjche.2016.08.01210.1016/j.cjche.2016.08.012 ↗
23. Sun Q et al (2015) Aqueous foam stabilized by partially hydrophobic nanoparticles in the presence of surfactant. Colloids Surf A Physicochem Eng Asp 471:54–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.colsurfa.2015.02.00710.1016/j.colsurfa.2015.02.007 ↗
24. Srivastava A, Qiao W, Wu Y, Li X, Bao L, Liu C (2017) Effects of silica nanoparticles and polymers on foam stability with sodium dodecylbenzene sulfonate in water–liquid paraffin oil emulsions at high temperatures. J Mol Liq 241:1069–1078. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molliq.2017.06.09610.1016/j.molliq.2017.06.096 ↗
25. AlYousef Z, Almobarky M, Schechter D (2017) Enhancing the stability of foam by the use of nanoparticles. Energy Fuels 31(10):10620–10627. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.energyfuels.7b0169710.1021/acs.energyfuels.7b01697 ↗
26. Wu Y, Fang S, Zhang K, Zhao M, Jiao B, Dai C (2018) Stability mechanism of nitrogen foam in porous media with silica nanoparticles modified by cationic surfactants. Langmuir 34(27):8015–8023. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.langmuir.8b0118710.1021/acs.langmuir.8b01187 ↗
27. AlYousef ZA, Almobarky MA, Schechter DS (2018) The effect of nanoparticle aggregation on surfactant foam stability. J Colloid Interface Sci 511:365–373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2017.09.05110.1016/j.jcis.2017.09.051 ↗
28. Li S, Qiao C, Li Z, Wanambwa S (2017) Properties of carbon dioxide foam stabilized by hydrophilic nanoparticles and hexadecyltrimethylammonium bromide. Energy Fuels 31(2):1478–1488. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.energyfuels.6b0313010.1021/acs.energyfuels.6b03130 ↗
29. Kim I, Worthen AJ, Johnston KP, DiCarlo DA, Huh C (2016) Size-dependent properties of silica nanoparticles for Pickering stabilization of emulsions and foams. J Nanopart Res 18:1–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11051-016-3395-010.1007/s11051-016-3395-0 ↗
30. Zhu Y, Pei X, Jiang J, Cui Z, Binks BP (2015) Responsive aqueous foams stabilized by silica nanoparticles hydrophobized in situ with a conventional surfactant. Langmuir 31(47):12937–12943. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.langmuir.5b0368110.1021/acs.langmuir.5b03681 ↗
31. Sheng Y, Zhang H, Guo Y, Ma L, Wang Q, Hu D (2023) Stability and rheological properties of foams co-stabilized by hydrophilic silica nanoparticles and amino acid/alkyl glycoside surfactants. J Mol Liq 382:122009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molliq.2023.12200910.1016/j.molliq.2023.122009 ↗
32. Sheng Y, Zhang H, Yan C, Lin X, Ma L (2023) Enhancement effect of alumina nanoparticles with distinct crystal structures on foam stability of multiple surfactants. J Solgel Sci Technol 108(3):598–608. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10971-023-06211-w10.1007/s10971-023-06211-w ↗
33. Wang S, Chen C, Kadum MJ, Shiau B-J, Harwell JH (2018) Enhancing foam stability in porous media by applying nanoparticles. J Dispers Sci Technol 39(5):734–743. https://doi.org/10.1080/01932691.2017.138817510.1080/01932691.2017.1388175 ↗
34. Petkova B et al (2020) Foamability of aqueous solutions: role of surfactant type and concentration. Adv Colloid Interface Sci 276:102084. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cis.2019.10208410.1016/j.cis.2019.102084 ↗
35. Vatanparast H, Samiee A, Bahramian A, Javadi A (2017) Surface behavior of hydrophilic silica nanoparticle-SDS surfactant solutions: I. Effect of nanoparticle concentration on foamability and foam stability. Colloids Surf A Physicochem Eng Asp 513:430–441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.colsurfa.2016.11.01210.1016/j.colsurfa.2016.11.012 ↗
36. Zhu J, Yang Z, Li X, Hou L, Xie S (2019) Experimental study on the microscopic characteristics of foams stabilized by viscoelastic surfactant and nanoparticles. Colloids Surf A Physicochem Eng Asp 572:88–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.colsurfa.2019.03.08710.1016/j.colsurfa.2019.03.087 ↗
37. Yoon I-H et al (2019) A highly efficient decontamination foam stabilized by well-dispersed mesoporous silica nanoparticles. Colloids Surf A Physicochem Eng Asp 560:164–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.colsurfa.2018.10.00210.1016/j.colsurfa.2018.10.002 ↗
38. Yoon I-H et al (2016) Structure and stability of decontamination foam in concentrated nitric acid and silica nanoparticles by image analysis. Ann Nucl Energy 95:102–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2016.05.00110.1016/j.anucene.2016.05.001 ↗
39. Sheng Y et al (2023) Foam stabilized by the mixture of silicone and hydrocarbon surfactants in the presence of nanoparticles with different specific surface area. J Solgel Sci Technol 106(2):581–589. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10971-023-06084-z10.1007/s10971-023-06084-z ↗
40. Ravera F, Ferrari M, Liggieri L, Loglio G, Santini E, Zanobini A (2008) Liquid–liquid interfacial properties of mixed nanoparticle–surfactant systems. Colloids Surf A Physicochem Eng Asp 323(1–3):99–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.colsurfa.2007.10.01710.1016/j.colsurfa.2007.10.017 ↗
41. Harishchandra RK, Saleem M, Galla HJ (2010) Nanoparticle interaction with model lung surfactant monolayers. J Royal Soc Interface 7(suppl_1):S15–S26. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2009.0329.focus10.1098/rsif.2009.0329.focus ↗
42. Ravera F, Santini E, Loglio G, Ferrari M, Liggieri L (2006) Effect of nanoparticles on the interfacial properties of liquid/liquid and liquid/air surface layers. J Phys Chem B 110(39):19543–19551. https://doi.org/10.1021/jp063646810.1021/jp0636468 ↗
43. Dwivedi MV, Harishchandra RK, Koshkina O, Maskos M, Galla H-J (2014) Size influences the effect of hydrophobic nanoparticles on lung surfactant model systems. Biophys J 106(1):289–298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpj.2013.10.03610.1016/j.bpj.2013.10.036 ↗
44. Mousseau F, Berret JF (2018) The role of surface charge in the interaction of nanoparticles with model pulmonary surfactants. Soft Matter 14(28):5764–5774. https://doi.org/10.1039/C8SM00925B10.1039/C8SM00925B ↗
45. Ye X, Hao C, Yang J, Sun R (2018) Influence of modified silica nanoparticles on phase behavior and structure properties of DPPC monolayers. Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 172:480–486. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.colsurfb.2018.08.07010.1016/j.colsurfb.2018.08.070 ↗
46. Shojaei MJ, Méheust Y, Osman A, Grassia P, Shokri N (2021) Combined effects of nanoparticles and surfactants upon foam stability. Chem Eng Sci 238:116601. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2021.11660110.1016/j.ces.2021.116601 ↗
47. Zabiegaj D, Santini E, Guzmán E, Ferrari M, Liggieri L, Ravera F (2015) Carbon soot–ionic surfactant mixed layers at water/air interfaces. J Nanosci Nanotechnol 15(5):3618–3625. https://doi.org/10.1166/jnn.2015.973010.1166/jnn.2015.9730 ↗
48. Maestro A et al (2015) Particle and particle-surfactant mixtures at fluid interfaces: assembly, morphology, and rheological description. Adv Condens Matter Phys 2015(1):917516. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/91751610.1155/2015/917516 ↗
49. Weir A, Westerhoff P, Fabricius L, Hristovski K, Von Goetz N (2012) Titanium dioxide nanoparticles in food and personal care products. Environ Sci Technol 46(4):2242–2250. https://doi.org/10.1021/es204168d10.1021/es204168d ↗
50. Vidmar J, Milačič R, Golja V, Novak S, Ščančar J (2016) Optimization of the procedure for efficient dispersion of titanium dioxide nanoparticles in aqueous samples. Anal Methods 8(5):1194–1201. https://doi.org/10.1039/C5AY03305E10.1039/C5AY03305E ↗
51. Younis AB, Haddad Y, Kosaristanova L, Smerkova K (2023) Titanium dioxide nanoparticles: recent progress in antimicrobial applications. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Nanomed Nanobiotechnol 15(3):e1860. https://doi.org/10.1002/wnan.186010.1002/wnan.1860 ↗
52. Manikanta G, Prasanthi NL, Supriya G, Shaheena M (2023) A review on titanium dioxide nanoparticles. https://doi.org/10.33289/IJRPC.17.1.2023.13(11).10.33289/IJRPC.17.1.2023.13(11 ↗
53. Manan MA, Farad S, Piroozian A, Esmail MJA (2015) Effects of nanoparticle types on carbon dioxide foam flooding in enhanced oil recovery. Pet Sci Technol 33(12):1286–1294. https://doi.org/10.1080/10916466.2015.105759310.1080/10916466.2015.1057593 ↗
54. Almahfood M, Bai B (2018) The synergistic effects of nanoparticle-surfactant nanofluids in EOR applications. J Pet Sci Eng 171:196–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2018.07.03010.1016/j.petrol.2018.07.030 ↗
55. Ms DP, Mr HR (2019) A pore-scale study on improving CTAB foam stability in heavy crude oil− water system using TiO2 nanoparticles. J Pet Sci Eng 183:106411. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2019.10641110.1016/j.petrol.2019.106411 ↗
56. Razali N, Hsia ICC, Zainal S, Manap AAA (2018) Nano-sized particle as foam stabiliser designed for application at high temperature and light crude oil condition for enhanced oil recovery-a fluid-fluid case study. In Offshore Technology Conference Asia, OTC, p D032S003R007. https://doi.org/10.4043/28431-MS10.4043/28431-MS ↗
57. Jami M, Dillert R, Suo Y, Bahnemann DW, Wark M (2018) Photoactivity of titanium dioxide foams. Int J Photoenergy 2018(1):5057814. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/505781410.1155/2018/5057814 ↗
58. Llamas S, Torres AP, Liggieri L, Santini E, Ravera F (2019) Surface properties of binary TiO2-SiO2 nanoparticle dispersions relevant for foams stabilization. Colloids Surf A Physicochem Eng Asp 575:299–309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.colsurfa.2019.05.02310.1016/j.colsurfa.2019.05.023 ↗
59. Arabatzis IM, Falaras P (2003) Synthesis of porous nanocrystalline TiO2 foam. Nano Lett 3(2):249–251. https://doi.org/10.1021/nl025902810.1021/nl0259028 ↗
60. Ramasundaram S, Balasankar A, Arokiyaraj S, Sumathi P, Oh TH (2023) Multi-usable titanium dioxide and poly (vinylidene fluoride) composite foam photocatalyst for degradation of organic pollutants. Appl Surf Sci 609:155264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsusc.2022.15526410.1016/j.apsusc.2022.155264 ↗
61. Cao H, Zhang X, Ding B, Wang L, Lu N (2017) Synergistic action of TiO 2 particles and surfactants on the foamability and stabilization of aqueous foams. RSC Adv 7(71):44972–44978. https://doi.org/10.1039/C7RA08394G10.1039/C7RA08394G ↗
62. Bolis V et al (2012) Hydrophilic/hydrophobic features of TiO2 nanoparticles as a function of crystal phase, surface area and coating, in relation to their potential toxicity in peripheral nervous system. J Colloid Interface Sci 369(1):28–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2011.11.05810.1016/j.jcis.2011.11.058 ↗
63. Hajirasouliha F (2022) Nanosized pollutants at the air-liquid interface under dynamic conditions: interfacial tension and rheology. University of Northumbria at Newcastle. [Online]. Available: https://www.proquest.com/openview/812bc7a3ccf409a707d78d986f19983d/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=51922&diss=y. Accessed 06 Aug 2024
64. Yanagida H (2008) The effect of dissolve gas concentration in the initial growth stage of multi cavitation bubbles: differences between vacuum degassing and ultrasound degassing. Ultrason Sonochem 15(4):492–496. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultsonch.2007.06.00810.1016/j.ultsonch.2007.06.008 ↗
65. Matott LS, Rabideau AJ (2008) ISOFIT–a program for fitting sorption isotherms to experimental data. Environ Model Softw 23(5):670–676. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2007.08.00510.1016/j.envsoft.2007.08.005 ↗
66. Schneider CA, Rasband WS, Eliceiri KW (2012) NIH Image to ImageJ: 25 years of image analysis. Nat Methods 9(7):671–675. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.208910.1038/nmeth.2089 ↗
67. Menger FM, Shi L, Rizvi SAA (2009) Re-evaluating the Gibbs analysis of surface tension at the air/water interface. J Am Chem Soc 131(30):10380–10381. https://doi.org/10.1021/ja904428910.1021/ja9044289 ↗
68. Wang J, Cao Y, Li G, Deng L, Li S (2018) Effect of CTAB concentration on foam properties and discussion based on liquid content and bubble size in the foam. Int J Oil Gas Coal Eng 6(1):18–2410.11648/j.ogce.20180601.13 ↗
69. Bergfreund J, Siegenthaler S, Lutz-Bueno V, Bertsch P, Fischer P (2021) Surfactant adsorption to different fluid interfaces. Langmuir 37(22):6722–672710.1021/acs.langmuir.1c00668 ↗
70. Perinelli DR, Cespi M, Lorusso N, Palmieri GF, Bonacucina G, Blasi P (2020) Surfactant self-assembling and critical micelle concentration: one approach fits all? Langmuir 36(21):5745–5753. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.langmuir.0c0042010.1021/acs.langmuir.0c00420 ↗
71. Kalam S, Abu-Khamsin SA, Kamal MS, Patil S (2021) Surfactant adsorption isotherms: a review. ACS Omega 6(48):32342–3234810.1021/acsomega.1c04661 ↗
72. Adamczyk Z, Para G, Warszyński P (1999) Influence of ionic strength on surface tension of cetyltrimethylammonium bromide. Langmuir 15(24):8383–838710.1021/la990241o ↗
73. Belhaj AF, Elraies KA, Mahmood SM, Zulkifli NN, Akbari S, Hussien OS (2020) The effect of surfactant concentration, salinity, temperature, and pH on surfactant adsorption for chemical enhanced oil recovery: a review. J Pet Explor Prod Technol 10:125–13710.1007/s13202-019-0685-y ↗
74. Kairaliyeva T et al (2017) Surface tension measurements with the drop profile analysis tensiometry—consideration of the surfactant mass balance in a single drop. Colloids Interfaces 1(1):110.3390/colloids1010001 ↗
75. Frumkin A (1925) Die Kapillarkurve der höheren Fettsäuren und die Zustandsgleichung der Oberflächenschicht. Z Phys Chem 116(1):466–484. https://doi.org/10.1515/zpch-1925-1162910.1515/zpch-1925-11629 ↗
76. Hua X, Frechette J, Bevan MA (2018) Nanoparticle adsorption dynamics at fluid interfaces. Soft Matter 14(19):3818–3828. https://doi.org/10.1039/C8SM00273H10.1039/C8SM00273H ↗
77. Fainerman VB, Miller R (2001) 2. Thermodynamics of adsorption of surfactants at the fluid interfaces. In Studies in interface science, vol. 13. Elsevier, pp 99–188. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1383-7303(01)80063-610.1016/S1383-7303(01)80063-6 ↗
78. Miller R, Aksenenko EV, Fainerman VB (2017) Dynamic interfacial tension of surfactant solutions. Adv Colloid Interface Sci 247:115–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cis.2016.12.00710.1016/j.cis.2016.12.007 ↗
79. Cheng C, Ran SY (2014) Interaction between DNA and trimethyl-ammonium bromides with different alkyl chain lengths. Sci World J 2014(1):863049. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/86304910.1155/2014/863049 ↗
80. Cases JM, Villiéras F, Michot LJ, Bersillon JL (2002) Long chain ionic surfactants: the understanding of adsorption mechanisms from the resolution of adsorption isotherms. Colloids Surf A Physicochem Eng Asp 205(1–2):85–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0927-7757(01)01151-710.1016/S0927-7757(01)01151-7 ↗
81. Karakashev SI, Manev ED (2002) Effect of interactions between the adsorbed species on the properties of single and mixed-surfactant monolayers at the air/water interface. J Colloid Interface Sci 248(2):477–48610.1006/jcis.2001.8206 ↗
82. Warszyński P, Barzyk W, Lunkenheimer K, Fruhner H (1998) Surface tension and surface potential of Na n-dodecyl sulfate at the air− solution interface: model and experiment. J Phys Chem B 102(52):10948–1095710.1021/jp983901r ↗
83. Li S, Yang K, Li Z, Zhang K, Jia N (2019) Properties of CO2 foam stabilized by hydrophilic nanoparticles and nonionic surfactants. Energy Fuels 33(6):5043–5054. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.energyfuels.9b0077310.1021/acs.energyfuels.9b00773 ↗
84. Briceño-Ahumada Z, Soltero-Martínez JFA, Castillo R (2021) Aqueous foams and emulsions stabilized by mixtures of silica nanoparticles and surfactants: a state-of-the-art review. Chem Eng J Adv 7:100116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceja.2021.10011610.1016/j.ceja.2021.100116 ↗
85. Jafarlou A, Javadi A, Miller R, Eckert K (2021) Dynamics of adsorption of CTAB-Silica nanoparticle complexes: new experiments and modeling approach. Colloids Surf A Physicochem Eng Asp 629:127448. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.colsurfa.2021.12744810.1016/j.colsurfa.2021.127448 ↗
86. Chiu YC, Kuo CY, Wang CW (2000) Using electrophoresis to determine zeta potential of micelles and critical micelle concentration. J Dispers Sci Technol 21(3):327–343. https://doi.org/10.1080/0193269000891327010.1080/01932690008913270 ↗
87. Vatanparast H, Shahabi F, Bahramian A, Javadi A, Miller R (2018) The role of electrostatic repulsion on increasing surface activity of anionic surfactants in the presence of hydrophilic silica nanoparticles. Sci Rep 8(1):7251. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-25493-710.1038/s41598-018-25493-7 ↗
88. Choudhary M, Kamil SM (2020) Phase diagram study of sodium dodecyl sulfate using dissipative particle dynamics. ACS Omega 5(36):22891–22900. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.0c0225510.1021/acsomega.0c02255 ↗
89. Clendennen SK, Boaz NW (2019) Betaine amphoteric surfactants—synthesis, properties, and applications. In Biobased surfactants. Elsevier, pp 447–46910.1016/B978-0-12-812705-6.00014-9 ↗
90. Xu Z et al (2020) Investigation of the effect of nanoparticle-stabilized foam on EOR: nitrogen foam and methane foam. ACS Omega 5(30):19092–1910310.1021/acsomega.0c02434 ↗