University of San Carlos

Department of Chemical Engineering

Talamban, Cebu City, Philippines 6000

Individual Laboratory Report

Laboratory Course: CHE 412L Physical Chemistry Laboratory II
Experiment Title: Conductimetric Determination of the Critical Micelle Concentration of
Sodium Dodecyl sulfate (CMC)
Students Name and Signature: Flores, Dharyl C.
Scheduled Date: August 16, 2017
Date Performed: August 18, 2017
Date Submitted: October 25, 2017
Submission Number: 1
Instructor: Engr. May V. Tampus
Term and Academic Year: 1st Semester, A.Y. 2017-2018

Data Processing and Results Grade

Introduction (x0.20)
Methodology (x 0.20)
Presentation of Results (x 0.20)
Discussion of Results and Conclusions (x 0.20)
Writing Style (x 0.10)
Appearance and Formatting (x 0.10)
Grade

Assessed and Graded By: Engr. May V. Tampus

(Signature over printed name)
Date and Time October 25, 2017
University of San Carlos Department of Chemical Engineering
CHE 323L FORM-2-Individual Laboratory Report Rating

University of San Carlos

Department of Chemical Engineering
Talamban, Cebu City, Philippines 6000

CHE 412L
Physical Chemistry Laboratory 2

Conductimetric Determination of the Critical Micelle Concentration of

Sodium Dodecyl sulfate
(CMC)

A laboratory report submitted to

Engr. May V. Tampus

CHE 412L Instructor

by

Flores, Dharyl C.

October 25, 2017

1
University of San Carlos Department of Chemical Engineering
CHE 323L FORM-2-Individual Laboratory Report Rating

1. Introduction

Surfactant is an abbreviation for surface-active agent, which includes molecules that are

active at surfaces. These molecules have a tendency to reside rather at the surface than in

bulk solutions due to their amphiphilic nature. Amphiphilic molecules consist of at least two

parts: one of which being hydrophobic and the other hydrophilic. A typical surfactant molecule

consists of a long hydrocarbon tail that dissolves in hydrocarbon and other nonpolar solvents

(water-insoluble; hydrophobic), and a headgroup that dissolves in polar solvents (typically

water; hydrophilic) as shown in Figure 1. Surfactants have two main features making them

essential; one of them is the tendency to adsorb at interfaces and lower the surface tension

and the other is the association in solution.

Figure 1. Schematic Representation of a Surfactant

(Bucak & Rende, 2014)

Surfactants have the general formula RX, in which R is a hydrocarbon chain and X is a

polar group. The hydrocarbon chains in the molecule are ordinarily C8 or greater, may be

saturated or unsaturated, may be linear or branched, and may contain an aromatic ring.

However, the polar group in the amphipathic molecule may be nonionic or ionic. Sodium

dodecyl sulfate or sodium lauryl sulfate (3 12 25 ), a common anionic surfactant, was

used in the experiment for the determination of its critical micelle concentration (CMC) in a

different solution pure water and 0.02 M aqueous NaCl solution. The amphiphilic ion is

12 25 4 while + is the counter ion.

2
University of San Carlos Department of Chemical Engineering
CHE 323L FORM-2-Individual Laboratory Report Rating

The increase in the concentration of a particular surfactant in an aqueous solvent reveals

a sudden change in various aqueous surfactant solution physico-chemical properties such as

surface tension, equivalent conductivity, solubilization, osmotic pressure, turbidity, self-

diffusion, magnetic resonance, UV-visible/fluorescence spectra of solutes, and reaction rates

above a sharp surfactant concentration (Khan, 2007). Such changes in various physical

properties of an aqueous solution of the surfactant are attributed to the formation of

aggregates of surfactant molecules above a critical surfactant concentration, which is termed

as critical micelle concentration (CMC), because these surfactant molecular aggregates are

called micelles.

Micelles are colloid-sized clusters of molecules; whose hydrophobic tails tend to

congregate through hydrophobic interactions while their hydrophilic head groups provide

protection. Micelle formation among surfactant molecules takes place when their hydrophobic

ends collect themselves away from the water molecules while the hydrophilic ends surround

them and are the ones oriented toward the water molecules. The centers of these micelles

are somewhat hollow so that they can still accommodate a few more molecules and thus,

water with surfactant micelles can now easily dissolve the otherwise insoluble hydrocarbons

(Atkins and de Paula, 2010).

Figure 2. Schematic diagram of a Spherical Micelle (Atkins

and de Paula, 2010)

Micelles form only above the critical micelle concentration (CMC) and above the Kraft

temperature. The CMC is detected by noting a pronounced change in physical properties of

3
 University of San Carlos Department of Chemical Engineering
CHE 323L FORM-2-Individual Laboratory Report Rating

the solution, particularly the molar conductivity. There is no abrupt change in properties at the

CMC; rather, there is a transition region corresponding to a range of concentrations around

the CMC where physical properties vary smoothly but nonlinearly with the concentration

(Atkins and de Paula, 2010).

Figure 3. The typical variation of some physical properties of an aqueous solution of sodium dodecyl
sulfate (SDS) close to the CMC (Atkins and de Paula, 2010)

2. Objectives of the Experiment

1. To measure the conductivity of an aqueous sodium dodecyl solution at different

concentrations
2. To determine the critical micelle concentration of an aqueous SDS solution
3. To determine the effect of the presence of an electrolyte on the critical micelle
concentration of an aqueous SDS solution

4
University of San Carlos Department of Chemical Engineering
CHE 323L FORM-2-Individual Laboratory Report Rating

3. Methodology
3.1. Methodological Framework

Preparation of sodium
dodecyl sulfate (SDS) and
aqueous sodium chloride
solutions.

Calibration of conductivity
meter with 0.01 N KCl
solution as standard
solution.

Determination of Critical
Micelle Concentration
(CMC) of SDS solution.

Determination of Critical
Micelle Concentration
(CMC) of SDS solution.

3.2. Materials
Materials used were Ssodium dodecyl sulfate (NaOSO3C12H25) solution, potassium chloride
(KCl) and sodium chloride (NaCl) aqueous solutions.

5
University of San Carlos Department of Chemical Engineering
CHE 323L FORM-2-Individual Laboratory Report Rating

3.3. Equipment

The equipment used for this experiments were the Orion Star A215 pH/Conductivity
Meter which is used to measure the conductivity of the samples. Also, analytical balance,
weighing boats, pipette and pipettor, stirring rod, magnetic stirrer, beakers and wash bottle were
used.

3.4. Procedures

Preparation of Solutions

For the preparation of 0.5M sodium dodecyl sulfate (NaOSO3C12H25), 1.5178 g of sodium

dodecyl sulphate was weighed, dissolved, and diluted to 100-mL in a 250-mL beaker. Another

sample was prepared using the same procedure.

For the preparation of 0.2 M aqueous NaCl solution, 1.6770 g of solid NaCl was weighed,

dissolved and diluted to 100-mL in a 250-mL beaker.

For the preparation of standard (0.01 N) KCl solution, 10-mL of standard solution was pipetted

and diluted with distilled water to 100-mL.

Calibration of Conductivity Meter with Standard KCl Solution

Initially, the conductivity meter was turned on and measurement mode was set to conductivity.

The conductivity cell and the electrodes were then connected to the meter also. In the measurement

mode, f1 (cal) was pressed. In order to highlight the conductivity-channel, the set-up or

log/print was pressed then the f2 (select). After, the electrodes and conductivity cell were rinsed

with distilled water using the wash bottle and dry it with a lint-free tissue before immersing it into

the prepared standard (0.1 N KCl). Next, f3 (start) was pressed to begin the calibration. Until the

conductivity value on the meter remained constant, f2 (accept) was pressed to display the cell

constant.

6
University of San Carlos Department of Chemical Engineering
CHE 323L FORM-2-Individual Laboratory Report Rating

Conductivity Measurement for CMC of SDS in Pure water

In a clean 200-mL beaker, 70-mL of distilled water was measured and pipetted. The beaker

was placed in top of a magnetic stirrer and inside it a small stirring bar. The conductivity cell and

other electrodes were then set up and the settings were set. The value of the measured conductivity

was than measured. Using a pipet, 0.3-mL of the prepared solution of SDS was added. The

conductivity was then recorded again. 0.3-mL aliquots of the SDS solution were continuously

added every minute and the readings of conductivity were recorded every addition. After 15

aliquots of 0.3-mL SDS solution were added, instead of 0.3-mL, 0.5-mL of SDS solutions were

now added and the conductivity were recorded every addition.

Conductivity Measurement for CMC of SDS in NaCl solution

The same procedure was employed as the conductivity measurement for CMC of SDS in Pure
water to SDS in 0.02M NaCl solution, except that 45 more additions of 0.2-mL aliquots of SDS
solution were added.

4. Results and Discussions

Objective 1: To measure the conductivity of an aqueous sodium dodecyl solution at different

concentrations

The conductivity meter (Polyscience Model 4010) was used to measure the conductivity

of an aqueous sodium dodecyl sulfate solution at different concentrations. Before determining the

conductivity of the surfactant solution, there is a need for calibration of the conductivity meter

apparatus by immersing the conductivity cell into 0.01 N KCl solution. The data gathered in the

calibration is shown in Table 1 below.

7
University of San Carlos Department of Chemical Engineering
CHE 323L FORM-2-Individual Laboratory Report Rating

Table 1. Calibration of Conductivity Meter with 0.01N KCl standard solution

Conductivity of 0.01N KCl Solution (/) 1413

Cell Constant ( ) 0.431

Temperature Displayed () 30

Temperature Reading () 30

RPM of Magnetic Stirrer () 400

Concentration of KCl Solution (eq KCl/L soln) 0.01

Concentration of NaCl Solution (mol NaCl/L soln) 0.02

Concentration of SDS Solution (mol SDS/L soln) 0.05

In the measurement of the conductivity of aqueous sodium dodecyl sulfate solution at

different concentrations, 70-mL of distilled water is put inside a 100ml beaker. Then this was

placed on top of a magnetic stirrer which operates in the settings shown in Table 1. The

conductivity of water is then read and tabulated. Using a 1-mL pipette, 0.3-mL aliquots of 0.05 M

SDS solution was added into the beaker every 1-minute interval for the first 15

8
University of San Carlos Department of Chemical Engineering
CHE 323L FORM-2-Individual Laboratory Report Rating

minutes. After the 15 additions 0.5-mL are added into the solution for every 1-minute interval.

This is done while reading and recording the conductivity of the solution with each aliquot addition.

600.00

500.00
Conductivity (S/cm)

400.00

300.00

200.00

100.00

0.00
0 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.01 0.012 0.014

Concentration (mol/L)

Figure 4. Conductivity Measurements of Aqueous Sodium Dodecyl Solutions at Different

Concentrations

From Figure 4 above, it can be observed that the conductivity of the solution increases as

the concentration of SDS in the solution increases. Though the magnitude of the increase of

conductivity with concentration varies at a point. It can be seen that there is a greater increase in

the conductivity of the solution with every increase in concentration before the intersection of the

two trend lines, than after the intersection. This is evidenced by the greater value of the slope of

the first trend line 61891 than in the second trend line 34355 .

This is because, the conductivity of a solution is dependent on the number of charge

carriers (ions) present in it. Before CMC point, the addition of the surfactant SDS into the solution

will tend to increase the number of cations and anions in the solution since SDS, when added to
+
the solution, will dissociate into () and 12 25 3() ions and therefore, it is expected that

9
University of San Carlos Department of Chemical Engineering
CHE 323L FORM-2-Individual Laboratory Report Rating

the solutions conductivity increases as more SDS is added. After the CMC point, upon addition
+
of SDS into the solution, the SDS will not anymore ionize into () and 12 25 3() ions but

instead cause micelle nucleation which would increase the micelle concentration upon further

SDS addition but would leave the monomer (ions) concentration unchanged. And since micelles
+
are bulkier than that of () and 12 25 3() ions they move slower and thus are less

effective charge carrier causing smaller increase in conductivity of the solution with increase in

SDS concentration than what was observed before reaching the CMC.

Objective 2: To determine the critical micelle concentration of an aqueous SDS solution

One of the fundamental properties of surface-active agents is the self-assembly of

surfactant molecules in the bulk solutions to form aggregates with different geometries like disks,

spheres, cylinders, etc. The simplest aggregates are generally spherical in shape and are called

micelles. However, this phenomenon occurs only when the surfactant concentration exceeds a

threshold known as the critical micelle concentration (CMC). In a micelle, the hydrophobic part of

the surfactant molecule is directed toward the interior of the cluster and the polar headgroup

toward the aqueous solution as shown in Figure 1a. When a surfactant adsorbs from aqueous

solution at a hydrophobic surface, it orients its hydrophobic group toward the surface and exposes

its polar group to water as shown in Figure 1b. The driving force for self-assembly is said to be

the hydrophobic effect. As micelles form as shown in Figure 1c, sharp changes occur in many

physical properties such as the surface tension, viscosity, conductivity, and sometimes turbidity

of the solution.

10
University of San Carlos Department of Chemical Engineering
CHE 323L FORM-2-Individual Laboratory Report Rating

Figure 5. Surfactant Behavior in Aqueous Solutions (Bucak & Rende, 2014)

The critical micelle concentration (CMC) is usually determined experimentally by plotting

some property as a function of concentration and extrapolating the results at low and high

concentrations to an intersection point (Lindman & Wennerstrom, 1980). That is, at the said point

shows a significant change of a physico-chemical parameter, where for this experiment is

260000

210000
k/C (S-L/cm-mol)

160000

110000

60000

10000

0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1 0.11 0.12
-40000
C1/2 (mol/L)1/2

11
University of San Carlos Department of Chemical Engineering
CHE 323L FORM-2-Individual Laboratory Report Rating

conductivity. The determination of the critical micelle concentration (CMC) was done through

graphical means which is discussed in detail in the below.

1. Conductivity of solution per molarity of solution (/C) vs. the square root of the SDS
concentration (C1/2)

260000

210000
k/C (S-L/cm-mol)

160000

110000

60000

10000

0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1 0.11 0.12
-40000
C1/2 (mol/L)1/2

Figure 6. CMC Determination from the Plot of /C vs C1/2 of SDS in Pure Water at T= 30.7
, 400 RPM

In this plot, two tangent lines were drawn and since the point of intersection is away from

the graph and the corresponding c1/2 value cannot be directly determined, the angle bisector of

the angle formed by the two lines was drawn and its point of intersection with the graph was

determined to find the c1/2 value. The critical micelle concentration was determined by squaring

this value. From this plot, the square root of the critical micelle concentration of the aqueous SDS

solution obtained is 3.40 102
. Squaring this value, the critical micelle concentration from

this plot is 1.1560 103
. The ratio between conductivity and concentration, k/C, is known as

12
University of San Carlos Department of Chemical Engineering
CHE 323L FORM-2-Individual Laboratory Report Rating

molar conductivity, . As observed in Figure 6, there is a drastic change in the molar conductivity

of the solution from the starting square root of concentration until it reaches the critical micelle

concentration.

Small amounts of SDS was added into the distilled water. At the beginning of the

experiment, a dilute solution of SDS was formed where its concentration is below its critical micelle

concentration. Below the critical micelle concentration, SDS behaves as a normal electrolyte
+
wherein when dissolved in water, it ionizes to produce () and 12 25 3() . The addition

of a surfactant to an aqueous solution causes an increase in the number of charge carriers

+
(() and 12 25 3() for SDS) and consequently, an increase in the conductivity. At these

low concentrations, below the CMC, only monomers exist in the solution.

As the amount of the SDS solution was added to the water, the number of monomers

increased. The SDS solution was continuously added then it reached to a point that the amount

of this surfactant added was equal to the critical micelle concentration. At this point, micellization

occurred. In addition, it is at this point that micelles start forming, being in equilibrium with the

monomers. The increase in the concentration of SDS in water above CMC, caused nucleation for

the micelle to form. Thus, there is an increase of in the concentration of micelles in the solution.

However, the concentration of monomers remained unchanged in the solution. Since a micelle is

much larger than a monomer, it diffuses more slowly through solution and so is a less efficient

charge carrier (Bucak & Rende, 2014).

According to Kohlrauschs law that at low concentrations the molar conductivities of strong

electrolytes (substances that are fully dissociated into ions in solution) vary linearly with the

square root of the concentration:

= 1/2

13
University of San Carlos Department of Chemical Engineering
CHE 323L FORM-2-Individual Laboratory Report Rating

where = , is the conductivity, c is the concentration of the added electrolyte and is the

molar conductivity of solution. This variation is called Kohlrauschs law. The constant is the

limiting molar conductivity, the molar conductivity in the limit of zero concentration (when the ions

are effectively infinitely far apart and do not interact with one another). The constant K is found to

depend more on the stoichiometry of the electrolyte than on its specific identity. The 1/2

dependence arises from interactions between ions: when charge is conducted ionically, ions of

one charge are moving past the ions of interest and retard its progress (Atkins and de Paula,

2010).

Objective 3: To determine the effect of the presence of an electrolyte on the critical micelle

concentration of an aqueous SDS solution

The critical micelle concentration (CMC) is at the point at which surfactant molecules

aggregate together in the liquid to form groups known as micelles. The CMC of a surfactant

indicates the point at which surface active properties are at the optimum and performance is

maximized. However, the presence of other component, in particular, electrolytes such as

inorganic builders and alkali consequently decreases the CMC of a surfactant. This reduction

affects the adsorption, wetting and emulsifying properties of surfactants (Savale, 2016).

In the experiment, the effect of sodium chloride aqueous solution on micellar systems of

an anionic surfactant such as sodium dodecyl sulfate was studied. It has been observed that the

critical micelle concentration (CMC) decreases with the presence of an electrolyte than pure water

alone. The effect of additives on CMC of an aqueous solution of a surfactant depends on the

nature of interaction between additive and micellized surfactant molecules. Molecular interaction

between interacting molecules may involve some or all of the following interactions: dipoledipole,

iondipole, ionion, van der Waals/dispersion forces, and hydrogen bonding. Energetically

favorable interactions between additive and micellized surfactant molecules will increase the

stability of micelle, which will, in turn, cause the decrease in CMC.

14
University of San Carlos Department of Chemical Engineering
CHE 323L FORM-2-Individual Laboratory Report Rating

175000

140000
/C (S-L/cm-mol)

105000

70000

35000

0
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08
C1/2 (mol/L)1/2

Figure 7. CMC Determination from the Plot of /C vs / of SDS in 0.02 M Aqueous NaCl
Solution at 30.3 , 400 rpm

As shown above, the experimentally determined critical micelle concentration of sodium

dodecyl sulfate at 30.3 and 400 rpm is 8.4100 104 /. The technique employed was

done similarly to the previous method described in Objective 2. The trend is almost the same with

that of the determination of CMC in pure water except that in this curve, it is almost approaching

linearity at a constant molar conductivity value. Moreover, a lesser addition of SDS solution to the

electrolyte solution of NaCl was needed for the change in conductivity to approach a constant

value.

Table 2. Critical Micelle Concentration of SDS in Pure Water and in 0.03 M Aqueous NaCl
Solution

Experimental Literature Value

Aqueous 0.05 M SDS solution CMC of SDS of CMC of SDS* % Error
(mol/L) (mol/L)

15
University of San Carlos Department of Chemical Engineering
CHE 323L FORM-2-Individual Laboratory Report Rating

Without electrolyte (Pure Water) 1.1560 103 8.0000 103 85.73

With electrolyte (0.02 M NaCl) 8.4100 104 3.8200 103 77.98

*Source: Page 360 P of Principles of Colloid and Surface Chemistry by Hiemenz and Rajagopalan. CRC Press. 2017

From the table above, comparing the obtained CMC values, the CMC of SDS in NaCl

solution is lower than the CMC of SDS in pure water. Thus, the presence of an electrolyte in a

solution lowers the CMC of the surfactant. The addition of salt in surfactant solution is a way of

reducing the CMC of a surfactant because the repulsive forces between the head groups of ionic

surfactants are fighting against it aggregation which implies that the repulsive forces of head

groups of SDS decreases due to the electrostatic shielding effect resulting in formation of micelle

at a lower CMC.

Ions of salts normally assist micelle formation, and help to formally bind the counter ions,

increase the micelle aggregation number description of the number of molecules present in a

micelle once the critical micelle concentration (CMC) has been reached, affect the electrokinetic

potential (zeta potential), and as well inuence the energetics of the process (Naskar, et al., 2013).

However, large errors that may have resulted in the determination of critical micelle concentration

of SDS in different solutions may be due to the degradation of instrument and temperature

fluctuations. The cell constant of conductivity meter was determined to be only 0.431 1 when

it should be between 0.71 1 to 1.50 1 . Secondly, a constant temperature was not

maintained rather an increase in temperature was maintained.

In general, repulsive forces between the head groups of ionic surfactants are fighting

against the aggregation. This is due mainly to the decrease in the thickness of the ionic

atmosphere surrounding the ionic head groups in the presence of the electrolyte and the

consequent decreased electrical repulsion between them in the micelle. A decrease in the

electrical repulsion would then mean a faster aggregation of monomers into micelles due to lesser

resistance, thus a lower critical micelle concentration is obtained (Rosen & Kunjappu 2012).

16
University of San Carlos Department of Chemical Engineering
CHE 323L FORM-2-Individual Laboratory Report Rating

The depression of the CMC Below CMC, no micelles are formed and the conductivity is

due to the separate contributions of the dissociated ionic surfactants and of the free counterions.

Also, an ionic surfactant is completely dissociated and there is a linear relationship between the

molar conductivity, of the surfactant solution and its concentration as the surfactant monomers

behave as normal electrolytes and thus obeying Kohlrauschs Law of Independent Ion Migration,

= []( + ) Equation 1

where is the conductivity, [] is the amphiphile (surfactant) concentration below CMC, and

and are the molar ionic conductivities of the counterion and of the amphiphile,

respectively.

Kohlrauschs Law of Independent Ion Migration states that every ion contributes a definite

amount to the equivalent conductance of an electrolyte in the limit of infinite dilution, regardless

of the presence of other ions (Parker, 2003).

Above the CMC, is constant and independent of surfactant concentration as micelles

behave like weak electrolyte. The addition of surfactant molecules increases the concentration of

micelles, while the equilibrium monomer concentration remains constant. In this region, the

conductivity again increases linearly with surfactant concentration, but due to the reduced ionic

mobility of micelles compared to that of the monomers the slope of this linear trend is smaller

than that below the CMC. The conductivity above the CMC is the sum of four different

contributions: the ionic conductivity of the counterion and of the amphiphile at the CMC, the

micelle conductivity and the conductivity of the unbonded counterions from the micelles. The

following equation applies:

= ( + ) + [] + ([] ) Equation 2

where is the dissociation degree and [] is the molar concentration of the micelles. If is the

average aggregation number, then [] = ([] )/ , and assuming that the micelle

17

Equation 2
University of San Carlos Department of Chemical Engineering
CHE 323L FORM-2-Individual Laboratory Report Rating

conductivity is the sum of the conductivity of all the charged monomers in the micelle, that is,

= , equation 2 can be rearranged as follows.

= ( + )(1)+ ( + )[]

Then the slope of the trendline of the conductivity above the CMC provides once +

has been obtained for concentrations below the CMC the micelle ionization degree (Garti, &

Amar-Yuli, 2012)

A plot of molar conductivity of the surfactant versus the surfactant concentration gives a

kink from which the CMC of the surfactant is obtained.

Figure 8. Molar Conductivity of the Surfactant vs. the

Surfactant Concentration

Post-Lab Questions

1. Assume that the cavity of SDS micelle has a diameter of 3nm and that it contains dissolved
benzene molecules. What is the concentration of benzene in that micelle?
= /
= 3 , = 1.5 = 1.5 109

18
University of San Carlos Department of Chemical Engineering
CHE 323L FORM-2-Individual Laboratory Report Rating

4 4
= 3 = (1.5109 )3
3 3
= 1.4136 1026 3 = 1.4136 1023
1
3 = 4.9834 1024
6.02 1023
4.9834 1024
= = 0.35
1.4136 1023

5. Conclusions

The CMC of sodium dodecyl sulfate can be investigated via conductimetric techniques. In

this experiment, the critical micelle concentration (CMC) of sodium dodecyl sulfate was

determined by plotting conductivity as a function of concentration and extrapolating the results at

low and high concentrations to an intersection point. That is, at the said point shows a significant

change of a physico-chemical parameter which is conductivity. The experimental critical micelle

concentration of aqueous sodium dodecyl sulfate solution in pure water at T = 30.0 C and 400

RPM, is 1.1560 mmol/L. The 85.73 % error compared to the literature value which is 8.0 mmol/L

is due to the errors in the experiment such as the fluctuating temperature during the experiment

and due to instrumental errors.

The critical micelle concentration of aqueous SDS solution in a 0.02 M NaCl solution is

0.8410 mmol/L. This shows that the addition of a dilute electrolyte solution decreases the critical

micelle concentration.

19
University of San Carlos Department of Chemical Engineering
CHE 323L FORM-2-Individual Laboratory Report Rating

References

Demissie, H., & Duraisamy, R. (n.d.). Effects of Electrolytes on the Surface and Micellar
Characteristics of Sodium Dodecyl Sulphate Surfactant Solution.
doi:http://www.jsirjournal.com/Vol5_Issue6_03.pdf

Naskar, B., Dey, A., & Moulik, S. P. (2013). Counter-ion Effect on Micellization of Ionic
Surfactants: A Comprehensive Understanding with Two Representatives, Sodium Dodecyl
Sulfate (SDS) and Dodecyltrimethylammonium Bromide (DTAB). Journal of Surfactants and
Detergents, 16(5), 785-794. doi:10.1007/s11743-013-1449-1

Garti, N., & Amar-Yuli, I. (2012). Nanotechnologies for Solubilization and Delivery in Foods
and Cosmetics Pharmaceuticals. Lancaster, PA: DEStech Publications.

Parker, S. P. (2003). The McGraw-Hill Dictionary of Scientific and Technical Terms. New
York: McGraw-Hill Professional.
doi:https://books.google.com.ph/books?id=xOPzO5HVFfEC&pg=PA1158&dq

Khan, M. N. (2007). Micellar Catalysis. Boca Raton, Fl: CRC/Taylor & Francis.

Bucak, S., & Rende, D. (2014). Colloid and Surface Chemistry a Laboratory Guide for
Exploration of the Nano World. Boca Raton, Fla.: CRC Press.

Atkins, P., de Paula, J. (2010). Atkins Physical Chemistry. 9th ed. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.

20
University of San Carlos Department of Chemical Engineering
CHE 323L FORM-2-Individual Laboratory Report Rating

ANNEX

Data Processing & Analysis Report

Cell constant: 0.431 Distilled water

Temperature
30 0.05
(C): [mol/L]

RPM: 400 0.3
[mL]

Measurement of Conductivity and determination of CMC of aqueous SDS solution

Total Conductivit Mol ( ) k/C
Volume
Time Tempera Volume of y [mol/L]1/2
(min) ture ()
Added
Solution k SDS [mol/L]
[S-L/cm-
(mL) mol]
(mL) [S/cm] (moles)
0 29.9 0.0 70.0 39.20 0.000000 0.0000000 0.00000 0.00
1 29.9 0.3 70.3 53.91 0.000015 0.0002134 0.01461 252658.20
2 29.9 0.6 70.6 68.21 0.000030 0.0004249 0.02061 160520.87
3 29.9 0.9 70.9 80.94 0.000045 0.0006347 0.02519 127525.47
4 29.9 1.2 71.2 94.31 0.000060 0.0008427 0.02903 111914.53
5 29.9 1.5 71.5 108.10 0.000075 0.0010490 0.03239 103055.33
6 29.9 1.8 71.8 122.1 0.000090 0.0012535 0.03540 97408.67
7 29.9 2.1 72.1 136.2 0.000105 0.0014563 0.03816 93524.00
8 29.9 2.4 72.4 150.4 0.000120 0.0016575 0.04071 90741.33
9 29.9 2.7 72.7 164.8 0.000135 0.0018569 0.04309 88747.85
10 29.9 3.0 73.0 179.2 0.000150 0.0020548 0.04533 87210.67
11 29.9 3.3 73.3 193.5 0.000165 0.0022510 0.04744 85960.91
12 29.9 3.6 73.6 207.0 0.000180 0.0024457 0.04945 84640.00
13 29.9 3.9 73.9 219.4 0.000195 0.0026387 0.05137 83146.97
14 29.9 4.2 74.2 231.6 0.000210 0.0028302 0.05320 81832.00
15 29.9 4.5 74.5 243.7 0.000225 0.0030201 0.05496 80691.78
16 29.9 5.0 75.0 255.8 0.000250 0.0033333 0.05774 76740.00
17 29.9 5.5 75.5 273.1 0.000275 0.0036424 0.06035 74978.36
18 29.9 6.0 76.0 288.7 0.000300 0.0039474 0.06283 73137.33
19 29.9 6.5 76.5 303.1 0.000325 0.0042484 0.06518 71345.08
20 29.9 7.0 77.0 317.5 0.000350 0.0045455 0.06742 69850.00
21 29.9 7.5 77.5 331.4 0.000375 0.0048387 0.06956 68489.33
22 29.9 8.0 78.0 344.5 0.000400 0.0051282 0.07161 67177.50
23 29.9 8.5 78.5 356.7 0.000425 0.0054140 0.07358 65884.59
24 30.0 9.0 79.0 369.4 0.000450 0.0056962 0.07547 64850.22

21
University of San Carlos Department of Chemical Engineering
CHE 323L FORM-2-Individual Laboratory Report Rating

25 30.0 9.5 79.5 380.4 0.000475 0.0059748 0.07730 63666.95

26 30.0 10.0 80.0 392.3 0.000500 0.0062500 0.07906 62768.00
27 30.0 10.5 80.5 403.8 0.000525 0.0065217 0.08076 61916.00
28 30.0 11.0 81.0 414.3 0.000550 0.0067901 0.08240 61015.09
29 30.0 11.5 81.5 425.0 0.000575 0.0070552 0.08400 60239.13
30 30.0 12.0 82.0 434.7 0.000600 0.0073171 0.08554 59409.00
31 30.0 12.5 82.5 444.7 0.000625 0.0075758 0.08704 58700.40
32 29.9 13.0 83.0 453.9 0.000650 0.0078313 0.08849 57959.54
33 30.0 13.5 83.5 462.7 0.000675 0.0080838 0.08991 57237.70
34 30.0 14.0 84.0 472.0 0.000700 0.0083333 0.09129 56640.00
35 30.0 14.5 84.5 480.7 0.000725 0.0085799 0.09263 56026.41
36 30.0 15.0 85.0 489.5 0.000750 0.0088235 0.09393 55476.67
37 30.0 15.5 85.5 497.8 0.000775 0.0090643 0.09521 54918.58
38 30.0 16.0 86.0 505.9 0.000800 0.0093023 0.09645 54384.25
39 30.0 16.5 86.5 513.9 0.000825 0.0095376 0.09766 53881.64
40 30.0 17.0 87.0 521.5 0.000850 0.0097701 0.09884 53377.06
41 30.0 17.5 87.5 529.4 0.000875 0.0100000 0.10000 52940.00
42 30.0 18.0 88.0 536.4 0.000900 0.0102273 0.10113 52448.00
43 30.0 18.5 88.5 543.8 0.000925 0.0104520 0.10223 52028.43
44 30.0 19.0 89.0 551.0 0.000950 0.0106742 0.10332 51620.00
45 30.0 19.5 89.5 558.3 0.000975 0.0108939 0.10437 51249.08
46 30.1 20.0 90.0 565.5 0.001000 0.0111111 0.10541 50895.00
47 30.1 20.5 90.5 572.6 0.001025 0.0113260 0.10642 50556.39
48 30.1 21.0 91.0 579.3 0.001050 0.0115385 0.10742 50206.00
49 30.1 21.5 91.5 586.3 0.001075 0.0117486 0.10839 49903.67
50 30.1 22.0 92.0 593.1 0.001100 0.0119565 0.10935 49604.73
51 30.1 22.5 92.5 599.6 0.001125 0.0121622 0.11028 49300.44
52 30.1 23.0 93.0 606.1 0.001150 0.0123656 0.11120 49015.04
53 30.1 23.5 93.5 612.5 0.001175 0.0125668 0.11210 48739.36
54 30.1 24.0 94.0 618.7 0.001200 0.0127660 0.11299 48464.83
55 30.1 24.5 94.5 624.8 0.001225 0.0129630 0.11386 48198.86
56 30.0 25.0 95.0 630.7 0.001250 0.0131579 0.11471 47933.20
57 30.1 25.5 95.5 637.0 0.001275 0.0133508 0.11555 47712.55
58 30.1 26.0 96.0 643.0 0.001300 0.0135417 0.11637 47483.08
59 30.1 26.5 96.5 648.8 0.001325 0.0137306 0.11718 47252.23
60 30.2 27.0 97.0 654.5 0.001350 0.0139175 0.11797 47027.04
61 30.2 27.5 97.5 660.4 0.001375 0.0141026 0.11875 46828.36
62 30.2 28.0 98.0 666.1 0.001400 0.0142857 0.11952 46627.00
63 30.2 28.5 98.5 671.4 0.001425 0.0144670 0.12028 46409.05

22
University of San Carlos Department of Chemical Engineering
CHE 323L FORM-2-Individual Laboratory Report Rating

Conductivity () vs. concentration of SDS (C)

CMC Determination from the Plot of Conductivity vs Concentration of SDS in Pure Water at
T=30.7 , 400 RPM

23
University of San Carlos Department of Chemical Engineering
CHE 323L FORM-2-Individual Laboratory Report Rating

Conductivity of solution per molarity of solution (/C) vs. the square root of the SDS
concentration (C1/2)

CMC Determination from the Plot of /C vs C1/2 of SDS in Pure Water at T= 30.7 , 400
RPM

Sample Calculation of Concentration of SDS

( ) 0.05 (0)
=
= = 0.00
70

( ) + ( ) (0 ) (70) + 0.05 (0.30 )
,1 = =
+ 70 + 0.30

= 0.0002134

1 (1 ) + ( ) (0.0002134 ) (70.30 ) + 0.05 (0.30 )
2 = =
1 + 70.30 + 0.30


= 0.0004249

24
University of San Carlos Department of Chemical Engineering
CHE 323L FORM-2-Individual Laboratory Report Rating

From Figure 3, inflection point is at = 4.8997 103 .

Since , = 4.8997 103
.

1
1/2
From Figure 6, 2 = 3.40 102 (
)

= 1.1560 103


Since , = 1 1.1560 103

Cell constant: 0.431 Distilled water

Temperature
30 0.05
(C): [mol/L]

RPM: 400 0.3
[mL]

Determination of CMC of aqueous SDS solution when added with 0.02M NaCl

Total Conductivit ( ) k/C
Volume
Time Temperatur
Added
Volume of y Mol SDS [mol/L]1/2 [S-
(min) e () Solution k (moles) [mol/L] L/cm-
(mL)
(mL) [S/cm]
mol]
0 29.9 0.0 70.0 2314 0.000000
194047.0
1 30.0 0.2 70.2 2316 0.000010 0.000142 0.01194
8
137585.3
2 30.1 0.4 70.4 2319 0.000020 0.000284 0.01685
1
112594.4
3 30.1 0.6 70.6 2321 0.000030 0.000425 0.02061
2
4 30.2 0.8 70.8 2322 0.000040 0.000565 0.02377 97689.72
5 30.2 1.0 71.0 2325 0.000050 0.000704 0.02654 87612.71
6 30.3 1.2 71.2 2326 0.000060 0.000843 0.02903 80126.11
7 30.3 1.4 71.4 2327 0.000070 0.000980 0.03131 74318.42
8 30.4 1.6 71.6 2328 0.000080 0.001117 0.03343 69645.73
9 30.4 1.8 71.8 2328 0.000090 0.001253 0.03540 65754.27
10 30.4 2.0 72.0 2329 0.000100 0.001389 0.03727 62493.63
11 30.4 2.2 72.2 2329 0.000110 0.001524 0.03903 59668.04
12 30.4 2.4 72.4 2330 0.000120 0.001657 0.04071 57231.43
13 30.4 2.6 72.6 2330 0.000130 0.001791 0.04232 55062.07
14 30.5 2.8 72.8 2330 0.000140 0.001923 0.04385 53132.17
15 30.5 3.0 73.0 2331 0.000150 0.002055 0.04533 51423.08
16 30.5 3.2 73.2 2330 0.000160 0.002186 0.04675 49836.95

25
University of San Carlos Department of Chemical Engineering
CHE 323L FORM-2-Individual Laboratory Report Rating

17 30.5 3.4 73.4 2330 0.000170 0.002316 0.04813 48414.95

18 30.5 3.6 73.6 2330 0.000180 0.002446 0.04945 47114.93
19 30.5 3.8 73.8 2329 0.000190 0.002575 0.05074 45900.86
20 30.5 4.0 74.0 2329 0.000200 0.002703 0.05199 44799.21
21 30.5 4.2 74.2 2329 0.000210 0.002830 0.05320 43778.59
22 30.5 4.4 74.4 2328 0.000220 0.002957 0.05438 42811.27
23 30.5 4.6 74.6 2328 0.000230 0.003083 0.05553 41926.49
24 30.4 4.8 74.8 2327 0.000240 0.003209 0.05664 41081.05
25 30.4 5.0 75.0 2326 0.000250 0.003333 0.05774 40287.50
26 30.4 5.2 75.2 2326 0.000260 0.003457 0.05880 39557.78
27 30.4 5.4 75.4 2325 0.000270 0.003581 0.05984 38853.20
28 30.4 5.6 75.6 2324 0.000280 0.003704 0.06086 38187.22
29 30.4 5.8 75.8 2323 0.000290 0.003826 0.06185 37556.47
30 30.4 6.0 76.0 2322 0.000300 0.003947 0.06283 36957.99
31 30.4 6.2 76.2 2321 0.000310 0.004068 0.06378 36389.14
32 30.4 6.4 76.4 2320 0.000320 0.004188 0.06472 35847.57
33 30.3 6.6 76.6 2319 0.000330 0.004308 0.06564 35331.18
34 30.3 6.8 76.8 2318 0.000340 0.004427 0.06654 34838.11
35 30.3 7.0 77.0 2317 0.000350 0.004545 0.06742 34366.66
36 30.3 7.2 77.2 2316 0.000360 0.004663 0.06829 33915.32
37 30.3 7.4 77.4 2316 0.000370 0.004780 0.06914 33497.17
38 30.3 7.6 77.6 2314 0.000380 0.004897 0.06998 33067.58
39 30.2 7.8 77.8 2313 0.000390 0.005013 0.07080 32668.80
40 30.2 8.0 78.0 2312 0.000400 0.005128 0.07161 32285.32
41 30.2 8.2 78.2 2311 0.000410 0.005243 0.07241 31916.22
42 30.2 8.4 78.4 2309 0.000420 0.005357 0.07319 31546.95
43 30.2 8.6 78.6 2308 0.000430 0.005471 0.07396 31204.19
44 30.2 8.8 78.8 2307 0.000440 0.005584 0.07472 30873.39
45 30.1 9.0 79.0 2306 0.000450 0.005696 0.07547 30553.90
46 30.1 9.2 79.2 2304 0.000460 0.005808 0.07621 30231.95
47 30.1 9.4 79.4 2303 0.000470 0.005919 0.07694 29933.35
48 30.1 9.6 79.6 2302 0.000480 0.006030 0.07765 29644.30
49 30.1 9.8 79.8 2302 0.000490 0.006140 0.07836 29377.09
50 30.1 10.0 80.0 2300 0.000500 0.006250 0.07906 29092.95
51 30.1 10.2 80.2 2299 0.000510 0.006359 0.07974 28829.76
52 30 10.4 80.4 2298 0.000520 0.006468 0.08042 28574.35

26
University of San Carlos Department of Chemical Engineering
CHE 323L FORM-2-Individual Laboratory Report Rating

CMC Determination from the Plot of /C vs / of SDS in 0.02 M Aqueous NaCl Solution
at 30.3 , 400 rpm

27