Contents

Client Citation Analysis

Influence of Cellulose Nanocrystals and Surfactants on Catastrophic Phase Inversion and Stability of Emulsions

This study compares catastrophic phase inversion and stability of water-in-oil emulsions stabilized by nanocrystalline cellulose versus molecular surfactants, using pendant-drop surface and oil–water interfacial tension measurements to interpret stabilizer behavior.

At-a-Glance Summary

Primary surface measurement reported

Equilibrium surface tension (aqueous/air) and oil–water interfacial tension (aqueous/WO-15) were reported as a function of NCC or surfactant concentration (Figures 8–9).

Dropometer attribution in the paper

The Dropometer is cited as a “smartphone-based pendant drop tensiometer (Droplet Lab, Markham, ON, Canada)” using droplet-profile fitting with the Young–Laplace equation via axisymmetric drop shape analysis (ADSA).

How the surface-tension / contact-angle data were used in the study

The surface- and interfacial-tension trends are used to contrast NCC’s weak surface activity with the strong tension reductions observed for molecular surfactants and to discuss how interfacial tension behavior relates to concentration-dependent catastrophic phase inversion behavior.

Replication / reliability statement

Each measurement was repeated 10 times per solution, and average values were reported.

Paper Details

Title
Influence of Cellulose Nanocrystals and Surfactants on Catastrophic Phase Inversion and Stability of Emulsions
Authors
Daniel Kim; Rajinder Pal
Journal
Colloids Interfaces
Year
2025
Volume
9
Pages / Article
46
License
Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) 4.0

Journal context

What it is
Journal-level metrics for the publication venue (not a rating of this specific article).
How to read it
Compare metrics within category; updates are annual and lag current-year publications.

Scopus metrics (Elsevier / Scopus rating 2024)

CiteScore 2024

4.4

CiteScore subject ranks (CiteScore 2024)
  • Q3 - Chemistry (miscellaneous)
  • Q3 - Colloid and Surface Chemistry
SNIP 2024

0.691

SJR 2024

0.475

Journal Impact Factor (Clarivate JCR)

Journal Impact Factor (JCR 2024)

3.2

5-Year Impact Factor

3.0

JCR category rank: Q3

Chemistry, Physical

What Was Measured

Primary surface / interfacial measurement

Equilibrium surface tension of aqueous phases containing NCC or surfactants, and oil–water interfacial tension (WO-15 oil vs aqueous phase) as a function of stabilizer concentration (Figures 8–9).

Supporting measurements

Catastrophic phase inversion behavior was tracked using conductivity measurements during incremental aqueous-phase addition under rotor–stator mixing, and emulsion coalescence stability was evaluated by monitoring separated aqueous-phase volume over time in graduated cylinders.

Role of the Dropometer

The Dropometer (cited as a smartphone-based pendant drop tensiometer from Droplet Lab) was used for pendant-drop measurements in which a pendant droplet of the aqueous phase (containing NCC or surfactants) was formed at a stainless-steel needle tip and analyzed by fitting the droplet profile with the Young–Laplace equation using axisymmetric drop shape analysis (ADSA) to obtain surface tension (droplet suspended in air) and interfacial tension (droplet dispensed into a sealed quartz cuvette containing WO-15 oil).

These surface- and interfacial-tension curves are used in the paper to compare stabilizer surface activity and to discuss a low-concentration regime of sharp interfacial-tension reduction versus a higher-concentration regime where the interface is described as saturated in relation to catastrophic phase inversion behavior.

Method Snapshot

Method Snapshot Table

System / series (aqueous phase) Stabilizer identity (as named in paper) Concentration basis used in Results Dropometer measurement geometry Dropometer outputs reported Instruments Conditions (as reported) Data figures
NCC series Nanocrystalline cellulose (NCC) Surface tension values discussed from 0.1 wt% to 2.0 wt%; IFT trend discussed with an initial decrease at 0.1–0.2 wt% Surface tension: pendant droplet suspended in air; IFT: pendant droplet dispensed into sealed quartz cuvette containing WO-15 oil Equilibrium surface tension (mN/m); interfacial tension (mN/m) smartphone-based pendant drop tensiometer (Droplet Lab, Markham, ON, Canada) Aqueous droplet typically 10–20 µL; stainless-steel needle (1.8 mm diameter); 500 µL Hamilton® gastight syringe (Model 1750 TPLT) with screw-driven plunger; LED back illumination; ambient temperature 22 ± 1 °C; 10 repeats per solution (averaged) Figures 8–9
Surfactant series (anionic) Sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) Surface tension values reported from 0.1 wt% to 1.0 wt%; IFT values discussed from no-surfactant baseline to 0.1 wt% and 1 wt% Same pendant-drop configurations as Section 2.5 Equilibrium surface tension (mN/m); interfacial tension (mN/m) smartphone-based pendant drop tensiometer (Droplet Lab, Markham, ON, Canada) Same pendant-drop conditions as Section 2.5 (10–20 µL droplet; 1.8 mm needle; Hamilton 1750 TPLT syringe; LED back illumination; 22 ± 1 °C; 10 repeats/solution) Figures 8–9
Surfactant series (cationic) Octadecyltrimethylammonium chloride (OTAC) Surface tension values reported from 0.1 wt% to 1.0 wt%; IFT values discussed from 0.1 wt% to 1 wt% Same pendant-drop configurations as Section 2.5 Equilibrium surface tension (mN/m); interfacial tension (mN/m) smartphone-based pendant drop tensiometer (Droplet Lab, Markham, ON, Canada) Same pendant-drop conditions as Section 2.5 (10–20 µL droplet; 1.8 mm needle; Hamilton 1750 TPLT syringe; LED back illumination; 22 ± 1 °C; 10 repeats/solution) Figures 8–9
Surfactant series (nonionic) C12–14 alcohol ethoxylate with 3 EO units (Alfonic 1412-3) Surface tension value highlighted at 0.5 wt%; IFT described as stabilizing near ~10 mN/m across concentrations tested Same pendant-drop configurations as Section 2.5 Equilibrium surface tension (mN/m); interfacial tension (mN/m) smartphone-based pendant drop tensiometer (Droplet Lab, Markham, ON, Canada) Same pendant-drop conditions as Section 2.5 (10–20 µL droplet; 1.8 mm needle; Hamilton 1750 TPLT syringe; LED back illumination; 22 ± 1 °C; 10 repeats/solution) Figures 8–9
Surfactant series (zwitterionic) Cetyl betaine (Amphosol) Surface tension value highlighted at 0.5 wt%; IFT value highlighted at 0.2 wt% and described across the full tested range Same pendant-drop configurations as Section 2.5 Equilibrium surface tension (mN/m); interfacial tension (mN/m) smartphone-based pendant drop tensiometer (Droplet Lab, Markham, ON, Canada) Same pendant-drop conditions as Section 2.5 (10–20 µL droplet; 1.8 mm needle; Hamilton 1750 TPLT syringe; LED back illumination; 22 ± 1 °C; 10 repeats/solution) Figures 8–9

Key Findings

NCC shows weak equilibrium surface-tension reduction

For NCC, equilibrium surface tension remains relatively high across the tested range, decreasing from 63.4 mN/m at 0.1 wt% to 62.3 mN/m at 2.0 wt% (Figure 8), and the paper characterizes this as negligible surface-tension reduction.

All four surfactants reduce surface tension with concentration

SDS and OTAC show large decreases in equilibrium surface tension from 0.1 wt% to 1.0 wt% (SDS: 44.23 → 33.74 mN/m; OTAC: 54.80 → 38.22 mN/m), while Amphosol and Alfonic reach 31.25 mN/m and 26.11 mN/m at 0.5 wt%, respectively (Figure 8).

Surfactants produce dramatic oil–water interfacial-tension reductions

The interfacial tension data show large reductions for surfactant systems, including SDS decreasing from 57.2 mN/m (no surfactant) to 4.61 mN/m at 0.1 wt% and 3.02 mN/m at 1 wt%, and Amphosol reaching 2.81 mN/m at 0.2 wt% while remaining below 3.4 mN/m across the tested range (Figure 9).

NCC shows limited, non-monotonic IFT behavior

For NCC, the paper reports an initial decrease in interfacial tension at 0.1–0.2 wt% reaching a minimum of 38.3 mN/m, followed by a plateau or slight increase at higher concentrations (Figure 9).

IFT concentration behavior is explicitly linked to phase inversion interpretation

The paper describes a sharp reduction in interfacial tension at lower surfactant concentrations before stabilizing near a minimum and states that this rapid initial drop coincides with a delay in catastrophic phase inversion; it also describes a higher-concentration threshold where the interface becomes saturated and further IFT decreases are minimal, while inversion occurs at lower aqueous phase fractions as excess surfactant accumulates in the bulk or micellar phase.

Figures & Visuals

Figure 8 — Surface tension separates NCC vs surfactant surface activity

What it shows

Shows equilibrium surface tension (aqueous/air) for NCC and surfactants (SDS, OTAC, Amphosol, Alfonic) as a function of concentration.

Figure 9 — Interfacial tension highlights strong surfactant activity and NCC’s limited effect

What it shows

Shows oil–water interfacial tension (WO-15 oil / aqueous phase) for NCC and surfactants as a function of concentration, including sharp surfactant-driven reductions and a non-monotonic NCC trend.

Why It Matters

Within the study’s focus on catastrophic phase inversion and emulsion stability, the Dropometer-derived pendant-drop surface and interfacial tension data provide the interfacial context used to compare particle-stabilized and surfactant-stabilized systems.

The paper uses these tension–concentration relationships to support its interpretation that NCC delays catastrophic phase inversion through interfacial jamming, while surfactant-stabilized systems show concentration-dependent inversion behavior associated with interfacial saturation and bulk/micellar accumulation at higher surfactant concentrations.

Practical Takeaways

Pendant-drop surface + oil–water interfacial tension in one workflow

The paper reports pendant-drop measurements for surface tension (droplet suspended in air) and interfacial tension (droplet dispensed into WO-15 oil in a sealed quartz cuvette) using Young–Laplace fitting with ADSA.

Replicated measurements with reported averaging

Each surface/interfacial tension measurement was repeated 10 times per solution and reported as an average at 22 ± 1 °C.

Clear differentiator between NCC and surfactants

The reported surface-tension data keep NCC near ~63 mN/m across concentration while surfactants substantially reduce surface tension (Figure 8), supporting a direct contrast in surface activity.

Interfacial-tension regimes used to interpret inversion behavior

The paper links a sharp low-concentration IFT decrease and a higher-concentration near-minimum/plateau (interface saturation) to the observed concentration-dependent catastrophic phase inversion behavior (Figure 9).

Comparative interfacial activity across surfactants

The interfacial tension results differentiate very low IFT values for SDS and Amphosol from more moderate reductions for Alfonic and a more gradual decrease for OTAC (Figure 9).

Download Experiment