See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/275904722

Study of Foam Stability for Detergents

Conference Paper · December 2014

CITATIONS READS

0 18,276

1 author:

Abhishek Ghosh
Birla Institute of Technology and Science Pilani
4 PUBLICATIONS   0 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Abhishek Ghosh on 06 May 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Comparison of Foamability and Foam Stability of Commercially Available Detergents

Birla Institute of Technology and Science, Pilani

Pilani Campus

Department of Chemical Engineering

First Semester 2014-15

To Compare the Foam Characteristics of Commercially

Available Detergents

End Semester Report Submission

Course Number: CHE F366

Course Title: Lab Project

Instructor-in-Charge: Suresh Gupta

Project Instructor: Dr. P. Chattopadhyay

Submitted by: Abhishek Ghosh

ID No. : 2012A1PS362P

Submitted on: 29 November, 2014

Page 1 of 16
 Comparison of Foamability and Foam Stability of Commercially Available Detergents

Acknowledgements

I would like to dedicate our efforts to Dr. Pradipta Chattopadhyay, our Projector Mentor and
Instructor for having selected me to undertake the laboratory project this semester. He has
consistently supplied extensive literature to supplement our experimental work.

Venkata Vijayan S., a Higher Degree Student at BITS Pilani was in charge of guiding our
experimental work throughout the duration of the project. He has spent innumerable hours in
the laboratory to help us get accurate and reproducible results of foaming parameters using
the instrument. I’d like to thank him for keeping a detailed record of all the data and
providing it to me for the purpose of my report.

I would also like to extend my gratitude to the Instructor-in-Charge for having accepted the
proposal of undertaking this project and to the institute for providing us with the requisite
infrastructural facilities.

Page 2 of 16
 Comparison of Foamability and Foam Stability of Commercially Available Detergents

Table of Contents

Topic Page Number

Cover Page……………………………………………………………………………….……1
Acknowledgements…………………………………………………………………………....2
1. Abstract……………………………………………………………………………......4
2. Introduction……………………………………………………………………………4
3. Experimental Description……………………………………………………………...5
3.1.Materials and Methodology……………………………………………………….5
3.2.Experimental Set Up………………………………………………………………5
4. Results and Discussion………………………………………………………………...6
4.1.Comparison of the Surfactants on the Parameter Measuring Foam
Stability………………………………………………………………………...….6
4.2.Characterisation of Foam Decay……………………………………………..........7
4.3.Comparison of the Surfactants on the Parameter Measuring
Foamability…………………………………………………………………….......9
4.4.Developing Correlations for Vim and Surf Excel………………………...….......10
5. Conclusions…………………………………………………………………………..14
6. Future Scope……………………………………………………………………….....15
7. Gaps in Experimental Work………………………………………………………….15
8. Bibliography………………………………………………………………………….16

List of Illustrations

1. Table 1- Technical Data on the Dynamic Foam Analyser 100……………………...6

2. Figure 1- Comparison of RMI 30 ml…………………………………………...……7
3. Figure 2- Determination of Foam Decay Characteristics for Aqueous Solution of Vim
at 2.0065 % w/w…………………………………….………………………………..8
4. Figure 3- Comparison of Foam Capacity…………………………………………….9
5. Figure 4- Comparison of Maximum Foam Volume…………………………………10
6. Figure 5- Maximum Foam Volume and Ross Miles Index versus Concentration for
Surf Excel and Water…………………………….…………………………………..11
7. Figure 6- Foam Capacity versus Concentration for Surf Excel and
Water……………………………………………………………............................…11
8. Table 2- Surf Excel and Water Data………………………….....................……..…12
9. Figure 7- Maximum Foam Volume and Ross Miles Index versus Concentration for
Vim and Water………………………………….........................................................12
10. Figure 8- Foam Capacity versus Concentration for Vim and Water............................13
11. Table 3- Vim and Water Data…………………………………………………...…...14

Page 3 of 16
 Comparison of Foamability and Foam Stability of Commercially Available Detergents

Study of Foamability and Foam Stability of Detergents

1. Abstract

Foams, when used as dishwashing detergents or laundry detergents, are required to

produce foams with characteristics that suit their respective requirements. In order to
able to control the formation of foams, apart from temperature and pH stability, a
comprehensive study on ease of foam formation (Foamability) and the stability of the
foams formed needs to be undertaken.

Through our experimental work, we aim to vary the concentration of two

commercially available aqueous detergent solutions in order to obtain stable or
rapidly decaying foams, depending on the requirements of the applications.
The parameters we used to measure Foamability were Foam Capacity and Maximum
Foam Volume. To measure Foam Stability, we used the Ross Miles Index 30 ml. All
measurements were integrated into the built-in software with the foaming equipment
(Krüss Dynamic Foam Analyser 100 GmbH).

Key words: Foam, Foamability, Foam Stability, Detergents

2. Introduction
1
Most common foams consist of gas pockets trapped in a network of thin liquid films.
Some well-known research areas for foams are adhesion and coating, cleaning, food
and beverages, pharmaceuticals and medicine and spraying and painting. Stable
aqueous foams could also be used to form a mass transfer barrier to the emission of
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC’s) during the loading of gasoline. In the
detergents that are used for this laboratory experiment, the role of surfactants is to
decrease the surface tension of water that is used to clean the grease stains off food
utensils or clothes. The reduced surface tension helps increase the wetting capacity of
water. Coupled with the effect of formation of micelles, the detergents help remover
grease/oil particles by attaching to it using their hydrophobic ends and subsequently
being washed away with water by attaching to water using their hydrophilic ends.

Foams are of two types- dynamic and static. Dynamic foams are ones that have
reached a state of dynamic equilibrium between the rates of formation and decay. A
static foam is one in which the rate of foam formation is zero. The foam once formed
is allowed to collapse without regeneration by further agitation or input of gas. 2All
static foams are unstable mainly due to factors such as film rupture and drainage. To
prevent foams from collapsing, it is necessary to oppose the draining by surface
tension gradients induced by surfactants.

1
Schramm .L, “Emulsions, Foam and Suspensions” (Wiley VCH: Weinheim, 2005), pp. 44-47
2
Joseph, D.D., “Understanding Foams and Foaming” (Minnesota: University of Minnesota, 1997), pp. 1-2

Page 4 of 16
 Comparison of Foamability and Foam Stability of Commercially Available Detergents

This study aims to use the Dynamic Foam Analyser 100 (Manufactured by Krüss
GmbH, Germany), in which a static foam is generated by air sparging in a cylindrical
vessel. The theoretical predictions are confirmed using aqueous solutions of
commercially available liquid dishwashing detergents. It is not possible for pure
liquids to foam as some contaminants that induce surface tension gradients seems
necessary to create even weak foams.

3. Experimental Description

3.1. Materials and Methodology

Initially, studies were conducted using Vim liquid dishwashing detergent.

Subsequently, a less viscous solid powder detergent, Surf Excel, was employed. The
aqueous solution was prepared using de-ionised distilled water. The surfactant
concentrations were well below the Critical Micelle Concentration. The temperature
was maintained at a constant room temperature (approximately 25 C).

3.2. Experimental Set Up

3
The foaming properties of the surfactant solutions were studied using a set-up that
provides visual observation and measurement of foam volume.

Our DFA100 instrument for analysing foams measures the Foamability of liquids and
the foam stability based on precise measurements of the foam height. Foam height
measurements can be reproduced with remarkable precision by accurately controlling
the foaming process with electronic gas flow control. The optical sensor measures the
quantity of foam produced and the decay characteristic equally precisely and with
high resolution, even with very short-lived foams.

The instrument consists of a conventional glass column with a length of 46 cm and a

diameter of 27.5 cm fitted with a porous glass frit placed at the bottom of the column.
Foam was generated by sparging air at a flow rate of 0.3 L/s through the aqueous
surfactant solution through the porous glass frit. To ensure gas supply at a constant
flow rate, a pressure regulator was connected to the base of the column.
The gas flow stopped automatically when the total foam height reached a preset value
of 100 mm. Foam volume during generation and decay was measured using a CCD
camera. The amount of liquid volume in the foam was measured by conductivity
measurements at the different heights of the foam column.

3
Kruss GmbH, Hamburg, Germany,“Dynamic Foam Analyser 100”, URL: http://www.kruss.de/products/foam-
analysis/dfa100/dynamic-foam-analyzer-dfa100/

Page 5 of 16
 Comparison of Foamability and Foam Stability of Commercially Available Detergents

Parameters that were measured include:

3.2.1. Foamability of liquids
3.2.2. Decay of foam volume after gas sparging (foam stability)
3.2.3. Total height, foam height and liquid height

The Foamability of the surfactant solutions was determined using the Foam Capacity
(FC) and Foam Maximum Density (MD) coefficients. The FC coefficient is the ratio
of the foam volume at the end of the gas sparging to the total gas volume injected.
When the generated foam is not stable during generation, the FC coefficient is less
than unity, meaning that part of the injected gas has not been retained in the foam
column. The MD coefficient was used to characterise the liquid retention in the
generated foam and is defined as the ratio of the liquid volume in the foam to the final
foam volume.
For the foam column experiments, aqueous detergent solutions of varying
concentrations were subjected to gas sparging.

Table 1- Technical Data on the Dynamic Foam Analyser (DFA 100)

Maximum measuring height 200 mm

Height resolution 0.125 mm
Minimum sample volume 20 ml
Gas flow when bubbling 0.3 L/s
Dimensions 245 x 275 x 460 mm (W x D x H)
Weight 9 kg

4. Results and Discussion

4.1. Comparison of the Surfactants on the Parameter Measuring

Foam Stability

Figure 1 shows the Ross Miles Index (30 ml) for the foam columns using two
surfactants (aqueous solutions of Vim and Surf Excel) at differing mass
concentrations. The Ross Miles Index is a measure of foam stability. The gas supply
that was used to generate the foam is shut down and the decay of foam height with
time is monitored. A longer RMI indicates higher foam stability. Since foam was
generated in a similar way for all experiments, the difference in foam stability
depends primarily on the surfactants used and their concentrations.
At all concentrations ranging from 2.0065 to 5.0159 w/w %, Surf Excel has, on an
average, a 108.93% greater RMI compared with the same concentration of Vim.

The Ross Miles method of testing foams is a standardised method where a dilute
solution is dropped into a pool of the same dilute solution from a fixed height, and the
volume of the foam produced is measured.

Page 6 of 16
 Comparison of Foamability and Foam Stability of Commercially Available Detergents

Fig. 1 Comparison of RMI 30ml

Vim & Water Surf Excel & Water 202.863
220 197.628
190.877
200 181.362

180
160
RMI 30ml

140
120
89.7 92.5 93.7 93.8
100
80
60
2.0065 3.0097 4.0129 5.0159
Concentration (w/w %)

Figure 1- Comparison of Ross Miles Index

4.2. Characterisation of Foam Decay

Figure 2 shows the variation of foam height as a function of time for 2.0065 wt. %
aqueous solution of Vim.

4
Foam decay occurs in three time-related decay phases. The first phase, known as
drainage, occurs when the liquid flows out of the foam column without destroying the
column. In this phase, the total height remains constant (approximately 10 to 150
seconds in Figure 2). This is because the decrease in the foam column height is
exactly matched by the increase in the liquid column height. Thus, t = 150 s is called
deviation time and corresponds to the start of decay.
In phase two, the foam starts to collapse while drainage is still occurring. The total
height keeps decreasing with time. The time corresponding to the end of drainage is
referred to as transition time. In measuring foam decay for 2.0065 wt. % aqueous
solution of Vim, this time is greater than the run time of 15 minutes.

From t = 0 s to approximately t = 50 s, the foam growth is linear with a very high

slope. This indicates a stable build-up of foam volume.

At this, stage, the foam is not affected by destructive effects such as gravity drainage,
coalescence and Ostwald ripening, which is the process by which the sol particles
dissolve and redeposit themselves on the surfaces of larger sol particles.

4
Dr. Ch. Bilke Krause, Dr. T. Winkler et.al, “Studies on the Stability of Foams” (Krüss: Hamburg, 2010), Krüss
Application Note: AN267e, URL: http://www.kruss.de

Page 7 of 16
 Comparison of Foamability and Foam Stability of Commercially Available Detergents

When the stage of gas sparging is over, the foam enters the decay regime.
The foam decay is characterised by a rapid and steep decline in foam height from 78
mm to 56 mm after which is remains at that level for a considerably longer period of
time. However, owing to the large foam stability, and the test duration run of 15
minutes, it was not possible to document a half-life time (the amount of time that has
elapsed since the formation of foam at which the foam height becomes half of its
maximum value). The parameter RMI 30 ml was used instead to characterise foam
stability.

5
During the initial stages of foaming, a monotonic increase in the liquid foaming
height is observed, indicating the formation of a stable static foam. As soon as the gas
sparging is terminated, the liquid volume starts dropping. The drop is considerably
steep initially followed by a relatively flat curve. This means the major mechanism of
foam decay is due to gravity drainage. In our experiment, because the run time was
limited to 15 minutes, the time required to observe considerable liquid drainage was
not reached.

Figure 2- Determination of Foam Decay Characteristics for Aqueous Solution of

Vim at 2.0065 % w/w

5
M. Simjoo, T. Rezaei et. al, “Foam stability in the presence of oil: Effect of surfactant concentration and oil
type” (Elsevier:http://www.elsevier.com/locate/colsurfa.com , 2013), Journal Name: Colloids and Surfaces A:
Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 438 (2013), pp. 148– 158

Page 8 of 16
 Comparison of Foamability and Foam Stability of Commercially Available Detergents

4.3. Comparison of the Surfactants on the Parameter Measuring

Foamability

In this part of the experiment, the concentrations of the surfactants were varied and
measurements of parameters such as Foam Capacity (FC) and Maximum Foam
Volume (MFV) were undertaken.

From Figure 3, the average FC values for the aqueous solution of Vim were found to
be 1.7 whereas it was considerably higher for Surf Excel at an average value of 3.44.
The FC values showed a monotonically increasing trend with increasing surfactant
concentration for both cases, though the FC enhancements were considerably less in
the case of Vim when compared to that of Surf Excel.

Smaller values of FC coefficients indicate that gas sparging has to be continued for
greater lengths of time to achieve the same foam volume as another solution with a
higher FC value. This is because FC is defined as the ratio of the foam volume at the
end of gas sparging to the total gas volume injected.

Fig. 3 Comparison of FC
3.609
Vim & Water Surf Excel & Water 3.521
3.65
3.407
3.5
3.246
3.35
3.2
3.05
2.9
Foam Capacity

2.75
2.6
2.45
2.3
2.15
2 1.8
1.85 1.7 1.7
1.6
1.7
1.55
1.4
1.25
2.0065 3.0097 4.0129 5.0159
Concentration (w/w %)

Figure 3- Comparison of Foam Capacity

On visual inspection of both foams, as the surfactant concentrations were increased,

the foam developed had a finer texture .i.e. the bubbles formed were smaller and
denser. As the surfactant concentration is increased, the total foam volume (refer to
Figure 4) and the amount of liquid volume (as shown by figure 2, where liquid

Page 9 of 16
 Comparison of Foamability and Foam Stability of Commercially Available Detergents

volume = liquid height * constant area of cross-section of the cylinder in which the
foam is generated) increases. The above observations are corroborated by the fact that
the FC coefficient also increases with increasing surfactant concentration. Thus, a
foam with a finer texture (higher Maximum Foam Density) and greater wetness is
formed if the surfactant concentrations are increased. A lower surfactant
concentration results on coarser bubbles forming and a reduction in the liquid volume
present in the foam.

Fig. 4 Comparison of MFV

Vim & Water Surf Excel & Water
230 211.628
206.433
199.735
210 190.295
Maximum Foam Volume (ml)

190
170
150
130
110 95 95.1 97.8 96.2

90
70
2.0065 3.0097 4.0129 5.0159
Concentration (w/w %)

Figure 4- Comparison of Maximum Foam Volume

4.4. Developing Correlations for Vim and Surf Excel

A scatter plot of parameters such as the Maximum Foam Volume (MFV), Ross Miles
Index (RMI) and Foam Capacity (FC) have been plotted as a function of the
independent variable, concentration, in terms of w / w % of detergent in an aqueous
solution.

The r-squared values of the individual graphs have been chosen so that it is as close to
unity as possible. In every case, the logarithmic trend line was most appropriate.

For comparison with Vim, the correlations were used to extrapolate and find the
values of the parameters at concentration of Surf Excel that would match the
concentrations of Vim.

Surf Excel products include Surf Excel, a detergent powder designed especially for
washing machines as it has a low lather formula. They are designed to remove stains
without generating excess foam, which is harmful for the functioning of the washing

Page 10 of 16
 Comparison of Foamability and Foam Stability of Commercially Available Detergents

machine. Vim is, on the other hand, majorly a hand dishwashing detergent that
requires considerable lathering properties to clean utensils.

Fig.5 MFV and RMI vs. Conc. for Surf Excel

100
90
Maximum Foam Volume RMI 30ml
80
70
60
50
40
MFV = 23.284 ln(c) + 174.08 RMI = 23.467 ln(c) + 165.02
30
R² = 0.7197 R² = 0.8438
20
10
0
0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03 0.035
Concentration (w/w %)

Figure 5- Maximum Foam Volume and Ross Miles Index vs. Concentration for
Surf Excel

Fig. 6 FC vs. Conc. for Surf Excel

1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
Foam Capacity

FC = 0.3957 ln(c) + 2.971

1
R² = 0.7756
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03 0.035
Concentration (w/w %)

Figure 6- Foam capacity vs. Concentration for Surf Excel

Surf Excel has ingredients that don’t suppress lather significantly during the main
wash.

Page 11 of 16
 Comparison of Foamability and Foam Stability of Commercially Available Detergents

6
Yet, they aid in significantly reducing foam formation during the rinsing step, thus
reducing the need for rinsing. This, ultimately, goes onto to save approximately two
buckets of water a day.

Table 2- Surf Excel and Water Data

Table 2. Surf Excel and Water Data

Concentration Time Foam Half RMI
S.No. Water Surf (c) length capacity MFV life 30
cc g %w/w mins. mL s mL
1 100 0.002 0.002 15 0.2 7.5 9.6 4.3
2 100 0.004 0.004 15 1 62.9 168.2 45.3
3 100 0.006 0.006 15 1.2 69.4 419.2 56.9
4 100 0.01 0.010 15 1.2 69.6 NaN 60.1
5 100 0.02 0.020 15 1.3 77.9 NaN 67.8
6 100 0.03 0.030 15 1.5 84.8 NaN 78.1

The same data was plotted for Vim. For the scatter plot of Maximum Foam Volume
(MFV) and for Ross Miles Index (RMI), a quadratic dependence was found to yield
the highest values of r-squared (the coefficient of determination). Thus, the power
trend lines with a power of 2 have been used to derive the correlations.

Fig.7. MFV and RMI vs. Conc. for Vim

99
Maximum Foam Volume RMI 30ml MFV = -0.425 c 2 + 3.605 c + 89.145
98
R² = 0.5321
97
96
95
94
93
92
RMI = -0.675 c 2 + 6.075 c + 80.275
91
R² = 0.9989
90
89
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Concentration (w/w %)

Figure 7- Maximum Foam Volume and Ross Miles Index vs. Concentrations for
Vim

6
“Reduced Rinsing; Clean Clothes, Less Water”, Hindustan Unilever Limited, URL:
http://www.hul.co.in/innovation/productinnovations/default/index.aspx, Accessed on: 1 Dec. 2014

Page 12 of 16
 Comparison of Foamability and Foam Stability of Commercially Available Detergents

Figure 8. FC vs. Conc. for Vim

1.85

1.8
FC = 0.1952 ln(c) + 1.4657
R² = 0.8942
1.75
Foam Capacity

1.7

1.65

1.6

1.55
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Concentration (w/w %)

Figure 8- Comparison of Foam Capacity versus Concentration for Vim and

Water

The 7density of Vim was found out to be 1.0004 g / cm3. This value was used to
convert all the densities to concentrations on a mass percentage basis. All the
experimental runs were carried out at ambient conditions of approximately 27 C.

Since the Surf Excel used was in the form of a solid powder, concentrations in terms
of mass percentages could be directly calculated using a weighing balance.

The required amounts of liquid detergent were mixed with 100 ml of water in a
beaker. 50 ml of the resulting aqueous solution was transferred into the cylinder of the
DFA 100 instrument using a syringe.

Table-3 Vim and Water Data

Table 3. Vim and Water Data

Time Maximum Half RMI
Foam
S.No Water Vim Concentration length foam volume life 30
capacity
cc ml %w/w mins mL s ml
1 98 2 2.006589 15 1.6 95 NaN 89.7
2 97 3 3.009783 15 1.7 95.1 NaN 92.5
3 96 4 4.012908 15 1.7 97.8 NaN 93.7
4 95 5 5.015967 15 1.8 96.2 NaN 93.8

7
“Vim Professional”, Interempresas Hardware, URL: http://www.interempresas.net/Hardware/Companies-
Products/Product-Liquid-detergent-Vim-Professional-117377.html, Accessed on 1 Dec. 2014

Page 13 of 16
 Comparison of Foamability and Foam Stability of Commercially Available Detergents

5. Conclusions

This study was conducted to principally compare the Foamability and Foam Stability
of two commercial detergents- Surf Excel and Vim.

For this, the run time was held constant at 15 minutes for each surfactant and
temperature was maintained at ambient conditions.

The Dynamic Foam Analyser software was used to gather data on parameters such as
RMI, Foam Capacity and Maximum Foam Volume along with plotting the variation
of Total, Liquid and Foam height with time.

The following conclusions can be drawn from the study:

a. Surf Excel foam exhibited a higher Foamability than Vim at the same
concentrations (measured in % w/w). For both surfactants, the foam height
increased linearly with time during the foam formation stage, as was the
increase in liquid height with time.
b. The decay of the foams for both surfactants was characterised by a small and
rapid reduction in foam height (first decay period) followed by a more
stabilised value (constant period).
The second decay period, which comes after the constant period, is a period
where the foam heights falls, but less rapidly than the first decay period. As
the foams were sufficiently stable, the second decay period could not be
observed. Also, the half-life time data was found to be greater than the run-
time of 15 minutes.
c. The Foam Stability of Surf Excel was consistently higher than Vim at all
concentrations. It was higher by an average of 108.93 % (as measured by the
Ross Miles Index).
d. Correlations for Surf Excel indicate that at extremely low concentrations such
as that from 0.002 w / w % to 0.03 w / w %, the logarithmic trend line was
most accurate for measuring FC, RMI and MFV vs. concentration. From
Figures 5 and 6, beyond 0.0125 % w / w Surf Excel, a rapid increase in the
parameters is observed and there is a monotonic increase in the values of the
parameters.
e. However, with Vim, higher concentrations ranging from 2 % w / w to 5 % w /
w were used. The quadratic trend line fitted this data set better. This indicates,
that as the concentration of Vim is increased, parameters such as FC and RMI
reach a maximum at a concentration of 4.5 % w / w (refer to Figures 7 and 8),
before falling in value at higher concentrations. The logarithmic trend line was
still applicable to measure MFV as a function of concentration. Thus, MFV
increases monotonically with concentration of Vim.

Page 14 of 16
 Comparison of Foamability and Foam Stability of Commercially Available Detergents

6. Future Scope

The aqueous solutions were made using distilled water, whereas in everyday practice,
water is found with varying concentrations of contaminants. Our experimental
apparatus did not support water with contaminants as it would severely damage the
filter plates and thus this is work that could be taken up in the future.

Also, varying other parameters such as temperature, pH of the solution and gas flow
rate that is sparged into the apparatus could be varied, in addition to the concentration
of the solution, to determine their effects on Foamability and Foam Stability.

The powdered laundry detergent – Surf Excel was found to have a higher Foaming
Capacity, higher Maximum Foam Volume and a higher Ross Miles Index (RMI 30
ml) when compared with the dishwashing detergent – Vim Liquid.

This means that laundry detergents like Surf Excel are manufactured to foam more
than dishwashing detergents like Vim Liquid.

The possible reason would be that excess foam makes handling and cleaning of
utensils a rather difficult process. Whereas, the consumer interested in washing
clothes has now associated a larger quantity of foam with higher cleaning capacity, as
is evident by most advertisements in today’s time. Most companies try to make people
believe that a larger amount of foam means a better cleaning capacity and perhaps
Surf Excel has been formulated following the same policy.

7. Gaps in Experimental Work

Three areas in which the experimental results could have improved in accuracy are:

a. The need to increase the number of runs to obtain a greater number of data points.
b. The requirement of testing the repeatability of each of the readings.
c. Testing the concentration and confirming if it is truly below the Critical Micelle
Concentration.
If the above precautions are undertaken, the correlations developed would have been
more accurate and could have been applied to more general applications.

Page 15 of 16
 Comparison of Foamability and Foam Stability of Commercially Available Detergents

8. Bibliography

1. M. Simjoo, T. Rezaei et. al, “Foam stability in the presence of oil: Effect of
surfactant concentration and oil type” (Elsevier:
http://www.elsevier.com/locate/colsurfa.com , 2013), Journal Name: Colloids and
Surfaces A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 438 (2013), pp. 148– 158
2. Dr. Ch. Bilke Krause, Dr. T. Winkler et.al, “Studies on the Stability of Foams”
(Krüss: Hamburg, 2010), Krüss Application Note: AN267e, URL:
http://www.kruss.de
3. Edinzo Iglesias, José Anderez, Ana Forgiarini, Jean-Louis Salager , “A new
method to estimate the stability of short-life foams” (Elsevier:
http://www.elsevier.com/locate/colsurfa.com, 1995), Journal Name: Colloids and
Surfaces A: Physicochemical and Engineering Aspects 98 (1995), pp. 167-174
4. Gupta. Nihit, “Aqueous Foam Stability and Development” (BITS Pilani: Pilani,
2013)
5. D.D. Joseph, “Understanding Foams and Foaming” (University of Minnesota:
Minnesota, 1997), pp. 1-2
6. Schramm. Laurier and Wassmuth. Fred, “Foams: Basic Principles” (Petroleum
Recovery Institute: Alberta, 1994)
7. “Reduced Rinsing; Clean Clothes, Less Water”, Hindustan Unilever Limited, URL:
http://www.hul.co.in/innovation/productinnovations/default/index.aspx, Accessed on: 1
Dec. 2014
8. “Vim Professional”, Interempresas Hardware, URL:
http://www.interempresas.net/Hardware/Companies-Products/Product-Liquid-detergent-
Vim-Professional-117377.html, Accessed on 1 Dec. 2014
9. Schramm.L, “Emulsions, Foam and Suspensions” (Wiley VCH: Weinheim,
2005), pp. 44-47

Page 16 of 16

View publication stats