Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This study aims to reveal the influence mechanisms of particles to provide a basis for screening high-efficiency foam stabilizers of nanoparticle (NP) and surfactant (SF). Molecular simulation was used, including Stretching Molecular Dynamics (SMD) for liquid film rupture, Mean Squared Displacement (MSD)/Radial Distribution Function (RDF) for water molecule behavior, NP interface tendency analysis, and interface traction force analysis. The system used silica (SiO2) NPs (silane-modified to adjust hydrophilicity–hydrophobicity), three SFs [DTAB, CHSB, BS12; single/mixed systems], water (liquid phase), and nitrogen (gas phase). NPs need balanced hydrophilicity (to adsorb water) and hydrophobicity (to stay at the gas–liquid interface); 10% silane-modified NPs performed best, with 44% higher critical traction force for film rupture than unmodified NPs, effective water adsorption (molecules within 0.3–0.4 nm), and 12% interface presence probability. SFs (especially mixed systems like DTAB + BS12) attracted NPs to form stable composites, binding more tightly than single SFs and reducing SF mobility. The NP-SF system showed superior stability: DTAB + BS12 + NPs had the highest critical traction force (816.11 kJ·mol−1·nm−1) and longest rupture time (1.61 ns); the traction work required to pull NPs in the composite (2443.87 kJ·mol−1) was much higher than that required for pure NPs (991.63 kJ·mol−1). Finally, an experiment was conducted to measure the initial foam volume and drainage half-life of different systems to verify the simulation results.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Li et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: