Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The atomic force microscope was used to investigate the interaction between 11-mercaptoundecanoic acid surfaces and 2-mercaptoethanesulfonic acid surfaces as a function of electrolyte and pH. The surface potential was found to peak at −80 mV at pH 6-8 in 0.1 mM 1:1 electrolyte. The Hamaker constant for the gold−gold interaction was found to be decreased from the value of 1 × 10 - 19 J in water to 4 × 10 - 20 J in ethanol. The dispersion interaction between gold surfaces following derivatization with 11-mercaptoundecanoic acid was drastically reduced. The terminal carboxyl groups did not ionize in ethanol. Even in water, extremely low degrees of ionization were observed, with just 1−2% of surface sites being ionized at pH 10. The force curves showed no jump-in nor adhesion above pH 7. We could not reconcile the ψ afm −pH results with a simple diffuse layer model for the interface; however the ionization behavior could be explained with sodium ion binding to surface carboxyl groups with a binding constant p K Na = 6.3. The addition of micromolar amounts of Pb 2+ caused almost complete neutralization of charged surface groups. These data could be modeled with K Pb = (1−4) × 10 - 10 . An alternative modeling procedure based on incorporation of a zero-order Stern layer could only explain the experimental values if an extremely low value of the inner layer capacitance was assumed of 1−4 μF cm - 2 . However, this model may be able to explain the lack of jump-in in alkaline solution and the absence of adhesion at high pH.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kane et al. (1998) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: