Spectroscopic and molecular modeling demonstrates higher interfacial stability and faster adsorption kinetics for long-chain ionic liquids, highlighting mechanisms for enhanced oil recovery.
Ionic liquids (ILs) serve as effective oil-displacing agents during oil exploitation, and elucidating their interaction mechanisms at the oil–water interface is pivotal for enhanced oil recovery (EOR). In this work, the oil–water interfacial interaction between Cl-imidazolium ILs and C18-saturated hydrocarbon (C18-SH) were systematically studied from TIR-interferometry experimental and theoretical insights. Interfacial mass results revealed thermodynamic models of Freundlich-multilayer for [C12MIm]Cl but Langmuir-monolayer for [C16MIm]Cl. The interaction spontaneity was indicated as [C12MIm]Cl < [C16MIm]Cl with free energy of ΔG[C16MIm]Cl = – 9.36 kJ mol-1< ΔG[C12MIm]Cl = – 0.49 kJ mol–1. Interfacial thickness results revealed diffusion-arrangement dynamic processes and arrangement-limiting step for both [C12MIm]Cl and [C16MIm]Cl. The interaction speed was indicated as [C12MIm]Cl < [C16MIm]Cl with rate constants of |karr([C12MIm]Cl)| = 0.04 s-1< |karr([C16MIm]Cl)| = 0.07 s–1. The density functional theory (DFT) calculation obtained the energy gaps of ΔEH–L[C12MIm]Cl = 1.497 eV > ΔEH–L[C16MIm]Cl = 1.415 eV from LUMO–HOMO distributions. Meanwhile, MDS results indicated that [C16MIm]Cl exhibits superior interaction stability than [C12MIm]Cl with lower interaction energy of ΔEint([C16MIm]Cl) = −156.20 kJ mol-1< ΔEint([C12MIm]Cl) = −110.21 kJ mol–1 and longer cover distance of doil–water ([C16MIm]Cl) = 9.85 Å > doil–water([C12MIm]Cl) = 9.07 Å. As a result, the mechanism model of “multihemimicelle packing” was illustrated for [C12MIm]Cl interaction and “monomicelle coverage” for [C16MIm]Cl interaction. This work systematically clarified the micromacro interaction performance of ILs at oil–water interface, which effectively reveal the interaction mechanisms and provide help for ILs applications in EOR.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Li et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: