乳化剂在集料化学成分表面吸附行为的分子模拟与试验论证

doi:10.16085/j.issn.1000-6613.2019-1774

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

采用分子模拟和电导率试验相结合的手段，研究了十二烷基苯磺酸钠（SDBS）和十八烷基三甲基氯化铵（STAC）在酸性集料主要化学成分（SiO₂）和碱性集料主要化学成分（CaCO₃）表面的吸附行为。模拟结果表明：两类乳化剂周围均有两层水化层，STAC的亲水基第一水化层内的水分子个数约为SDBS的两倍，其亲水性强于SDBS；通过界面能分析，对两类乳化剂而言，STAC在集料主要化学成分表面的吸附能力大于SDBS，对于两种集料来说CaCO₃对两类乳化剂的吸附能力较SiO₂强。电导率试验结果表明：不同集料比（乳化剂的质量与集料化学成分的质量比）下，乳化剂在CaCO₃表面的吸附量大于SiO₂，且随集料比的增加，不同集料化学成分对乳化剂的吸附量也增加；CaCO₃和SiO₂对两类乳化剂的吸附曲线近似为S型，且对STAC的吸附曲线离散性小于SDBS；SDBS和STAC在CaCO₃上表面浓度（ $Γ 1$ ）最大，另STAC的最大吸附量约为SDBS的3.2倍；模拟参数中的配位数与试验参数中的最大吸附量和乳化剂吸附系数之间的灰色关联度良好，通过配位数可分析乳化剂的亲水性，最大吸附量和吸附系数可用来判断集料对乳化剂的吸附量大小。模拟结果与试验结果一致，表明分子动力学可以准确描述乳化剂在集料主要化学成分表面的吸附行为。

关键词: 分子模拟, 相对浓度, 界面能, 电导率, 吸附系数, 吸附等温线

Abstract:

The adsorption behavior of sodium dodecyl benzene sulfonate(SDBS) and octadecyl trimethylammonium chloride (STAC) on the surface of the main chemical components of acidic aggregate (SiO₂) and basic aggregate (CaCO₃) was studied by means of molecular simulation and conductivity test. The simulation results show that there are two hydration layers around the two types of emulsifiers. The number of water molecules in the first hydration layer of the hydrophilic group of STAC is about twice that of SDBS, which is more hydrophilic than SDBS. According to the analysis of interface energy, for two types of emulsifiers, the adsorption capacity of STAC on the surface of the main chemical components of the aggregate is greater than SDBS. For both types of aggregates, the adsorption capacity of CaCO₃ for the two types of emulsifiers is stronger than that of SiO₂. The conductivity test results show that: under different aggregate ratios (mass ratio of emulsifier to aggregate chemical composition), the adsorption amount of emulsifier on the surface of CaCO₃ is greater than SiO₂, and with the increase of aggregate ratio, the chemical composition of different aggregates adsorption of emulsifiers also increased. The adsorption curves of CaCO₃ and SiO₂ for the two types of emulsifiers are approximately S-type, and the dispersion of the adsorption curves for STAC is less than SDBS. SDBS and STAC have the highest surface concentration (Γ₁) on CaCO₃, and the maximum adsorption capacity of STAC is about 3.2 times that of SDBS. The gray correlation between the coordination number of simulation parameters and the maximum adsorption amount and the adsorption coefficient of emulsifier is good. The coordination number can be used to analyze the hydrophilicity of the emulsifier, and the maximum adsorption capacity and adsorption coefficient can be used to judge the amount of the emulsifier adsorbed by the aggregate. The simulation results are consistent with the experimental results, indicating that molecular dynamics can accurately describe the adsorption behavior of emulsifier on the surface of main chemical components of the aggregate.

Key words: molecular simulation, relative concentration, interfacial energy, conductivity, adsorption coefficient, adsorption isotherm

中图分类号:

U414

孔令云, 全秀洁, 李朝波, 余苗. 乳化剂在集料化学成分表面吸附行为的分子模拟与试验论证[J]. 化工进展, 2020, 39(8): 3196-3204.

Lingyun KONG, Xiujie QUAN, Chaobo LI, Miao YU. Molecular simulation and experimental demonstration of adsorption behavior of emulsifier on surface of chemical composition of aggregate[J]. Chemical Industry and Engineering Progress, 2020, 39(8): 3196-3204.

参考文献

1	夏朝彬, 马波.国内外乳化沥青的发展及应用概况[J].石油与天然气化工, 2000, 2: 88-91, 52.
1	XIA C B, MA B. Development and application of emulsified asphalt at home and abroad[J]. Oil and Gas Chemical Industry, 2000, 2: 88-91, 52.
2	褚建军, 沈春林. 乳化沥青在喷涂速凝防水涂料中的应用[J]. 石油沥青, 2016, 30(2): 54-56.
2	CHU J J, SHEN C L. Application of emulsified asphalt in spraying quick-setting waterproof coating[J]. Petroleum Asphalt, 2016, 30(2): 54-56.
3	李云良, 欧阳剑, 王山山, 等. 水泥沥青复合砂浆拌合物乳化沥青破乳过程研究[J]. 哈尔滨工程大学学报, 2015, 36(7): 997-1000.
3	LI Y L, OUYANG J, WANG S S, et al. Demulsification process of emulsified asphalt with cement asphalt composite mortar mixture[J]. Journal of Harbin Engineering University, 2015, 36(7): 997-1000.
4	朱晓斌, 洪锦祥, 李炜.破乳行为对CA浆体流变性能的影响及机理[J]. 建筑材料学报, 2017, 20(4): 548-555.
4	ZHU X B, HONG J X, LI W. Effect of demulsification behavior of emulsified asphalt on rheological properties in CA paste and its mechanism[J]. Journal of Building Materials, 2017, 20(4): 548-555.
5	朱晓斌, 徐静, 刘至飞, 等. CA砂浆的离析与泌水机理探讨[J].建筑材料学报, 2014, 17(6): 945-951.
5	ZHU X B, XU J, LIU Z F, et al. Separation and bleeding mechanism of CA mortar[J]. Journal of Building Materials, 2014, 17 (6): 945-951.
6	孔令云, 唐樊龙, 徐燕, 等. 紫外光谱法评价乳化沥青破乳过程[J].长安大学学报(自然科学版), 2017, 37(6): 17-23.
6	KONG L Y, TANG F L, XU Y, et al. Evaluation of emulsification asphalt demulsification process by UV spectroscopy[J]. Journal of Chang’an University (Natural Science Edition), 2017, 37(6): 17-23.
7	宋哲玉, 徐培华, 陶家朴. 乳化沥青破乳机理研究[J]. 石油沥青, 1995, 3: 23-29.
7	SONG Z Y, XU P H, TAO J P. Study on demulsification mechanism of emulsified asphalt[J]. Petroleum Asphalt, 1995, 3: 23-29.
8	冯虎, 王友刚. 阳离子乳化沥青化学破乳试验研究[J]. 石油沥青, 2012, 26(5): 32-34.
8	FENG H, WANG Y G. Experimental study on chemical demulsification of cationic emulsified asphalt[J]. Petroleum Asphalt, 2012, 26(5): 32-34.
9	侯研博, 任强, 代振宇, 等. 表面活性剂分子与油水界面分子的作用机理[J].石油学报(石油加工), 2018, 34(1): 108-114.
9	HOU Y B, REN Q, DAI Z Y, et al. Interaction mechanism between surfactant molecules and oil-water interface molecules[J]. Acta Petrolei Sinica (Petroleum Processing), 2018, 34 (1): 108-114.
10	李振泉, 郭新利, 王红艳, 等. 阴离子表面活性剂在油水界面聚集的分子动力学模拟[J]. 物理化学学报, 2009, 25 (1): 6-12.
10	LI Z Q, GUO X L, WANG H Y, et al. Molecular dynamics simulation of aggregation of anionic surfactants at oil-water interface[J]. Acta Phys. Sinica, 2009, 25(1): 6-12.
11	宋其圣, 郭新利, 苑世领, 等. 十二烷基苯磺酸钠在SiO₂表面聚集的分子动力学模拟[J]. 物理化学学报, 2009, 25(6): 1053-1058.
11	SONG Q S, GUO X L, YUAN S L, et al. Molecular dynamics simulation of sodium dodecyl benzene sulfonate aggregation on SiO₂ surface[J]. Acta Phys. Sinica, 2009, 25(6): 1053-1058.
12	韩颖, 曲广淼, 薛春龙, 等. 十二烷基苯磺酸钠气/液界面聚集行为的分子动力学模拟[J]. 化工科技, 2016, 24(4): 22-26.
12	HAN Y, QU G M, XUE C L, et al. Molecular dynamics simulation of gas/liquid interface aggregation behavior of sodium dodecyl benzene sulfonate[J]. Chemical Technology, 2016, 24(4): 22- 26.
13	范维玉, 赵品晖, 康剑翘, 等. 分子模拟技术在乳化沥青研究中的应用[J]. 中国石油大学学报(自然科学版), 2014, 38(6): 179-185.
13	FAN W Y, ZHAO P H, KANG J Q, et al. Application of molecular simulation technology in emulsified asphalt research[J]. Journal of China University of Petroleum, 2014, 38(6): 179-185.
14	张雪芳, 潘艳秋, 陈鹏鹏, 等. 乳化剂对动态膜分离油水乳化液过程的影响[J]. 化工进展, 2019, 38(2): 790-797.
14	ZHANG X F, PAN Y Q, CHEN P P, et al. Effect of emulsifier on the process of dynamic membrane separation of oil-water emulsion[J]. Chemical Industry and Engineering Progress, 2019, 38(2): 790-797.
15	方伟锋, 沈本贤, 仝玉军, 等. LM-S沥青改性剂提高沥青混合料黏附性能的分子模拟计算及路用性能考察[J]. 化工进展, 2018, 37(10): 3949-3957.
15	FANG W F, SHEN B X, TONG Y J, et al. Molecular simulation calculation and road performance of LM-S asphalt modifier for improving the adhesion of asphalt mixture[J]. Chemical Industry and Engineering Progress, 2018, 37(10): 3949- 3957.
16	周艳, 李佩林. 基于分子模拟技术的沥青自愈合性能研究[J]. 山西建筑, 2013, 39(6): 83-85.
16	ZHOU Y, LI P L. Research on self-healing properties of asphalt based on molecular simulation technology[J]. Shanxi Architecture, 2013, 39(6): 83-85.
17	邱延峻, 苏婷, 郑鹏飞, 等. 基于分子模拟的沥青胶结料物理老化机理研究[J]. 建筑材料学报, .
17	QIU Y J, SU T, ZHENG P F, et al. Research on physical aging mechanism of asphalt binder based on molecular simulation[J]. Journal of Building Materials, .
18	孔令云, 李金桥, 张玉贞, 等. 矿粉表面能与其所含化学成分表面能关系模型[J]. 哈尔滨工业大学学报, 2018, 50(9): 101-107.
18	KONG L Y, LI J Q, ZHANG Y Z, et al. Model of surface energy relationship between surface energy of mineral powder and its chemical composition[J]. Journal of Harbin Institute of Technology, 2018, 50(9): 101-107.
19	严六明, 朱素华. 分子动力学模拟的理论与实践[M]. 北京：科学出版社, 2013：50-51.
19	YAN L M, ZHU S H. Theory and practice of molecular dynamics simulation [M]. Beijing: Science Press, 2013: 50-51.
20	庄昌清, 岳红, 张慧军. 分子模拟方法及模拟软件Materials Studio在高分子材料中的应用[J]. 塑料, 2010, 39(4): 81-84.
20	ZHUANG C Q, YUE H, ZHANG H J. Molecular simulation method and simulation software materials studio application in polymer materials[J]. Plastics, 2010, 39(4): 81-84.
21	ESPINOSA J R, YOUNG J M, JIANG H, et al. On the calculation of solubilities via direct coexistence simulations: investigation of NaCl aqueous solutions and Lennard-Jones binary mixtures[J]. Journal of Chemical Physics, 2016, 145(15): 611.
22	王文杰, 卢秀萍.阴离子水性聚氨酯内乳化剂的研究进展[J].聚氨酯工业, 2005(4): 6-10.
22	WANG W J, LU X P. Research progress of anionic waterborne polyurethane internal emulsifier[J]. Polyurethane Industry, 2005(4):6-10.
23	黄志宇, 张太亮, 鲁红升. 表面及胶体化学[M]. 2版. 北京：石油工业出版社, 2012：90-92
23	HUANG Z Y, ZHANG T L, LU H S. Surface and colloid chemistry[M]. 2nd ed. Beijing: Petroleum Industry Press, 2012: 90-92.
24	PRADIP, RAI B. Design of tailor-made surfactants for industrial applications using a molecular modelling approach[J]. Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochemical and Engineering Aspects, 2002, 205(1/2):139-148.
25	GAO Z Y, SUN W, HU Y H, et al. Surface energies and appearances of commonly exposed surfaces of scheelite crystal[J]. Transactions of Nonferrous Metals Society of China, 2013, 23(7): 2147-2152.
26	徐龙华, 董发勤, 巫侯琴, 等. 阴离子捕收剂浮选分离一水硬铝石与高岭石的表面晶体化学[J]. 矿物学报, 2016, 36(2): 265-270.
26	XU L H, DONG F Q, WU H Q, et al. Surface crystal chemistry of anisite flotation separation of diaspore and kaolinite[J]. Acta Minerala Sinica, 2016, 36(2): 265-270.
27	王喜然, 华一新, 赵秋凝, 等. AlCl₃-BMIC离子液体的电导率[J]. 中国有色金属学报, 2006, 16(12): 2138-2142.
27	WANG X R, HUA Y X, ZHAO Q N, et al. Conductivity of AlCl₃-BMIC ionic liquids[J]. Journal of Chinese Nonferrous Metals, 2006, 16(12): 2138-2142.
28	姚晨曦, 杨春信, 周成龙. Langmuir吸附等温式推导浅析[J]. 化学与生物工程, 2018, 35(1): 31-35.
28	YAO C X, YANG C X, ZHOU C L. Analysis of langmuir adsorption isotherm derivation[J]. Chemical and Bioengineering, 2018,35(1): 31-35.
29	杨峰, 宁正福, 孔德涛, 等. 页岩甲烷吸附等温线拟合模型对比分析[J]. 煤炭科学技术, 2013, 41(11): 86-89.
29	YANG F, NING Z F, KONG D T, et al. Comparative analysis of shale methane adsorption isotherm fitting model[J]. Coal Science and Technology, 2013, 41 (11): 86-89.

[1]	崔守成, 徐洪波, 彭楠. 两种MOFs材料用于O₂/He吸附分离的模拟分析[J]. 化工进展, 2023, 42(S1): 382-390.
[2]	张振, 李丹, 陈辰, 吴菁岚, 应汉杰, 乔浩. 吸附树脂对唾液酸的分离纯化[J]. 化工进展, 2023, 42(8): 4153-4158.
[3]	欧阳素芳, 周道伟, 黄伟, 贾凤. 新型耐迁移橡胶防老剂的研究进展[J]. 化工进展, 2023, 42(7): 3708-3719.
[4]	李瑞东, 黄辉, 同国虎, 王跃社. 原油精馏塔中铵盐吸湿特性及其腐蚀行为[J]. 化工进展, 2023, 42(6): 2809-2818.
[5]	杨发容, 顾丽莉, 刘洋, 李伟雪, 蔡洁云, 王惠平. 计算机模拟辅助特丁津分子印迹聚合物的制备及应用[J]. 化工进展, 2023, 42(6): 3157-3166.
[6]	赵毅, 杨臻, 张新为, 王刚, 杨旋. 不同裂缝损伤和愈合温度条件下沥青自愈合行为的分子模拟[J]. 化工进展, 2023, 42(6): 3147-3156.
[7]	宋超, 叶学民, 李春曦. 纳米颗粒与表面活性剂的自组装行为对硅油-水界面性质影响的分子动力学[J]. 化工进展, 2022, 41(S1): 366-375.
[8]	张洪铭, 卢炯元, 王三反. 燃料电池用阴离子交换膜分子结构研究进展[J]. 化工进展, 2022, 41(S1): 318-330.
[9]	冯颖, 赵孟杰, 崔倩, 解玉鞠, 张建伟, 董鑫. 分子模拟技术在壳聚糖功能材料开发和应用中的研究进展[J]. 化工进展, 2022, 41(8): 4241-4253.
[10]	李艳平, 严大洲, 杨涛, 温国胜, 韩治成. 硅基电子气去除甲基氯硅烷的分子动力学模拟[J]. 化工进展, 2022, 41(8): 4375-4385.
[11]	张辛铖, 何林, 隋红, 李鑫钢. 重质油包水乳液破乳过程及降黏强化机制[J]. 化工进展, 2022, 41(7): 3534-3544.
[12]	秦丽, 李东东, 田景升, 韩俊华, 张寅, 李建文, 高文惠. 融合多种技术的隐色孔雀石绿印迹传感器的制备及其应用[J]. 化工进展, 2022, 41(11): 6018-6028.
[13]	王东亮, 谢江鹏, 孟文亮, 李婧玮, 周怀荣. 基于酸度系数（pK_a）模型的胺法SO₂捕集过程多目标效能分析[J]. 化工进展, 2022, 41(10): 5669-5676.
[14]	李秉繁, 刘刚, 陈雷. CH₄在原油体系中溶解规律及影响机理[J]. 化工进展, 2021, 40(8): 4205-4222.
[15]	王傢俊, 邓帅, 赵睿恺, 赵力. 电子级HF吸附法回收的节能降耗潜力分析[J]. 化工进展, 2021, 40(7): 3645-3655.