The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Quantitative Evaluation of Surfactant-stabilized Single-walled Carbon Nanotubes: Dispersion Quality and Its Correlation with Zeta Potential
Abstract
Stable dispersions of single-walled carbon nanotubes in deionized water were prepared using six common surfactants: sodium dodecylbenzene sulfonate (SDBS), sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS), lithium dodecyl sulfate (LDS), tetradecyl trimethyl ammonium bromide (TTAB), sodium cholate (SC), and Fairy liquid (FL). For all nanotube dispersions ( C NT = 1 mg/mL), the optimum concentration of surfactant was found to be close to C Surf = 10 mg/mL by measuring the fraction of nanotubes remaining after centrifugation for a range of surfactant concentrations. The aggregation state of each nanotube−surfactant dispersion was characterized as a function of nanotube concentration by AFM analysis of large numbers of nanotubes/bundles deposited onto substrates. The dispersion quality could then be quantified by four parameters: the saturation value (at low concentration) of the root-mean-square bundle diameter, the maximum value of the total number of dispersed objects (individuals and bundles) per unit volume of dispersion, the saturation value (at low concentration) of the number fraction of individual nanotubes, and the maximum value of the number of individual nanotubes per unit volume of dispersion. According to these metrics, the dispersion quality of the six surfactant−nanotube dispersions varied as SDS > LDS > SDBS > TTAB > SC > Fairy liquid. It was found that each of these dispersion-quality metrics scaled very well with the measured ζ-potential of the surfactant−nanotube dispersion. This confirms that dispersion quality is controlled by the magnitude of electrostatic repulsive forces between coated nanotubes.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Polymer Nanocomposites—A Comparison between Carbon Nanotubes, Graphene, and Clay as Nanofillers
Bhattacharya, M. (2016) · Materials · doi:10.3390/ma9040262 · Cited by 747
Ultrastable MXene@Pt/SWCNTs' Nanocatalysts for Hydrogen Evolution Reaction
Cui, C., Cheng, R., Zhang, H., Zhang, C., Ma, Y., Shi, C., Fan, B., Wang, H., & Wang, X. (2020) · Advanced Functional Materials · doi:10.1002/adfm.202000693 · Cited by 270
AlOmar, M. K., Alsaadi, M. A., Hayyan, M., Akib, S., Ibrahim, R. K., & Hashim, M. A. (2016) · Journal of Molecular Liquids · doi:10.1016/j.molliq.2016.07.074 · Cited by 129
Deep Eutectic Solvent Assisted Dispersion of Carbon Nanotubes in Water
Zaib, Q., Adeyemi, I., Warsinger, D. M., & AlNashef, I. M. (2020) · Frontiers in Chemistry · doi:10.3389/fchem.2020.00808 · Cited by 29
Metadata
- Authors
- Sun, Z., Nicolosi, V., Rickard, D., Bergin, S. D., Aherne, D., & Coleman, J. N.
- Venue
- The Journal of Physical Chemistry C
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2008-06-25
- Volume
- 112
- Issue
- 29
- Pages
- 10692-10699
- ISSN
- 1932-7447 (ISSN-L)
- 1932-7455
- OpenAlex
- W2042443175
- Cited by
- 381
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 14.15
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Quantitative Evaluation of Surfactant-stabilized Single-walled Carbon Nanotubes: Dispersion Quality and Its Correlation with Zeta Potential. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1021/jp8021634
- The paper
- Sun, Z., Nicolosi, V., Rickard, D., Bergin, S. D., Aherne, D., & Coleman, J. N. (2008). Quantitative Evaluation of Surfactant-stabilized Single-walled Carbon Nanotubes: Dispersion Quality and Its Correlation with Zeta Potential. The Journal of Physical Chemistry C. https://doi.org/10.1021/jp8021634
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.