Determination of anionic surfactants by two-phase titration with tetrabromophenolphthalein ethyl ester as indicator

1979 ◽  
Vol 56 (11Part2) ◽  
pp. 921-923 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Tsubochi ◽  
N. Yamasaki ◽  
K. Matsuoka
Keyword(s):  
Ethyl Ester ◽  
Anionic Surfactants ◽  
Two Phase

scholarly journals Potentiometric Surfactant Sensor Based on 1,3-Dihexadecyl-1H-benzo[d]imidazol-3-ium for Anionic Surfactants in Detergents and Household Care Products

Molecules ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (12) ◽  
pp. 3627
Author(s):  
Nikola Sakač ◽  
Dubravka Madunić-Čačić ◽  
Dean Marković ◽  
Lucija Hok ◽  
Robert Vianello ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Anionic Surfactants ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Ion Pair ◽  
Two Phase ◽  
Potentiometric Response ◽  
Titration Curves ◽  
Signal Change ◽  
Nernstian Slope ◽  
Good Agreement

A 1,3-dihexadecyl-1H-benzo[d]imidazol-3-ium-tetraphenylborate (DHBI-TPB) ion-pair implemented in DHBI-TPB surfactant sensor was used for the potentiometric quantification of anionic surfactants in detergents and commercial household care products. The DHBI-TPB ion-pair was characterized by FTIR spectroscopy and computational analysis which revealed a crucial contribution of the C–H∙∙∙π contacts for the optimal complex formation. The DHBI-TPB sensor potentiometric response showed excellent analytical properties and Nernstian slope for SDS (60.1 mV/decade) with LOD 3.2 × 10−7 M; and DBS (58.4 mV/decade) with LOD 6.1 × 10−7 M was obtained. The sensor possesses exceptional resistance to different organic and inorganic interferences in broad pH (2–10) range. DMIC used as a titrant demonstrated superior analytical performances for potentiometric titrations of SDS, compared to other tested cationic surfactants (DMIC > CTAB > CPC > Hyamine 1622). The combination of DHBI-TPB sensor and DMIC was successfully employed to perform titrations of the highly soluble alkane sulfonate homologues. Nonionic surfactants (increased concentration and number of EO groups) had a negative impact on anionic surfactant titration curves and a signal change. The DHBI-TPB sensor was effectively employed for the determination of technical grade anionic surfactants presenting the recoveries from 99.5 to 101.3%. The sensor was applied on twelve powered samples as well as liquid-gel and handwashing home care detergents containing anionic surfactants. The obtained results showed good agreement compared to the outcomes measured by ISE surfactant sensor and a two-phase titration method. The developed DHBI-TPB surfactant sensor could be used for quality control in industry and has great potential in environmental monitoring.

Two-phase mixed indicator titration method for determination of anionic surfactants

1981 ◽  
Vol 53 (9) ◽  
pp. 1516-1519 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhi-ping. Li ◽  
Milton J. Rosen
Keyword(s):  
Anionic Surfactants ◽  
Titration Method ◽  
Two Phase

scholarly journals Application of ion-association titration for the assay of bupropion hydrochloride in pharmaceuticals

2011 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 299-306 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sameer Abdulrahman ◽  
Kanakapura Basavaiah
Keyword(s):  
Solvent Extraction ◽  
Ethyl Ester ◽  
Phosphate Buffer ◽  
Ion Association ◽  
Comparison Method ◽  
Phase Changes ◽  
Two Phase ◽  
Accuracy And Precision ◽  
Label Claim

Two simple and rapid titrimetric methods are described for the determination of bupropion hydrochloride (BUPH) in pharmaceuticals. The proposed methods are based on the solvent extraction-titration of BUPH with two ion-association reagents, i.e. sodium lauryl sulphate (SLS) and tetraphenylborate (TPB). In method A, SLS was used as titrant and the titration was carried out in the presence of dilute sulphuric acid and chloroform using dimethyl yellow as indicator whereas in method B, the titrant was TPB and the titration was done in borate-phosphate buffer of pH 6.0 and 1,2-dichloroethane with tetrabromophenolphthalein ethyl ester (TBPE) as indicator. In the two-phase titrations, the proposed procedures give sharp end points as the color of the organic phase changes from yellow to pink in method A and from red-violet to yellow in method B. The methods are applicable over the ranges of 1.0-20.0 and 3.0-10.0 mg of BUPH for method A and method B, respectively. The accuracy and precision of the methods are good. The methods were applied successfully to the determination of BUPH in tablets and the results were in agreement with the label claim and those of the comparison method.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document