Particle size distribution as obtained from the x-ray powder diffraction (line) and TEM (columns) measurements. Analyzed TEM image is shown in the inset.
(Color online) (a) Experimental XRR data (circles) and fit result (line). (b) Representation of the FF surface structure. Best fit SLD in-depth distribution is superimposed on the left side of the sketch and scaled appropriately. Horizontal lines separate main structural sub-layers. Dark clouds schematically show agglomeration of sodium oleate molecules. (c) Small-angle GID pattern from water ferrofluid revealing surface organization of the surfactant in to multilamellar structures. (d) Radially averaged GID data taken at corresponding to the x-ray penetration depth Å (open circles) and at corresponding to Å (filled circles).
Best fit model SLD profiles for the fresh sample wFF7 (gray dashed line) and for the same sample after surface cleaning (black line).
(Color online) (a) Photograph of wFF4 and under hexadecane taken 22 h after the interface assembly. FF – non-transformed ferrofluid, HD – hexadecane, IC – interface composite. (b) Internal structure of the interface composite emulsion.
(Color online) Stages of the wFF4 transformation under hexadecane in the dropping funnel. FF – ferrofluid, HD – hexadecane, IC – interface composite, dashed line shows the original level of the interface. (a) The funnel as it was obtained 35 months after the assembly of the interface. (b) Enlarged image of the interfacial part. (c) A view of the funnel after draining of the ferrofluid through the bottom bleeder.
Reflectivity data for the free surfaces of wFF4 (filled circles) and wFF4 T (open circles). Black dashed line and gray solid line represent fit results corresponding to the model SLD profiles shown in the inset with preservation of the line style.
Article metrics loading...
Full text loading...