## 3 Results and Discussion  
### Conductometric Study  
Electrical conductivity techniques determine the interaction and association of molecules in diverse fluid systems [17; 18]. In the current study, two sets of conductivity tests were performed to evaluate the interaction behavior and affiliation of different molecules in the component systems. The conductance was measured as a function of SDS in the presence of ethanol (Figure 2) and SDS in presence of CAD + ethanol in the concentration range of 0.001 to 0.020 mol kg\({}^{-1}\) at 298.15, 303.15, 308.15 and 313.15 K and are presented in Figure 3. The intersection of straight lines above and below the breaking points of conductance (\(\kappa\)) against surfactant concentration at different temperatures acquired the CMC values. The values of CMC for SDS in pure ethanol solutions are presented in Table 1. The data given in Table 1 presents the minimum value of CMC verses temperature curve for SDS + ethanol system at lower temperature (298.15 K). The CMC of SDS rises from 298.15 to 313.15 K as the temperature rises. The influence of temperature on CMC has been shown to be system dependent [19]. Depending on the type of solvent solution employed, the micellization process might either be instantaneous or sluggish [20]. In the instance of the SDS in CAD + ethanol solution, the specific conductivity values gave a distinct breakpoint suggesting instantaneous micellization. Figure 3: Specific conductance of SDS in cinnamaldehyde + ethanol at different temperatures. Figure 2: Specific conductance of SDS in ethanol at different temperatures. However, In Figure 3, CMC values increase when CAD is introduced into the system, and the micellization process observed is different. CAD molecules are insoluble in an aqueous medium so we conducted the experiment using an ethanol medium. Ethanol acts as a structure-breaking solvent which causes the destruction of the inherent H-bond association of CAD and SDS. The incorporation of CAD molecules with SDS molecules resulted in slower micellization. This slight change in CMC values in the (SDS in CAD + Ethanol) system in Table 1 reveals that an addition of CAD molecules led to an effect on the types of interactions occurring in the system. However, micellization is delayed when CAD is added, which can be explained by the presence of an aromatic ring in the CAD's structure, which may establish a fine balance of hydrophobic interactions between SDS's long hydrocarbon tails and repulsive interactions between the ionic head groups. In the presence of CAD, a delay in CMC values was reported. The values of CMC rise as the temperature rises. Due to the existence of various components in the mixture, the effect of temperature on the magnitude of the CMC values of surfactant was frequently examined. The disruption of the ordered molecules surrounds the surfactant's hydrophobic groups at higher temperatures. Furthermore, it is advantageous that at higher temperatures, thermal motion increases, resulting in de-micellization due to the distraction of the micelle's palisade layer, which increases the CMC of the surfactants [21]. This is due to the fact that when the temperature rises, the high solubility of hydrocarbons stabilizes the surfactant monomers, preventing micelle formation, resulting in a larger SDS CMC [22]. The evaluations of the thermodynamic parameters of the pseudo-phase separation model were deduced from various thermodynamic micellization equations as described above. The Gibbs free energy of micellization, \(\Delta G_{m}^{\circ}\), entropy of micellization, \(\Delta S_{m}^{\circ}\) and enthalpy of micellization, \(\Delta H_{m}^{\prime}\) are worth applying to understand molecular interaction and are also the core concepts behind the process of micellization [23].