4.8 Article

Ultrasmall Nanodiamonds: Perspectives and Questions

Journal

ACS NANO
Volume 16, Issue 6, Pages 8513-8524

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acsnano.2c00197

Keywords

nanodiamond; diamond; synthesis; characterization

Funding

  1. Synthesis and Processing of Materials program in the Army Research Office [W911NF-18-1-0155]
  2. National Eye Institute of the National Institutes of Health [1R15EY029813-01A1]
  3. Australian Research Council DECRA Fellowship [DE200100279]
  4. RMIT University
  5. Australian Research Council (ARC) [IC210100056]
  6. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft [KR3316/6-2]
  7. BMBF [Az. 033RC009B]
  8. Australian Research Council [DE200100279, IC210100056] Funding Source: Australian Research Council

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Nanodiamonds have diverse applications, but the accurate control of their composition and size remain challenges.
Nanodiamonds are at the heart of a plethora of emerging applications in areas ranging from nanocomposites and tribology to nanomedicine and quantum sensing. The development of alternative synthesis methods, a better understanding, and the availability of ultrasmall nanodiamonds of less than 3 nm size with a precisely engineered composition, including the particle surface and atomic defects in the diamond crystal lattice, would mark a leap forward for many existing and future applications. Yet today, we are unable to accurately control nanodiamond composition at the atomic scale, nor can we reliably create and isolate particles in this size range. In this perspective, we discuss recent advances, challenges, and opportunities in the synthesis, characterization, and application of ultrasmall nanodiamonds. We particularly focus on the advantages of bottom-up synthesis of these particles and critically assess the physicochemical properties of ultrasmall nanodiamonds, which significantly differ from those of larger particles and bulk diamond.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available