4.3 Article

An experimental study of nanoparticle focusing with aerodynamic lenses

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MASS SPECTROMETRY
Volume 258, Issue 1-3, Pages 30-36

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijms.2006.06.008

Keywords

aerodynamic lens; focusing; particle beam; transmission efficiency; electrospray; nanoparticle

Ask authors/readers for more resources

High sampling efficiencies of analyte ions, molecules or particles are needed to maximize the sensitivity of mass spectrometers. Ion funnels, which utilize electrodynamic focusing, have been shown to effectively focus ions with mass-to-charge ratio (m/z) ranging from similar to 100 to 5000. Focusing efficiencies of ion funnels drop for higher m/z values because very high voltages are needed to overcome the particle inertia. Conventional aerodynamic lenses utilize inertia to focus down to 25 nm in diameter (similar to 5 MDa); to date, Brownian diffusion has prevented the effective focusing of particles smaller than this. We recently reported a design procedure that should, in principle, extend focusing with aerodynamic lenses to particles as small as 3 nm (similar to 10 kDa), thereby bridging the gap between the ion funnel and the conventional aerodynamic lenses. In this paper, we report for the first time experimental results for the performance of these new nanolenses. Measurements were done using spherical oil droplets, proteins, and sodium chloride particles ranging in size from 3 to 30 nm diameter. We found that particle transport efficiencies from atmospheric pressure to vacuum through the aerodynamic lens system were greater than 80% for 10-30 nm particles, and greater than 50% for a similar to 3.8 nm protein (Lysozyme from chicken egg white, molecular weight 14.3 kDa). Particle beam diameters were about a factor of two greater than predicted by our numerical simulations, but provide clear evidence that the nanolenses effectively focus all three particle types. (c) 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available