4.7 Article

Influence of natural organic matter on the aggregation and deposition of titanium dioxide nanoparticles

期刊

JOURNAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
卷 189, 期 1-2, 页码 556-563

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2011.02.072

关键词

TiO2 nanoparticles; SRHA; QCM-D; Critical coagulation concentration; Aggregation kinetics; Deposition

资金

  1. National Science Foundation
  2. US Environmental Protection Agency [NSF-EF0830117]
  3. UC Toxic Substances Research and Training Program, Lead Campus on Nanotoxicology
  4. Div Of Biological Infrastructure
  5. Direct For Biological Sciences [0830117] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aggregation kinetics of TiO2 nanoparticles was studied in the absence and presence of Suwanee River humic acid (SRHA) in either NaCl or CaCl2 electrolytes. The CCC[Ca2+]/CCC[Na+] ratios were found to yield a proportionality fraction of Z(-7.2) (in the absence of SRHA) and z(-5.6) (in the presence of SRHA), near the theoretical prediction of z(-6), where z is the cation's valence. SRHA drastically increased the stability of TiO2 nanoparticles under most conditions, due to the combined effect of increased electrostatic and steric repulsions. Deposition rates of TiO2 nanoparticles onto a silica surface were quantitatively measured using a quartz crystal microbalance with dissipation (QCM-D) over a broad range of solution (pH and ionic strength, IS) conditions, and the effects of the SRHA on particle deposition behavior were evaluated. In general, zeta potential can be used to predict the interaction energies between particles or particles and surfaces, and from there an inference can be made as to the potential for aggregation and deposition. The presence of SRHA significantly hinders TiO2 deposition onto silica surfaces via steric repulsion in addition to repulsive electrostatics even under high ionic strength, which has important implications for the mobility of these nanoparticles. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据