4.6 Article

Transition metal-chelating surfactant micelle templates for facile synthesis of mesoporous silica nanoparticles

期刊

JOURNAL OF SOLID STATE CHEMISTRY
卷 185, 期 -, 页码 89-94

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.jssc.2011.10.037

关键词

Mesoporous silica nanoparticles; Metal-chelating surfactant; Micelle templates; Complex; Stability constant

资金

  1. Fundmental R&D Program for Core Technology of Materials
  2. Ministry of Knowledge Economy, Republic of Korea

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Highly ordered mesoporous silica nanoparticles with tunable morphology and pore-size are prepared by the use of a transition metal-chelating surfactant micelle complex using Co2+, Ni2+, Cu2+, and Zn2+ ions. These metal ions formed a metal-P123 micelle complex in an aqueous solution, while the metal ions are chelated to the hydrophilic domain such as the poly(ethylene oxide) group of a P123 surfactant. The different complexation abilities of the utilized transition metal ions play an important role in determining the formation of nano-sized ordered MSNs due to the different stabilization constant of the metal-P123 complex. Consequently, from a particle length of 1700 nm in the original mesoporous silica materials, the particle length of ordered MSNs through the metal-chelating P123 micelle templates can be reduced to a range of 180-800 nm. Furthermore, the variation of pore size shows a slight change from 8.8 to 6.6 nm. In particular, the Cu2+-chelated MSNs show only decreased particle size to 180 nm. The stability constants for the metal-P123 complex are calculated on the basis of molar conductance measurements in order to elucidate the formation mechanism of MSNs by the metal-chelating P123 complex templates. In addition, solid-state Si-29, C-13-NMR and ICP-OES measurements are used for quantitative characterization reveal that the utilized metal ions affect only the formation of a metal-P123 complex in a micelle as a template. (C) 2011 Elsevier Inc. 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

4.6
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