4.6 Review

Nanorods of transition metal oxalates: A versatile route to the oxide nanoparticles

期刊

ARABIAN JOURNAL OF CHEMISTRY
卷 4, 期 2, 页码 125-134

出版社

KING SAUD UNIV PRESS, KING SAUD UNIV
DOI: 10.1016/j.arabjc.2010.06.041

关键词

Nanorods; Nanoparticles; Reverse micelles; X-ray diffraction; Transmission electron microscopy

资金

  1. Department of Science and Technology (DST) Govt. of India
  2. University Grant Commission (UGC)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A versatile route has been explored for the synthesis of nanorods of transition metal (Cu, Ni, Mn, Zn, Co and Fe) oxalates using reverse micelles. Transmission electron microscopy shows that the as-prepared nanorods of nickel and copper oxalates have diameter of 250 nm and 130 nm while the length is of the order of 2.5 mu m and 480 nm, respectively. The aspect ratio of the nanorods of copper oxalate could be modified by changing the solvent. The average dimensions of manganese, zinc and cobalt oxalate nanorods were 100 mu m, 120 mu m and 300 nm, respectively, in diameter and 2.5 mu m, 600 nm and 6.5 mu m, respectively, in length. The aspect ratio of the cobalt oxalate nanorods could be modified by controlling the temperature. The nanorods of metal (Cu, Ni, Mn, Zn, Co and Fe) oxalates were found to be suitable precursors to obtain a variety of transition metal oxide nanoparticles. Our studies show that the grain size of CuO nanoparticles is highly dependent on the nature of non-polar solvent used to initially synthesize the oxalate rods. All the commonly known manganese oxides could be obtained as pure phases from the single manganese oxalate precursor by decomposing in different atmospheres (air, vacuum or nitrogen). The ZnO nanoparticles obtained from zinc oxalate rods are similar to 55 nm in diameter. Oxides with different morphology, Fe(3)O(4) nanoparticles faceted (cuboidal) and Fe(2)O(3) nanoparticles (spherical) could be obtained. (c) 2010 King Saud University. Production and hosting by 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

4.6
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