3.8 Article

Synthesis of Various Size Gold Nanoparticles by Chemical Reduction Method with Different Solvent Polarity

期刊

NANOSCALE RESEARCH LETTERS
卷 15, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1186/s11671-020-03370-5

关键词

Gold nanoparticles; Chemical reduction; Solvent polarity index; Ethanol; PVP

资金

  1. Ministry of Education Malaysia (MOE) [600-IRMI/FRGS 5/3 (105/2019)]
  2. Universiti Teknologi MARA [600-IRMI/DANA 5/3/BESTARI (M)]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Complicated and strict protocols are followed to tune the size of gold nanoparticles (GNPs) in chemical synthesis methods. In this study, we address the polarity of solvents as a tool for tailoring the size of GNPs in the chemical reduction method. The effects of varying polarity index of the reaction medium on synthesizing gold nanoparticles by chemical reduction method have been investigated. Ethanol as a polar solvent, ethanol-water mixture as reaction medium, L-ascorbic acid as reducing agent, and polyvinylpyrrolidone as stabilizer were used to synthesize GNPs. The polarity index of the reaction medium was adjusted by changing the volume ratio of ethanol to water. UV-Vis, dynamic light scattering (DLS), and transmission electron microscopy (TEM) characterizations reveal that the growth of nanoparticles was gradually increased (similar to 22 to 219 nm hydrodynamic diameter) with decreasing value of polarity index of the reaction medium (similar to 8.2 to 5.2). Furthermore, the high polarity index of the reaction medium produced smaller and spherical nanoparticles, whereas lower polarity index of reaction medium results in bigger size of GNPs with different shapes. These results imply that the mechanistic of the growth, assembly, and aggregation phenomena of ligand or stabilizer-capped GNPs strongly rely on the polarity of solvent molecules. Using the proposed methodology, wide size range of GNPs with different morphology sizes can be synthesized by simply modulating the volume percentage of organic solvent in the reaction medium.

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

3.8
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