4.6 Article

Non-Destructive Imaging on Synthesised Nanoparticles

期刊

MATERIALS
卷 14, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ma14030613

关键词

scanning electron microscopy; backscattered electrons; electron flight simulation; nanoparticles; synthesis

资金

  1. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS)-Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) Core-to-core programme [EP/M02458X/1]
  2. Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST) Core Research for Evolutional Science and Technology (CREST) [JPMJCR17J5]
  3. JEOL UK
  4. European Soft Matter Infrastructure (EUSMI)
  5. EPSRC [EP/M02458X/1] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Our non-destructive imaging technique was successfully used to characterize nanoparticles synthesized by X-ray radiolysis and the sol-gel method, revealing the interfacial conditions and adhesion dependence on solution pH. The results supported the prediction based on the DLVO theory, showing the potential of extending the technique to study different types of interfaces.
Our recently developed non-destructive imaging technique was applied for the characterisation of nanoparticles synthesised by X-ray radiolysis and the sol-gel method. The interfacial conditions between the nanoparticles and the substrates were observed by subtracting images taken by scanning electron microscopy at controlled electron acceleration voltages to allow backscattered electrons to be generated predominantly below and above the interfaces. The interfacial adhesion was found to be dependent on the solution pH used for the particle synthesis or particle suspension preparation, proving the change in the particle formation/deposition processes with pH as anticipated and agreed with the prediction based on the Derjaguin-Landau-Verwey-Overbeek (DLVO) theory. We found that our imaging technique was useful for the characterisation of interfaces hidden by nanoparticles to reveal the formation/deposition mechanism and can be extended to the other types of interfaces.

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