4.6 Review

Classical and Nonclassical Nucleation and Growth Mechanisms for Nanoparticle Formation

期刊

ANNUAL REVIEW OF PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 73, 期 -, 页码 453-477

出版社

ANNUAL REVIEWS
DOI: 10.1146/annurev-physchem-082720-100947

关键词

classical nucleation theory; nonclassical nucleation theory; crystal growth; oriented attachment; phase transformation; interfacial structure

资金

  1. US National Science Foundation [CHE-1905077]
  2. American Chemical Society's Petroleum Research Fund [62756-ND5]
  3. US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) [84008401]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The nucleation and growth processes of nanoparticles have important physical properties, which can be observed in real time through nanoscale analytical technologies to uncover their molecular nature and critical controlling factors. We have started to recognize the importance of connecting classical and nonclassical theories and how they can interact with each other.
All solid materials are created via nucleation. In this evolutionary process, nuclei form in solution or at interfaces, expand by monomeric growth and oriented attachment, and undergo phase transformation. Nucleation determines the location and size of nuclei, whereas growth controls the size, shape, and aggregation of newly formed nanoparticles. These physical properties of nanoparticles can affect their functionalities, reactivities, and porosities, as well as their fate and transport. Recent advances in nanoscale analytical technologies allow in situ real-time observations, enabling us to uncover the molecular nature of nuclei and the critical controlling factors for nucleation and growth. Although a single theory cannot yet fully explain such evolving processes, we have started to better understand how both classical and nonclassical theories can work together, and we have begun to recognize the importance of connecting these theories. This review discusses the recent convergence of knowledge about the nucleation and growth of nanoparticles.

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