4.4 Article

Nanoparticle formation by laser ablation

期刊

JOURNAL OF NANOPARTICLE RESEARCH
卷 4, 期 6, 页码 499-509

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1023/A:1022840924336

关键词

laser ablation; primary particle size; electrical mobility diameter; ablated mass; metal oxide particles

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The properties of nanoparticle aerosols of size ranging from 4.9 nm to 13 nm, generated by laser ablation of solid surfaces are described. The experimental system consisted of a pulsed excimer laser, which irradiated a rotating target mounted in a cylindrical chamber 4 cm in diameter and 18-cm long. Aerosols of oxides of aluminum, titanium, iron, niobium, tungsten and silicon were generated in an oxygen carrier gas as a result of a reactive laser ablation process. Gold and carbon aerosols were generated in nitrogen by non-reactive laser ablation. The aerosols were produced in the form of aggregates of primary particles in the nanometer size range. The aggregates were characterized using a differential mobility analyzer and electron microscopy. Aggregate mass and number concentration, electrical mobility size distribution, primary particle size distribution and fractal dimension were measured. System operating parameters including laser power (100 mJ/pulse) and frequency (2 Hz), and carrier gas flowrate (1 l/min) were held constant. A striking result was the similarity in the properties of the aerosols. Primary particle size ranged between 4.9 and 13 nm for the eight substances studied. The previous studies with flame reactors produced a wider spread in primary particle size, but the order of increasing primary particle size follows the same trend. While the solid-state diffusion coefficient probably influences the size of the aerosol in flame reactors, its effect is reduced for aerosols generated by laser ablation. It is hypothesized that the reduced effect can be explained by the collision-coalescence mechanism and the very fast quenching of the laser generated aerosol.

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

4.4
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