4.6 Article

Aggregation kinetics of cerium oxide nanoparticles in monovalent and divalent electrolytes

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.colsurfa.2010.05.024

关键词

Cerium oxide; Nanoparticles; Aggregation; Light scattering; Hamaker constant

资金

  1. NSF MRI [0619409]
  2. EPA-GRO
  3. Lafayette College
  4. Lafayette College Chemistry Department
  5. Directorate For Engineering
  6. Div Of Chem, Bioeng, Env, & Transp Sys [0619409] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

As a result of the commercial availability and use of nanoparticulate cerium oxide, CeO2, it is extremely likely that this material will be introduced into the environment requiring knowledge of its fate, transport and bioavailability in natural aquatic systems. To this end, this work probes the physicochemical interactions that govern the aggregation kinetics of cerium oxide nanoparticles using time-resolved dynamic light scattering (TR-DLS) over a range of monovalent, Na+, and divalent, Ca2+, electrolyte concentrations. Sets of nanoparticles were synthesized by precipitation in aqueous solutions containing varying concentrations of methanol. The point of zero charge (pzc) of these nanoparticles changes as a result of synthesis method. Those produced in the absence of methanol had pzc = 6.5. As predicted by the theories of Derjaguin-Landau-Verwey-Overbeek (DLVO), both reaction-limited and diffusion-limited aggregation were observed in each solution type. The experimental critical coagulation concentrations (CCC) at pH 11.0 was ca. 80 mM and ca. 16 mM for the monovalent (NaCl) and divalent (CaCl2) salts, respectively. DLVO theory proved to be an adequate predictor for the interactions between cerium oxide nanoparticles albeit the derived Hamaker constant of 1.0 x 10(-20) J was somewhat smaller than experimental Hamaker constants determined for other metal oxide nanoparticles. Deviations between experimental data and DLVO theory are discussed. (C) 2010 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