The new recommended definition of a nanomaterial, 2022/C 229/01, adopted by the European Commission in 2022, will have a considerable impact on European Union legislation addressing chemicals, and therefore tools to implement this new definition are urgently needed. The updated NanoDefiner framework and its e-tool implementation presented here are such instruments, which help stakeholders to find out in a straightforward way whether a material is a nanomaterial or not. They are two major outcomes of the NanoDefine project, which is explicitly referred to in the new definition. This work revisits the framework and e-tool, and elaborates necessary adjustments to make these outcomes applicable for the updated recommendation. A broad set of case studies on representative materials confirms the validity of these adjustments. To further foster the sustainability and applicability of the framework and e-tool, measures for the FAIRification of expert knowledge within the e-tool’s knowledge base are elaborated as well. The updated framework and e-tool are now ready to be used in line with the updated recommendation. The presented approach may serve as an example for reviewing existing guidance and tools developed for the previous definition 2011/696/EU, particularly those adopting NanoDefine project outcomes.
Evaluation of electron microscopy techniques for the purpose of classification of nanomaterials
(2016)
Electron microscopy techniques such as TEM, STEM, SEM or TSEM (transmission in SEM) are capable of assessing the size of individual nanoparticles accurately. Nevertheless, the challenging aspect is sample preparation from powder or liquid form on the substrate, so that a
homogeneous distribution of well-separated (deagglomerated) particles is attained. The systematic study in this work shows examples where the extraction of the critical, smallest particle dimension - as the decisive particle parameter for the classification as a NM - is possible by analysing the sample after ist simple, dry preparation. The consequences of additional typical issues like loss of information due to screening of smaller particles by larger ones or the (in)ability to access the constituent particles in aggregates are discussed.
Evaluation of electron microscopy techniques for the purpose of classification of nanomaterials
(2016)
One current and much-debated topic in the characterization of nanomaterials (NM) is the implementation of the recently introduced recommendation on a definition of a nanomaterial by the European Commission.
All currently available sizing techniques able to address nanoparticles were systematically evaluated. It was demonstrated that particle sizing techniques like: analytical centrifugation, particle tracking analysis, single-particle inductively coupled plasma mass-spectrometry, differential electrical mobility analysis, dynamic light scattering, small angle X-ray scattering, ultrasonic attenuation spectrometry, but also gas Adsorption analysis based on the BET-method can be applied for a screening classification. However, the quality of the results depends on the individual material to be classified. For well-dispersed, nearly spherical (nano)particles most of the sizing techniques can be applied in a quick and reliable way. In contrast, the classification of most real-world materials is a challenging task, mainly due to non-spherical particle shape, large polydispersity or strong agglomeration/ aggregation of the particles. In the present study it was shown that these issues can be resolved in most cases by electron microscopy as a confirmatory classification technique.
Electron microscopy techniques such as TEM, STEM, SEM or TSEM transmission in SEM) are capable of assessing the size of individual nanoparticles accurately (see Figures 1 and 2). Nevertheless the challenging aspect is sample preparation from powder or liquid form on the substrate, so that a homogeneous distribution of well-separated (deagglomerated) particles is attained. The systematic study in this work shows examples where the extraction of the critical, smallest particle dimension - as the decisive particle parameter for the classification as a NM - is possible by analysing the sample after its simple, dry preparation. The consequences of additional typical issues like loss of information due to Screening of smaller particles by larger ones or the (in)ability to access the constituent particles in aggregates are discussed.