Filtern
Dokumenttyp
- Zeitschriftenartikel (3)
- Corrigendum (1)
Sprache
- Englisch (4)
Schlagworte
- X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (2)
- Core-shell nanoparticles (1)
- Metal fluorides (1)
- Secondary ion mass spectrometry (1)
- Sol-gel synthesis (1)
- Surface chemisttry (1)
- Synchrotron radiation (1)
- T-SEM (1)
- Titania nanoparticles (1)
- ToF-SIMS (1)
Organisationseinheit der BAM
The fluorolytic sol–gel synthesis is applied with the intention to obtain two different types of core–shell nanoparticles, namely, SrF2–CaF2 and CaF2–SrF2. In two separate fluorination steps for core and shell formation, the corresponding metal lactates are reacted with anhydrous HF in ethylene glycol. Scanning transmission electron microscopy (STEM) and dynamic light scattering (DLS) confirm the formation of particles with mean dimensions between 6.4 and 11.5 nm. The overall chemical composition of the particles during the different reaction steps is monitored by quantitative Al Kα excitation X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS). Here, the formation of stoichiometric metal fluorides (MF2) is confirmed, both for the core and the final core–shell particles. Furthermore, an in-depth analysis by synchrotron radiation XPS (SR-XPS) with tunable excitation energy is performed to confirm the core–Shell character of the nanoparticles. Additionally, Ca2p/Sr3d XPS intensity ratio in-Depth profiles are simulated using the software Simulation of Electron Spectra for Surface Analysis (SESSA). In principle, core–shell like particle morphologies are formed but without a sharp interface between calcium and strontium containing phases.
Surprisingly, the in-depth chemical distribution of the two types of nanoparticles is equal within the error of the experiment. Both comprise a SrF2-rich core domain and CaF2-rich shell domain with an intermixing zone between them. Consequently, the internal morphology of the final nanoparticles seems to be independent from the synthesis chronology.
This is a corrigendum to the original article "Determining the thickness and completeness of the shell of polymer core-shell nanoparticles by X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy, secondary ion mass spectrometry, and transmission scanning electron microscopy" that was published in "The journal of physical chemistry C", vol. 123 (2019), no. 49 pp. 29765-29775.
Core–shell nanoparticles (CSNPs) have become indispensable in various industrial applications. However, their real internal structure usually deviates from an ideal core–shell structure. To control how the particles perform with regard to their specific applications, characterization techniques are required that can distinguish an ideal from a nonideal morphology. In this work, we investigated poly(tetrafluoroethylene)–poly(methyl methacrylate) (PTFE–PMMA) and poly(tetrafluoroethylene)–polystyrene (PTFE–PS) polymer CSNPs with a constant core diameter (45 nm) but varying shell thicknesses (4–50 nm). As confirmed by transmission scanning electron microscopy (T-SEM), the shell completely covers the core for the PTFE–PMMA nanoparticles, while the encapsulation of the core by the shell material is incomplete for the PTFE–PS nanoparticles. X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) was applied to determine the shell thickness of the nanoparticles. The software SESSA v2.0 was used to analyze the intensities of the elastic peaks, and the QUASES software package was employed to evaluate the shape of the inelastic background in the XPS survey spectra. For the first time, nanoparticle shell thicknesses are presented, which are exclusively based on the analysis of the XPS inelastic background. Furthermore, principal component analysis (PCA)-assisted time-of-flight secondary-ion mass spectrometry (ToF-SIMS) of the PTFE–PS nanoparticle sample set revealed a systematic variation among the samples and, thus, confirmed the incomplete encapsulation of the core by the shell material. As opposed to that, no variation is observed in the PCA score plots of the PTFE–PMMA nanoparticle sample set. Consequently, the complete coverage of the core by the shell material is proved by ToF-SIMS with a certainty that cannot be achieved by XPS and T-SEM.
Nanoparticles have gained increasing attention in recent years due to their potential and application in different fields including medicine, cosmetics, chemistry, and their potential to enable advanced materials. To effectively understand and regulate the physico-chemical properties and potential adverse effects of nanoparticles, validated measurement procedures for the various properties of nanoparticles need to be developed. While procedures for measuring nanoparticle size and size Distribution are already established, standardized methods for analysis of their surface chemistry are not yet in place, although the influence of the surface chemistry on nanoparticle properties is undisputed. In particular, storage and preparation of nanoparticles for surface analysis strongly influences the analytical results from various methods, and in order to obtain consistent results, sample preparation must be both optimized and standardized. In this contribution, we present, in detail, some standard procedures for preparing nanoparticles for surface analytics. In principle, nanoparticles can be deposited on a suitable substrate from suspension or as a powder. Silicon (Si) Wafers are commonly used as substrate, however, their cleaning is critical to the process. For sample preparation from suspension, we will discuss drop-casting and spin-coating, where not only the cleanliness of the substrate and purity of the suspension but also its concentration play important roles for the success of the preparation methodology.
For nanoparticles with sensitive ligand shells or coatings, deposition as powders is more suitable, although this method requires particular care in fixing the sample.