Ingenieurwissenschaften und zugeordnete Tätigkeiten
Filtern
Dokumenttyp
- Vortrag (14)
Sprache
- Englisch (14)
Referierte Publikation
- nein (14)
Schlagworte
- Nanomaterials (14) (entfernen)
Organisationseinheit der BAM
Eingeladener Vortrag
- nein (14) (entfernen)
Fluorescent particles like nm- and m-sized polymeric beads doped or labeled with different types of fluorophores and nanocrystalline systems like quantum dots and upconversion phosphors emitting in the visible (vis), near-infrared (NIR), and IR (infrared) region are of increasing importance as fluorescent reporters for bioanalysis and medical diagnostics. The assessment and comparison of material performance and the development of rational design strategies for improved systems requires suitable spectroscopic tools for the determination of signal-relevant optical properties and analytical tools for the determination of the number of surface groups, ligands, biomolecules and /or fluorophores per bead. In this respect, suitable spectroscopic tools for the characterization of the optical properties of such materials like photoluminescence quantum yields and brightness values and the determination of their surface chemistry are introduced. This includes integrating sphere setups for absolute measurements of fluorescence quantum yields of liquid and solid, transparent and scattering materials in the wavelength region of 350 nm to 1600 nm at varying excitation power densities for the study of multi-photon processes and simple optical assays, validated by comparison with established analytical techniques relying on different detection principles. Here, different examples for the optical and analytical characterization of different types of nanoscale reporters are presented.
There is an increasing interest in optical reporters like semiconductor quantum dots and upconversion nanocrystals with emission > 800 nm for bioanalysis, medical diagnostics, and safety barcodes. Prerequisites for the comparison of material performance, the mechanistic understanding of nonradiative decay channels, and the rational design of new nanomaterials with improved properties are reliable fluorescence measurements and validated methods for the assessment of their surface chemistry. The latter is of special relevance for nanocrystalline emitters, where surface states and the accessibility of emissive states by quenchers largely control accomplishable photoluminescence quantum yields and hence, signal sizes and detection sensitivities from the reporter side. Here, we present the design of integrating sphere setups for the excitation power density-dependent absolute measurement of emission spectra and photoluminescence quantum yields in the wavelength region of 350 to 1600 nm and results from spectroscopic studies of semiconductor quantum dots and upconversion nanocrystals of different size and surface chemistries in various environments. Subsequently, examples for simple approaches to surface group and ligand analysis are presented.
Nanoforms with at least one dimension below 100 nm have an important part to play in more and more areas of our daily life. Therefore, risk assessment of these materials is becoming increasingly important. In this context, the European Chemical Agency (ECHA) considered eleven physico-chemical properties as relevant, of which the following six are essential for the registration: chemical composition, crystallinity, particle size, particle shape, surface chemistry and specific surface area. Four of these priority properties can be obtained with electron microscopy and surface analytics like XPS and ToF-SIMS. The reliability of this data must be ensured, especially for their use for grouping and read across approaches. On the other hand, the “reproducibility” crisis has revealed major shortcomings in the reliability of published data.
In a case study, we show how the quality of the data can be ensured by using existing standards and protocols of each step in the workflow of sample characterization. As exemplary samples, two Al-coated TiO2 samples as nanopowders were selected from the JRC repository, capped either with a hydrophilic or a hydrophobic organic ultrathin shell. SEM results provided the size and shape of the nanoparticles, a first overview about the composition was obtained with EDS. XPS and ToF-SIMS supplied the surface chemistry, especially information about the shell and the coating of the particles. Standards and protocols of all steps of the analytical workflow including preparation and data reduction are discussed regarding reliable and reproducible data. Additionally, uncertainties for the different steps are specified.
Only such a detailed description of all these factors allows a comprehensive physico-chemical characterization of the nanoparticles with understanding of their potential risk assessment.
The European legislation has responded to the wide use of nanomaterials in our daily life and defined the term “nanoform” in the Annexes to the REACH (Registration, Evaluation, Authorization of Chemicals) Regulation. Now specific information of the nanomaterials is required from the companies when registering the appropriate materials in a dossier.
In the context of REACH eleven physicochemical properties were considered as relevant, of which the following six are essential for registration of nanoforms (priority properties): chemical composition, crystallinity, particle size, particle shape, chemical nature of the surface (“surface chemistry”), and specific surface area (SSA). A key role is the reliable, reproduceable and traceable character of the data of these priority properties.
In this context, we want to discuss which ‘analytical’ information is exactly required to fulfill these conditions. Time-of-Flight Secondary Ion Mass Spectrometry (ToF-SIMS) and X-ray Photoelectron Spectroscopy (XPS) were chosen as the most popular surface analytical methods. Both methods allow a detailed understanding of the surface chemistry with an information depth below ten nanometers. As a rather bulk method for the analysis of nanoforms, Electron Probe Microanalysis (EPMA) in the version with energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) is considered for the quick identification of the main chemical elements present in the sample. Furthermore, Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) results are discussed which provide results on particle size and shape. Thus, four of the six priority properties can be obtained with these methods.
How much do we, the small-angle scatterers, influence the results of an investigation? What uncertainty do we add by our human diversity in thoughts and approaches, and is this significant compared to the uncertainty from the instrumental measurement factors?
After our previous Round Robin on data collection, we know that many laboratories can collect reasonably consistent small-angle scattering data on easy samples1. To investigate the next, human component, we compiled four existing datasets from globular (roughly spherical) scatterers, each exhibiting a common complication, and asked the participants to apply their usual methods and toolset to the quantification of the results https://lookingatnothing.com/index.php/archives/3274).
Accompanying the datasets was a modicum of accompanying information to help with the interpretation of the data, similar to what we normally receive from our collaborators. More than 30 participants reported back with volume fractions, mean sizes and size distribution widths of the particle populations in the samples, as well as information on their self-assessed level of experience and years in the field.
While the Round Robin is still underway (until the 25th of April, 2022), the initial results already show significant spread in the results. Some of these are due to the variety in interpretation of the meaning of the requested parameters, as well as simple human errors, both of which are easy to correct for. Nevertheless, even after correcting for these differences in understanding, a significant spread remains. This highlights an urgent challenge to our community: how can we better help ourselves and our colleagues obtain more reliable results, how could we take the human factor out of the equation, so to speak?
In this talk, we will introduce the four datasets, their origins and challenges. Hot off the press, we will summarize the anonymized, quantified results of the Data Analysis Round Robin. (Incidentally, we will also see if a correlation exists between experience and proximity of the result to the median). Lastly, potential avenues for improving our field will be offered based on the findings, ranging from low-effort yet somehow controversial improvements, to high-effort foundational considerations.
In contrast to the crisp, clear images you can get from electron microscopy, small-angle X-ray scattering (SAXS) patterns are rather featureless. These patterns, however, contain averaged structural information of all of the finest material structures that were illuminated by the X-ray beam. With careful and precise investigation, and supplementary information from complementary techniques, this bulk material structure can be quantified to reveal structural information spanning four or even five decades in size. Additionally, while the data correction and analysis is complex, sample preparation is very straightforward, also allowing for in-situ and operando measurements to be performed without breaking a sweat. In the right hands, then, this technique can be the most powerful tool in your analytical arsenal.
By automatically recording as much information as possible in automated laboratory setups, reproducibility and traceability of experiments are vastly improved. This presentation shows what such an approach means for the quality of experiments in an X-ray scattering laboratory and an automated synthesis set-up.
Blueprint for a sustainable new European Centre to support safe innovation for nanotechnology
(2020)
This paper presents the blueprint for the operation of a sustainable and permanent European Centre of collaborating reference laboratories and research centres, to establish a one-stop shop for a wide variety of nanosafety related services, and to provide a central contact point for questions about nanosafety in Europe. The Centre aims to harmonise service provision, and bring novel risk assessment and management approaches closer to practice.