Recovery of iron/iron oxide nanoparticles from solution: Comparison of methods and their effects

James T. Nurmi, Vaishnavi Sarathy, Paul Tratnyek, Donald R. Baer, James E. Amonette, Abhi Karkamkar

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

19 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Most methods currently being used to recover Fe0-core/oxide-shell nanoparticles from solutions (including the solvents they are synthesized or stored in) are potentially problematic because they may alter the particle composition (e.g., depositing salts formed from solutes) or leave the particles prone to transformations during subsequent storage and handling (e.g., due to residual moisture). In this study, several methods for recovery of nanoparticles from aqueous solution were studied to determine how they affect the structure and reactivity of the recovered materials. Simple washing of the nanoparticles during vacuum filtration (i.e., "flash drying") can leave up to ∼17 wt% residual moisture. Modeling calculations suggest this moisture is mostly capillary or matric water held between particles and particle aggregates, which can be removed by drying for short periods at relative vapor pressures below 0.9. Flash drying followed by vacuum drying, all under N2, leaves no detectable residue from precipitation of solutes (detectable by X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy, XPS), no significant changes in overall particle composition or structure (determined by transmission electron microscopy, TEM), and negligible residual moisture (by thermogravimetric analysis, TGA). While this improved flash-drying protocol may be the preferred method for recovering nanoparticles for many purposes, we found that Feo-core/oxide-shell nanoparticles still exhibit gradual aging during storage when characterized electrochemically with voltammetry.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1937-1952
Number of pages16
JournalJournal of Nanoparticle Research
Volume13
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - May 2011

Fingerprint

Drying
Iron oxides
iron oxides
Iron
drying
Nanoparticles
Oxides
Moisture
Recovery
moisture
recovery
iron
Flash
nanoparticles
flash
Shell
solutes
Vacuum
vacuum
oxides

Keywords

  • Colloids
  • Flash drying
  • Linear sweep voltammetry
  • Recovery
  • Thermogravimetric analysis
  • Transmission electron microscopy
  • Weight loss
  • X-ray diffraction
  • X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics
  • Condensed Matter Physics
  • Modeling and Simulation
  • Chemistry(all)
  • Materials Science(all)
  • Bioengineering

Cite this

Recovery of iron/iron oxide nanoparticles from solution : Comparison of methods and their effects. / Nurmi, James T.; Sarathy, Vaishnavi; Tratnyek, Paul; Baer, Donald R.; Amonette, James E.; Karkamkar, Abhi.

In: Journal of Nanoparticle Research, Vol. 13, No. 5, 05.2011, p. 1937-1952.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Nurmi, James T. ; Sarathy, Vaishnavi ; Tratnyek, Paul ; Baer, Donald R. ; Amonette, James E. ; Karkamkar, Abhi. / Recovery of iron/iron oxide nanoparticles from solution : Comparison of methods and their effects. In: Journal of Nanoparticle Research. 2011 ; Vol. 13, No. 5. pp. 1937-1952.
@article{588d45d8bd814452ad4d08fa150f7809,
title = "Recovery of iron/iron oxide nanoparticles from solution: Comparison of methods and their effects",
abstract = "Most methods currently being used to recover Fe0-core/oxide-shell nanoparticles from solutions (including the solvents they are synthesized or stored in) are potentially problematic because they may alter the particle composition (e.g., depositing salts formed from solutes) or leave the particles prone to transformations during subsequent storage and handling (e.g., due to residual moisture). In this study, several methods for recovery of nanoparticles from aqueous solution were studied to determine how they affect the structure and reactivity of the recovered materials. Simple washing of the nanoparticles during vacuum filtration (i.e., {"}flash drying{"}) can leave up to ∼17 wt{\%} residual moisture. Modeling calculations suggest this moisture is mostly capillary or matric water held between particles and particle aggregates, which can be removed by drying for short periods at relative vapor pressures below 0.9. Flash drying followed by vacuum drying, all under N2, leaves no detectable residue from precipitation of solutes (detectable by X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy, XPS), no significant changes in overall particle composition or structure (determined by transmission electron microscopy, TEM), and negligible residual moisture (by thermogravimetric analysis, TGA). While this improved flash-drying protocol may be the preferred method for recovering nanoparticles for many purposes, we found that Feo-core/oxide-shell nanoparticles still exhibit gradual aging during storage when characterized electrochemically with voltammetry.",
keywords = "Colloids, Flash drying, Linear sweep voltammetry, Recovery, Thermogravimetric analysis, Transmission electron microscopy, Weight loss, X-ray diffraction, X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy",
author = "Nurmi, {James T.} and Vaishnavi Sarathy and Paul Tratnyek and Baer, {Donald R.} and Amonette, {James E.} and Abhi Karkamkar",
year = "2011",
month = "5",
doi = "10.1007/s11051-010-9946-x",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "13",
pages = "1937--1952",
journal = "Journal of Nanoparticle Research",
issn = "1388-0764",
publisher = "Springer Netherlands",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Recovery of iron/iron oxide nanoparticles from solution

T2 - Comparison of methods and their effects

AU - Nurmi, James T.

AU - Sarathy, Vaishnavi

AU - Tratnyek, Paul

AU - Baer, Donald R.

AU - Amonette, James E.

AU - Karkamkar, Abhi

PY - 2011/5

Y1 - 2011/5

N2 - Most methods currently being used to recover Fe0-core/oxide-shell nanoparticles from solutions (including the solvents they are synthesized or stored in) are potentially problematic because they may alter the particle composition (e.g., depositing salts formed from solutes) or leave the particles prone to transformations during subsequent storage and handling (e.g., due to residual moisture). In this study, several methods for recovery of nanoparticles from aqueous solution were studied to determine how they affect the structure and reactivity of the recovered materials. Simple washing of the nanoparticles during vacuum filtration (i.e., "flash drying") can leave up to ∼17 wt% residual moisture. Modeling calculations suggest this moisture is mostly capillary or matric water held between particles and particle aggregates, which can be removed by drying for short periods at relative vapor pressures below 0.9. Flash drying followed by vacuum drying, all under N2, leaves no detectable residue from precipitation of solutes (detectable by X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy, XPS), no significant changes in overall particle composition or structure (determined by transmission electron microscopy, TEM), and negligible residual moisture (by thermogravimetric analysis, TGA). While this improved flash-drying protocol may be the preferred method for recovering nanoparticles for many purposes, we found that Feo-core/oxide-shell nanoparticles still exhibit gradual aging during storage when characterized electrochemically with voltammetry.

AB - Most methods currently being used to recover Fe0-core/oxide-shell nanoparticles from solutions (including the solvents they are synthesized or stored in) are potentially problematic because they may alter the particle composition (e.g., depositing salts formed from solutes) or leave the particles prone to transformations during subsequent storage and handling (e.g., due to residual moisture). In this study, several methods for recovery of nanoparticles from aqueous solution were studied to determine how they affect the structure and reactivity of the recovered materials. Simple washing of the nanoparticles during vacuum filtration (i.e., "flash drying") can leave up to ∼17 wt% residual moisture. Modeling calculations suggest this moisture is mostly capillary or matric water held between particles and particle aggregates, which can be removed by drying for short periods at relative vapor pressures below 0.9. Flash drying followed by vacuum drying, all under N2, leaves no detectable residue from precipitation of solutes (detectable by X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy, XPS), no significant changes in overall particle composition or structure (determined by transmission electron microscopy, TEM), and negligible residual moisture (by thermogravimetric analysis, TGA). While this improved flash-drying protocol may be the preferred method for recovering nanoparticles for many purposes, we found that Feo-core/oxide-shell nanoparticles still exhibit gradual aging during storage when characterized electrochemically with voltammetry.

KW - Colloids

KW - Flash drying

KW - Linear sweep voltammetry

KW - Recovery

KW - Thermogravimetric analysis

KW - Transmission electron microscopy

KW - Weight loss

KW - X-ray diffraction

KW - X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=80051664649&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=80051664649&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s11051-010-9946-x

DO - 10.1007/s11051-010-9946-x

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:80051664649

VL - 13

SP - 1937

EP - 1952

JO - Journal of Nanoparticle Research

JF - Journal of Nanoparticle Research

SN - 1388-0764

IS - 5

ER -