Hello everyone,
there are many ways to dope nano-particles by impurity atoms during chemical reaction like wt%, at%, mol% and mass%...Suppose we are using aqueous route for synthesis of nano-particles than which method of calculation from above will give highest control over stoichiometry?
In principle, the doping of nanoparticles is not as unambiguous as for macroparticles. A situation is quite possible when the doping element has a preference for concentration on the surface (and the surface in nanoparticles, as is known, plays a leading role). Conversely, doping can lead to saturation of the volume with the doping element, with a small effect on the surface. In general, if the degrees of freedom for an substance are doubled (for example, the surface of the "FeO" nanoparticles obviously contains an excess of oxygen in normal case (we live in oxygen world), from a chemical point of view it is better to describe it as Fe3O4 (or even Fe2O3), then a similar phenomenon should be taken into account also when doping. Of course, the assumption of a uniform distribution of the doping element, which is implicitly present when indicating the total concentration of the dopant, does not make much sense. How to research doping, by what methods, is another question.
Dear Krishna Joshi , it is true that nanoparticles can be doped and the amount of dopant species can be given as wt% (the % on weight of dopant ), at% (the % of atoms of dopant) , mol% (the % of mols of dopant) and mass% (the % of mass of dopant) with respect to the whole weight, to all atoms, to all mols and to the whole mass of the nanoparticles.
These are simply different ways to express the same information: how much of dopant species you have on your NP´s.
However, they don´t give you control over stoichiometry, because they are not doping or synthesis methods. Doping or synthesis methods are what allow you to control stoichiometry of your final NP´s. The best method would be that which let you achieve the stoichiometry you want and with the lowest variability among individual NP´s.
Hope it helps.
In principle, the doping of nanoparticles is not as unambiguous as for macroparticles. A situation is quite possible when the doping element has a preference for concentration on the surface (and the surface in nanoparticles, as is known, plays a leading role). Conversely, doping can lead to saturation of the volume with the doping element, with a small effect on the surface. In general, if the degrees of freedom for an substance are doubled (for example, the surface of the "FeO" nanoparticles obviously contains an excess of oxygen in normal case (we live in oxygen world), from a chemical point of view it is better to describe it as Fe3O4 (or even Fe2O3), then a similar phenomenon should be taken into account also when doping. Of course, the assumption of a uniform distribution of the doping element, which is implicitly present when indicating the total concentration of the dopant, does not make much sense. How to research doping, by what methods, is another question.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Physical Sciences
- Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics
- Atoms