Compare to using lithography to define nanostructures on surface, what is the advantage of using solution-chemistry synthesized particle to assemble on substrate directly? I know the particles have more flat surface, less defect and usually form single crystals.
One advantage is that the nanoparticles that you deposit can display internal morphologies that you cannot achieve by lithography. For instance, you can deposit Janus nanoparticles or core-shell nanoparticles.
The best developed application for NPs assembled on substrate is for SERS or sensing. In this case, people normally want larger NPs (larger than 50 nm), smaller interval (less than 10 nm) and larger area (larger than 100 um sq). I think it might not be a easy thing for lithography.
Another application might be catalysis, like what PC is doing in our group. The nanocatalysis is now developed into surface structrue or interface structrue level, which can help us understand the mechanism of suface catalysis and be a guide to reasonable design catalyst for specific reaction. It is still difficult for lithography to create a well defined surface structure or interface structure like what solution-chemistry can do.
There are a lot of advantages and many disadvantages, Using lithography you can get a better control in the formed nanostructure and you can design more or less what you want. However this is more time demanding and expensive. On the other hand in solution NP assembling you´ll usually obtain random distributions. But in a couple of hours you can get a large area with NP deposited.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Chemistry
- Nanotechnology
- Nanostructures