Setting priorities in CNF particle size measurement: What is needed vs. what is feasible
Source abstract
Abstract
Measuring the size of cellulose nanomaterials can be challenging, especially in the case of branched and entangled cellulose nanofibrils (CNFs). The International Organization for Standardization, Technical Committee 6, Task Group 1—Cellulosic Nanomaterials, is exploring opportunities to develop standard methods for the measurement of CNF particle size and particle size distribution. This paper presents a summary of the available measuring techniques, responses from a survey on the measurement needs of CNF companies and researchers, and outcomes from an international workshop on cellulose nanofibril measurement and standardization. Standardization needs differed among groups, with Japanese companies mostly requiring measurements for product specification and production control, and other companies mostly needing measurements for safety/regulatory purposes and for grade definitions in patents. Among all the companies, average length and width with percentiles (D(10), D(50), D(90)) were the most desired measurands. Workshop participants concurred that defining the location(s) on the CNF at which to measure the width and the length is an urgent and complex question. They also agreed that methods are needed for rapid particle size measurement at the nanoscale. Our recommendation within ISO is to start work to revise the definition of CNFs and develop sample preparation and measurement guidelines. It was also recommended that further research be done to reproducibly prepare hierarchical branched CNF structures and characterize them, develop automated image analysis for hierarchical branched CNF structures, and develop a classification system encompassing measurements at multiple size ranges from micro- to nanoscale to fully characterize and distinguish CNF samples.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Advanced Cellulose Research Studies · Advanced Data Storage Technologies · Polysaccharides and Plant Cell Walls
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (44)
Show source-provided references
1. Moon, R.J., Schueneman, G.T., and Simonsen, J., JOM 68(9): 2383(2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11837-016-2018-7.10.1007/s11837-016-2018-7 ↗
2. Foster, E.J., Moon, R.J., Agarwal, U.P., et al., Chem. Soc. Rev. 47(8): 2609(2018). https://doi.org/10.1039/C6CS00895J.10.1039/C6CS00895J ↗
3. Shatkin, J.A. and Kim, B., Environ. Sci.: Nano 2(5): 477(2015). https://doi.org/10.1039/C5EN00059A.10.1039/C5EN00059A ↗
4. Meija, J., Bushell, M., Couillard, M., et al., Anal. Chem. 92(19): 13434(2020). https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.0c02805.10.1021/acs.analchem.0c02805 ↗
5. Bushell, M., Meija, J., Chen, M., et al., Cellulose 28(3): 1387(2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-020-03618-4.10.1007/s10570-020-03618-4 ↗
6. Tanaka, R., Saito, T., Ishii, D., et al., Cellulose 21(3): 1581(2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-014-0196-4.10.1007/s10570-014-0196-4 ↗
7. Usov, I., Nyström, G., Adamcik, J., et al., Nat. Commun. 6(1): 7564(2015). https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms8564.10.1038/ncomms8564 ↗
8. Anon., “No. S30A: Observation of cellulose nanofibers and mea-surement of fiber length/diameter,” Application News, Shimadzu, Kyoto, 2018. Available [Online] https://www.shimadzu.com/an/sites/shimadzu.com.an/files/pim/pim_document_file/applications/application_note/9856/jpq618002.pdf <07Feb2023>.
9. Kangas, H., Lahtinen, P., Sneck, A., et al., Nord. Pulp Pap. Res. J. 29(1): 129(2014). https://doi.org/10.3183/npprj-2014-29-01-p129-143.10.3183/npprj-2014-29-01-p129-143 ↗
10. Desmaisons, J., Boutonnet, E., Rueff, M., et al., Carbohydr. Polym. 174: 318(2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2017.06.032.10.1016/j.carbpol.2017.06.032 ↗
11. Wang, Q.Q., Zhu, J.Y., Gleisner, R., et al., Cellulose 19(5):1631(2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-012-9745-x.10.1007/s10570-012-9745-x ↗
12. Le Van, H., Cellul. Chem. Technol. 51(7-8): 649(2017).
13. Ang, S., Narayanan, J.R., Kargupta, W., et al., Cellulose 27(8): 4189(2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-020-03058-0.10.1007/s10570-020-03058-0 ↗
14. Mattos, B.D., Tardy, B.L., and Rojas, O.J., Biomacromolecules 20(7): 2657(2019). https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.biomac.9b00432.10.1021/acs.biomac.9b00432 ↗
15. Fall, A.B., Lindström, S.B., Sundman, O., et al., Langmuir 27(18): 11332(2011). https://doi.org/10.1021/la201947x.10.1021/la201947x ↗
16. Taylor, L., Phipps, J., Blackburn, S., et al., Cellulose 27(11):6149(2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-020-03226-2.10.1007/s10570-020-03226-2 ↗
17. Yuan, Z., Zeng, J., and Chen, K., IOP Conf. Ser.: Mater. Sci. Eng. 397(1): 5(2018). https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/397/1/012002.10.1088/1757-899x/397/1/012002 ↗
18. Isogai, A., “Determination of length and width of nanocelluloses from their dilute dispersions,” in Advances in Pulp and Paper Research, Trans. of the XVIth Fund. Res. Symp. Oxford, 2017 (W. Batchelor and D. Söderberg, Eds.), FRC, Manchester, 2018, pp. 801–811.10.15376/frc.2017.2.801 ↗
19. Berto, G.L. and Arantes, V., Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 127: 637(2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2019.01.169.10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2019.01.169 ↗
20. Moser, C., Lindström, M., and Henriksson, G., BioResources 10(2): 2360(2015). https://doi.org/10.15376/biores.10.2.2360-2375.10.15376/biores.10.2.2360-2375 ↗
21. Errokh, A., Magnin, A., Putaux, J.-L., et al., Cellulose 25(7):3899(2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-018-1871-7.10.1007/s10570-018-1871-7 ↗
22. Shimizu, M., Saito, T., Nishiyama, Y., et al., Macromol. Rapid Commun. 37(19): 1581(2016). https://doi.org/10.1002/marc.201600357.10.1002/marc.201600357 ↗
23. LUM, "LUMisizer: The all-in-one dispersion analyser," LUM GmbH, Berlin. Available [Online] https://www.lumisizer.com <28Feb2023>.
24. Varanasi, S., He, R., and Batchelor, W., Cellulose 20: 1885(2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-013-9972-9.10.1007/s10570-013-9972-9 ↗
25. Raj, P., Mayahi, A., Lahtinen, P., et al., Cellulose 23(5): 3051(2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-016-1039-2.10.1007/s10570-016-1039-2 ↗
26. Trovagunta, R., Kelley, S.S., and Lavoine, N., Cellulose 28(18): 11329(2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-021-04226-6.10.1007/s10570-021-04226-6 ↗
27. Gu, F., Wang, W., Cai, Z., et al., Cellulose 25(5): 2861(2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-018-1765-8.10.1007/s10570-018-1765-8 ↗
28. Glatter, O.K.O., Small Angle X-Ray Scattering, Academic Press, London/New York, 1982.
29. Feigin, L.A., Svergun, D.I., and Taylor, G.W., in Structure Analysis by Small-Angle X-Ray and Neutron Scattering (L.A. Feigin, D.I. Svergun, and G.W. Taylor, Eds.), Springer US, Boston, 1987, pp. 25-55. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-6624-0_2.10.1007/978-1-4757-6624-0_2 ↗
30. Georgieva, J., Valova, E., Mintsouli, I., et al., J. Electroanal. Chem. 754: 65(2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jelechem.2015.07.001.10.1016/j.jelechem.2015.07.001 ↗
31. Hossain, L., Raghuwanshi, V.S., Tanner, J., et al., J. Colloid Interface Sci. 568: 234(2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2020.02.048.10.1016/j.jcis.2020.02.048 ↗
32. Raghuwanshi, V.S., Garusinghe, U.M., Raj, P., et al., J. Colloid Interface Sci. 529: 180(2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2018.06.009.10.1016/j.jcis.2018.06.009 ↗
33. Raghuwanshi, V.S. and Garnier, G., Adv. Colloid Interface Sci. 274: 102044(2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cis.2019.102044.10.1016/j.cis.2019.102044 ↗
34. Raghuwanshi, V.S., Varanasi, S., Batchelor, W., et al., Mater. Des. 216: 110572(2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2022.110572.10.1016/j.matdes.2022.110572 ↗
35. Cherny, A.Y., Anitas, E.M., Osipov, V.A., et al., Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 21(24): 12748(2019). https://doi.org/10.1039/C9CP00783K.10.1039/C9CP00783K ↗
36. Gommes, C.J., Jaksch, S., and Frielinghaus, H., J. Appl. Crystallogr. 54: 1832(2021). https://doi.org/10.1107/S1600576721010293.10.1107/s1600576721010293 ↗
37. Mao, Y., Liu, K., Zhan, C., et al., J. Phys. Chem. B 121(6): 1340(2017). https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpcb.6b11425.10.1021/acs.jpcb.6b11425 ↗
38. Geng, L., Peng, X., Zhan, C., et al., Cellulose 24(12): 5417(2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-017-1496-2.10.1007/s10570-017-1496-2 ↗
39. Penttilä, P.A., Imai, T., Hemming, J., et al., Carbohydr. Polym. 190: 95(2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2018.02.051.10.1016/j.carbpol.2018.02.051 ↗
40. Larsson, P., Riazanova, A., Cinar, G., et al., Cellulose 26: 1565(2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-018-2214-4.10.1007/s10570-018-2214-4 ↗
41. Ghazani, M.S., Martinez, D.M., Al-Shibl, M., et al., Nord. Pulp Pap. Res. J. 35(2): 205(2020). https://doi.org/10.1515/npprj-2019-0069.10.1515/npprj-2019-0069 ↗
42. Grulke, E.A., Rice, S.B., Xiong, J., et al., Carbon 130: 822(2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2018.01.030.10.1016/j.carbon.2018.01.030 ↗
43. Grulke, E.A., Wu, X., Ji, Y., et al., Metrologia 55(2): 254(2018). https://doi.org/10.1088/1681-7575/aaa368.10.1088/1681-7575/aaa368 ↗
44. Grulke, E.A., Yamamoto, K., Kumagai, K., et al., Adv. Powder Technol. 28(7): 1647(2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apt.2017.03.027.10.1016/j.apt.2017.03.027 ↗