A comparison of atomic force microscopy (AFM) and dynamic light scattering (DLS) methods to characterize nanoparticle size distributions
Source abstract
Abstract
This paper compares the accuracy of conventional dynamic light scattering (DLS) and atomic force microscopy (AFM) for characterizing size distributions of polystyrene nanoparticles in the size range of 20–100 nm. Average DLS values for monosize dispersed particles are slightly higher than the nominal values whereas AFM values were slightly lower than nominal values. Bimodal distributions were easily identified with AFM, but DLS results were skewed toward larger particles. AFM characterization of nanoparticles using automated analysis software provides an accurate and rapid analysis for nanoparticle characterization and has advantages over DLS for non-monodispersed solutions.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Force Microscopy Techniques and Applications · Nanoparticles: synthesis and applications · Near-Field Optical Microscopy
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (16)
Show source-provided references
1. Binnig G, Quate CF, Gerber C (1986) Atomic force microscope. Phys Rev Lett 56:930–93410.1103/PhysRevLett.56.930 ↗
2. Bryant G, Thomas J (1995) Improved particle size distribution measurements using multiangle dynamic light scattering. Langmuir 11:2480–248210.1021/la00007a028 ↗
3. Cadene A, Durand-Vidal S, Turq P, Brendle J (2005) Study of individual Na-montmorillonite particles size, morphology, and apparent charge. J Colloid Interface Sci 285:719–73010.1016/j.jcis.2004.12.016 ↗
4. Cao A (2003) Light scattering. Recent applications. Anal Lett 36:3185–322510.1081/AL-120026567 ↗
5. Dick K, Dhanasekaran T, Zhang Z, Meisel D (2001) Size-dependent melting of silica-encapsulated gold nanoparticles. J Am Chem Soc 124:2312–231710.1021/ja017281a ↗
6. Elizalde O, Leal GP, Leiza JR (2000) Particle size distribution measurements of polymeric dispersions: a comparative study. Part Part Syst Charact 17:236–24310.1002/1521-4117(200012)17:5/6<236::AID-PPSC236>3.0.CO;2-0 ↗
7. Finsy R, De Jaeger N, Sneyers R, Gelade E (1992) Particle sizing by photon correlation spectroscopy. Part III: mono and bimodal distributions and data analysis. Part Part Syst Charact 9:125–13710.1002/ppsc.19920090117 ↗
8. Flamberg A, Pecora R (1984) Dynamic light scattering study of micelles in a high ionic strength solution. J Phys Chem 88:3026–303310.1021/j150658a020 ↗
9. Juillerat F, Solak HH, Bowen P, Hofmann H (2005) Fabrication of large-area ordered arrays of nanoparticles on patterned substrates. Nanotechnology 16:1311–131610.1088/0957-4484/16/8/055 ↗
10. Leung AB, Suh KI, Ansari RR (2006) Particle-size and velocity measurements in flowing conditions using dynamic light scattering. Appl Opt 45:2186–219010.1364/AO.45.002186 ↗
11. Li Y, Lindsay SM (1991) Polystyrene latex particles as a size calibration for the atomic force microscope. Rev Sci Instrum 62:2630–263310.1063/1.1142243 ↗
12. Liu FK, Chang YC, Ko FH, Chu TC, Dai BT (2003) Rapid fabrication of high quality self–assembled nanometer gold nanoparticles by spin coating method. Microelectron Eng 67–68:702–709
13. Meulenkamp EA (1998) Size dependence of the dissolution of ZnO nanoparticles. J Phys Chem B 102:7764–776910.1021/jp982305u ↗
14. Provder T (1997) Challenges in particle size distribution measurement past, present and for the 21st century. Prog Org Coat 32:143–15310.1016/S0300-9440(97)00043-X ↗
15. Villarrubia JS (1997) Algorithms for scanned probe microscope image simulation, surface reconstruction and tip estimation. J Res Natl Inst Stand Technol 102:425–45410.6028/jres.102.030 ↗
16. Xia D, Biswas A, Li D, Bruek S (2004) Directed self-assembly of silica nanoparticles into nanometer-scale patterned surfaces using spin coating. Adv Mater 16:1427–143210.1002/adma.200400095 ↗