How reliably can a material be classified as a nanomaterial? Available particle-sizing techniques at work
Source abstract
Abstract
ABSTRACT: Currently established and projected regulatory frameworks require the classification of materials (whether nano or non-nano) as specified by respective definitions, most of which are based on the size of the constituent particles. This brings up the question if currently available techniques for particle size determination are capable of reliably classifying materials that potentially fall under these definitions. In this study, a wide variety of characterisation techniques, including counting, fractionating, and spectroscopic techniques, has been applied to the same set of materials under harmonised conditions. The selected materials comprised well-defined quality control materials (spherical, monodisperse) as well as industrial materials of complex shapes and considerable polydispersity. As a result, each technique could be evaluated with respect to the determination of the number-weighted median size. Recommendations on the most appropriate and efficient use of techniques for different types of material are given.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Mineral Processing and Grinding · Coagulation and Flocculation Studies · Spectroscopy and Chemometric Analyses
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (70)
Show source-provided references
1. Agarwal JK, Sem GJ (1980) Continous flow, single particle counting condensation nucleus counter. J Aerosol Sci 11:343–357. doi: 10.1016/0021-8502(80)90042-710.1016/0021-8502(80)90042-7 ↗
2. Anderson W, Kozak D, Coleman VA, Jämting ÅK, Trau M (2013) A comparative study of submicron particle sizing platforms: Accuracy, precision, and resolution analysis of polydisperse particle size distributions. J Colloid Interface Sci 405:322–330. doi: 10.1016/j.jcis.2013.02.03010.1016/j.jcis.2013.02.030 ↗
3. Baalousha M, Prasad A, Lead JR (2014) Quantitative measurement of the nanoparticle size and number concentration from liqid suspensions by atomic force microscopy. Environ Sci Proc Impacts 16:1338–1347. doi: 10.1039/QCM3em00712j10.1039/QCM3em00712j ↗
4. Babick F (2016) Suspensions of colloidal particles and aggregates; chapter 4. In: Valverde Millán JM (ed) Particle technology series, vol. 20. Springer, New York. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-30663-6_410.1007/978-3-319-30663-6_4 ↗
5. Babick F, Richter A (2006) Sound attenuation by small spheroidal particles due to visco-inertial coupling. J Acoust Soc Am 119:1441–1448. doi: 10.1121/1.216842710.1121/1.2168427 ↗
6. Babick F, Schießl K, Stintz M (2012a) Characterization of pyrogenic powders with conventional particle sizing technique: I. Prediction of measured size distributions. Part Part Syst Charact 29:104–115. doi: 10.1002/ppsc.20100002410.1002/ppsc.201000024 ↗
7. Babick F, Vorbau M, Stintz M (2012b) Characterization of pyrogenic powders with conventional particle sizing technique: II. Experimental data. Part Part Syst Charact 29:116–127. doi: 10.1002/ppsc.20100002510.1002/ppsc.201000025 ↗
8. Bałdyga J, Makowski Ł, Orciuch W, Sauter C, Schuchmann HP (2009) Agglomerate dispersion in cavitating flows. Chem Eng Res Design 87:474–484. doi: 10.1016/j.cherd.2008.12.01510.1016/j.cherd.2008.12.015 ↗
9. Bleeker EAJ, de Jong WH, Geertsma RE et al (2013) Considerations on the EU definition of a nanomaterial: science to support policy making. Regul Toxicol Pharm 65:119–125. doi: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2012.11.00710.1016/j.yrtph.2012.11.007 ↗
10. Boverhof DR, Bramante CM, Butala JH et al (2015) Comparative assessment of nanomaterial definitions and safety evaluation considerations. Pharmac, Regul Toxicol. doi: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2015.06.00110.1016/j.yrtph.2015.06.001 ↗
11. Bowen P (2002) Particle size distribution measurement from millimeters to nanometers and from rods to platelets. J Dispers Sci Technol 23(5):631–662. doi: 10.1081/DIS-12001536810.1081/DIS-120015368 ↗
12. Braun A, Couteau O, Franks K et al (2011) Validation of dynamic light scattering and centrifugal liquid sedimentation methods for nanoparticle characterisation. Adv Powder Technol 22(6):766–770. doi: 10.1016/j.apt.2010.11.00110.1016/j.apt.2010.11.001 ↗
13. Braun A, Kestens V, Franks K et al (2012) A new certified reference material for size analysis of nanoparticles. J Nanopart Res 14:1–12. doi: 10.1007/s11051-012-1021-310.1007/s11051-012-1021-3 ↗
14. Brown SC, Boyko V, Meyers G, Voetz M, Wohlleben W (2013) Towards advancing nano-object count metrology—A best practice framework. Environ Health Perspect 121:1282–1291. doi: 10.1289/ehp.130695710.1289/ehp.1306957 ↗
15. Brugger K (1976) The particle size determination of pigments with the disc centrifuge. Powder Technol 13:215–221. doi: 10.1016/0032-5910(76)85006-110.1016/0032-5910(76)85006-1 ↗
16. Challis RE, Povey MJW, Mather ML, Holmes AK (2005) Ultrasound techniques for characterizing colloidal dispersions. Rep Prog Phys 68:1541–1637. doi: 10.1088/0034-4885/68/7/R0110.1088/0034-4885/68/7/R01 ↗
17. de Temmerman PJ, Lammertyn J, de Ketelaere B et al (2014a) Measurement uncertainties of size, shape, and surface measurements using transmission electron microscopy of near-monodisperse, near-spherical nanoparticles. J Nanopart Res 16:2177. doi: 10.1007/s11051-013-2177-110.1007/s11051-013-2177-1 ↗
18. de Temmerman PJ, Verleysen E, Lammertyn J, Mast J (2014b) Semi-automatic size measurement of primary particles in aggregated nanomaterials by transmission electron microscopy. Powder Technol 261:191–200. doi: 10.1016/j.powtec.2014.04.04010.1016/j.powtec.2014.04.040 ↗
19. Dukhin A, Parlia S, Klank D, Lesti M (2012) Particle sizing and zeta potential of silica Koestrosol (basis for certified reference material ERM-FD100 for nanoparticles) by acoustics and electroacoustics. Part Part Syst Charact 27:165–171. doi: 10.1002/ppsc.20110003810.1002/ppsc.201100038 ↗
20. European Commission (2011) Commission Recommendation of 18 October 2011 on the definition of nanomaterial (2011/696/EU). Official J Eur Union 54:38–40. doi: 10.3000/18770677.L_2011.275.eng10.3000/18770677.L_2011.275.eng ↗
21. Fissan H, Hummes D, Stratmann F et al (1996) Experimental comparison of four differential mobility analyzers for nanometer aerosol measurements. Aerosol Sci Technol 24:1–13. doi: 10.1080/0278682960896534710.1080/02786829608965347 ↗
22. Flegler SL, Heckman JW, Klomparens KL (1993) Scanning and transmission electron microscopy: an introduction; reprint. Oxford University Press, Oxford
23. Gilliland D, Gibson N, Hempelmann U (eds) (2014) Basic comparison of particle size distribution measurements of pigments and fillers using commonly available industrial methods, report EUR 26916 EN. European Commission, JRC-IHCP; doi: 10.2788/2102410.2788/21024 ↗
24. Glatter O, Kratky O (eds) (1982) Small angle X-ray scattering. Academic Press, London
25. Hackley VA, Stefaniak AB (2013) “Real-world” precision, bias, and between-laboratory variation for surface area measurement of a titanium dioxide nanomaterial in powder form. J Nanopart Res 15:1742. doi: 10.1007/s11051-013-1742-y10.1007/s11051-013-1742-y ↗
26. Hassellöv M, Readman JW, Ranville JF, Tiede K (2008) Nanoparticle analysis and characterization methodologies in environmental risk assessment of engineered nanoparticles. Ecotoxicol 17:344–361. doi: 10.1007/s10646-008-0225-x10.1007/s10646-008-0225-x ↗
27. Hodoroaba VD, Motzkus C, Macé T, Vaslin-Reimann S (2014) Performance of high-resolution SEM/EDX systems equipped with transmission mode (TSEM) for imaging and measurement of size and size distribution of spherical nanoparticles. Microsc Microanal 20:602–612. doi: 10.1017/S143192761400001410.1017/S1431927614000014 ↗
28. Hogg R (2008) Issues in particle sizing. KONA Powder J. 26:81–93. doi: 10.14356/kona.200800910.14356/kona.2008009 ↗
29. Hole P, Sillence K, Hannell C et al (2013) Interlaboratory comparison of size measurements on nanoparticles using nanoparticle tracking analysis (NTA). J Nanopart Res 15:2101. doi: 10.1007/s11051-013-2101-810.1007/s11051-013-2101-8 ↗
30. ISO Guide 30:2015, Reference materials – Selected terms and definitions. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, 2015
31. ISO/TS 16195:2013. Nanotechnologies – Guidance for developing representative test materials consisting of nano-objects in dry powder form. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, 2013
32. Jung KY, Park BC, Song WY, Ho B, Eom TB (2002) Measurement of 100-nm polystyrene sphere by transmission electron microscope. Powder Technol 126:255–265. doi: 10.1016/S0032-5910(02)00062-110.1016/S0032-5910(02)00062-1 ↗
33. Just U, Werthmann B (1999) Static light scattering of polystyrene reference materials: Round-robintest. Int J Polym Anal Charact 5:195–207. doi: 10.1080/1023666990800973710.1080/10236669908009737 ↗
34. Keller AA, McFerran S, Lazareva A, Suh S (2013) Global life cycle release of engineered nanomaterials. J Nanopart Res 15:1692. doi: 10.1007/s11051-013-1692-410.1007/s11051-013-1692-4 ↗
35. Klein T, Buhr E, Johnsen KP, Frase CG (2011) Traceable measurement of nanoparticles size using a scanning electron microscope in transmission mode (TSEM). Meas Sci Technol 22:094002. doi: 10.1088/0957-0233/22/9/09400210.1088/0957-0233/22/9/094002 ↗
36. Kuchenbecker P, Gemeinert M, Rabe T (2012) Interlaboratory study of particle size distribution measurements by laser diffraction. Part Part Syst Charact 29:304–310. doi: 10.1002/ppsc.20100002610.1002/ppsc.201000026 ↗
37. Lamberty A, Franks K, Braun A A et al (2011) Interlaboratory comparison for the measurement of particle size and zeta potential of silica nanoparticles in an aqueous suspension. J Nanopart Res 13:7317–7329. doi: 10.1007/s11051-011-0624-410.1007/s11051-011-0624-4 ↗
38. Leschonski K (1986) Particle characterization, present state and possible future trends. Part Charact 3:99–103. doi: 10.1002/ppsc.1986003030210.1002/ppsc.19860030302 ↗
39. Linak E, Kishi A, Guan M, Buchholz U (2011) Organic color pigments. Chemical economics handbook. SRI Consulting, Menlo Park
40. Linsinger T, Roebben G, Gilliland D, et al. (2012) Requirements on measurements for the implementation of the European Commission definition of the therm “nanomaterial”. report EUR 26916 EN. European Commission, JRC-IRMM; doi: 10.2787/6349010.2787/63490 ↗
41. Matsuyama T, Yamamoto H, Scarlett B (2000) Transformation of diffraction pattern due to ellipsoids into equivalent diameter distribution for spheres. Part Part Syst Charact 17:41–46. doi: 10.1002/1521-4117(200006)17:2<41:AID-PPSC41>3.0.CO;2-W10.1002/1521-4117(200006)17:2<41::AID-PPSC41>3.0.CO;2-W ↗
42. Meli F, Klein T, Buhr E et al (2012) Traceable size determination of nanoparticles, a comparison among European metrology institutes. Meas Sci Technol 23:125005. doi: 10.1088/0957-0233/23/12/12500510.1088/0957-0233/23/12/125005 ↗
43. Montes-Burgos I, Walczyk D, Hole P et al (2010) Characterisation of nanoparticle size and state prior to nanotoxicological studies. J Nanopart Res 12:47–53. doi: 10.1007/s11051-009-9774-z10.1007/s11051-009-9774-z ↗
44. Mori Y, Yoshida H, Masuda H (2007) Characterization of reference particles of transparent glass by laser diffraction method. Part Part Syst Charact 24:91–96. doi: 10.1002/ppsc.20060104810.1002/ppsc.200601048 ↗
45. Motzkus C, Macé T, Gaie-Levrel F et al (2013) Size characterization of airborne SiO2 nanoparticles with on-line and off-line measurement techniques: an interlaboratory comparison study. J Nanopart Res 15:1919. doi: 10.1007/s11051-013-1919-410.1007/s11051-013-1919-4 ↗
46. Nowack B, Bornhöft N et al (2015) The flows of engineered nanomaterials from production, use, and disposal to the environment. In: Hutzinger O (ed) The handbook of environmental chemistry. Springer, Berlin, pp 1–23. doi: 10.1007/698_2015_40210.1007/698_2015_402 ↗
47. Ortega A, García de la Torre J (2003) Hydrodynamic properties of rodlike and disklike particles in dilute solution. J Chem Phys 119:9914–9919. doi: 10.1063/1.161596710.1063/1.1615967 ↗
48. Perrin J (1909) Mouvement brownien et realité moléculaire. Ann Chim Phys 8:1–114
49. Peters RJB, van Bemmel G, Herrera-Rivera Z et al (2014) Characterization of titanium dioxide nanoparticles in food products: analytical methods to define nanoparticles. J Agric Food Chem 62:6285–6293. doi: 10.1021/jf501188510.1021/jf5011885 ↗
50. Pohl M, Hogekamp S, Hoffmann NQ, Schuchmann HP (2004) Dispergieren und Desagglomerieren von Nanopartikeln mit Ultraschall. Chem Ing Tech 76:392–396. doi: 10.1002/cite.20040337110.1002/cite.200403371 ↗
51. Pohl M, Schubert H, Schuchmann HP (2005) Herstellung stabiler Dispersionen aus pyrogener Kieselsäure. Chem Ing Tech 77:258–262. doi: 10.1002/cite20040702010.1002/cite200407020 ↗
52. Rades S, Hodoroaba VD, Salge T et al (2014) High-resolution imaging with SEM/T-SEM, EDX and SAM as a combined methodical approach for morphological and elemental analyses of single engineered nanoparticles. RSC Adv 4:49577–49587. doi: 10.1039/c4ra05092d10.1039/c4ra05092d ↗
53. Rice SB, Chan C, Brown SC et al (2013) Particle size distributions by transmission electron microscopy: an interlaboratory comparison case study. Metrologia 50:663–678. doi: 10.1088/0026-1394/50/6/66310.1088/0026-1394/50/6/663 ↗
54. Roebben G, Rauscher H (eds) (2014) Towards a review of the EC Recommendation for a definition of the term “nanomaterial” Part 2: Assessment of collected information concerning the experience with the definition. JRC-report 91377. doi: 10.2787/9728610.2787/97286 ↗
55. Roebben G, Rasmussen K, Kestens V et al (2013) Reference materials and representative test materials: the nanotechnology case. J Nanopart Res 15:1455. doi: 10.1007/s11051-013-1455-210.1007/s11051-013-1455-2 ↗
56. Santillán JMJ, Videla FA, Fernández van Raap MB et al (2013) Influence of size-corrected bound-electron contribution on nanometric silver dielectric function. Sizing through optical extinction spectroscopy. J Phys D 46:435301. doi: 10.1088/0022-3727/46/43/43530110.1088/0022-3727/46/43/435301 ↗
57. Sauter C, Emin MA, Schuchmann HP, Tavman S (2008) Influence of hydrostatic pressure and sound amplitude on the ultrasound induced dispersion and de-agglomeration of nanoparticles. Ultrason Sonochem 15:517–523. doi: 10.1016/j.ultsonch.2007.08.01010.1016/j.ultsonch.2007.08.010 ↗
58. Saveyn H, de Baets B, Thas O et al (2010) Accurate particle size distribution determination by nanoparticle tracking analysis based on 2-D Brownian dynamics simulation. J Colloid Interface Sci 352:593–600. doi: 10.1016/j.jcis.2010.09.00610.1016/j.jcis.2010.09.006 ↗
59. Scaffardi LB, Tocho JO (2006) Size dependence of refractive index of gold nanoparticles. Nanotechnol 17:1309–1315. doi: 10.1088/0957-4484/17/5/02410.1088/0957-4484/17/5/024 ↗
60. Sidorenko I, Nizamov S, Hergenröder R et al (2016) Computer assisted detection and quantification of single adsorbing nanoparticles by differential surface plasmon microscopy. Microcim Acta 183:101–109. doi: 10.1007/s00604-015-1599-010.1007/s00604-015-1599-0 ↗
61. Stock RS, Ray WH (1985) Interpretation of photon correlation spectroscopy data: a comparison of analysis methods. J Polym Sci B 23:1393–1447. doi: 10.1002/pol.1985.18023070710.1002/pol.1985.180230707 ↗
62. von der Kammer F, Baborowski M, Friese K (2005) Application of a high-performance liquid chromatography fluorescence detector as a nephelometric turbidity detector following field-flow fractionation to analyse size distributions of environmental colloids. J Chromatogr A 1100:81–89. doi: 10.1016/j.chroma.2005.09.01310.1016/j.chroma.2005.09.013 ↗
63. Wadell H (1932) Volume, shape and roundness of rock particles. J Geol 40:443–45110.1086/623964 ↗
64. Wang SC, Flagan RC (1990) Scanning electrical mobility spectrometer. Aerosol Sci Technol 13:230–240. doi: 10.1080/0278682900895944110.1080/02786829008959441 ↗
65. Wang CY, Fu WE, Lin HL, Peng GS (2007) Preliminary study on nanoparticle sizes under the APEC technology cooperative framework. Meas Sci Technol 18:487–495. doi: 10.1088/0957-0233/18/2/S2310.1088/0957-0233/18/2/S23 ↗
66. Wengeler R, Teleki A, Vetter M, Pratsinis SE, Nirschl H (2006) High-pressure liquid dispersion and fragmentation of flame-made silica agglomerates. Langmuir 22:4928–4935. doi: 10.1021/la053283n10.1021/la053283n ↗
67. Willemse AW, Marijnissen JCM, van Wuyckhuyse AL et al (1997) Low-concentration photon correlation spectroscopy. Part Part Syst Charact 14:157–16210.1002/ppsc.199700036 ↗
68. Wohlleben W (2012) Validity range of centrifuges for the regulation of nanomaterials: from classification to as-tested coronas. J Nanopart Res 14:1300. doi: 10.1007/s11051-012-1300-z10.1007/s11051-012-1300-z ↗
69. Wohlleben W, Müller P (2014) Classification strategies for regulatory nanomaterial definitions. In: Wohlleben W, Kuhlbusch T, Schnekenburger J, Lehr CM (eds) Safety of nanomaterials along their lifecycle: release, exposure, and human hazards. CRC Press, Frankfurt, pp 47–5810.1201/b17774-5 ↗
70. Xu R (2000) Particle characterization: light scattering methods. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dortrecht