The worldwide trend in nanoparticle technology toward increasing complexity must be directly linked to more advanced characterization methods of size, shape and related properties, applicable to many different particle systems in science and technology. Available techniques for nanoparticle characterization are predominantly focused on size characterization. However, simultaneous size and shape characterization is still an unresolved major challenge. We demonstrate that analytical ultracentrifugation with a multiwavelength detector is a powerful technique to address multidimensional nanoparticle analysis. Using a high performance optical setup and data acquisition software, information on size, shape anisotropy and optical properties were accessible in one single experiment with unmatched accuracy and resolution. A dynamic rotor speed gradient allowed us to investigate broad distributions on a short time scale and differentiate between gold nanorod species including the precise evaluation of aggregate formation. We report how to distinguish between different species of single-wall carbon nanotubes in just one experiment using the wavelength-dependent sedimentation coefficient distribution without the necessity of time-consuming purification methods. Furthermore, CdTe nanoparticles of different size and optical properties were investigated in a single experiment providing important information on structure-property relations. Thus, multidimensional information on size, density, shape and optical properties of nanoparticulate systems becomes accessible by means of analytical ultracentrifugation equipped with multiwavelength detection.

The identification of scalable processes that transfer random mixtures of single-walled carbon nanotubes (SWCNTs) into fractions featuring a high content of semiconducting species is crucial for future application of SWCNTs in high-performance electronics. Herein we demonstrate a highly efficient and simple separation method that relies on selective interactions between tailor-made amphiphilic polymers and semiconducting SWCNTs in the presence of low viscosity separation media. High purity individualized semiconducting SWCNTs or even self-organized semiconducting sheets are separated from an as-produced SWCNT dispersion via a single weak field centrifugation run. Absorption and Raman spectroscopy are applied to verify the high purity of the obtained SWCNTs. Furthermore SWCNT - network field-effect transistors were fabricated, which exhibit high ON/OFF ratios (105) and field-effect mobilities (17 cm2/Vs). In addition to demonstrating the feasibility of high purity separation by a novel low complexity process, our method can be readily transferred to large scale production.

The potential of single–walled carbon nanotubes (SWCNTs) to outperform silicon in electronic application was finally enabled through selective separation of semiconducting nanotubes from the as-synthesized statistical mix with polymeric dispersants. Such separation methods provide typically high semiconducting purity samples with narrow diameter distribution, i.e. almost single chiralities. But for a wide range of applications high purity mixtures of small and large diameters are sufficient or even required. Here we proof that weak field centrifugation is a diameter independent method for enrichment of semiconducting nanotubes. We show that the non-selective and strong adsorption of polyarylether dispersants on nanostructured carbon surfaces enables simple separation of diverse raw materials with different SWCNT diameter. In addition and for the first time, we demonstrate that increased temperature enables higher purity separation. Furthermore we show that the mode of action behind this electronic enrichment is strongly connected to both colloidal stability and protonation. By giving simple access to electronically sorted SWCNTs of any diameter, the wide dynamic range of weak field centrifugation can provide economical relevance to SWCNTs.

Scientific Reports 6: Article number: 26259; published online: 18 May 2016; updated: 20 July 2016 In this Article, there are typographical errors in Figure 1b. In test tube 2, ‘pH 1.8’ is incorrectly given as ‘pH 7.0’. The correct Figure 1 appears below.