Abstract
Many papers, in which the submerged arc discharge (SAD) method in nanoparticle synthesis was used, reported similar operating parameters, but different electrode erosion rate values, different yields and purities of the obtained nanostructures, and a different sort of contaminants present in the synthesis. Analyzing these articles, we found insufficient attention to ensure the arc power stability, which is a key factor guaranteeing the product homogeneity and quality. This paper presents an analysis of different control strategies, remarks their advantages and drawbacks, and proposes the most appropriate technique to be used in SAD. The most appropriate technique is proposed from the SAD stabilization method analysis.
Highlights
Carbon nanostructures (CNSs) have a remarkable use in nanoscience because of their exceptional thermal, electrical, chemical, and mechanical properties
CNSs that have been manufactured keeping under control the structure in nanometer scale and the binding nature of carbon atoms can lead to highly functional advanced performances, which are hard to achieve using conventional carbons [1, 2]
One of the issues that still need to be improved in CNS synthesis is the necessity to obtain high yields through simple synthesis processes
Summary
Carbon nanostructures (CNSs) have a remarkable use in nanoscience because of their exceptional thermal, electrical, chemical, and mechanical properties. Quantum dots (CQD), oxidized graphene sheets, large polyhedral particles (LPP), amorphous carbon, and graphite particles This technique is straightforward and uses standard equipment, several factors make it difficult to control the arc power stability, which is something that is more difficult to achieve in liquid than in gas [11]. The above discussion illustrates the complexity of the arc discharge in liquids, the difficulties involved in achieving its stability, and the importance of the latter in the quality of the obtained CNSs. the insufficient attention given to ensure the arc power stability in SAD and the different approaches to do so could explain why existing articles, reporting similar operating parameters, show the following differences: (a) the electrode erosion rate values are scarce and contradictory, (b) no rigorous yield value has yet been reported, and (c) the nanostructure purity degree and the contaminants sorts present in the synthesis radically vary.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
