We show that we can select magnetically steerable nanopropellers from a set of carbon coated aggregates of magnetic nanoparticles using weak homogeneous rotating magnetic fields. The carbon coating can be functionalized, enabling a wide range of applications. Despite their arbitrary shape, all nanostructures propel parallel to the vector of rotation of the magnetic field. We use a simple theoretical model to find experimental conditions to select nanopropellers which are predominantly smaller than previously published ones.
We show that we can select magnetically steerable nanopropellers from a set of carbon coated aggregates of magnetic nanoparticles using weak homogeneous rotating magnetic fields. The carbon coating can be functionalized, enabling a wide range of applications. Despite their arbitrary shape, all nanostructures propel parallel to the vector of rotation of the magnetic field. We use a simple theoretical model to find experimental conditions to select nanopropellers which are predominantly smaller than previously published ones.
Micro- and nanostructures typically
possess shape-dependent characteristics, like their optical,[1] catalytic,[2] or magnetic[3] properties. The typical approach to producing
such structures in large quantities by solution synthesis is based
on selection for shape. Reaction conditions and purification schemes
are chosen to favor a specific shape.[4] A
potentially more economical approach is to select instead for a specific
function. This second option is particularly advantageous when the
optimal shape is not known, or when a multitude of shapes can fulfill
the desired function. Here we demonstrate this strategy by selecting
magnetically steerable nanopropellers from a set of variedly shaped
carbon coated aggregates of magnetic nanoparticles. Selecting for
function can thus be a viable approach to producing functional nanoscopic
devices in extremely large quantities.Nanoscopic devices have
the potential to manipulate biological
and inanimate matter with unprecedented precision. Envisioned applications
range from nanosurgery to the controlled assembly of microstructures.[5−7] Magnetic nanostructures are promising for such technologies, since
they can be manipulated by external magnetic fields.[8−11] Unlike electric fields, magnetic fields are not screened by dissolved
ions and can selectively exert large forces on magnetic materials.
Gradient fields can in principle be used to directly actuate magnetic
micro- and nanostructures,[12] but sufficiently
strong gradient fields are difficult to produce. Coupling hydrodynamic
forces with magnetic forces has allowed the creation of swimmers and
propellers, which can be moved by weak homogeneous magnetic fields.
Typical examples of swimmers are elastic structures driven by time-reversible
magnetic fields,[13−16] whereas typical propellers are rigid structures actuated by nontime-reversible
magnetic fields.[17,18] In fact, as described by the
scallop theorem,[19] translatory movement
would be impossible if both the actuating magnetic field was time-reversible
and the structure rigid.Previous micro- and nanopropellers
were created using sophisticated
nanofabrication methods[17,18,20] which allowed precise control of the propeller nanostructure but
required expensive clean room equipment. In addition, such devices
had at least one dimension larger than 1 μm, which might be
too large for some of the envisioned applications.Here we report
the surprising finding that magnetically controllable
nanopropellers with large dimensionless speeds can be selected from
a diverse set of randomly shaped carbon-coated magnetic nanoparticle
aggregates synthesized by a simple route. With specific experimental
conditions we can predominantly select structures that are smaller
than 1 μm in all dimensions. The nanopropellers are actuated,
selected, and imaged in a custom-built open-frame microscope. Further
characterization is performed by electron microscopy.The synthesis
method is based on hydrothermal carbonization (HTC),
which has been used previously to coat iron oxide nanostructures.[21,22] In summary, we suspend iron oxide nanoparticles in glucose solution
and heat it to 180 °C for 24 h. The HTC reaction leads to an
efficient carbon coating of the iron oxide, effectively fixing the
iron oxide nanoparticles in aggregates of varied shapes (Figures 4B and S5). A weak homogeneous
rotating magnetic field is then used to select nanopropellers from
the reaction product by letting them propel to the top of a glass
vial (see Figure S1 for a schematic).
Figure 4
(A) Size distribution
of propellers selected in different rotating
magnetic fields (red 0.25 mT, green 0.5 mT, blue 1 mT, frequency always
100 Hz). Synthesized nanostructures of a fixed concentration were
injected (without prior selection) into a glass capillary and subjected
to a rotating magnetic field. A fixed area of the upper, inner surface
of the capillary was imaged, while the rotating magnetic field was
continuously applied. The histograms display the total number of structures
of a particular size that were found to propel against gravity in
the applied rotating magnetic field. As expected from our theory,
fewer larger structures can propel upward in a weaker magnetic field.
This is also apparent in the inset, where the mean size is plotted
against the inverse magnetic field strength (error bars are standard
error). Our size estimation is based on optical images; therefore
its accuracy is limited by diffraction, which is particularly apparent
for nanopropellers smaller than 1 μm. (B) To study the smallest
propellers, we acquired backscattered electron images of structures
that were selected in a 0.5 mT, 100 Hz magnetic field. Based on the
distance traveled and the duration of our selection experiment, we
can estimate the dimensionless speed value of a nanopropeller of 1
μm size to be above 10, for propulsion against gravity. This
minimal dimensionless speed is proportionally larger for smaller nanopropellers.
Here we report the eight smallest structures we observed. More images
of nanopropellers are presented in Figure S5.
The direction of motion of the nanopropellers can be controlled,
since they always move parallel to the vector of rotation of the magnetic
field. The speed of the nanopropeller can also be controlled, by varying
the frequency of the actuating field. We investigated the nanostructure
of four typical nanopropellers with scanning electron microscopy (Figures 1 and S4). To this end
we first measured the propulsion speed of a nanopropeller in a droplet
on a marked coverslip and monitored the position of the nanopropeller
during the drying process. The very same propeller was subsequently
imaged with electron microscopy (Figure 1).
Figure 1
Two exemplary
nanopropellers were first studied in the optical
microscope. Two example traces of these measurements are displayed
(A, D). The black arrows indicate the direction of the vector of rotation
of the actuating magnetic field. Diffusive and translatory movements
are superimposed. Speed versus frequency measurements show that the
propulsion speed varies linearly with the frequency of the actuating
magnetic field up to a critical frequency (around 80 Hz in B and above
100 Hz in E). Backscattered electron images of the two nanopropellers
are displayed in panels C and F. Scale bars are 200 nm. The dimensionless
speeds are estimated from these measurements as U = 32 (v = 2.7 μm s–1, L = 1.22 μm, f = 70 Hz) for the upper
nanopropeller (C) and U = 69 (v =
6.1 μm s–1, L = 0.88 μm, f = 100 Hz) for the lower nanopropeller (F).
Two exemplary
nanopropellers were first studied in the optical
microscope. Two example traces of these measurements are displayed
(A, D). The black arrows indicate the direction of the vector of rotation
of the actuating magnetic field. Diffusive and translatory movements
are superimposed. Speed versus frequency measurements show that the
propulsion speed varies linearly with the frequency of the actuating
magnetic field up to a critical frequency (around 80 Hz in B and above
100 Hz in E). Backscattered electron images of the two nanopropellers
are displayed in panels C and F. Scale bars are 200 nm. The dimensionless
speeds are estimated from these measurements as U = 32 (v = 2.7 μm s–1, L = 1.22 μm, f = 70 Hz) for the upper
nanopropeller (C) and U = 69 (v =
6.1 μm s–1, L = 0.88 μm, f = 100 Hz) for the lower nanopropeller (F).It is apparent that the nanopropellers are rather
arbitrarily shaped
and do not resemble the helical propellers published previously.[17,18] A helix with many turns might not be the optimal shape for a nanopropeller.
This has recently been suggested by hydrodynamic simulations, which
found a slender shape with about one helical turn to be optimal under
certain assumptions.[23]Different
propellers can be compared using a dimensionsless speed,
defined as U = v/(Lf) × 103, where v is the dimensional
speed, L the largest dimension of the propeller,
and f the frequency of the actuating magnetic field.[15] A propeller with particularly high dimensionless
speed was created by glancing angle deposition,[18] with U up to 133 (v =
40 μm/s, L = 2 μm, f = 150 Hz). Self-scrolling thin films yielded a propeller[24] with U up to 21 (v = 8 μm/s, L = 38 μm, f = 10 Hz). A more recent propeller created by two-photon-lithography[25] achieved U up to 116 (v = 93 μm/s, L = 35 μm, f = 23 Hz). The exemplary propellers from our synthesis
presented in Figure 1 have U values of 69 and 32, respectively.In the following, we present
a simple model we developed to describe
the movement of our nanopropellers (Figure 2). We assume that the nanopropeller rotates around a given axis,
independently of the actuating frequency. This could be due to a large
magnetization of the nanopropeller, forced to rotate in the same plane
as the magnetic field, or to the rotational friction coefficient being
particularly low for a specific axis of rotation. With this assumption,
we can describe the orientation of the nanostructure by a single angle
φ and formulate the equations of motion. As we assume that the
nanostructure always rotates around the same axis, the coupling between
rotation and translation is constant. Thus:where v is the propulsion
speed and c the coupling
coefficient, which can be thought of as an effective screw pitch.
Two torques act on the nanostructure, fluid friction τF and magnetic torque τM:where cF is the
friction constant and M the magnetization of the
nanopropeller. B and ω are the amplitude and
frequency of the rotating magnetic field, respectively. In the strongly
overdamped case of low Reynolds numbers, these torques must be equal
at all times, and we get:An equivalent
differential equation was recently
derived and solved by Schamel and co-workers.[26] The full solution is complicated, but we obtain a rather simple
expression for the dependence of the propulsion speed on the frequency
of the actuating fieldwhere we call ωc = BM/cF the critical frequency
(see SI, part 2). Figure 2 B shows that this prediction is in good agreement with experimental
observation.
Figure 2
(A) Scheme illustrating our theoretical model and the
variables
used. On the left the propulsion speed v is drawn
parallel to the vector of rotation of the turning magnetic fields.
The red arrows indicate a time series of magnetic field vectors. Turning
this schematic out of the plane, we arrive at the scheme on the right.
The magnetic field B and the magnetic moment M are indicated as well as the angle φ that is used
to describe the orientation of the nanopropeller, relative to the
magnetic field vector which is rotating at the frequency ω.
(B) For one individual nanopropeller (imaged in Figure S5 I), the propulsion speed was measured at various
magnetic field strengths and frequencies. The speed divided by the
magnetic field strength is plotted against the frequency divided by
the magnetic field strength. Error bars are based on the expected
standard deviation of the end position measurement due to diffusion.
The diffusion constant was measured to be 0.9 μm2 s–1 (see SI, part 4).
The theoretically expected curve is plotted in blue. Two parameters
were determined by nonlinear regression: c = 26.1 nm and B/ωc = 8.27 mT ms. This measurement is more precise than the one shown
in Figure 1, as speed measurements could here
be performed in bulk water, far away from a potentially disturbing
surface.
(A) Scheme illustrating our theoretical model and the
variables
used. On the left the propulsion speed v is drawn
parallel to the vector of rotation of the turning magnetic fields.
The red arrows indicate a time series of magnetic field vectors. Turning
this schematic out of the plane, we arrive at the scheme on the right.
The magnetic field B and the magnetic moment M are indicated as well as the angle φ that is used
to describe the orientation of the nanopropeller, relative to the
magnetic field vector which is rotating at the frequency ω.
(B) For one individual nanopropeller (imaged in Figure S5 I), the propulsion speed was measured at various
magnetic field strengths and frequencies. The speed divided by the
magnetic field strength is plotted against the frequency divided by
the magnetic field strength. Error bars are based on the expected
standard deviation of the end position measurement due to diffusion.
The diffusion constant was measured to be 0.9 μm2 s–1 (see SI, part 4).
The theoretically expected curve is plotted in blue. Two parameters
were determined by nonlinear regression: c = 26.1 nm and B/ωc = 8.27 mT ms. This measurement is more precise than the one shown
in Figure 1, as speed measurements could here
be performed in bulk water, far away from a potentially disturbing
surface.Our hydrodynamic model of the
nanopropeller motion treats water
as a continuous viscous fluid and ignores the effect of thermal noise.
However, the nanopropellers presented here are small enough for significant
Brownian motion to occur (Figure 1A and D and
Figure 3 A). We did not include thermal noise
in our model, since we assume that Brownian motion is simply superimposed
on the nanopropeller propulsion and cancels out on average. To show
the validity of this assumption, we split nanopropeller trajectories
into a propulsion and a noise component by linear fits of the x and y data (Figure 3A). This was done for trajectories with different nanopropeller speeds,
respectively above and below the critical frequency of the nanopropeller.
The noise components obtained in this way were used to calculate diffusion
constants (Figure 3B), which were similar to
that obtained from a high speed video of the nanopropeller diffusing
with the magnetic field switched off (Figure S3). Another characteristic property of Brownian motion is that the
absolute value of its Fourier transform decreases as |(yB)| ∝ f–1, where (yB) denotes
the Fourier transform of a time series of y positions
and f is the frequency. We fitted functions of the
form af (a and b constants) to the noise components of different
trajectories and always obtained b values close to
one (Figure 3C). At high frequencies we observed
slightly higher noise than expected from Brownian motion, which is
probably due to additional noise produced by the limited precision
of the tracking algorithm. We therefore conclude that we can indeed
describe nanopropeller motion as a superposition of our hydrodynamic
model and Brownian motion.
Figure 3
Decomposition of the motion of the nanopropeller
into a propulsion
component described by our theoretical model and a noise component
that can be described as Brownian motion. All data stem from measurements
of the nanopropeller displayed in Figure S5 I. (A) Trace of the nanopropeller moving in a 0.3 mT field rotating
at 40 Hz (see Supplementary Movie 4). The
propulsion is slow as the propeller is actuated above its critical
frequency. By fitting linear functions to the x and y components of the trajectory, the trace can be split into
a propulsion component (in blue) and a noise component (in green).
Adding these components reproduces the original trace. (B) The splitting
procedure is exemplified for the x coordinate of
the same trace (in red). The propulsion component is a linear fit
(in blue). The difference between the two is the noise component (in
green). Splitting of the y coordinate is done equivalently.
(C) Determination of the diffusion coefficient based on the noise
components of various traces. Δ(τ) is the width of a Gaussian
fit to the distribution of distances, traversed during a time τ
(see Figure S3). A linear fit yields an
estimate for the diffusion coefficient.[27] The obtained diffusion coefficients are displayed with the data
labels, whereby the first number denotes the field strength and the
second number the frequency. The Supplementary
Videos, in which these traces can be observed, are labeled
in the same way. The fact that the noise component data allow this
analysis is a strong indication that the origin of the noise component
is Brownian motion. The diffusion coefficients are very similar to
the values obtained from a high speed measurement with the magnetic
field turned off. The biggest discrepancy is observed in trace03_40, which is the reason we display it
in this figure. (D) The absolute value of the Fourier transform of
the y noise component of trace03_40 is plotted against the frequency in a log–log plot. After
binning the data (red crosses) we can fit a straight line (in blue).
The negative of the slope of this line is an exponent, which is expected
to be 1 for Brownian motion. The inset shows that the fitted exponents
for the noise components of all traces are close to 1.
Decomposition of the motion of the nanopropeller
into a propulsion
component described by our theoretical model and a noise component
that can be described as Brownian motion. All data stem from measurements
of the nanopropeller displayed in Figure S5 I. (A) Trace of the nanopropeller moving in a 0.3 mT field rotating
at 40 Hz (see Supplementary Movie 4). The
propulsion is slow as the propeller is actuated above its critical
frequency. By fitting linear functions to the x and y components of the trajectory, the trace can be split into
a propulsion component (in blue) and a noise component (in green).
Adding these components reproduces the original trace. (B) The splitting
procedure is exemplified for the x coordinate of
the same trace (in red). The propulsion component is a linear fit
(in blue). The difference between the two is the noise component (in
green). Splitting of the y coordinate is done equivalently.
(C) Determination of the diffusion coefficient based on the noise
components of various traces. Δ(τ) is the width of a Gaussian
fit to the distribution of distances, traversed during a time τ
(see Figure S3). A linear fit yields an
estimate for the diffusion coefficient.[27] The obtained diffusion coefficients are displayed with the data
labels, whereby the first number denotes the field strength and the
second number the frequency. The Supplementary
Videos, in which these traces can be observed, are labeled
in the same way. The fact that the noise component data allow this
analysis is a strong indication that the origin of the noise component
is Brownian motion. The diffusion coefficients are very similar to
the values obtained from a high speed measurement with the magnetic
field turned off. The biggest discrepancy is observed in trace03_40, which is the reason we display it
in this figure. (D) The absolute value of the Fourier transform of
the y noise component of trace03_40 is plotted against the frequency in a log–log plot. After
binning the data (red crosses) we can fit a straight line (in blue).
The negative of the slope of this line is an exponent, which is expected
to be 1 for Brownian motion. The inset shows that the fitted exponents
for the noise components of all traces are close to 1.Based on our theoretical work, we expect smaller
nanopropellers
to have a higher critical frequency (see SI, part 6c). This expectation was confirmed by optical size estimates
of propellers that could propel to the upper inner surface of a capillary
in rotating magnetic fields of different field strengths (Figure 4A). Indeed, fewer larger
structures can propel upward, against gravity, in a weaker magnetic
field. To study the smallest propellers, we acquired backscattered
electron micrographs to image structures selected with a reduced magnetic
field of 0.5 mT rotating at 100 Hz. We found structures smaller than
1 μm (Figure 4B), showing that nanopropellers
can be selected from our synthesis products. The smallest propellers
we observed were around 300 nm in size. For comparison, the smallest
propellers previously reported measured about 1.5 μm along their
longest dimension.[18](A) Size distribution
of propellers selected in different rotating
magnetic fields (red 0.25 mT, green 0.5 mT, blue 1 mT, frequency always
100 Hz). Synthesized nanostructures of a fixed concentration were
injected (without prior selection) into a glass capillary and subjected
to a rotating magnetic field. A fixed area of the upper, inner surface
of the capillary was imaged, while the rotating magnetic field was
continuously applied. The histograms display the total number of structures
of a particular size that were found to propel against gravity in
the applied rotating magnetic field. As expected from our theory,
fewer larger structures can propel upward in a weaker magnetic field.
This is also apparent in the inset, where the mean size is plotted
against the inverse magnetic field strength (error bars are standard
error). Our size estimation is based on optical images; therefore
its accuracy is limited by diffraction, which is particularly apparent
for nanopropellers smaller than 1 μm. (B) To study the smallest
propellers, we acquired backscattered electron images of structures
that were selected in a 0.5 mT, 100 Hz magnetic field. Based on the
distance traveled and the duration of our selection experiment, we
can estimate the dimensionless speed value of a nanopropeller of 1
μm size to be above 10, for propulsion against gravity. This
minimal dimensionless speed is proportionally larger for smaller nanopropellers.
Here we report the eight smallest structures we observed. More images
of nanopropellers are presented in Figure S5.Many potential applications rely
on functionalizing the propeller’s
surface. The carboxylic groups present on HTC carbon[28] allow such surface modification. We demonstrate this ability
by fluorescently labeling our nanostructures (Figure 5).
Figure 5
(A) Fluorescence image of a labeled propeller moving toward the
upper inner surface of a glass capillary, actuated by a magnetic field
of 1 mT rotating at 50 Hz. (B) When the magnetic field is switched
off, the same nanopropeller falls out of focus, and the fluorescence
disappears. (C) When the field is switched back on, this nanopropeller
returns to the upper inner surface of the capillary and is visible
again. Panels D and E show brightfield images of this propeller in
different orientations. Panel F shows the movement of this propeller
along the lower surface of the capillary during 7 s exposure time.
Scale bars are 4 μm.
(A) Fluorescence image of a labeled propeller moving toward the
upper inner surface of a glass capillary, actuated by a magnetic field
of 1 mT rotating at 50 Hz. (B) When the magnetic field is switched
off, the same nanopropeller falls out of focus, and the fluorescence
disappears. (C) When the field is switched back on, this nanopropeller
returns to the upper inner surface of the capillary and is visible
again. Panels D and E show brightfield images of this propeller in
different orientations. Panel F shows the movement of this propeller
along the lower surface of the capillary during 7 s exposure time.
Scale bars are 4 μm.Our functionalization technique is versatile and can enable
a wide
range of applications such as controlled assembly in solution[7] or triggered release.[29] Other potential applications include fluid mixing at low Reynolds
numbers and local rheological probes.[10] Production of our nanopropellers is simple, cheap, and scalable
and thus of particular interest to large-scale applications, such
as micropatterning of large surfaces[30] and
environmental remediation.[31]The
general idea of selecting from randomness has been previously
demonstrated for libraries of chemical compounds (combinatorial chemistry)
or viral proteins (phage display), thereby showing great potential.
We demonstrated here that this principle can also be used for the
selection of nanopropellers with specific properties. Such an approach
might also be successfully applied to other combinations of external
stimuli and random features.
Authors: Rémi Dreyfus; Jean Baudry; Marcus L Roper; Marc Fermigier; Howard A Stone; Jérôme Bibette Journal: Nature Date: 2005-10-06 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Debora Schamel; Marcel Pfeifer; John G Gibbs; Björn Miksch; Andrew G Mark; Peer Fischer Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2013-08-08 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Mathieu Bennet; Aongus McCarthy; Dmitri Fix; Matthew R Edwards; Felix Repp; Peter Vach; John W C Dunlop; Metin Sitti; Gerald S Buller; Stefan Klumpp; Damien Faivre Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-07-01 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Agnese Codutti; Mohammad A Charsooghi; Elisa Cerdá-Doñate; Hubert M Taïeb; Tom Robinson; Damien Faivre; Stefan Klumpp Journal: Elife Date: 2022-07-19 Impact factor: 8.713