Nanocomposite materials represent a success story of nanotechnology. However, development of nanomaterial fabrication still suffers from the lack of adequate analysis tools. In particular, achieving and maintaining well-dispersed particle distributions is a key challenge, both in material development and industrial production. Conventional methods like optical or electron microscopy need laborious, costly sample preparation and do not permit fast extraction of nanoscale structural information from statistically relevant sample volumes. Here we show that optical coherence tomography (OCT) represents a versatile tool for nanomaterial characterization, both in a laboratory and in a production environment. The technique does not require sample preparation and is applicable to a wide range of solid and liquid material systems. Large particle agglomerates can be directly found by OCT imaging, whereas dispersed nanoparticles are detected by model-based analysis of depth-dependent backscattering. Using a model system of polystyrene nanoparticles, we demonstrate nanoparticle sizing with high accuracy. We further prove the viability of the approach by characterizing highly relevant material systems based on nanoclays or carbon nanotubes. The technique is perfectly suited for in-line metrology in a production environment, which is demonstrated using a state-of-the-art compounding extruder. These experiments represent the first demonstration of multiscale nanomaterial characterization using OCT.
Nanocomposite materials represent a success story of nanotechnology. However, development of nanomaterial fabrication still suffers from the lack of adequate analysis tools. In particular, achieving and maintaining well-dispersed particle distributions is a key challenge, both in material development and industrial production. Conventional methods like optical or electron microscopy need laborious, costly sample preparation and do not permit fast extraction of nanoscale structural information from statistically relevant sample volumes. Here we show that optical coherence tomography (OCT) represents a versatile tool for nanomaterial characterization, both in a laboratory and in a production environment. The technique does not require sample preparation and is applicable to a wide range of solid and liquid material systems. Large particle agglomerates can be directly found by OCT imaging, whereas dispersed nanoparticles are detected by model-based analysis of depth-dependent backscattering. Using a model system of polystyrene nanoparticles, we demonstrate nanoparticle sizing with high accuracy. We further prove the viability of the approach by characterizing highly relevant material systems based on nanoclays or carbon nanotubes. The technique is perfectly suited for in-line metrology in a production environment, which is demonstrated using a state-of-the-art compounding extruder. These experiments represent the first demonstration of multiscale nanomaterial characterization using OCT.
Nanomaterials represent an emerging multi-billion dollar market driven by a vast variety
of applications that range from mechanical and civil engineering to energy storage and
life sciences. Examples comprise nanocomposite polymers with enhanced mechanical or
electronic properties12, functional coatings3,
flame-retardant materials4, advanced drug-delivery systems5, and anode materials for Li-ion batteries6. These applications mostly
rely on the unique properties of nanosize particles, namely huge surface-to-volume
ratios, enhanced tensile strengths and superior electrical conductivities as shown by
carbon nanotubes (CNT) or other nanofibres7, or outstanding barrier
properties of nanoplatelets8. Properties of nanocomposites depend not
only on the size and shape of the particles but also on their dispersion state,
characterized by the degree of agglomeration when immersed into a liquid or solid host
material. The dispersion state is governed by the nanoparticle properties, by the
composition and the physical parameters of the host material, as well as by the
processing route adopted for dispersing the nanoparticles in the host material. In order
to ensure consistent product quality, the dispersion state must be continuously
monitored during fabrication, which has been identified a key challenge both in
nanomaterial development and industrial production9. In solid media,
dispersion-state characterization mainly relies on microscopic imaging. For small
nanoparticles, this requires high-resolution techniques such as scanning-electron
microscopy (SEM) of specially prepared sample surfaces10, or transmission
electron microscopy (TEM) of microtome slices11. In both cases, sample
preparation is laborious and costly and not well suited for quality control or process
development, where sample processing and analysis have to be continuously iterated.
Moreover, SEM and TEM are limited to small sample volumes, which are not necessarily
representative of the entire batch. Light microscopy, on the other hand, can reduce the
experimental effort12, but is limited to the identification of large
agglomerates in sufficiently transparent samples and areas close to the surface. In
contrast to image-based methods, light scattering techniques have proven to be viable
tools for measuring particle size distributions from large sample volumes. Static light
scattering (SLS) relies on angle-resolved and/or spectrally resolved detection of
scattered light1314 and is based on a rather complex optical setup,
especially when large scattering angles have to be taken into account. Moreover, for
solid samples, it is challenging to separate scattering inside the sample volume from
contributions of the rough sample surface. Dynamic light scattering (DLS) methods
exploit temporal fluctuations of interference patterns of scattered light to calculate
the Brownian motion and the hydrodynamic diameter of particles within the respective
solvent15. This technique is limited to low concentrations, and can
only be applied to liquid media. In addition, both SLS and DLS suffer from limitations
in dealing with mixtures of particles having vastly different diameters that may range,
e.g., from a few nanometres to hundreds of micrometres, as is often the case for
nanocomposites with poorly dispersed nanoparticles. Partial wave spectroscopic
microscopy (PWS)16 has been used for investigation of nanoscale
refractive index fluctuations, which can be an early indicator of carcinogenesis, yet
without providing a link to the size of the scatterers. X-ray diffraction (XRD)17 or small-angle X-ray scattering (SAXS)18 finally rely on
diffraction or scattering of X-rays in the sample and are able to reveal the atomic or
molecular arrangement inside the material. However, high instrumental effort and a small
probing region limit the application range of these methods to the laboratory
environment. Hence, none of the aforementioned techniques can meet the stringent
requirements associated with industrial process development and quality control, which
comprise robustness of the measurement method, fast analysis, the capability to
characterize representative sample volumes without laborious sample preparation, good
mechanical and thermal robustness of the measurement system, and the possibility to
integrate the measurement system into the processing line for enabling in-line process
control. The lack of adequate analysis methods for dispersion-state characterization is
considered one of the major obstacles towards large-scale industrial processing and
exploitation of nanomaterials.As an alternative, optical coherence tomography (OCT)192021 was
proposed as a tool for nanocomposite characterization2223. OCT provides
three-dimensional imaging data from the bulk of the sample and avoids expensive sample
preparation. However, previous demonstrations have been limited to image-based analysis
of composites containing rather large microparticles combined with wavelet-based
processing of the image data23. Due to the limited resolution of OCT
imaging, this method cannot provide information about the nanoscopic structure of the
nanocomposite such as the particle size. A further method uses a spectral-domain OCT
setup and measures the size of particles suspended in a fluid by the temporal variation
of the optical phase due to particle diffusion2425. Particle sizes
range from 15 nm to 625 nm. The main disadvantage is that only
particles suspended in a fluid can be investigated, and that parameters like viscosity
and temperature need to be tightly controlled. Another technique is angle-resolved
OCT26, where the angular dependence of the scattered intensity is
evaluated according to Mie’s theory. However, the angular range is limited
to about 0.5 rad due to practical reasons, and the particle size which can be detected
is not smaller than 5 μm in diameter. A further approach is
low-coherence spectroscopy, which allows for the extraction of wavelength-dependent
scattering coefficients of the investigated samples and compares well with Mie
scattering calculations27. The aforementioned techniques serve well for
the determination of scattering parameters from nanoparticle samples, but miss the
multiscalar approach, including imaging of large agglomerations. A technique using a
setup similar to spectral-domain OCT is super-resolution imaging relying on spectral
encoding of spatial frequency (SESF)28. With that approach,
sub-micrometre imaging has been demonstrated, but exact nanoparticle sizes cannot be
extracted due to the still limited resolution. In summary, OCT-based quantitative and
qualitative characterization of composites at the nanoscale still remains to be
shown.In this paper we demonstrate that OCT represents an attractive tool for fast and robust
dispersion-state characterization of composite materials over a wide range of particle
and agglomerate sizes both on the micrometre and on the nanometre scale. The technique
pursues a multiscale approach: Using a theoretical model of light scattering in the
sample, we accurately measure particle sizes down to 140 nm. Particle
agglomerates with sizes of up to hundreds of micrometres can be easily detected by
applying dedicated image processing techniques to the OCT data. Both methods can be
performed in situ, without prior sample preparation, in both liquid and solid
materials, and are applicable to laboratory investigations as well as to in-line process
control in industrial production. Using a model system of polystyrene nanoparticles
dispersed in water, we prove the reliability and accuracy of our sizing technique. We
further apply the technique to an epoxy resin filled with multi-wall carbon nanotubes
(MWCNT). The results of OCT-based scattering analysis show good correlation with
independently measured material properties, thereby outperforming conventional
characterization techniques based on light microscopy. Finally, we show that our
technique is also perfectly suited for in-line metrology in a production environment. To
this end, we integrate our system with a state-of-the-art industrial compounding
extruder using a dedicated optical probe. The OCT system operates reliably during the
compounding process and allows to immediately examine the impact of extruding parameters
on the dispersion state of the material. We believe that OCT will pave the path towards
industrially viable nanomaterial characterization and process control.
Materials and Methods
Swept-source optical coherence tomography (OCT) system
Optical coherence tomography (OCT) evolved greatly in the past decades. The
technique provides microscopic resolution in volumetric imaging and highly
sensitive detection of backscattered optical power. OCT opened a wide field of
applications reaching from ophthalmology in medical diagnostics29
to particle and defect characterization in material sciences2230. Among various implementations, swept-source OCT (SS-OCT) offers a
particularly attractive combination of highest sensitivity and high imaging
speed21.The SS-OCT setup used in this work is depicted in Fig.
1(a). In general, an OCT system measures the position and the strength of
a multitude of scatterers along a light path in a sample. To this end, the
electric field that is backreflected from a sample is compared in amplitude and
phase to a reference field. Both the sample and the reference field are derived
from the same optical swept-wavelength source (SS). In our experiments, we use
an SS laser with central wavelength of 1315 nm and a wavelength
scanning range of 1260–1370 nm, a scan rate of
1 kHz, and 10 dBm average output power (model s3, Micron
Optics Inc., Atlanta, GA, USA). The scan range of the laser corresponds to a
theoretical depth resolution of 7 μm, which compares
well to the experimentally observed resolution of 11 μm.
A first fibre-based directional coupler (CPL1, splitting ratio 50:50) is used to
split the power among the sample path (SP) and the reference path (RP). The
reference path contains a free-space section allowing for precise matching of
the RP and SP length. Backscattered light from the sample and light travelling
along the RP is superimposed in a second fibre-based coupler (CPL2, splitting
ratio 50:50) and coupled to a balanced photodetector (BD, model PDB430C,
Thorlabs, Munich, Germany). The output current of the BD contains patterns
resulting from interference of the backscattered field with the reference field.
The BD suppresses intensity noise from the strong RP signal and enables a large
dynamic range and a high sensitivity, defined by the lowest detectable
backscatter from the sample, of −110 dB. The electrical
signal is digitized by a 16 bit analogue-to-digital converter (ADC, model
ATS660, Alazar Technologies Inc., Pointe-Claire, Canada) and processed in a
personal computer (PC). The amplitude and the position of the backscatter along
the light path can be obtained by Fourier analysis of the photocurrent as a
function of optical frequency21. One depth-scan (A-scan) consists
of 768 measurement points with 8 μm step size. We
extract the backscatter strength, which denotes the ratio of backscattered
optical power to optical power incident on the sample.
Figure 1
Fibre-based swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT) setup for
laboratory measurements and in-line process control.
(a) Schematic setup of the SS-OCT. SS: Swept-wavelength source,
scanning range 1260–1370 nm; CPL1,2: fibre-based
directional coupler; SP: sample path; RP: reference path; FC: fibre
collimator; PolC: polarization controller; BD: balanced photodetector; ADC:
analogue-to-digital converter; PC: personal computer. (b) Laboratory
scan head with galvo-based scanners and a scan lens for 3D-imaging. The red
line indicates the light beam towards the sample. (c) Extruder probe
for in-line measurements. The probe consists of a titanium shaft for a high
temperature environment and comprises a sapphire window towards the
sample.
In the course of this work, the SP of the SS-OCT system is connected to two
different scan heads: First, to a conventional OCT scan head for offline
characterization of laboratory samples, Fig. 1(b), and
second, to a specially developed probe head for in-line dispersion
characterization during the compounding process in an industrial extruder, Fig. 1(c). This probe is designed for the harsh
environmental conditions at a nanocomposite production line and must tolerate
vibrations, high temperatures of 250 °C, and high
pressures of 200 bar. The probe features a titanium shaft and a sapphire window
towards the sample, and is designed to allow for adjustment of focal length and
the axial position of the focus within the sample.
Model-based dispersion state analysis and sizing of
nanoparticles
Big agglomerates of nanoparticles with dimensions larger than the resolution
limit of the OCT system can be detected directly by imaging. However, size
information on nanoscale agglomerates and single particles is relevant as well.
In this section we show that model-based analysis of OCT backscatter
measurements allows to extract scattering parameters that are correlated with
the dispersion state of the material so that even small particle sizes can be
determined.The analysis relies on a single-scattering model assuming that incident light is
scattered at maximum once within the medium, similar to the approach used by
Kodach et al.31. This model is found to be appropriate for
weakly scattering samples and for an analysis of moderate scattering depths32. As depicted in Fig. 2(a), a light beam
with input power Pin enters the sample. At each particle
(grey), a first portion (blue) of the incident light in the respective depth
z is scattered back into the numerical aperture of the optical
system, a second portion (red) is scattered into all other directions or is
absorbed, and the remaining third portion (black) is propagating deeper into the
medium. The total scattering σs and absorption
cross section σa can be described by the
extinction cross section
σt = σs + σa
of a single particle, or by the extinction coefficient
μt = Nσt
for an ensemble of particles with volume number density N. In analogy,
the backscatter is described by the backscatter cross section
σb, or by the backscatter coefficient
μb = Nσb
of the material.
Figure 2
Concept of model-based dispersion state analysis and sizing of
nanoparticles.
(a) Single scattering model: Incident light is scattered at maximum
once inside the medium. A light beam with power Pin enters
the sample. At each particle (grey), a first portion
(σb, blue) of the incident light in the
respective depth z is scattered back into the numerical aperture of
the optical system, a second portion (σt, red)
is scattered into all other directions or is absorbed, and the remaining
third portion (black) propagates deeper into the medium. (b)
Schematic profile of the logarithmic backscattering factor
RdB(z) = 10 lg(R(z)).
(c) Direction-dependent scattering lobes according to
Mie’s theory, plotted here for the example of polystyrene (PS)
nanospheres (diameters 506 nm and 143 nm, refractive
index nPS = 1.57 at
1315 nm) in aqueous dispersion
(nH20 = 1.33).
σs: total scattering (red);
σb: backward scattering (blue). (d)
Total scattering σs and backscattering
σb cross sections for non-absorbing
polystyrene spheres in aqueous dispersion.
The depth-dependent decay
dP(z)/dz = −μtP(z)
of the forward-travelling power P(z) is dictated by the extinction
coefficient μt, leading to an exponential decay of
optical power
P(z) = Pine−tz
inside the sample. For a given depth z, the power in a depth element
δz as scattered back into the numerical aperture of the
optical system amounts to
Pb(z) = μbδzP(z)e−t,
where
e−t
accounts for the extinction of the backscattered light during backpropagation.
The signal measured in an OCT scan corresponds to the depth-dependent
backscatter
Pb(z) = /Pin.
In the presence of a depth-independent noise floor Rn, the
depth-dependent backscatter signal measured by the OCT system isA semi-logarithmic plot
RdB(z) = 10 lg(R(z))
of this backscatter signal is depicted in Fig. 2(b). The
background noise term Rn defines the sensitivity limit of the
OCT system. For real OCT systems, this background noise is sometimes dominated
by relative intensity noise (RIN) of the swept source, which may lead to a
depth-dependent noise floor. In contrast to that, the noise floor in our system
originates from thermal noise of the receiver electronics, which exhibits a
white power spectrum and is hence constant over the depth range of interest.
Note that all measurements for particle sizing are taken under oblique incidence
of the OCT beam on the sample surface. This avoids occurrence of isolated
reflection peaks at the sample surface such that the signal model according to
Eq. (1) can be directly used to fit the measurement
data.In real OCT measurements, the measured backscatter depends on further parameters,
which need to be determined in a calibration step. This comprises the divergence
of the measurement beam, the decay of the coherence function of the swept laser,
and the absorption of the matrix material which surrounds the scatterers. These
influences are approximated by including two calibration factors2233
q and Q in the single-scattering model according to Eq. (1),Both calibration factors are determined by comparing measured backscatter of a
NIST-traceable polystyrene particle standard (246 nm diameter
polystyrene nanospheres in 0.5 wt.% aqueous dispersion, BS-Partikel
GmbH, Wiesbaden, Germany) with the model calculations according to Eq. (1).In the special case of spherical scatterers with a size in the order of the
wavelength, the scattering cross section σs can be
modelled by means of Mie’s theory34. As an example,
Fig. 2(c) shows direction-dependent scattering lobes
of water-dispersed polystyrene nanospheres with diameters 143 nm and
506 nm. The larger sphere (506 nm diameter) shows
stronger total scattering (red), but less pronounced fractional backscatter as
compared to the small sphere (143 nm diameter). For a small aperture
of the scan head (1° half-angle, corresponding to a theoretical and
experimental lateral resolution of 28 μm and
36 μm, respectively), the Mie scattering lobes can be
parameterized using the total scattering cross section
σs and the backscattering cross section
σb. Figure 2(d) shows
both cross sections σs and
σb as a function of the sphere diameter
d for polystyrene (PS) spheres (refractive index
nPS = 1.57) dispersed in water
(refractive index = 1.33)
at a wavelength of 1315 nm. In the limit of small diameters
d, Mie scattering can be approximated by Rayleigh scattering. In this
regime, both scattering cross sections increase in proportion to
d6. For larger diameters, the spheres show resonances,
which lead to dips in the backscattering cross section
σb, whereas the total scattering cross section
remains unaffected. The relationship between backscattering cross section
σb and particle size is unambiguous only if
the particle diameter is smaller than 460 nm, which corresponds to
roughly half the material wavelength in the polystyrene spheres.In real measurements, the total scattering cross section
σs and the backscattering cross section
σb cannot be assessed directly. Instead, only
the extinction coefficient
μt = Nσt
and the backscatter coefficient
μb = σb
are extracted from the backscatter signal R(z). For non-absorbing
particles in the Rayleigh scattering regime, particle size and concentration
cannot be separately evaluated, since both σs and
σb increase with d6,
Fig. 2(d). As an example, for particle sizes of less
than 150 nm (λ/9), we can safely assume Rayleigh
scattering, and the backscattering probability
pb = σb/σs
stays constant within 10%. As a consequence, a low concentration of bigger
particles cannot be distinguished from a high concentration of smaller
particles. However, for the case of nanomaterial characterization, the total
volume of nanoparticles added to the sample is usually known. For an increasing
degree of dispersion, the average size d of the agglomerates decreases
and their volume number density N increases in proportion to
d−3. Together with the
d6-dependence of the scattering cross sections in the
Rayleigh regime, this leads to an overall decrease of the scattering
coefficients in proportion to d3, which allows robust
separation of particle size d and volume number density N. Note
that this applies to non-absorbing particles only. If the extinction coefficient
μt is dominated by the contribution of
absorption rather than scattering, an increased degree of dispersion could lead
to an increase of μt. This is due to the fact that
the breaking-up of agglomerates exposes more particles from the inner region to
the incident light. These particles from the inner region were formerly shielded
from light by the absorbing outer shell, and did therefore not contribute to
attenuation. If absorption dominates, the effect of increasing extinction with
increasing number of separated absorbing particles can be exploited for the
analysis of the dispersion state. We use this approach in the section on
dispersion analysis of epoxy-CNT composites.
Image-based dispersion state analysis
Although nanocomposites ideally feature a homogeneous distribution of nanosized
fillers, in practice, microscale agglomerates cannot be completely avoided. The
size of the agglomerates could reach several hundreds of micrometres, especially
at the beginning of the so-called compounding process, which usually exploits
shear forces to break up particle agglomerates into their nanoscale
constituents. Therefore, a dispersion-state analysis suitable for process
monitoring should be able to cope with nanometre to micrometre sized objects.
This section is dedicated to imaging and analysis of agglomerates in the
micrometre range.Optical coherence tomography can be used to visualize agglomerates, if their
dimensions exceed the spatial resolution δx, δy,
δz of the imaging system in x, y and
z-direction (about 10 μm), and if the
backscattering is stronger than the background noise. Below these limits, an
analysis based on a scattering-model has to be applied. To identify agglomerate
regions with stronger backscatter within the OCT image, we use an image
segmentation algorithm based on seeded region growing35. For
quantitative information related to agglomerate size and number, two independent
parameters are extracted from the segmented images, namely the area fraction
(AF) and the perimeter-to-area ratio (PAR) of the agglomerates, see Fig. 3. The area fraction relates the image area covered by
all identified agglomerates with individual area Ai to the
entire imaging cross section Atot,
Figure 3
Illustration of agglomerate areas and perimeters in a cross-sectional OCT
image.
The total image cross section amounts to Atot; the
quantities A1 … An denote
the areas (grey) and the quantities s1 …
sn (red) denote the perimeters of the agglomerates.
The area fraction (AF) is a measure for total agglomerate content and
relates the agglomerate areas A1 …
An to the total image cross section
Atot. The perimeter-to-area ratio (PAR) is a measure
for the size of the found agglomerates and relates perimeters
s1 … sn to the areas
A1 … An.
For a given volume fraction of the nanosize filler, and assuming spherical
agglomerate shapes which are accurately detected by an ideal measurement system,
the AF would be independent of the agglomerate diameter. This can be understood
by the following consideration: Assume that each spherical agglomerate splits
and decreases in radius by a factor of ν. The total amount of
material remains constant, therefore the number of (smaller) agglomerates in the
volume increases by ν3, whereas the number of
agglomerates in the measurement plane increases by
ν2. The average area Ai of each
individual cross section in the measurement plane decreases in proportion to
ν2. Therefore the radius change of the
agglomerates has no effect on AF. This would render AF as non-indicative for
agglomerate analysis. For real measurement systems, however, a decreasing
average agglomerate size will increase the number of agglomerates that are
smaller than the detection threshold of the image-based analysis technique. In
this case, a decrease of AF is observed which is correlated with a decreasing
agglomerate size. In our experiments, the detection threshold is set to three
times the standard deviation of the background noise floor in the image. While
the threshold influences the measured percentage of the area fraction, our
choice of the threshold level suffices to judge the dispersion of a certain
sample type.As a further parameter, the perimeter-to-area ratio (PAR) relates the sum of all
agglomerate perimeters si to the sum of all agglomerate areas
Ai,Assuming agglomerates of equally distributed shapes, the PAR depends only on the
average size of the agglomerates and is otherwise independent of the number
density. A change in the average shape of all agglomerates during the dispersion
process would influence the PAR, but this is not to be expected for typical
dispersion processes that rely on milling or shear-strain-induced breaking of
agglomerates. If the dimensions of each agglomerate decrease by a factor of
ν, the perimeter decreases by v, while the cross sectional
area decreases by v2. Accordingly, the perimeter-to-area
ratio of each agglomerate increases by a factor of ν, and the same
applies to the overall PAR, independently of the filler content. Image-based
analysis is applied to OCT measurements of nanocomposites both offline and
during production.
Results and Discussion
To prove the viability of OCT as a tool for characterization of nanoparticles and
nanocomposite materials, we performed a series of experiments comprising accurate
nanoparticle sizing as well as nanocomposite dispersion state analysis in liquid and
solid materials. Our characterization employs image evaluation and a simplified
model-based scattering analysis. We show that OCT methods are useful for measuring
nanoscopic particle sizes as well as for analyzing the dispersion of agglomerates in
the micro- and millimetre regime. The technique can even cope with highly absorbing
CNT-loaded materials and is well suited for in-line process control.
Model-based sizing of nanoscale particles
Polystyrene (PS) nanospheres (refractive index
nPS = 1.57) in aqueous dispersion
(refractive index = 1.33)
are used as a model system to prove the viability of OCT as a tool for
model-based nanoparticle sizing. This model system offers higher refractive
index contrast than the sample systems investigated in following sections
(polyamide/clay: nPA = 1.59,
nClay = 1.54; polypropylene/clay:
nPP = 1.49,
nClay = 1.54). All these samples
offer sufficient backscattering levels. In this experiment, we characterize
dispersed NIST-traceable polystyrene particles (BS-Partikel GmbH, Wiesbaden,
Germany) with diameters of 143 nm and 246 nm. The
results are depicted in Fig. 4. The particle size is
determined by fitting the calibrated single scattering model according to Eq. (2) to measured OCT depth scans as described in the
previous section. We use three different samples S1, S2, and S3 with different
diameters and particle concentrations expressed in weight-% (wt.%) of PS
particles in the dispersion, see Fig. 4(d,e) for scanning
electron images of the dried particles. The nominal size and concentration of
the investigated dispersed particles amount to 143 nm at
2.0 wt.% for S1, 143 nm at 0.5 wt.% for S2,
and 246 nm at 0.2 wt.% for S3, respectively. Figure 4(a) depicts averaged OCT depth scans (light coloured
circles) along with the curves of the fitted single-scattering model (bright
colours). For the fit, measurement data have been taken into account only up to
a depth of 1.8 mm (225 measurement points) to avoid inaccuracies by
multiple scattering36. The extinction coefficient
μt and the backscattering coefficient
μb can be extracted from the fit: Sample S1
(143 nm, 0.5 wt.%):
μt1 = (85 ± 23) m−1,
μb1 = (97.0 ± 7.4) × 10−4 m−1;
Sample S2 (143 nm, 2.0 wt.%):
μt2 = (352 ± 26) m−1,
μb2 = (53.6 ± 5.8) × 10−3 m−1;
Sample S3 (246 nm, 0.2 wt.%):
μt3 = (125 ± 7.5) m−1,
μb3 = (18.0 ± 2.0) × 10−3 m−1.
The error bounds refer to the standard deviation of the averages. Since the
particle concentrations and hence the number densities N are known, we
can translate these coefficients directly to the scattering cross sections
σs and σb,
assuming that absorption of the PS particles can be neglected at the measurement
wavelength around 1315 nm. The following total scattering
σs and backscattering cross sections
σb have been extracted: Sample S1
(143 nm, 0.5 wt.%):
σs1 = (25.9 ± 7.0) nm2,
σb1 = (29.7 ± 2.3) × 10−4 nm2;
Sample S2 (143 nm, 2.0 wt.%):
σs2 = (26.9 ± 2.0) nm2,
σb2 = (41.0 ± 4.4) × 10−4 nm2;
Sample S3 (246 nm, 0.2 wt.%):
σs3 = (488 ± 29) nm2,
σb3 = (70.1 ± 7.7) × 10−3 nm2.
The values given include the standard deviation of the averages. The cross
sections σs and σb
can be related to the diameters of the respective particles using
Mie’s theory34, see Fig. 4(b).
The total scattering cross section σs (left axis,
red) and the backscattering cross section σb
(right axis, blue) of polystyrene nanospheres dispersed in water are calculated
and plotted as a function of the sphere diameter, assuming incident light of
1315 nm wavelength and a system aperture of 0.018 (1°
half-angle). From the measurement fits in Fig. 4(a), the
scattering parameters σs1,
σb1 for sample S1 and
σs3, σb3 for
sample S3 are extracted. The sphere diameter can then be read from the Mie
calculations displayed in Fig. 4(b), vertical arrows. For
clarity, the analysis is only depicted for sample S1, but sample S2 yields very
similar results. The table in Fig. 4(c) summarizes the
results as derived from scattering cross section
σs and backscattering cross section
σb, together with the associated standard
deviation of the averages, and compares them with the nominal particle size and
its standard deviation. The standard deviation measured by OCT can be lower than
the standard deviation of the particle size distribution, since various
particles contribute to one OCT measurement. Measurement errors may arise from
refractive index uncertainties, where an uncertainty of 0.01 would lead to a
size determination error of 2 nm to 4 nm. Relative
deviations between nominally and measured particle sizes are below 4%.
Figure 4
Size determination of sub-wavelength nanoparticles with OCT.
(a) Measured OCT depth scans of aqueous dispersions of polystyrene
(PS) nanospheres (S1: 143 nm diameter, 0.5 wt.%,
grey circles: measurement, black line: fit; S2: 143 nm diameter,
2.0 wt.%, light green circles: measurement, green line: fit; S3:
246 nm diameter, 0.2 wt.%, light orange circles:
measurement, orange line: fit), fitted with the calibrated single-scattering
model according to Eq. (2). (b) Total scattering
(red) and backscattering (blue) cross sections, according to
Mie’s theory for polystyrene spheres in water. Both scattering
cross sections are compared with the measurements, depicted only for the
samples S1 (σs1: total scattering cross
section, σb1 backscattering cross section) and
S3 (σs3, σb3,
respectively). Both parameters can be attributed to sphere diameters,
horizontal axis. (c) Comparison of nominal particle sizes with
measured sizes. Relative (absolute) deviations from the nominal values are
maximal 4% (5 nm). (d,e) Scanning electron micrograph
(SEM) of the nanospheres having diameters of 143 nm and 246,
respectively.
Model-based nanoscale dispersion-state analysis
Owing to the high sensitivity of the OCT technique, even strongly absorbing
nanomaterials such as carbon-nanotube (CNT) composites can be analysed. This is
a key feature, as CNT-loaded composites represent an important market
segment37. Standard light scattering techniques like DLS or
SLS are not applicable because the scattered or transmitted optical powers are
small. Conventional CNT dispersion analysis relies either on thin material
layers that are investigated in a light microscope (LM), or on the determination
of macroscopic material parameters like the dielectric permittivity that can
also indicate the dispersion quality38. For our experiments, we
use a multi-wall CNT (MWCNT) dispersion in an epoxy resin (Araldite LY 556,
Huntsman Advanced Materials GmbH, Basel, Switzerland). The samples contain
0.12 wt.% of MWCNT (NC7000, Nanocyl S.A., Sambreville, Belgium), and
were prepared by 1, 3 and 5 milling cycles in a three-roll mill. We compare the
results of OCT-based backscattering and extinction parameter analysis with the
results of standard LM analysis as well as with rheological and dielectric
measurements. For OCT measurements, the CNT-filled resin samples were filled
into cuvettes and heated up to a temperature of 50 °C
for melting the resin, thereby avoiding scattering from resin crystals.The results of the dispersion analysis are shown in Fig. 5.
Conventional dispersion analysis of thin composite layers by light microscopy,
see Fig. 5(a), reveals significant agglomerates after the
first milling cycle. After three milling cycles, the size of agglomerates
reduces. After five milling cycles, the light microscope images could lead to
the conclusion that dispersion quality seems to decrease again, but other
measurement techniques, like OCT analysis and rheological characterization,
contradict this finding. Light microscopy for dispersion analysis, while being a
state-of-the-art technique, suffers from small imaging areas. This could lead to
an erroneous interpretation, if the agglomerate concentration is not spatially
homogeneous over the whole sample. The same samples were investigated using OCT,
see Fig. 5(b), which shows extinction coefficients
μt and the backscattering coefficients
μb in a two-dimensional plot. For each of the
samples, we take ten measurements, each consisting of 5000 depth-scans which
were taken while laterally moving the sample over a distance of
2 mm. The depth scans are averaged, and the extinction coefficient
μt and the backscattering coefficient
μb are extracted by fitting Eq.
(2) to the measurement data. This has been repeated at ten different
regions of each sample, each region corresponding to a cross in Fig. 5(b). Note that the particle sizes cannot be extracted from
these data: In contrast to the situation for pure nanosphere dispersions used as
a reference, the CNT agglomerates exhibit a large variety of shapes, and a Mie
scattering theory based on simple spheres cannot be applied. Yet, the analysis
of the extinction and backscattering coefficients suffices for a qualitative
dispersion analysis. The horizontal and vertical error bars in Fig. 5(b) represent the average (solid dots) and the standard
deviation of the measurements obtained for each sample. Although it is not
possible to exactly discriminate between scattering and absorption, we may
assume that the high extinction values of
5 mm−1 up to
15 mm−1 arise mainly from absorption
of the CNT and only marginally from scattering. This is supported by strong
reported absorption39 of
1000 mm−1 due to separated CNT in
composites with comparable concentrations. Consequently, we did not take
multi-scattering into account. A clear tendency with respect to the number of
milling cycles can be seen: The more agglomerates are broken, the more isolated
CNT can contribute to absorption and hence to the extinction
μt, which rises significantly between one and
three milling cycles, and increases slightly for five cycles. Simultaneously,
the backscattering coefficient μb increases with
the number of milling cycles and shows the same tendency as the extinction
μt. The backscattering coefficient
μb = σb
N, however, does not necessarily increase if the dispersion quality
increases so that the agglomerates become smaller and their number N
becomes larger. It is impossible to state in general how smaller agglomerates
contribute to the backscattering inside the light receiving aperture, because
σb strongly depends on the angle dependency of
the backscattering for the respective agglomerate shape. In our specific case,
μb increases with an increasing degree of
dispersion, and therefore allows a qualitative judgement of the state of the
sample dispersion.
Figure 5
OCT characterization of highly absorbing epoxy/carbon nanotube (CNT)
composite materials.
Comparison to conventional characterization techniques and macroscopic
material properties. The composite was milled over 1, 3 and 5 cycles in a
three-roll-mill to improve dispersion. (a) Conventional dispersion
state analysis by light microscopy of thin composite layers. Black areas are
attributed to agglomerates. (b) OCT-determined backscattering
μb and extinction
μt coefficients, measured in 10 different
spatial regions (crosses) of each sample (average: solid dots; standard
deviations: horizontal and vertical error bars). (c) Rheologic
dielectric characterization of the relative permittivity
εr as a function of applied shear strain after 1,
3, and 5 milling cycles. The relative permittivity increases monotonically
from the pure epoxy material over 1 to 3 to 5 milling cycles, indicating an
increase in the separation of the CNT.
These results of the OCT analysis are confirmed by a rheological characterization
of the relative permittivity εr. For this purpose, the
dispersions were investigated using a rheometer (MCR 501, Anton Paar GmbH, Graz,
Austria) in combination with a programmable LCR bridge for measuring inductance,
capacitance and resistance (HM 8118, HAMEG Instruments GmbH, Mainhausen,
Germany). The rheometer consists of two parallel rotatable plates at a
separation of s = 1 mm. The sample
dispersion fills the gap between the plates, which are isolated electrically
from each other and which are connected to the LCR bridge for measuring the
capacitance. During a measurement, one of the plates performs an oscillating
rotation. The amplitude b of the oscillation at the outer radius of the
plate, related to the plate separation s results in the strain amplitude
γ = b/s. Both the
measurement setup and the measurement procedure are described in detail in ref.
38. The relative permittivity is measured at a
frequency of 1 kHz and increases monotonically from the pure epoxy
material over 1 to 3 to 5 milling cycles: This indicates a continuous
improvement of dispersion quality, see Fig. 5(c), since an
increasing number of CNT are separated from agglomerates and contribute to the
electric polarization of the nanocomposite. Note that the rheological
measurements themselves introduce shear strain into the samples, which could
lead to further exfoliation of CNT from the agglomerates and hence to an
increase of the relative permittivity during characterization of the samples
after three milling cycles. This additional exfoliation might be not possible
for the mixture after one milling cycle (insufficient exfoliation) and five
milling cycles (largely complete exfoliation). At higher strain amplitudes (not
shown), the separated CNT align in parallel to the rheometer plates and thus
perpendicularly to the electric field. In this case the CNT cease to influence
the permittivity.In contrast to the microscopy analysis and the permittivity measurement, OCT
characterizes the heated sample without any further preparation. The results
correlate well with the permittivity measurement and with the number of
dispersion cycles. In contrast to light microscopy, OCT also reveals the
increase in dispersion quality between the third and the fifth dispersion cycle.
This experiment demonstrates that OCT metrology is useful to characterize even
highly absorbing nanomaterials, outperforming by far the elaborate and time
consuming conventional light microscopy method.
Image-based dispersion-state analysis for microscale
agglomerates
For experimentally assessing the ability of the OCT technique to analyse
nanocomposites with large agglomerates, composites of polyamide (PA; Badamid
B70, Bada AG, Bühl, Germany) and nanoclay particles with
5 wt.% concentration were prepared in a compounding extruder40. For controlling the dispersion quality during fabrication, one
batch of samples was prepared from a clay with modified surface (I.34, Nanocor
Inc., Hoffman Estates, IL, USA), the other one was prepared from unmodified clay
(PGN, Nanocor Inc.). The surface modification is expected to lead to an improved
dispersion state and to decreased sizes of agglomerates as compared to the
unmodified clay. After compounding, all samples are granulated without further
sample processing. Cross-sectional images (B-scans) are taken from the granules
with our laboratory OCT system. Representative B-scans from the PA/nanoclay
composite without and with surface modification are shown in Fig.
6(a,b), where the pixel brightness indicates measured backscattering.
The sample with no modification, Fig. 6(a), shows large
lengthy bright areas, indicating large clay agglomerates that extend over
several hundreds of micrometres, whereas the sample with modification, Fig. 6(b), features small bright spots only from which small
agglomerates can be inferred. The image segmentation algorithm detects bright
regions automatically; the corresponding borders are drawn as red lines.
Figure 6
Image-based dispersion-state analysis for microscale agglomerates, showing
the impact of chemical surface modification on dispersibility.
(a) Cross-sectional image (B-Scan) of a PA/nanoclay composite with
5 wt-% nanoclay content without surface modification. Bright
spots (strong backscattering) with red borders indicate agglomerates. Right
part: magnified section. (b) Cross-sectional image of a
PA/nanoclay-composite with surface-modified clay particles having the same
concentration as the sample in (a). Right part: magnified section.
(c) Area fraction (AF) covered by detected agglomerates. The
circles denote average values of the three samples, and the error bars
indicate the standard deviation of the average. (d) Perimeter-to-area
ratio (PAR) of the detected agglomerates. The circles denote average values
of the three samples, and the error bars indicate the standard deviation of
the average.
For each sample type, three B-scans are taken, segmented, and the area fraction
(AF) as well as the perimeter-to-area ratio (PAR) are calculated for each
measurement. Figure 6(c,d) display the average AF and the
average PAR for both sample types along with the corresponding error bars
showing the standard deviation of the averages. A significant decrease in the AF
is obtained when the surface of the clay filler is modified
(AFmod = 2.0% ± 0.4%)
as compared to the filler without surface modifications
(AFunmod = 5.3% ± 0.8%),
Fig. 6(c). This indicates that a surface modification
significantly decreases the agglomerate size such that a substantial fraction of
agglomerates becomes smaller than the size detection threshold of the image
analysis. This is in accordance with the observation that the cross-sectional
image of the surface-modified clay composite exhibits a large number of bright
spots, each of which contains only a few pixels, see Fig.
6(b). At the same time, the PAR increases significantly with
modification of the filler surface
(PARunmod = 132 mm−1 ± 8.2 mm−1,
PARmod = 178 mm−1 ± 4.1 mm−1)
which confirms the decrease in average agglomerate size, Fig.
6(d). These experiments prove the viability of image-based OCT
analysis to characterize the dispersion state of samples with relatively large
agglomerates sized from a few micrometres to hundreds of micrometres. The
quantitative evaluation of further dispersion-related parameters like
agglomerate shape and number would further increase the reliability and
robustness of our technique.
Demonstration of in-line dispersion-state analysis
Nanocomposite development is hampered by rather long development cycles, which
are dominated by time consuming off-line characterization. In this section, OCT
is demonstrated to be well-suited for continuous dispersion-state monitoring in
a production environment.In the following experiment, a production-scale twin-screw compounding extruder
(Leistritz GmbH, Nuremberg, Germany) is used for production of a
polypropylene(PP)/nanoclay composite with a mass throughput of
6 kg/h. The applied host material is PP (R352-08R, Dow Chemical,
Midland, MI, USA) and the nanosized filler is a nanoclay (Cloisite 15A, Southern
Clay Products, Gonzales, TX, USA). The screws introduce shear into the polymer
melt filled with nanoparticles and thus disperse the particles40.
With this extruder, nanocomposites were dispersed with different revolution
speeds. In general, increasing speed comes with higher energy input into the
material and causes a better nanoparticle dispersion12. In order
to characterize the dispersion state of the PP/clay melt during production, the
extruder has been equipped with the OCT probe for in-line process monitoring,
see Fig. 1(c). The probe is mounted to a sensor port of
the extruder located at the end of the machine close to the die. The optical
window of the probe is in direct contact with the main stream of the extruded
nanoparticle loaded polymer melt. With the OCT probe, A-scans of the medium
underneath the probe window are measured continuously. The flow of the melt
causes a continuous movement of the material seen by the OCT measurement beam,
thereby replacing a lateral movement of the measurement beam in conventional
measurements. This results in a temporal change of the backscatter signal, which
can be interpreted as 2D image data, where one dimension corresponds to time and
the other dimension is the usual imaging depth measured from the probe window,
see Fig. 7.
Figure 7
Demonstration of in-line dispersion-state analysis during operation of a
compounding extruder.
The OCT measurement beam is fixed, the vertical axis of the OCT images
indicates the imaging depth and the horizontal axis corresponds to the
measurement time. Bright spots: strong backscatter of agglomerates. Straight
horizontal line at z ≈ 0:
permanent reflections at the probe window. Material system:
polypropylene/nanoclay. Mass flow: 6 kg/h. Clay content: 1%.
Bottom: magnification after segmentation. (a) OCT scan at
200 rpm. (b) OCT scan at 500 rpm. (c)
OCT scan at 800 rpm. (d) Quantitative analysis of the
dispersion state by area fraction (AF) and modified perimeter-to-area ratio
from five OCT scans. The circles
denote average values of the five scans, and the error bars indicate the
standard deviation of the averages.
Figure 7(a–c) show the in-line OCT data for the
screw revolution speeds 200 rpm, 500 rpm and
800 rpm, respectively. Note that, due to non-uniform mass flow as a
function of depth, it not possible to directly map the measurement time
(horizontal axis) to spatial coordinates of the sample. Bright spots indicate
strong backscatter and are attributed to agglomerates. The straight horizontal
line at z ≈ 0 originates from
permanent reflections at the probe window. With higher screw speed and
accordingly higher shear strain inside the material, fewer agglomerates are
visible indicating an improvement in dispersion quality. At the highest screw
speed of 800 rpm, almost no agglomerates are visible. This
impression is also confirmed by quantitative dispersion-related parameters.
Since the measurement is performed as a function of time rather than as a
function of lateral position, a perimeter-to-area ratio in the strict sense as
defined by Eq. (4) cannot be calculated. Instead, we use a
modified quantity PAR, which essentially corresponds to the PAR except that
both, the agglomerate perimeters si and the agglomerate areas
Ai, are expressed by pixel numbers rather than by physical
lengths and areas. Note that PAR. a dimensionless quantity in contrast to PAR,
which has the unit m−1. The results are depicted in
Fig. 7(d), where the circles denote average values
from five OCT scans, and the error bars denote the respective standard
deviations of the averages. With increasing speed, the area fraction AF reduces,
and the PAR rises. Both quantities indicate that the agglomerates inside the
material flow become smaller corresponding to a better dispersion quality of the
composite. These results reveal a clear relationship between operation
parameters of the machine and OCT-measured dispersion parameters. This is the
first demonstration of an in-line dispersion-state analysis in a nanocomposite
production line. The results encourage the application of our technique to more
material systems for controlling multiple production parameters.
Conclusions
In this work, we present a novel and a highly attractive approach to nanomaterial
analysis applied to nanoparticles and nanocomposites. The method uses optical
coherence tomography (OCT) and model-based parameter extraction. Our approach
enables detection and quantification of nanoparticles and agglomerates over a wide
range of size scales: Image segmentation of OCT data sets is well suited for
dispersion-state characterization of nanocomposites with agglomerates in the
micrometre range, whereas model-based scattering analysis lends itself to size
determination of nanoparticles below the resolution limit. We elaborate the
measurement technique along with theoretical models and demonstrate the viability of
the procedure in a series of proof-of-principle experiments. A wide variety of
material systems is investigated by our experiments: A first demonstration shows
accurate OCT-based nanoparticle sizing. An in-situ dispersion-state analysis
characterizes strongly absorbing CNT composites in liquid media. Finally, we perform
in-line monitoring of the compounding process in a state-of-the-art production line.
Major challenges in industrial applications are the stringent requirements with
respect to mechanical stability and size of the OCT system. These requirements can
be met by integration of interferometer and detection system on a silicon photonic
chip41. We believe that OCT has the potential to fill a metrology
gap in the emerging field of nanocomposite technology. We conclude that OCT
metrology opens new directions in material analysis, both in laboratory and
production environments.
Additional Information
How to cite this article: Schneider, S. et al. Multiscale
dispersion-state characterization of nanocomposites using optical coherence
tomography. Sci. Rep.
6, 31733; doi: 10.1038/srep31733 (2016).
Authors: Lars Thrane; Michael H Frosz; Thomas M Jørgensen; Andreas Tycho; Harold T Yura; Peter E Andersen Journal: Opt Lett Date: 2004-07-15 Impact factor: 3.776
Authors: Simon Schneider; Matthias Lauermann; Philipp-Immanuel Dietrich; Claudius Weimann; Wolfgang Freude; Christian Koos Journal: Opt Express Date: 2016-01-25 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: D Huang; E A Swanson; C P Lin; J S Schuman; W G Stinson; W Chang; M R Hee; T Flotte; K Gregory; C A Puliafito Journal: Science Date: 1991-11-22 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Peijun Gong; Mitra Almasian; Gijs van Soest; Daniel de Bruin; Ton van Leeuwen; David Sampson; Dirk Faber Journal: J Biomed Opt Date: 2020-04 Impact factor: 3.170