ACS Publications. Most Trusted. Most Cited. Most Read
Comprehensive Optical Strain Sensing Through the Use of Colloidal Quantum Dots
My Activity

Figure 1Loading Img
  • Open Access
Applications of Polymer, Composite, and Coating Materials

Comprehensive Optical Strain Sensing Through the Use of Colloidal Quantum Dots
Click to copy article linkArticle link copied!

  • Michael D. Sherburne
    Michael D. Sherburne
    Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Air Force Institute of Technology, Dayton, Ohio 45433, United States
  • Candice R. Roberts
    Candice R. Roberts
    Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Air Force Institute of Technology, Dayton, Ohio 45433, United States
  • John S. Brewer
    John S. Brewer
    Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Air Force Institute of Technology, Dayton, Ohio 45433, United States
  • Thomas E. Weber
    Thomas E. Weber
    Physics Division, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico 87545, United States
  • Tod V. Laurvick
    Tod V. Laurvick
    Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Air Force Institute of Technology, Dayton, Ohio 45433, United States
  • Hengky Chandrahalim*
    Hengky Chandrahalim
    Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Air Force Institute of Technology, Dayton, Ohio 45433, United States
    *E-mail: [email protected]
Open PDFSupporting Information (1)

ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces

Cite this: ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2020, 12, 39, 44156–44162
Click to copy citationCitation copied!
https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.0c12110
Published September 2, 2020

Copyright © 2020 American Chemical Society. This publication is licensed under CC-BY-NC-ND.

Abstract

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

The adaptation of colloidal quantum dots loaded within a polymer for use in nondestructive testing can be used as an optical strain gauge due to the nanomaterial’s strain sensing properties. In this paper, we utilized InP/ZnS colloidal quantum dots loaded within a polymer matrix applied onto the surface of a dog-bone foil precoated with an epoxy. By employing an empirical formula and a calibration factor, there is a propinquity between both the calculated optical strain and mechanical stress–strain reference data. Fluctuations are observed, which may be due to both additional strain responses not seen by the mechanical data and quantum dot blinking. These results and methods show the applied use of this novel optical nondestructive testing technique for a variety of structures, especially for structures that operate in harsh environments.

Copyright © 2020 American Chemical Society

1. Introduction

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

Nondestructive testing (NDT) is carried out in a myriad of industries to ensure both the integrity and quality of their respective structures. (1−5) A pertinent example pushing the limits in the use of NDTs can be seen in the United States Air Force (USAF), where aircraft maintainers are facing unique NDT problems every day. NDT becomes more important as the USAF’s air fleet ages. (6) This issue encourages the development of novel NDT techniques since one of the main techniques used are eddy current probes that are inherently complicated to read. (7) A promising NDT technique can make use of newer nanotechnologies such as colloidal quantum dots (CQDs) to help address common NDT issues. A summary of well-established NDT methods compared to the work described in this paper can be seen in Table 1.
Table 1. Comparing the Pros and Cons of Presently Used NDT Methods to the One Presented in This Papera
 capability
NDT testABCDEF
radiographic (X-rays) (8)×× ×× 
electromagnetic (9)×  ×  
acoustic emission (10)× × ××
laser methods (11)×  ×  
microwave (12,13)×  ×  
liquid penetrant (14)×  ×  
thermal/infrared (15−17)×  ×  
ultrasonic (18)×  ×  
this paper×  ×××
a

The different NDT capabilities within the table are the defined as: (A) sensitive to small cracks, (B) see through an airframe, (C) sense acoustic events, (D) high location accuracy, (E) applicable to any material, and (F) real-time testing.

Table 1 shows that an optical strain gauge approach using CQDs could address multiple NDT areas, making them more versatile for use in a variety of environments (e.g., weather, materials, and part sizes). Development shortfalls for near-field optical sensing of CQDs for measuring strain would be both seeing through an airframe and sensing acoustic cracks. Although the latter is both theoretically possible and demonstrated in a laboratory setting, it has not yet been applied as a tool for NDT. (19)
Previous investigations into the use of CQDs as optical strain gauges were only preliminary and without a written out calibration process for the optical strain data. In addition, these studies did not look into epoxy precoatings that would better emulate real-world conditions, especially for use as an aircraft NDT. (20,21) Epoxy-based primers (such as the Solvay BR 6747-1 used in this paper) and similar coatings are commonly used in aerospace applications to prevent corrosion and promote adhesion at adhesively bonded joints. This epoxy material is common for metal to metal and composite to metal bonds in new manufacturing and adhesively bonded repairs. The epoxy is designed to sustain forces that an aircraft would experience during the life of the aircraft. (22−27) As was seen in this paper, the epoxy precoating caused a unique spectral response not seen before in previous literature.

2. Theory

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

CQDs are nanomaterials that emit a discrete wavelength dependent upon the diameter of the CQDs themselves. They can be excited with lower wavelengths under their emission wavelength. Due to their nanometer scale, they exhibit quantum confinement effects that allow for diagnostic applications such as temperature and magnetic field sensing. (28,29) CQDs have also been demonstrated to change their emission wavelength under strain in multiple studies, further motivating the development of a CQD optical strain gauge. (20,21,30−32)
The diameters of CQDs are usually in the range of sub-nanometers, and an example of a spherical CQD is seen in Figure 1. (33)

Figure 1

Figure 1. Graphic of a CQD where the inner core (pink), outer shell (yellow), and polymer ligands (black lines) can be seen. Sherburne, M. X-Ray Detection and Strain Sensing Applications of Colloidal Quantum Dots. M.S. Thesis, Air Force Institute of Technology, March 2020. (33)

From Figure 1, the CQDs are prevented from agglomerating due to their encapsulating organic ligands. These polymers allow CQDs to be dispersed within other organic and liquid media. CQDs are commonly sold in the commercial market as a core–shell, where the core contains the semiconducting material and the shell (usually made of ZnO) helps to smooth over defects around the core while protecting the semiconducting material from environmental degradation. (33)
CQDs are able to change their wavelength when experiencing either tensile or compressive strain, due to being made up of semiconducting material. This is also due to the interatomic spacing between the atoms within a CQD, which determines the relative energies of the electrons. (30) By changing the relative energy of the electrons, this would in turn change the discrete energy states and thus change the wavelength of emission. To be more specific, semiconducting materials contain both heavy holes and light holes that can change their respective locations on a Ek diagram depending upon the type of strain the material is experiencing. This in turn changes the material’s effective band gap, which shifts the wavelength of emission. (34,35)

3. Experimental Setup

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

Testing was carried out in accordance with the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) standard E345. (36) Per the standard, the sample (dog-bone foil) gauge length was used as the reference length and strain was calculated based on the head displacement as compared to the gauge length. The metal samples employed were made of 301 stainless steel. The dimensions of the neck of the dog-bone were: 83.312 mm × 12.7 mm × 0.1016 mm. An epoxy-based precoating (Solvay BR 6747-1) was applied as a surface treatment to the dog-bones. The surface roughness of the precoated dog-bone samples was measured with a profilometer at an average of 0.483 μm. This roughness helped the polymer better adhere to a metallic surface.
InP/ZnS CQDs were homogeneously loaded with a 10% concentration into a proprietary UV photocurable polymer (supplied by NN-Labs). We selected 530 nm for emission wavelength due to relatively high signal returns from optical imaging devices at this wavelength. The selection of InP/ZnS was chosen because of both cadmium and lead exposure concerns if used as a coating on aircraft. (37) The CQD-loaded polymer was then coated as a thin film onto the middle of the dog-bone across a 20 mm × 12.7 mm surface. The dog-bone sample was then placed in a convection oven and baked at 121.11 °C for 23 min and 30 s. A Leica DVM6 microscope was used to measure the thickness of the CQD-loaded polymer layer. The microscope settings used were: 0° tilt, Z-step size of 0.25 μm, and a FOV3.6 lens.
The resulting three-dimensional (3D) microscope image is seen in Figure 2.

Figure 2

Figure 2. Three-dimensional surface model of the coated stainless steel dog-bone with the CQD polymer matrix applied. The left half of the image contained the CQD-loaded polymer matrix coating, while the right half was only the precoating (Solvay BR 6747-1) on top of the stainless steel. (a) Three-dimensional surface image of the dog-bone. (b) Two-dimensional (2D) cross-section through the CQD-loaded polymer and precoated polymer boundary.

The maximum/minimum thickness across the CQD-loaded polymer matrix and no CQD-loaded polymer matrix boundary were measured as 17.9 ± 0.125 and 4.33 ± 0.125 μm, respectively. The mean thickness across this section was 10.07 ± 0.177 μm. As seen in Figure 2, the application of CQD-loaded polymer did not cause a thicker surface. Instead, the CQD-loaded polymer matrix was applied within the grooves and valleys of the epoxy precoating on the surface of the sample.
A servo-hydraulic test frame (model: MTS Systems Corporation 370.02) was used to apply a tensile force to the sample. The test frame had the following specifications: rated capacity (25 kN), actuator force capacity (25 kN), actuator dynamic stroke (100 mm), actuator total stroke (114 mm), actuator rated flow (57 lpm), manifold rated flow (57 lpm), and bearing type (standard). Mechanical measurements were taken by a force transducer (model: MTS Systems Corporation 661.19H-04). Both axial displacement in mm and axial force in N were collected. The experimental setup can be seen in Figure 3.

Figure 3

Figure 3. (a) Illustration of the experimental setup. (b) Labeled photo of the experimental setup. Sherburne, M. X-Ray Detection and Strain Sensing Applications of Colloidal Quantum Dots. M.S. Thesis, Air Force Institute of Technology, March 2020. (33)

As seen in Figure 3, the spectrometer (model: Ocean Optics FLAME-S-VIS-NIR) with ≈1.5 nm full width at half-maximum (FWHM) optical resolution was secured to the load frame and fiber coupled to a collimator (model: Thorlabs ZC618APC-A). A standard blacklight was clamped to the load frame. The spectrometer was set to integrate light over 1 s increments across a spectral range of 350–1000 nm, which goes through the peak emission wavelength of interest at 530 nm. The start time between the load frame and the spectrometer acquisition was synchronized by two researchers (timing error of ±1 s). The experiment was displacement controlled at 8.7750 × 10–4 in/s over a period of 504 s (to failure of the sample). Two dog-bone samples were used to help the researchers dial down the correct settings and orientation of the blacklight and collimator. This resulted in only one dog-bone sample that resulted in useful collected values.
A digital imaging correlation (DIC) test was done using the same dog-bone fabrication recipe without the CQD-loaded polymer layer. The entire face of the dog-bone was white speckled for the ARAMIS 4M rev03 adjustable DIC camera to make stress–strain measurements. The complementary metal-oxide semiconductor (CMOS) camera resolution was 2400 × 1728 pixels with a strain accuracy of up to 0.01%. The displacement was controlled at the same rate at 8.7750 × 10–4.

4. Stress–Strain Calculations

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

To calculate the stress–strain curve, first tensile stress is calculated by the following σ = F/A, where F is the axial force and A is the cross-sectional area in m2 perpendicular to the top surface of the dog-bone sample. The cross-sectional area is calculated to be 1.29032 × 10–6 m2. The axial force taken from the experiment would be divided by this cross-sectional area to get the tensile stress over time. The following equation is used to get the tensile strain , where ΔL is the change in axial displacement and L0 is the original gauge length of the dog-bone sample. (38) With both the tensile strain and tensile stress on hand, trends can be determined by jointly plotting both the mechanical stress–strain curve and the CQD photoluminescence (PL) spectra.

4.1. Calculating Percent Change of Relative Emission Intensity

Figure 4a shows the changing optical spectra due to continuously applied strain over time. The black dotted-dashed line represents the initial nonstrained spectra. As the sample is strained toward failure, the sides of the spectral peak collapse while the center point of the peak rises as a plateau. There was no clear blue or red shifting of wavelengths in contrast to what was reported in similar literature. An animation of the optical spectra changing can be seen in the Supporting Information.

Figure 4

Figure 4. This figure shows the three-step process from (a) collecting the spectral data from the experiment, (b) applying a calibration, and then (c) plotting the calibrated optical strain data in relation to the mechanical reference strain data.

To quantify strain measurements for this sample from the optical data, a %PL change was calculated as a percentage to get relative data at each moment in time. This %PL change was calculated as the percent difference between the average emission intensity values of the wavelength points contained on the plateau between ν3 and ν4 and the average emission intensity values of side reference points ν1 and ν2. This can be explained by the following relation
(1)
where κ(t) is the calculated averaged difference between the two sets of points described and κ0 is the same calculation at time zero. This is then multiplied by 100 to make it a percentage of change. Mathematically, κ(t) is described by the following formula
(2)
where I(ν, t) is the total amount of current collected by the spectrometer at wavelength ν and time t. More specifically, I(ν, t) is equivalent to the normalized counts of the PL spectra. The left side of this relationship represents the integrated average values between ν3: 542.88 nm and ν4: 545.39 nm and the right side represents the integrated average values between ν1: 536.79 nm and ν2: 539.29 nm. An average of values is needed because of the random fluctuations across both the plateau and reference regions. The measurement method described made it viable to use the optical spectra seen in this experiment as a way to optically measure strain.

4.2. Calibrating CQD Percent PL Intensity to Strain

Since the dog-bone sample had slack before loading, both the mechanical reference and CQD optical strain data had to be shifted to ensure that the linear region passed through the origin. Linear approximation of the linear elastic region was done by selecting points corresponding to 100 and 700 MPa. Due to fewer points in the CQD optical data, four reference points around both the 100 and 700 MPa points as seen in Figure 4b were averaged to be used for linearization. Then, the correction factor was determined by the intersection of this line with the X-axis. Finally, this correction factor was subtracted from each collected strain value such that the linear region passed through the origin. For the mechanical reference data, this correction was 9.934 × 10–4 (strain), and for the CQD optical data, this correction was 225 %PL shift.
With the corrected data for both the mechanical reference and CQD optical information, a calibration factor was determined by comparing the greatest CQD optical measured strain with the greatest mechanical reference strain value. For example, using corrected data, the greatest mechanical reference strain value was divided by the greatest CQD optical strain value. This was similar to how one would calibrate the lateral force response of an atomic force microscope (AFM). (39) In this case, that calibration factor was determined to be 2.905 × 10–4. Further characterization of the strain properties of CQDs would enable a priori calibration. The calibrated optical data was plotted alongside the mechanical reference data in Figure 4c.

4.3. Calculating the Experiment’s Sensitivity

Characterizing the sensitivity of the optical strain gauge to the length of deformation of the sample under strain was a metric of interest. The sensitivity S with units in meters can be calculated through the following formula
(3)
where η is the absolute value maximum %PLchange change between data points, which in this case was 37.77 au. Additionally, Δ%PLchange is the absolute value change of %PLchange over a defined period of time, which is 1 s in this case. Finally, ΔL is the length of deformation over the same defined period of time as Δ%PLchange.

5. Results and Discussion

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

Going back to Figure 4a, the rising plateau could be attributed to the CQD-loaded polymer experiencing both tensile and transverse strain due to the Poisson effect. However, this transverse strain was determined to be overall negligible to the tensile strain. This then led to the hypothesis that the compressive strain contribution within the rising plateau spectrum occurred due to both the nanoscale interactions between the CQD-loaded polymer and the surrounding epoxy precoating. The CQDs within the polymer could experience compression when being strained against the epoxy precoating and in addition Förster resonance energy transfer (FRET) may have also contributed to the rising plateau. FRET was already found in the same InP/ZnS CQD-loaded polymer material in another study. (33) From the 545 to 560 nm spectrum in Figure 4a, the steepening of the curve was less pronounced when compared to the 530–545 nm spectrum. This was due to cross-talk between the 545 and 560 nm emitting CQDs as they became closer (1/R6) energy transfer efficiency distance relationship to the CQDs with a smaller wavelength of emission. (40) A similar experiment conducted by Yin et al. showed both a shifting trend in wavelength and in relative PL intensity, but no optical spectral structures that this paper’s experiment had seen. (20) The fundamental difference between their experiment and this paper was no application of the epoxy precoating, which helped to corroborate the hypothesis that an additional interaction between the CQDs and the surrounding epoxy precoating in this paper’s experiment has caused the unique rising plateau structure.
As seen after calibration in Figure 4c, the optical data fits right alongside with the mechanical stress–strain curve. There were three noticeable deviations from the mechanical reference data: (1) the initial slack, (2) three separate trends along the elastic region, and (3) few data points available about the proportional limit and toward failure of the sample. For the first deviation, the initial slack can be explained by the 3D physical movement of the sample as strain was first applied. This would cause a lag and a difference in optical values until the sample began to stretch. This then led to the second deviation, where three separate trends were seen along the elastic region. Due to the CQD-loaded polymer being located in a localized area on the sample versus covering the entire sample, there would be localized changes seen in the optical data that the mechanical reference data would be unable to sense. This was further confirmed by the DIC data collected in Figure 5. In addition, the DIC data also answered the third deviation about the proportional limit since the localized strain would be changing at a different rate than the overall dog-bone structure.

Figure 5

Figure 5. DIC images showing the surface strains of a sample. The mechanical strains correlated for their respective DIC images were the following: (D1) 0.04, (D2) 0.08, (D3) 0.09, and (D4) 0.1. The orange dashed boxes showed, where the CQD-loaded polymer coating would be during the optical experiment.

The DIC data shown in Figure 5 can be related to the markers D1–D4 in Figure 4c. Initially in D1, the source of the majority of strain was along the localized area coated with the CQD-loaded polymer; however, as the sample was strained into the plastic region (as seen in the DIC data from D3–D4), the source of the majority of strain traveled to one end of the dog-bone. This led to a nonlinear trend in the optical strain data as the localized strain began to lessen in strain due to the fracture occurring at the bottom of the dog-bone. Overall, the DIC data helped to visualize why there were significant deviations between the optical data and the mechanical reference data at certain regions about the stress–strain curve.
Figure 4 shows different data collected for the final strain reading after the sample fractured. This disparity reflected the difference in measurement reference employed by each measurement system. The reference strain was based on the change in distance between the two grips of the test frame. In the case of this displacement controlled experiment, the grips continued to move apart as the sample fractured, until the displacement was halted. Thus, after fracture, the reference strain continued to positively increase. In contrast, the CQD-loaded polymer was measuring strain directly from the face of the sample. After fracture, the material was expected to recover the elastic deformation imparted by initially loading the sample at the same slope of the initial linear elastic behavior. In Figure 4, the expected path of this elastic recovery was denoted by the purple dashed line. When referencing the final calibrated CQD strain point, the value of strain showed more recovered deformation. This was attributed to the fact that the fracture of the sample dynamically released the stored strain energy and not only recovered the elastic deformation but caused a slight compressive strain. This was further shown by buckling appearing in the sample after fracture, which must have been caused by compressive strains.
It was observed that the sensitivity of the experiment described in this paper was lower at the beginning of the applied strain and became higher toward the failure of the sample. The sensitivity data showed a skewed distribution toward higher sensitivity; hence, the median would be the best way to describe the overall sensitivity instead of the average. The median sensitivity of this experimental setup was 1.88 μm with a maximum sensitivity of 1.34 μm and a minimum sensitivity of 6.79 μm.

6. Conclusions

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

We have demonstrated that CQD-loaded polymer experienced a noticeable and measurable intensity shift in wavelength with a relatively simple equipment. From the experiment, a readable relative intensity change of the rising plateau peak of ≈690% was measured. Upon applying a calibration to the %PL data, there was an excellent correlation between the optical data and the mechanical stress–strain data. This optical data was also compared to several data points of DIC data to show how the CQDs measured a specific area of strain versus the overall structure, hence showing its potential for high-resolution strain imaging. Also observed in the data were fluctuations in the emission intensity signal over applied strain. This may be attributed to CQD blinking and could be mitigated using both oligo-(phenylene vinylene) (OPV) ligands and alloyed CQDs. (41−43) However, more than likely, the CQD strain diagnostic shown here was measuring additional mechanical changes that occurred in the sample than could be detected with a mechanical stress–strain device.
Due to being able to measure a localized area, the results show that there is a lot of promise in further developing this technology and making it useful as a next-gen NDT technique. Applications that can make use of this work can be the NDT of: aircraft, ground vehicles, and ships. In addition, the most near-term use of this technology could be the following: a new strain gauge for quality control, 3D printing, and in buildings/structures.

Supporting Information

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

The Supporting Information is available free of charge at https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsami.0c12110.

  • Graphical animation of the optical spectra changing along the mechanical stress–strain curve (AVI)

Terms & Conditions

Most electronic Supporting Information files are available without a subscription to ACS Web Editions. Such files may be downloaded by article for research use (if there is a public use license linked to the relevant article, that license may permit other uses). Permission may be obtained from ACS for other uses through requests via the RightsLink permission system: http://pubs.acs.org/page/copyright/permissions.html.

Author Information

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

  • Corresponding Author
  • Authors
    • Michael D. Sherburne - Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Air Force Institute of Technology, Dayton, Ohio 45433, United States
    • Candice R. Roberts - Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Air Force Institute of Technology, Dayton, Ohio 45433, United States
    • John S. Brewer - Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Air Force Institute of Technology, Dayton, Ohio 45433, United States
    • Thomas E. Weber - Physics Division, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico 87545, United States
    • Tod V. Laurvick - Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Air Force Institute of Technology, Dayton, Ohio 45433, United States
  • Notes
    The authors declare no competing financial interest.

Acknowledgments

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

The authors thank C. Brasch from MITRE for his inspiration of pursuing the possible idea of using CQDs as a type of strain sensor for aircraft NDT applications. The authors also thank R. Aung for his smoothing code that allowed for creating a professional stress–strain profile. In addition, the authors thank B. Rothberg for his help in looking over the manuscript for technical correctness. This research was supported in part by the U.S. Dept. of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration under grant NA000103. Approved for unlimited release, LA-UR-20-24430. The views expressed are those of the authors and do not reflect the official policy or position of the U.S. Air Force, Department of Defense, Department of Energy, or the U.S. government.

References

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

This article references 43 other publications.

  1. 1
    Prine, D. Inspection of Nuclear Power Component Welds by In-Process Acoustic-Emission Monitoring. NDT Int. 1976, 9, 281284,  DOI: 10.1016/0308-9126(76)90069-9
  2. 2
    Avdelidis, N.; Almond, D.; Dobbinson, A.; Hawtin, B.; Ibarra-Castanedo, C.; Maldague, X. Aircraft Composites Assessment by Means of Transient Thermal NDT. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 2004, 40, 143162,  DOI: 10.1016/j.paerosci.2004.03.001
  3. 3
    Eich, M.; Bonnin-Pascual, F.; Garcia-Fidalgo, E.; Ortiz, A.; Bruzzone, G.; Koveos, Y.; Kirchner, F. A Robot Application for Marine Vessel Inspection. J. Field Rob. 2014, 31, 319341,  DOI: 10.1002/rob.21498
  4. 4
    Pohl, R.; Erhard, A.; Montag, H.-J.; Thomas, H.-M.; Wüstenberg, H. NDT Techniques for Railroad Wheel and Gauge Corner Inspection. NDT&E Int. 2004, 37, 8994,  DOI: 10.1016/j.ndteint.2003.06.001
  5. 5
    Capozzoli, L.; Rizzo, E. Combined NDT Techniques in Civil Engineering Applications: Laboratory and Real Test. Constr. Build. Mater. 2017, 154, 11391150,  DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.07.147
  6. 6
    Losey, S. Air Force Chief Wright: Innovation Crucial to Win the Next War , online, 2018.
  7. 7
    Tian, G. Y.; Sophian, A. Reduction of Lift-Off Effects for Pulsed Eddy Current NDT. NDT&E Int. 2005, 38, 319324,  DOI: 10.1016/j.ndteint.2004.09.007
  8. 8
    Hashem, J. A.; Pryor, M.; Landsberger, S.; Hunter, J.; Janecky, D. R. Automating High-Precision X-Ray and Neutron Imaging Applications With Robotics. IEEE Trans. Autom. Sci. Eng. 2018, 15, 663674,  DOI: 10.1109/TASE.2017.2675709
  9. 9
    Cheng, Y.; Deng, Y.; Bai, L.; Chen, K. Enhanced Laser-Based Magneto-Optic Imaging System for Nondestructive Evaluation Applications. IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas. 2013, 62, 11921198,  DOI: 10.1109/TIM.2012.2220039
  10. 10
    Bassim, M.; Dudar, M.; Rifaat, R.; Roller, R. Application of Acoustic Emission for Non-Destructive Evaluation of Utility Inductive Reactors. IEEE Trans. Power Delivery 1993, 8, 281284,  DOI: 10.1109/61.180347
  11. 11
    Wu, E.; Ke, Y.; Du, B. Noncontact Laser Inspection Based on a PSD for the Inner Surface of Minidiameter Pipes. IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas. 2009, 58, 21692173,  DOI: 10.1109/TIM.2008.2006727
  12. 12
    Yeh, C.-Y.; Zoughi, R. A Novel Microwave Method for Detection of Long Surface Cracks in Metals. IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas. 1994, 43, 719725,  DOI: 10.1109/19.328896
  13. 13
    Zhang, H.; Gao, B.; Tian, G. Y.; Woo, W. L.; Bai, L. Metal Defects Sizing and Detection Under Thick Coating Using Microwave NDT. NDT&E Int. 2013, 60, 5261,  DOI: 10.1016/j.ndteint.2013.07.002
  14. 14
    Şimşir, M.; Ankara, A. Comparison of Two Non-Destructive Inspection Techniques on the Basis of Sensitivity and Reliability. Mater. Des. 2007, 28, 14331439,  DOI: 10.1016/j.matdes.2006.03.019
  15. 15
    Roy, D.; Tuli, S. Applicability of LED-Based Excitation Source for Defect Depth Resolved Frequency Modulated Thermal Wave Imaging. IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas. 2017, 66, 26582665,  DOI: 10.1109/TIM.2017.2711798
  16. 16
    Ahmed, J.; Gao, B.; Woo, W. L. Wavelet-Integrated Alternating Sparse Dictionary Matrix Decomposition in Thermal Imaging CFRP Defect Detection. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inf. 2019, 15, 40334043,  DOI: 10.1109/TII.2018.2881341
  17. 17
    He, Z.; Wang, H.; He, Y.; Zhang, G.; Wang, J.; Zou, G.; Chady, T. Joint Scanning Laser Thermography Defect Detection Method for Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer. IEEE Sens. J. 2020, 20, 328336,  DOI: 10.1109/JSEN.2019.2941077
  18. 18
    Shen, Z.; Chen, S.; Zhang, L.; Yao, K.; Tan, C. Y. Direct-Write Piezoelectric Ultrasonic Transducers for Non-Destructive Testing of Metal Plates. IEEE Sens. J. 2017, 17, 33543361,  DOI: 10.1109/JSEN.2017.2694454
  19. 19
    Gulbahar, B.; Memisoglu, G. CSSTag: Optical Nanoscale Radar and Particle Tracking for In-Body and Microfluidic Systems With Vibrating Graphene and Resonance Energy Transfer. IEEE Trans. Nanobiosci. 2017, 16, 905916,  DOI: 10.1109/TNB.2017.2785226
  20. 20
    Yin, S.; Zhao, Z.; Luan, W.; Tu, S.-T. In-Situ Strain Gauge: Based on Photoluminescence of Quantum Dots. Procedia Eng. 2015, 130, 17881794,  DOI: 10.1016/j.proeng.2015.12.335
  21. 21
    Shauloff, N.; Bhattacharya, S.; Jelinek, R. Elastic Carbon Dot/Polymer Films for Fluorescent Tensile Sensing and Mechano-Optical Tuning. Carbon 2019, 152, 363371,  DOI: 10.1016/j.carbon.2019.06.046
  22. 22
    Blohowiak, K. Improvements in Surface Preparation Methods for Adhesive Bonding SERDP/ESTCP Workshop. Def. Tech. Inf. Cent. 2008, A604688
  23. 23
    Mazza, J. J.; Avram, J. B.; Kuhbander, R. J. Grit-Blast/Silane (GBS) Aluminum Surface Preparation for Structural Adhesive Bonding. Def. Tech. Inf. Cent. 2003, ADA415239
  24. 24
    Mazza, J. J.; Gaskin, G. B.; De Piero, W. S.; Blohowiak, K. Y. Sol-Gel Technology for Low-Voc Nonchromated Adhesive Bonding Applications SERDP Project PP-1113, Task 1. Def. Tech. Inf. Cent. 2004, ADA423563
  25. 25
    Kleinschmidt, D.; James, M.; Jensen, R.; Jaworowski, M.; Zhang, W.; Stropki, J.; Gadkari, V.; Tienda, K.; Blohowiak, K.; Kutscha, E. Understanding Corrosion Protection Requirements for Adhesive Bond Primers. Def. Tech. Inf. Cent. 2016, AD1092341
  26. 26
    Blohowiak, K. Y.; Anderson, R. A.; Stephenson, R. R. Structure Technology and Analysis Program (STAP) Delivery Order 0010: Sol-Gel Technology for Surface Preparation of Metal Alloys for Adhesive Bonding and Sealing Operations. Def. Tech. Inf. Cent. 2001, ADA419256
  27. 27
    McCray, D. B. Nonmetals Test and Evaluation Delivery Order 0007: The Development of On-Aircraft Surface Preparations Utilizing Sol-Gel Coatings for Adhesive Bonding Aluminum Alloys. Def. Tech. Inf. Cent. 2001, ADA406628
  28. 28
    Li, S.; Zhang, K.; Yang, J.-M.; Lin, L.; Yang, H. Single Quantum Dots As Local Temperature Markers. Nano Lett. 2007, 7, 31023105,  DOI: 10.1021/nl071606p
  29. 29
    Pietka, B. Excitonic Complexes in Natural Quantum Dots Formed in Type II GaAs/AlAs Structures. Ph.D. Thesis, Université Joseph-Fourier: Grenoble, 2007.
  30. 30
    Bryant, G. W.; Zieliński, M.; Malkova, N.; Sims, J.; Jaskólski, W.; Aizpurua, J. Effect of Mechanical Strain on the Optical Properties of Quantum Dots: Controlling Exciton Shape, Orientation, and Phase with a Mechanical Strain. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2010, 105. 067404 DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.105.067404 .
  31. 31
    Kuo, M. K.; Lin, T. R.; Hong, K. B.; Liao, B. T.; Lee, H. T.; Yu, C. H. Two-Step Strain Analysis of Self-Assembled InAs/GaAs Quantum Dots. Semicond. Sci. Technol. 2006, 21, 626632,  DOI: 10.1088/0268-1242/21/5/010
  32. 32
    Zhang, Y.; Chen, Y.; Mietschke, M.; Zhang, L.; Yuan, F.; Abel, S.; Hühne, R.; Nielsch, K.; Fompeyrine, J.; Ding, F.; Schmidt, O. G. Monolithically Integrated Microelectromechanical Systems for On-Chip Strain Engineering of Quantum Dots. Nano Lett. 2016, 16, 57855791,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.nanolett.6b02523
  33. 33
    Sherburne, M. X-Ray Detection and Strain Sensing Applications of Colloidal Quantum Dots. M.Sc. Thesis, Air Force Institute of Technology, 2020.
  34. 34
    Zhou, W.; Liu, Y.; Yang, Y.; Wu, P. Band Gap Engineering of SnO2 by Epitaxial Strain: Experimental and Theoretical Investigations. J. Phys. Chem. C 2014, 118, 64486453,  DOI: 10.1021/jp500546r
  35. 35
    Yu, P. Y.; Cardona, M. Fundamentals of Semiconductors; Springer: Berlin, 2010; Chapter 3, pp 121127.
  36. 36
    Blake, A. J.; Kohlmeyer, R. R.; Drummy, L. F.; Gutiérrez-Kolar, J. S.; Carpena-Núñez, J.; Maruyama, B.; Shahbazian-Yassar, R.; Huang, H.; Durstock, M. F. Creasable Batteries: Understanding Failure Modes through Dynamic Electrochemical Mechanical Testing. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2016, 8, 51965204,  DOI: 10.1021/acsami.5b11175
  37. 37
    Rocha, T. L.; Mestre, N. C.; Sabóia-Morais, S. M. T.; Bebianno, M. J. Environmental Behaviour and Ecotoxicity of Quantum Dots at Various Trophic Levels: A Review. Environ. Int. 2017, 98, 117,  DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2016.09.021
  38. 38
    Roark, R. Roark’s Formulas for Stress and Strain; McGraw-Hill: New York, 2002; Chapter 2, pp 915.
  39. 39
    Chung, K.-H.; Pratt, J. R.; Reitsma, M. G. Lateral Force Calibration: Accurate Procedures for Colloidal Probe Friction Measurements in Atomic Force Microscopy. Langmuir 2010, 26, 13861394,  DOI: 10.1021/la902488r
  40. 40
    Schaufele, F.; Demarco, I.; Day, R. N. Molecular Imaging; Elsevier Inc., 2005; pp 7294.
  41. 41
    Hammer, N. I.; Emrick, T.; Barnes, M. D. Quantum Dots Coordinated With Conjugated Organic Ligands: New Nanomaterials With Novel Photophysics. Nanoscale Res. Lett. 2007, 2, 282290,  DOI: 10.1007/s11671-007-9062-8
  42. 42
    Bae, W. K.; Padilha, L. A.; Park, Y.-S.; McDaniel, H.; Robel, I.; Pietryga, J. M.; Klimov, V. I. Controlled Alloying of the Core–Shell Interface in CdSe/CdS Quantum Dots for Suppression of Auger Recombination. ACS Nano 2013, 7, 34113419,  DOI: 10.1021/nn4002825
  43. 43
    Selopal, G. S.; Zhao, H.; Liu, G.; Zhang, H.; Tong, X.; Wang, K.; Tang, J.; Sun, X.; Sun, S.; Vidal, F.; Wang, Y.; Wang, Z. M.; Rosei, F. Interfacial Engineering in Colloidal “Giant” Quantum Dots for High-Performance Photovoltaics. Nano Energy 2019, 55, 377388,  DOI: 10.1016/j.nanoen.2018.11.001

Cited By

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!
Citation Statements
Explore this article's citation statements on scite.ai

This article is cited by 6 publications.

  1. Michael Sherburne, Cameron Harjes, Benjamin Klitsner, Jonathan Gigax, Sergei Ivanov, Edl Schamiloglu, Jane Lehr. Rapid Prototyping for Nanoparticle-Based Photonic Crystal Fiber Sensors. Sensors 2024, 24 (12) , 3707. https://doi.org/10.3390/s24123707
  2. Özgür Keleş, Prathamesh P. Deshpande. Mechanical behavior of graphene quantum dot epoxy nanocomposites: A molecular dynamics study. Materials Letters 2024, 362 , 136206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matlet.2024.136206
  3. Jae‐Hyun Kim, Joseph Rosenfeld, Ye Chan Kim, Sean Choe, Russell J. Composto, Daeyeon Lee, Rémi Dreyfus. Polymer‐Grafted, Gold Nanoparticle‐Based Nano‐Capsules as Reversible Colorimetric Tensile Strain Sensors. Small 2023, 19 (36) https://doi.org/10.1002/smll.202300361
  4. Sultan Şahin, Özge Ergüder, Levent Trabzon, Caner Ünlü. Quantum dots for sensing applications. 2023, 443-473. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-88431-0.00025-9
  5. Fuqian Yang. Contact-induced change of the bandgap of semiconductors of the wurtzite structure. Journal of Applied Physics 2021, 129 (6) https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0041029
  6. Michael D. Sherburne, Candice R. Roberts, John S. Brewer, Thomas E. Weber, Tod V. Laurvick, Hengky Chandrahalim. Strain Sensing Using Colloidal Quantum Dots Integrated With Epoxy. 2020, 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1109/SENSORS47125.2020.9278933

ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces

Cite this: ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2020, 12, 39, 44156–44162
Click to copy citationCitation copied!
https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.0c12110
Published September 2, 2020

Copyright © 2020 American Chemical Society. This publication is licensed under CC-BY-NC-ND.

Article Views

3743

Altmetric

-

Citations

Learn about these metrics

Article Views are the COUNTER-compliant sum of full text article downloads since November 2008 (both PDF and HTML) across all institutions and individuals. These metrics are regularly updated to reflect usage leading up to the last few days.

Citations are the number of other articles citing this article, calculated by Crossref and updated daily. Find more information about Crossref citation counts.

The Altmetric Attention Score is a quantitative measure of the attention that a research article has received online. Clicking on the donut icon will load a page at altmetric.com with additional details about the score and the social media presence for the given article. Find more information on the Altmetric Attention Score and how the score is calculated.

  • Abstract

    Figure 1

    Figure 1. Graphic of a CQD where the inner core (pink), outer shell (yellow), and polymer ligands (black lines) can be seen. Sherburne, M. X-Ray Detection and Strain Sensing Applications of Colloidal Quantum Dots. M.S. Thesis, Air Force Institute of Technology, March 2020. (33)

    Figure 2

    Figure 2. Three-dimensional surface model of the coated stainless steel dog-bone with the CQD polymer matrix applied. The left half of the image contained the CQD-loaded polymer matrix coating, while the right half was only the precoating (Solvay BR 6747-1) on top of the stainless steel. (a) Three-dimensional surface image of the dog-bone. (b) Two-dimensional (2D) cross-section through the CQD-loaded polymer and precoated polymer boundary.

    Figure 3

    Figure 3. (a) Illustration of the experimental setup. (b) Labeled photo of the experimental setup. Sherburne, M. X-Ray Detection and Strain Sensing Applications of Colloidal Quantum Dots. M.S. Thesis, Air Force Institute of Technology, March 2020. (33)

    Figure 4

    Figure 4. This figure shows the three-step process from (a) collecting the spectral data from the experiment, (b) applying a calibration, and then (c) plotting the calibrated optical strain data in relation to the mechanical reference strain data.

    Figure 5

    Figure 5. DIC images showing the surface strains of a sample. The mechanical strains correlated for their respective DIC images were the following: (D1) 0.04, (D2) 0.08, (D3) 0.09, and (D4) 0.1. The orange dashed boxes showed, where the CQD-loaded polymer coating would be during the optical experiment.

  • References


    This article references 43 other publications.

    1. 1
      Prine, D. Inspection of Nuclear Power Component Welds by In-Process Acoustic-Emission Monitoring. NDT Int. 1976, 9, 281284,  DOI: 10.1016/0308-9126(76)90069-9
    2. 2
      Avdelidis, N.; Almond, D.; Dobbinson, A.; Hawtin, B.; Ibarra-Castanedo, C.; Maldague, X. Aircraft Composites Assessment by Means of Transient Thermal NDT. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 2004, 40, 143162,  DOI: 10.1016/j.paerosci.2004.03.001
    3. 3
      Eich, M.; Bonnin-Pascual, F.; Garcia-Fidalgo, E.; Ortiz, A.; Bruzzone, G.; Koveos, Y.; Kirchner, F. A Robot Application for Marine Vessel Inspection. J. Field Rob. 2014, 31, 319341,  DOI: 10.1002/rob.21498
    4. 4
      Pohl, R.; Erhard, A.; Montag, H.-J.; Thomas, H.-M.; Wüstenberg, H. NDT Techniques for Railroad Wheel and Gauge Corner Inspection. NDT&E Int. 2004, 37, 8994,  DOI: 10.1016/j.ndteint.2003.06.001
    5. 5
      Capozzoli, L.; Rizzo, E. Combined NDT Techniques in Civil Engineering Applications: Laboratory and Real Test. Constr. Build. Mater. 2017, 154, 11391150,  DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.07.147
    6. 6
      Losey, S. Air Force Chief Wright: Innovation Crucial to Win the Next War , online, 2018.
    7. 7
      Tian, G. Y.; Sophian, A. Reduction of Lift-Off Effects for Pulsed Eddy Current NDT. NDT&E Int. 2005, 38, 319324,  DOI: 10.1016/j.ndteint.2004.09.007
    8. 8
      Hashem, J. A.; Pryor, M.; Landsberger, S.; Hunter, J.; Janecky, D. R. Automating High-Precision X-Ray and Neutron Imaging Applications With Robotics. IEEE Trans. Autom. Sci. Eng. 2018, 15, 663674,  DOI: 10.1109/TASE.2017.2675709
    9. 9
      Cheng, Y.; Deng, Y.; Bai, L.; Chen, K. Enhanced Laser-Based Magneto-Optic Imaging System for Nondestructive Evaluation Applications. IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas. 2013, 62, 11921198,  DOI: 10.1109/TIM.2012.2220039
    10. 10
      Bassim, M.; Dudar, M.; Rifaat, R.; Roller, R. Application of Acoustic Emission for Non-Destructive Evaluation of Utility Inductive Reactors. IEEE Trans. Power Delivery 1993, 8, 281284,  DOI: 10.1109/61.180347
    11. 11
      Wu, E.; Ke, Y.; Du, B. Noncontact Laser Inspection Based on a PSD for the Inner Surface of Minidiameter Pipes. IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas. 2009, 58, 21692173,  DOI: 10.1109/TIM.2008.2006727
    12. 12
      Yeh, C.-Y.; Zoughi, R. A Novel Microwave Method for Detection of Long Surface Cracks in Metals. IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas. 1994, 43, 719725,  DOI: 10.1109/19.328896
    13. 13
      Zhang, H.; Gao, B.; Tian, G. Y.; Woo, W. L.; Bai, L. Metal Defects Sizing and Detection Under Thick Coating Using Microwave NDT. NDT&E Int. 2013, 60, 5261,  DOI: 10.1016/j.ndteint.2013.07.002
    14. 14
      Şimşir, M.; Ankara, A. Comparison of Two Non-Destructive Inspection Techniques on the Basis of Sensitivity and Reliability. Mater. Des. 2007, 28, 14331439,  DOI: 10.1016/j.matdes.2006.03.019
    15. 15
      Roy, D.; Tuli, S. Applicability of LED-Based Excitation Source for Defect Depth Resolved Frequency Modulated Thermal Wave Imaging. IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas. 2017, 66, 26582665,  DOI: 10.1109/TIM.2017.2711798
    16. 16
      Ahmed, J.; Gao, B.; Woo, W. L. Wavelet-Integrated Alternating Sparse Dictionary Matrix Decomposition in Thermal Imaging CFRP Defect Detection. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inf. 2019, 15, 40334043,  DOI: 10.1109/TII.2018.2881341
    17. 17
      He, Z.; Wang, H.; He, Y.; Zhang, G.; Wang, J.; Zou, G.; Chady, T. Joint Scanning Laser Thermography Defect Detection Method for Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer. IEEE Sens. J. 2020, 20, 328336,  DOI: 10.1109/JSEN.2019.2941077
    18. 18
      Shen, Z.; Chen, S.; Zhang, L.; Yao, K.; Tan, C. Y. Direct-Write Piezoelectric Ultrasonic Transducers for Non-Destructive Testing of Metal Plates. IEEE Sens. J. 2017, 17, 33543361,  DOI: 10.1109/JSEN.2017.2694454
    19. 19
      Gulbahar, B.; Memisoglu, G. CSSTag: Optical Nanoscale Radar and Particle Tracking for In-Body and Microfluidic Systems With Vibrating Graphene and Resonance Energy Transfer. IEEE Trans. Nanobiosci. 2017, 16, 905916,  DOI: 10.1109/TNB.2017.2785226
    20. 20
      Yin, S.; Zhao, Z.; Luan, W.; Tu, S.-T. In-Situ Strain Gauge: Based on Photoluminescence of Quantum Dots. Procedia Eng. 2015, 130, 17881794,  DOI: 10.1016/j.proeng.2015.12.335
    21. 21
      Shauloff, N.; Bhattacharya, S.; Jelinek, R. Elastic Carbon Dot/Polymer Films for Fluorescent Tensile Sensing and Mechano-Optical Tuning. Carbon 2019, 152, 363371,  DOI: 10.1016/j.carbon.2019.06.046
    22. 22
      Blohowiak, K. Improvements in Surface Preparation Methods for Adhesive Bonding SERDP/ESTCP Workshop. Def. Tech. Inf. Cent. 2008, A604688
    23. 23
      Mazza, J. J.; Avram, J. B.; Kuhbander, R. J. Grit-Blast/Silane (GBS) Aluminum Surface Preparation for Structural Adhesive Bonding. Def. Tech. Inf. Cent. 2003, ADA415239
    24. 24
      Mazza, J. J.; Gaskin, G. B.; De Piero, W. S.; Blohowiak, K. Y. Sol-Gel Technology for Low-Voc Nonchromated Adhesive Bonding Applications SERDP Project PP-1113, Task 1. Def. Tech. Inf. Cent. 2004, ADA423563
    25. 25
      Kleinschmidt, D.; James, M.; Jensen, R.; Jaworowski, M.; Zhang, W.; Stropki, J.; Gadkari, V.; Tienda, K.; Blohowiak, K.; Kutscha, E. Understanding Corrosion Protection Requirements for Adhesive Bond Primers. Def. Tech. Inf. Cent. 2016, AD1092341
    26. 26
      Blohowiak, K. Y.; Anderson, R. A.; Stephenson, R. R. Structure Technology and Analysis Program (STAP) Delivery Order 0010: Sol-Gel Technology for Surface Preparation of Metal Alloys for Adhesive Bonding and Sealing Operations. Def. Tech. Inf. Cent. 2001, ADA419256
    27. 27
      McCray, D. B. Nonmetals Test and Evaluation Delivery Order 0007: The Development of On-Aircraft Surface Preparations Utilizing Sol-Gel Coatings for Adhesive Bonding Aluminum Alloys. Def. Tech. Inf. Cent. 2001, ADA406628
    28. 28
      Li, S.; Zhang, K.; Yang, J.-M.; Lin, L.; Yang, H. Single Quantum Dots As Local Temperature Markers. Nano Lett. 2007, 7, 31023105,  DOI: 10.1021/nl071606p
    29. 29
      Pietka, B. Excitonic Complexes in Natural Quantum Dots Formed in Type II GaAs/AlAs Structures. Ph.D. Thesis, Université Joseph-Fourier: Grenoble, 2007.
    30. 30
      Bryant, G. W.; Zieliński, M.; Malkova, N.; Sims, J.; Jaskólski, W.; Aizpurua, J. Effect of Mechanical Strain on the Optical Properties of Quantum Dots: Controlling Exciton Shape, Orientation, and Phase with a Mechanical Strain. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2010, 105. 067404 DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.105.067404 .
    31. 31
      Kuo, M. K.; Lin, T. R.; Hong, K. B.; Liao, B. T.; Lee, H. T.; Yu, C. H. Two-Step Strain Analysis of Self-Assembled InAs/GaAs Quantum Dots. Semicond. Sci. Technol. 2006, 21, 626632,  DOI: 10.1088/0268-1242/21/5/010
    32. 32
      Zhang, Y.; Chen, Y.; Mietschke, M.; Zhang, L.; Yuan, F.; Abel, S.; Hühne, R.; Nielsch, K.; Fompeyrine, J.; Ding, F.; Schmidt, O. G. Monolithically Integrated Microelectromechanical Systems for On-Chip Strain Engineering of Quantum Dots. Nano Lett. 2016, 16, 57855791,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.nanolett.6b02523
    33. 33
      Sherburne, M. X-Ray Detection and Strain Sensing Applications of Colloidal Quantum Dots. M.Sc. Thesis, Air Force Institute of Technology, 2020.
    34. 34
      Zhou, W.; Liu, Y.; Yang, Y.; Wu, P. Band Gap Engineering of SnO2 by Epitaxial Strain: Experimental and Theoretical Investigations. J. Phys. Chem. C 2014, 118, 64486453,  DOI: 10.1021/jp500546r
    35. 35
      Yu, P. Y.; Cardona, M. Fundamentals of Semiconductors; Springer: Berlin, 2010; Chapter 3, pp 121127.
    36. 36
      Blake, A. J.; Kohlmeyer, R. R.; Drummy, L. F.; Gutiérrez-Kolar, J. S.; Carpena-Núñez, J.; Maruyama, B.; Shahbazian-Yassar, R.; Huang, H.; Durstock, M. F. Creasable Batteries: Understanding Failure Modes through Dynamic Electrochemical Mechanical Testing. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2016, 8, 51965204,  DOI: 10.1021/acsami.5b11175
    37. 37
      Rocha, T. L.; Mestre, N. C.; Sabóia-Morais, S. M. T.; Bebianno, M. J. Environmental Behaviour and Ecotoxicity of Quantum Dots at Various Trophic Levels: A Review. Environ. Int. 2017, 98, 117,  DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2016.09.021
    38. 38
      Roark, R. Roark’s Formulas for Stress and Strain; McGraw-Hill: New York, 2002; Chapter 2, pp 915.
    39. 39
      Chung, K.-H.; Pratt, J. R.; Reitsma, M. G. Lateral Force Calibration: Accurate Procedures for Colloidal Probe Friction Measurements in Atomic Force Microscopy. Langmuir 2010, 26, 13861394,  DOI: 10.1021/la902488r
    40. 40
      Schaufele, F.; Demarco, I.; Day, R. N. Molecular Imaging; Elsevier Inc., 2005; pp 7294.
    41. 41
      Hammer, N. I.; Emrick, T.; Barnes, M. D. Quantum Dots Coordinated With Conjugated Organic Ligands: New Nanomaterials With Novel Photophysics. Nanoscale Res. Lett. 2007, 2, 282290,  DOI: 10.1007/s11671-007-9062-8
    42. 42
      Bae, W. K.; Padilha, L. A.; Park, Y.-S.; McDaniel, H.; Robel, I.; Pietryga, J. M.; Klimov, V. I. Controlled Alloying of the Core–Shell Interface in CdSe/CdS Quantum Dots for Suppression of Auger Recombination. ACS Nano 2013, 7, 34113419,  DOI: 10.1021/nn4002825
    43. 43
      Selopal, G. S.; Zhao, H.; Liu, G.; Zhang, H.; Tong, X.; Wang, K.; Tang, J.; Sun, X.; Sun, S.; Vidal, F.; Wang, Y.; Wang, Z. M.; Rosei, F. Interfacial Engineering in Colloidal “Giant” Quantum Dots for High-Performance Photovoltaics. Nano Energy 2019, 55, 377388,  DOI: 10.1016/j.nanoen.2018.11.001
  • Supporting Information

    Supporting Information


    The Supporting Information is available free of charge at https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsami.0c12110.

    • Graphical animation of the optical spectra changing along the mechanical stress–strain curve (AVI)


    Terms & Conditions

    Most electronic Supporting Information files are available without a subscription to ACS Web Editions. Such files may be downloaded by article for research use (if there is a public use license linked to the relevant article, that license may permit other uses). Permission may be obtained from ACS for other uses through requests via the RightsLink permission system: http://pubs.acs.org/page/copyright/permissions.html.