Do these 3 things before closing this tab:
1Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errors2Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitches3Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsiTechGuides is reader-supported. When you buy through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. Learn more
Researchers filmed carbon nanotubes turning as they grew. A 2009 news report said atoms were added at the growing tip in a regular pattern, an observation it presented as support for a screw-dislocation-like growth model. Later work used optical microscopy and video analysis to track thousands of individual nanotubes, revealing a different level of detail: how their growth rates and activity changed over time.
What did the 2009 nanotube video show?
The report titled “Nanotube growth caught on camera” describes carbon nanotubes turning as they grew. It says atoms were added at the growing tip in a regular pattern and links that behavior to a screw-dislocation-like (SDL) growth model.
That is the report’s interpretation, not a mechanism that can be independently evaluated from the brief account. The item does not identify the underlying research paper or researchers, nor does it give experimental details such as the camera, resolution, or imaging method. It is therefore safest to describe the observation and the model the report proposed without treating the mechanism as definitively established.
The Tool Desk
Outbyte Driver Updater FREEScan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →Outbyte PC Repair FREEClear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →How can researchers see a carbon nanotube growing?
In situ imaging means observing a material while it is being made, rather than examining it only after synthesis. Different imaging methods reveal different things: atomic-scale imaging can show catalyst particles and structural changes, while optical microscopy can track the motion and growth of individual nanotubes over time.
#1 Best Overall
A related 2009 Nano Letters paper on site-specific fabrication of iron particles for carbon nanotube growth reports atomic-level in situ observations of iron catalyst particles. The available information does not establish that this was the paper behind the 2009 camera headline.
What did later optical videos reveal?
A separate 2025 study by Pimonov, Tahir, and Jourdain used homodyne polarization microscopy to record individual nanotubes during synthesis. The team grew horizontally aligned nanotubes in a miniature chemical vapor deposition cell using ST-cut quartz, iron nanoparticles, ethanol as the carbon precursor, and argon as the carrier gas. Its custom optical setup used crossed polarizers, a long-distance objective, and a Hamamatsu digital camera.
Rank #2
- The setup recorded at rates of up to 40 frames per second.
- The researchers extracted growth rates, lifetimes, and final segment lengths for more than 2,000 nanotubes across more than 50 in situ videos.
- Video analysis showed that observed nanotubes could switch among growth, pauses, and etching even under nominally constant synthesis conditions. The paper does not imply that every nanotube followed this pattern.
These measurements describe the 2025 study, not the unidentified experiment in the 2009 news report. They also answer a different question: optical tracking quantifies individual nanotubes’ kinetics, while atomic-level imaging can reveal details of catalyst particles and structure.
Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
How did the researchers track nanotubes in the videos?
Low-contrast video makes it difficult to identify the same nanotube reliably from frame to frame, especially when growth pauses, material shrinks, or structures change. The 2025 team enhanced image contrast and used a Mask R-CNN deep-learning system to recognize and track image features. Researchers then manually checked tracks and labeled complex kinetic events.
For its own workflow comparison, the paper reports approximately six hours per video for manual extraction at five-second time resolution, compared with two hours at one-second resolution using its deep-learning workflow—an approximately 15-fold increase in throughput for kinetic extraction. This is the authors’ comparison for that particular method and analysis, not a general benchmark or evidence of a fully automated process.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.Can you watch the nanotubes growing yourself?
The 2025 paper says supplementary image sequences can be viewed with the free ImageJ software. That lets readers inspect the study’s supplied videos, but reproducing the experiment requires specialized synthesis and microscopy equipment; an ordinary consumer camera or microscope is not a substitute.
Quick Recap
Rank #4
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
