The largest database of trusted experimental protocols

52 protocols using jem 2800

1

Comprehensive Characterization of Materials

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The crystallographic information and phase purity of the samples were investigated by X-ray diffraction (XRD, Rigaku D/MAX-2500) equipped with Cu-Kα radiation (λ = 0.15406 nm). The surface species and chemical states of the samples were measured by X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS, Thermo Fisher Scientific Escalab 250Xi) using an Al Kα X-ray source at 15 kV and 10 mA. The morphologies of the samples were characterized using scanning electron microscopy (SEM, Zeiss, 5.0–20.0 kV) with an EDX detector, fieldemission transmission electorn microscope (FE-TEM, JEOL JEM-2800, 200 keV) with an EDX detector.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
2

Size Distribution of Coated Nanoparticles

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
A typical size distribution of ACM-coated NaCl or NaNO2 is shown in SI Appendix, Fig. S11, where the mode diameter is seen to be ~120 nm. The morphologies and elemental composition of films and individual particles were determined by using a scanning transmission electron microscope (TEM, JEOL JEM-2800, USA) with energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS). More details on the TEM-EDS analysis are given in SI Appendix, Text S5.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
3

Multi-Technique Powder Characterization

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The structural
properties of all powders were investigated by using X-ray diffraction
(XRD, PANalytical X’pert PRO diffractometer with Cu Kα
radiation, λ = 0.15406 nm). The surface element states were
studied by X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS, Omicron Nanotechnology
Gmbh surface analysis system with a photon energy of 1486.7 eV, Al
Kα X-ray source). The bonding properties were characterized
using Raman spectroscopy (1000 UV Raman spectrometer with a laser
wavelength of 514 nm for measurement). The surface morphologies were
characterized by high-resolution scanning electron microscopy (HRSEM,
Zeiss Merlin HRSEM). The powders were cut by focused ion beam (FIB,
JEOL JLB-4700), and the corresponding elemental mappings were collected
by energy dispersive X-ray spectrometry (EDX). The local lattice parameters
were investigated by transmission electron microscopy (TEM, JEOL JEM-2800
with a beam voltage of 200 kV). The surface areas and pore sizes were
determined by utilizing the Brunauer–Emmett–Teller (BET,
Germini Vll of Micromeritics) technique.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
4

Characterizing CsMPs via TEM and STEM

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The thin specimens of the CsMPs were observed using a TEM (JEM-2010, JEOL) operated at 200 kV to characterise the inner structures of the CsMPs. EDS analysis was conducted using a STEM (JEM-2800, JEOL) operated at 200 kV equipped with a silicon drift detector (X-MaxN 100 TLE, Oxford Instruments). The probe size and current were ~1 nm and ~1 nA, respectively, and the collection angle (2θ) of the annular dark-field (ADF) detector was 46–208 mrad. Sample thickness measurement using EELS was also conducted using a spectrometer (Enfina, Gatan) attached to the STEM. The collection semi-angle was ca. 27 mrad and the full-width at half-maximum of the zero-loss peak was ca. 1.2 eV.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
5

Electrochemical Characterization of Nanocomposites

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
All electrochemical experiments were tested on a CHI660D electrochemical workstation (Chenhua, Shanghai, China). During all the tests, a platinum wire electrode was used as the counter electrode, an Ag/AgCl electrode was used as the reference electrode and a glassy carbon electrode (GCE, Ø = 3 mm) was used as the working electrode. Morphology of the as-prepared nanocomposites was investigated with field emission scanning electron microscope (FESEM, SU-8020, Hitachi, Japan) and transmission electron microscope (TEM, JEM-2800, Jeol, Japan). The crystallographic structure was carried out by X-ray diffraction (XRD, Smart Lab, Rigaku) with Cu Kα radiation in the 2θ range of 10°-90°. X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) was performed by ESCALAB 250xi (Thermo Fisher Scientific, America). Energy-dispersive spectroscopy (EDS) was performed by X-Max 80/EX-270 (HORIBA, Japan).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
6

Comprehensive Characterization of Catalyst Samples

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Morphologies of samples were characterized by scanning electron microscope (SEM, SU3500, HITACHI and MERLIN Compact, ZEISS) and transmission electron microscopy (TEM, JEM‐2800, JEOL and FEI Talos F200X G2, FEI). The crystallographic information was analyzed by X‐ray diffraction (XRD, Ultima IV, Rigaku) equipped with a Cu Kα radiation source. Specific surface areas, pore volume, and pore size of samples were determined using N2 physisorption isotherms at 77 K (ASAP 2020 PLUS Analyzer, Micromeritic). CO2 uptake amount were determined at 298 K (ASAP 2020 V4.03, Micromeritic). Metal loadings in the catalysts were determined by inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrometry (ICP‐OES, SpectroBlue, Spectro). X‐ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS, Thermo ESCALAB 250XI, ThermoFisher), The charging effect was corrected using the C1s level (284.8 eV) as the reference. XAFS spectra at the copper K edge and were collected at Australian Synchrotron, ANSTO. Synchrotron powder X‐ray diffraction (Synchrotron PXRD) measurements were measured at PD beamline, Australian Synchrotron, ANSTO with a wavelength of λ = 0.77471 Å. UV–vis absorption diffuse reflectance spectra (UV–vis DRS) were recorded on a Cary 100 UV–vis spectrophotometer using an integrating sphere accessory.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
7

Electron Microscopy Sample Preparation

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Cells sheets or tissues were fixed overnight at 4 °C in a solution containing 2.5% glutaraldehyde, 1% paraformaldehyde, 100 mM cacodylate buffer at pH 7.4, 6 mM CaCl2, and 4.8% sucrose. The next day, cells were washed three times for 5 min each with cacodylate buffer, post-fixed with 2% osmium tetroxide at room temperature for 45 min, washed twice for 5 min with cacodylate buffer, then washed once with distilled water for 5 min. Specimens were then stained with saturated uranyl acetate for 45 min at room temperature, washed three times for 5 min each with distilled water, then dehydrated with consecutive ethanol washes (30%, 50%, 70%, twice at 95%, and three times with 100%) for 15 min each. This was followed by dehydration with absolute acetone three times for 10 min each. Specimens were infiltrated with consecutive EPON epoxy resin incubations (30% for 5 h, 70% overnight, three times with 100% for 8 h). 70 nm thick sections were made using a Leica Ultra Cut 6 ultratome, and imaged using a JEOL JEM-2800 operated at an accelerating voltage of 200 kV.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
8

Comprehensive Characterization of Annealed Nanotubes

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Morphology of amorphous and annealed NTs was observed using a field emission scanning electron microscope (FE-SEM, Hitachi, S-4800). The dimensions (Length, wall thickness, diameter) and uniformity of NTs were analysed using ImageJ software. A total of 10 nanotube dimensions for each sample was measured and the standard deviation for each dimension was also calculated. The crystal phases present within the NTs after annealing were observed using x-ray diffractometer (Rigaku MiniFlex 600) with CuKα radiation (λ = 1.54 A) between 2θ = 20°–80° at a rate of 0.025°/s. The XRD pattern were analysed using PDXL software. The Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) and Selected Area electron Diffraction (SAED) patterns were generated using high resolution transmission electron microscope (S/TEM, JEOL JEM-2800), and were analysed using Gatan, and ImageJ. Raman spectra were produced using micro-Raman spectroscopy (WiTec AlphaSNOM).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
9

Structural Characterization of ZIF-62 Variants

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
All samples were ground in an agate mortar containing a few drops of EtOH. The resulting samples were diluted with EtOH and drop-cast onto 200-mesh copper grids, coated with a carbon film (Rigorous). Subsequently, the samples were dried in an oven at 70 °C. The HR-TEM and ED measurements were carried out at the Electron Microscopy Facility at IST Austria using the S/TEM JEOL JEM2800 instrument with an accelerating voltage of 200 kV equipped with a complementary metal–oxide–semiconductor transmission electron microscopy (TEM) camera (TemCam-XF416) for the HR-TEM images and a 1,024 × 1,024 pixel charge-coupled device camera (Hamamatsu ORCA R2) for the ED images. Although amorphous agZIF-62nP and agZIF-62P display a relatively robust beam tolerance, the crystalline ZIF-62 samples are very beam sensitive. To mitigate the effects of beam damage on ZIF-62, the electron beam was deliberately blocked on identifying the target crystals until the optimal magnification and focus distance were set. Subsequently, snapshots were taken to minimize any potential beam-induced alterations in the samples. The reported interatomic distance distributions were measured using the EM Measure Beta 0.85 software package. Reported values are averaged over a total of 200 counts, consisting of two independent counts of 100 counts per sample.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
10

Characterization of Si-NSs Nanomaterials

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The crystal structure, morphology and microstructure of the samples were characterized by X–ray diffraction (XRD, D8 Advance, Bruker, Germany), Raman spectroscopy (Raman, LabRAM HR Evolution, Horiba, Japan), scanning electron microscopy (SEM, JSM-7001F, JEOL, Japan), an energy–dispersive X–ray spectrometer (EDX), a transmission electron microscope (TEM, JEM-2800, JEOL, Japan), and X–ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS, Scientific K–Alpha, Thermo, Waltham, MA, USA). The Si–NSs content of the samples was measured by thermogravimetric analysis (TGA, 7300, Hitachi, Japan) in the air atmosphere and inductively coupled plasma spectrometer (ICP, 5110, Agilent, Santa Clara, CA, USA). The specific surface area and pore size distribution of the samples were tested by a specific surface area analyzer (BET, ASAP2460, Micromeritics, Norcross, GA, USA).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand

About PubCompare

Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.

We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.

However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.

Ready to get started?

Sign up for free.
Registration takes 20 seconds.
Available from any computer
No download required

Sign up now

Revolutionizing how scientists
search and build protocols!