The largest database of trusted experimental protocols

5 protocols using tristar 2 3020 surface area and porosity analyzer

1

Comprehensive Surface Analysis of CoMn2O4

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The surface elemental composition of the sample was analyzed by the ESCALAB 250XI X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA) using Al K-alpha radiation under conditions optimized for the maximum signal (spot size, 500 µm; lens mode, standard; analyzer mode, CAE; pass energy 30.0 eV; energy step size, 0.050 eV). Wide scans were recorded for the CoMn2O4, whilst the core level peaks that were recorded in detail were: C 1s and O 1s, Co 2p and Mn 2p.
The morphologies were determined using the Quanta400FEG scanning electron microscope (SEM, FEI, Hillsboro, OR, USA) at 20 kV and the JEM-2100F transmission electron microscope (TEM, JEOL, Tokyo, Japan). The elemental composition was determined using a Horiba EX-250 energy-dispersive X-ray (EDX, Kyoto, Japan) at 20 kV.
The crystal structure of the synthesized sample was confirmed through the X-ray diffraction spectra recorded in the 2θ range of 5–80° (scan rate of 0.06° s−1), using a Cu–Kα (λ = 0.154 nm) wavelength D8-advanced X-ray diffractometer (XRD, Bruker, Karlsruhe, Germany) at 40 kV and 30 mA.
The specific surface area and the pore size distribution were determined using the TriStar II 3020 surface area and porosity analyzer (Micromeritics, Atlanta, GA, USA) at the liquid nitrogen temperature (−196 °C).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
2

Characterization of Porous Nanocomposite Sensors

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The microstructure of the porous architectures was investigated by scanning electron microscopy (SEM, JSM-7600F, Japan). The tensile performance of the nanocomposite sensors were evaluated by dynamic mechanical analysis (DMA, TA Q800). X-ray diffraction (XRD) measurements were carried out at room temperature with specular reflection mode (Cu Ka radiation, X'Pert PRO, PANalytical, Holland). Raman spectra were obtained with a Renishaw in Via Raman Spectroscope, using the 632.8 nm line of a He-Ne laser. Micromeritics TriStar II 3020 Surface Area and Porosity Analyzer was used to obtain nitrogen adsorption desorption isotherms and gave the Brunauer-Emmett-Teller (BET) specific surface area. The electromechanical response of the strain sensors was evaluated by measuring the resistance using a Keithley 4200-SCS electrometer (Keithley, Cleveland, Ohio, USA) when each sample was subjected to uniaxial stretch by a home-built stretching stage. At least five specimens were tested for each type of nanocomposites. The measured electrical conductivities of the RGO foams, CRGO foams, and the CRGO foam/PDMS nanocomposites were similar in different directions due to the interconnected graphene-based cell walls.
Mechanical and electromechanical tests of the sensors were performed when the tensile direction is along the transverse direction for all the samples unless mentioned otherwise.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
3

Comprehensive SEM Characterization of Freestanding Films

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The surface morphology of both sides and cross-sectional view of the freestanding films, and also the element composition of the films and BGNPs, was assessed using the SEM JSM-6010 LV (JEOL, Tokyo, Japan) coupled with EDS (INCAx-Act, PentaFET Precision, Oxford Instruments, Abingdon, UK). For the observation of the cross-section, the films were fractured using nitrogen. Cross-Sectional SEM views were obtained from the LbL films before and after cross-linking with genipin, and the correspondent film thickness was estimated using the software ImageJ. The surface morphology of the BGNPs was characterized by a high-resolution field emission SEM with focused ion beam (AURIGA Compact FIB-SEM, Carl Zeiss, Oberkochen, Germany). Before each analysis, except for EDS, the samples were sputtered with a gold layer, using a sputter coater EM ACE600 (Leica Microsystems, Wetzlar, Germany). The specific surface area of the BGNPs was measured by determining the N2-gas adsorption isotherms using a TriStar II 3020 surface area and porosity analyzer (Micromeritics Instrument Corporation, Norcross, GA, USA). The samples were degassed at 130 °C overnight before measurements.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
4

Comprehensive Material Characterization Protocol

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The XRD patterns were gained via a Bruker D8. The SEM images were acquired using a Hitachi S-4800 instrument operating at 5 kV. The TEM photographs were gained from JEOL JEM 1400F (JEOL Ltd., Tokyo, Japan) with an accelerating voltage of 120 kV, and high-angle annular dark-field scanning transmission electron microscopy (HAADF-STEM) photographs were acquired from FEI Talos F200S (Thermo Fisher Scientific, New York, NY, USA). The SSA of samples was determined using a Tristar II 3020 surface area and porosity analyzer (Micromeritics, Norcross, GA, USA) according to the Brunauer–Emmett–Teller (BET) method. The UV–Vis diffuse reflectance spectrum was obtained by a PuXi TU-1901 UV–Vis spectrophotometer (Puxi, Beijing, China), with BaSO4 as the reference. XPS patterns were tested using a Thermo Fisher Scientific ESCALAB 250Xi (Thermo Fisher Scientific, New York, NY, USA) with a monochromatic Al-Kα line source, where the standard C1s peak centered at 284.8 eV was used as the reference. The electron paramagnetic resonance (EPR) patterns were obtained via a Bruker EMX-nano (Bruker, Karlsruhe, Germany).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
5

Multimodal Characterization of Carbon Materials

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
X-ray diffraction (XRD, BRUKER D8 Advance, Germany) was used to determine the structure of the samples. Raman spectroscopy (HORIBA JY LabRAM HR Evolution, France) was performed at a laser wavelength of 532 nm. Defects were analyzed by electron paramagnetic resonance (EPR; SE/X-type X-band spectrometer, Poland) at a microwave frequency of 9.06 GHz. The morphologies were observed using field-emission scanning electron microscopy (FESEM; SUPRA 55 Sapphire, Zeiss, Germany) and high-resolution transmission electron microscopy (HRTEM; FEI Tecnai G2 F20s-twin 200 kV, USA). A TriStar II 3020 surface-area and porosity analyzer (Micromeritics, Georgia, USA) was used to perform N2 adsorption–desorption experiments. The specific surface area was calculated using the BET method. The microporous specific surface area (Smic) and micropore volume (Vmic) were calculated by the t-plot method. Pore size distributions (PSDs) were determined by density functional theory (DFT). The element composition and content of as-prepared carbon materials were analyzed with an element analyzer (Vario EL cube, Germany).
The electrode sheet after full charge/discharge was washed with dimethyl carbonate (DMC) before ex situ testing. Ex situ X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) was carried out after the electrode material was etched 10, 50, 100 and 150 nm, respectively.
+ 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!