The largest database of trusted experimental protocols

124 protocols using axis ultra

1

Comprehensive Nanoparticle Characterization

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The nanoparticles were characterized
using scanning electron microscopy (SEM, Inspect FEI F50), atomic
force microscopy (AFM, Nanoscope 8.10 tapping mode), X-ray photoelectron
spectroscopy (XPS, Kratos Axis Ultra, with a monochromatic Al Ka X-ray
source), XRD (Bruker D8 ADVANCE ECO, Co Kα, λ = 1.7889
A), ATR-FTIR (Perkin Elmer Frontier), UV–vis spectroscopy (Agilent
technologies Cary 60 Uv–vis), and TEM (Tecnai_G2_Spirit). Particles
were collected using a centrifuge (Dynamica VELOCITY 14R). Magnetization
measurements were carried out using a Quantum design MPMS at 295 K
in the field range ± 1.50 T.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
2

Comprehensive Characterization of ZnO Nanoparticles

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The morphology of the ZnO NPs was analyzed via SEM using a JEOL JSM-5300 scanning electron microscope, at a working distance of 11 mm and a voltage of 15 kV. The elemental composition was performed via EDS coupled to the SEM equipment, using Aztec software (Oxford). The TEM analysis was performed with a JEOL JEM-2010F transmission electron microscope, with an acceleration of 120 kV. The structural analysis of the ZnO NPs was performed using an ATR-IR piece of equipment (Perkin Elmer Brand, 0.5 cm−1 resolution and 400 to 3500 cm−1 measurement range) and via XRD (Bruker-D2 Phase, with a radiation of Cu Ka = 1.541 Å at a step of 0.022 from 10 to 80°). For the elemental chemical analysis, an XPS system (Axis-Ultra, Kratos, in SPECS system using Al Kα monochromatic X-rays at 1486.6 eV) was used. To evaluate the optical properties of the NPs, the PL (Horiba Nanlog, using ethanol as solvent and a concentration of 100 ppm) and UV-Vis (Perkin Elmer brand spectrophotometer, Lambda 365 with a wavelength of 190–800 nm, and a scanning speed of 600 nm/s) spectra were analyzed.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
3

Comprehensive Characterization of Photovoltaic Devices

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The IV measurements and
stability test were performed using a
Keithley 2400 digital source meter under simulated sunlight from a
Newport 94123A solar simulator matching the AM 1.5G irradiation (100
mW cm–2). The devices were measured from 1.4 to
−0.2 V at a scan rate of 10 mV/s. XPS was carried out on PHI
5000 Versa Probe III. EQE was measured by Enlitech QE-R3011. UV-absorption
spectra were recorded using a Youke UV-1901 UV–vis spectrometer.
AFM scans were obtained by Bruker Dimension Edge. STEM was performed
by an FEI Titan Themis (300 kV). The contact angle measurement was
carried out by a contact angle meter (OSA25, Kruss). SCLC and conductivity
were tested using a Keithley 2400 digital source meter. Ultraviolet
photoelectron spectroscopy (UPS) was performed using a UPS system
(Kratos, Axis Ultra) using HeI radiation of 21.22 eV.
XRD patterns
were obtained using an EMPYREAN four-circle diffractometer operated
at 40 kV and 30 mA at a scan rate of 20° per minute. SEM images
were obtained using a field-emission scanning electron microscope
(FEI inspect) at an acceleration voltage of 8 kV. Steady-state PL
and TRPL were measured using Edinburgh Instruments, FLS 920 equipped
with a light source with an excitation wavelength of 375 nm. EIS plots
were measured using a CorrTest Electrochemical Workstation under dark
conditions.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
4

Comprehensive Material Characterization

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The morphology of the sample was characterized by environmental scanning electron microscope, E-SEM, (Quanta 200 s, Phillips Electron Optics Company) and transmission electron microscope, TEM, (JEOL JEM-2100, USA). X-ray diffraction, XRD pattern was collected using a diffractometer (Rigaku SmartLab) equipped with a Cu Kα radiation source (λ = 1.5406 A). The electronic states of the different elements in the sample were examined using X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy, XPS, (Kratos Axis Ultra).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
5

Comprehensive Structural and Surface Analysis of Nanomaterials

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
TEM, field emission SEM, and HAADF-STEM with EDS detectors for elemental mapping analysis were taken on JEOL-7700, JEOL-7800, and HF-5000 microscopes, respectively. Samples for TEM and SEM analysis were prepared by dispersing samples in ethanol via ultrasonication and dried on a copper grid and silicon substrates, respectively. ET tilt series were carried out by tilting the specimen inside Tecnai F30 G2 TEM over an angular range of −60° to 60° under the electron beam and the images were processed via IMODE software. Nitrogen adsorption/desorption measurement was conducted using a Micromeritics TriStar II system at 77 K. Before the measurement, all samples were degassed for 12 hours under a vacuum environment at 170°C. The pore size and specific surface area of samples were calculated through the BJH and BET methods, respectively. The zeta potential of the polymer core in reactive solution and PEI-modified SNP-x dispersed in water was tested by DLS using a Zetasizer NanoZS from Malvern Instruments. XPS measurement was conducted using a Kratos Axis ULTRA.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
6

Characterization of SnO2 Nanocrystals

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The crystal structure of the hydrogenated and non-hydrogenated SnO2 nanocrystals were characterized by X-ray diffraction (Haoyuan DX-2700, Dandong, China) using Cu Kα1 radiation with 2θ ranging from 20° to 80°. The morphology was analyzed by field-emission scanning electron microscope (Hitachi SU8020, Japan) with an acceleration voltage of 20 kV. The surface compositions were determined on an X-ray photoelectron spectroscope (Kratos Axis ultra, Japan) and on an infrared (IR) spectrometer (Bruker Tensor 27, Germany) by mixing 0.001 g of sample with 0.100 g of KBr and pressing into tablet.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
7

Comprehensive Materials Characterization Protocol

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Transmission
electron
microscopy (TEM) images of the samples were obtained on a JEOL JEM
1230 operated at 120 kV. Powder X-ray diffraction (XRD) patterns of
the samples were collected on a Bruker SMART APEXII X-ray diffractometer
equipped with a Cu Kα radiation source (λ = 1.5418 Å).
X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) measurements were carried out
in an ion-pumped chamber (evacuated to 10–9 Torr)
of a photoelectron spectrometer (Kratos Axis-Ultra) equipped with
a focused X-ray source (Al Kα, hν = 1486.6
eV). The UV–vis absorption spectra were recorded on a Cary
300 Bio UV–vis spectrophotometer. Fourier transform infrared
spectra were measured with an FTS 45 infrared spectrophotometer with
the KBr pellet technique. The photocurrent measurements were carried
out in a conventional three-electrode station (Autolab PGSTAT204).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
8

Surface Composition of Fluorinated Cellulose Ester

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Surface composition of the fluorinated
cellulose ester was evaluated using the AXIS Ultra instrument (Kratos
Analytical, U.K.). A sample, deposited on paper, was mounted on a
sample holder using an ultrahigh vacuum-compatible carbon tape and
pre-evacuated overnight. A fresh piece of pure cellulosic filter paper
(Whatman) was analyzed as an in situ reference. Measurements were
performed using monochromated Al Kα irradiation at 100 W and
under neutralization. Wide scans as well as high-resolution regions
of C 1s, O 1s, and F 1s were recorded on several locations with a
nominal analysis area of 400 × 800 μm2. Analysis
depth of the method is less than 5 nm. Data analysis was performed
with CasaXPS, and all binding energies were charge-corrected using
the main cellulosic C–O component at 286.7 eV as the reference.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
9

SEM, XRD, and Micro-Indentation Analysis of Regenerated Dental Layers

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The morphology of the reconstructed layer was observed on a scanning electron microscope (FEI company, NovaSEM 430, USA) operated at 10–20 kV. For higher resolution in the SEM image, all samples were coated with an Au/Pd film. The crystalline phase of the newly grown layer was examined by X-ray diffraction (Rigatu, D/max, USA) with Cu Kα radiation (λ = 1.5405) at 40 kV and 100 mA. An X-Ray Imaging Photoelectron Spectrometer (Kratos, Axis Ultra, UK) was used to analyze the chemical composition of the regenerated layer, with Al Kα X-rays at 40 kV with a power of 225 W.
A TriboIndenter (Hysitron Inc., US) with a 100 nm Berkovich tip at a maximum load of 1000 μN was used to measure the elastic modulus and hardness of our samples. All specimens were cut thinly so that the weak strength of dentin would not affect the final result. Three indents were performed for each sample, and results were analyzed statistically.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
10

X-ray Photoelectron Spectroscopy of Materials

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) was conducted using a Kratos
Analytical Axis Ultra instrument with a monochromated Al Kα X-ray source (1486.69 eV) operated at 15 kV and 10 mA (150 W) in
a 5 × 10–8 Torr chamber. Survey spectra were
collected using an analyzer pass energy of 160 eV, and binding energies
were collected from −5 to 1200 eV scanned at 1 eV increments.
Each step was integrated for 500 ms and the entire spectrum was averaged
across 5 sweeps. Regional C 1s spectra (276.9–300.0 eV) were
collected using the same conditions as the survey spectra, except
a pass energy of 20 eV (resolution of 0.4 eV) was used.
+ 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!