The XRD analysis was accomplished with an X’ Pert3 Powder X-ray diffractometer (PANalytical, Almelo, The Netherlands). Cu Kα radiation (λ = 1.541 Å) was used. The scattering angle range of 2θ was from 5° to 45° with a scan rate of 5°·min−1.
X pert3 powder x ray diffractometer
Manufactured by Malvern Panalytical
Sourced in United Kingdom, Netherlands
The X'Pert3 Powder X-ray diffractometer is a laboratory instrument designed to analyze the crystalline structure of solid materials. It utilizes X-ray diffraction technology to identify and quantify the various crystalline phases present in a sample. The instrument is capable of performing a range of analytical tasks, including phase identification, phase quantification, and structural characterization.
Automatically generated - may contain errors
Lab products found in correlation
Jem 2010, by JEOL (1 mentions)
Uv 2600, by Shimadzu (1 mentions)
Nicolet is10 ft ir spectrometer, by Thermo Fisher Scientific (1 mentions)
Labram hr evolution raman spectrometer, by Horiba (1 mentions)
Spectrum 100 ftir spectrometer, by PerkinElmer (1 mentions)
Tecnai f20 electron microscope, by Thermo Fisher Scientific (1 mentions)
Axis ultra x ray photoelectron spectroscope, by Shimadzu (1 mentions)
Labram aramis spectrometer, by Horiba (1 mentions)
S 4800 scanning electron microscope, by Hitachi (1 mentions)
Ft 4100 spectrometer, by Jasco (1 mentions)
Nrs 5100 micro raman spectrometer, by Jasco (1 mentions)
Dtg 60h, by Shimadzu (1 mentions)
6700f fe sem, by JEOL (1 mentions)
Innova afm, by Bruker (1 mentions)
X celerator, by Malvern Panalytical (1 mentions)
Evolution 300 uv vis spectrophotometer, by Thermo Fisher Scientific (1 mentions)
Spectrum gx ft ir spectrophotometer, by PerkinElmer (1 mentions)
Zetasizer nano zs90, by Malvern Panalytical (1 mentions)
19 protocols using x pert3 powder x ray diffractometer
1
XRD Analysis of Powder Samples
2
Characterization of Iron Oxide and Zinc Oxide Nanoparticles
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
Proper iron oxide NPs and coating with ZnO NPs were characterized by using various instruments, such as UV-visible spectroscope (Shimadzu UV-2600), high-resolution transmission electron microscope (HRTEM, JEOL-JEM-2010), dynamic light scattering (DLS) instrument, X-ray diffractometer (X’Pert3 powder X-ray Diffractometer, PANalytical), and Fourier transform infrared spectroscope (FTIR) (JASCO 4600).
3
Quantifying Silk Crystallinity via XRD
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
XRD was used to identify the crystalline phases present in the micro-samples. All XRD measurements were obtained using an X’Pert3 Powder X-ray diffractometer (PANalytical, Almelo, Netherlands) with Cu-Kα radiation from a source operated at 40 kV and 40 mA. The silk samples were mounted on aluminum frames and scanned from 5° to 50° (2θ) at a scan rate of 2.0°/min. The relative crystallinity of each sample was calculated using MDI JADE 6.5 software. During the deconvolution process, the numbers and positions of the peaks were fixed using previously reported methods [28 (link),29 (link),30 (link)]. The sample crystallinity was evaluated according to the following Equation (1):
where X is the net area of the crystal peaks, and Y is the net area of crystal peaks + amorphous halo [31 (link),32 (link),33 (link)].
where X is the net area of the crystal peaks, and Y is the net area of crystal peaks + amorphous halo [31 (link),32 (link),33 (link)].
4
Comprehensive Materials Characterization Protocol
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) images were obtained on Nova NanoSEM field emission scanning electron microscope (Frequency Electronics, Inc., USA). Chromium was used as a conductive material to coat the samples.
N2-BET isotherms were measured with a Quadrasorb Evo fully-automatic specific surface and pore size distribution analyzer (Quantachrome, Inc., USA).
Raman spectra were collected with a LabRAM HR Evolution Raman spectrometer (Horiba, Inc., Japan). The wavenumber range was 50–4000 cm−1.
X-ray diffraction (XRD) measurements were performed using an X'Pert3 powder X-ray diffractometer (PANalytical, Inc., Netherlands).
X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) was carried out using a K-Alpha X-ray photoelectron spectrometer (Horiba, Inc., Japan). The excitation source was Al Kα rays (hv = 1486.6 eV) with a beam spot of 400 μm.
FTIR spectra were collected using a Nicolet iS10 FTIR spectrometer (Thermo Fisher, Inc., USA). The wavenumber range was 4000–400 cm−1.
TD-DTG was collected with HCT-1 synchronous TG-DTA thermal analyzer (Beijing Hengjiu Experimental Equipment Co. Ltd., China).
N2-BET isotherms were measured with a Quadrasorb Evo fully-automatic specific surface and pore size distribution analyzer (Quantachrome, Inc., USA).
Raman spectra were collected with a LabRAM HR Evolution Raman spectrometer (Horiba, Inc., Japan). The wavenumber range was 50–4000 cm−1.
X-ray diffraction (XRD) measurements were performed using an X'Pert3 powder X-ray diffractometer (PANalytical, Inc., Netherlands).
X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) was carried out using a K-Alpha X-ray photoelectron spectrometer (Horiba, Inc., Japan). The excitation source was Al Kα rays (hv = 1486.6 eV) with a beam spot of 400 μm.
FTIR spectra were collected using a Nicolet iS10 FTIR spectrometer (Thermo Fisher, Inc., USA). The wavenumber range was 4000–400 cm−1.
TD-DTG was collected with HCT-1 synchronous TG-DTA thermal analyzer (Beijing Hengjiu Experimental Equipment Co. Ltd., China).
5
Synthesis and Characterization of Mo2N Thin Films
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
Mo2N thin films were synthesized
on 0.1 mm thick polycrystalline Mo (Alfa Aesar, 99.95%) foils cut
into 1 cm × 2 cm rectangles. The cut foils were sonicated for
5 min in ethanol to remove surface oils, washed in deionized (DI)
water, sonicated for 5 min in 1 M NaOH to remove surface oxides, and
received a final wash in DI water prior to being loaded into a horizontal
quartz tube furnace. Nitridification was conducted under a 150 cm3/min flow of 100% ammonia, where the furnace temperature was
ramped from 298 to 1123 K at a linear rate of 7 K/min and kept at
1123 K for 10 h. The sample was then gradually cooled under the same
gas condition to room temperature. The furnace was purged with Ar,
and nitride foils were removed.
The Mo2N foils were
characterized using both X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) and
X-ray diffraction (XRD). An ultrahigh vacuum (UHV) chamber equipped
with XPS was used to quantify the Mo/N ratios under a base pressure
of 2 × 10–9 Torr. XPS measurements were conducted
using a PHI 5600 XPS equipped with a hemispherical analyzer and an
Al X-ray source. XRD measurements were conducted using a Cu Kα
X-ray source in a PANalytical XPERT3 Powder X-ray diffractometer that
measured both symmetric and 3° glancing incidence (GI) scans.
on 0.1 mm thick polycrystalline Mo (Alfa Aesar, 99.95%) foils cut
into 1 cm × 2 cm rectangles. The cut foils were sonicated for
5 min in ethanol to remove surface oils, washed in deionized (DI)
water, sonicated for 5 min in 1 M NaOH to remove surface oxides, and
received a final wash in DI water prior to being loaded into a horizontal
quartz tube furnace. Nitridification was conducted under a 150 cm3/min flow of 100% ammonia, where the furnace temperature was
ramped from 298 to 1123 K at a linear rate of 7 K/min and kept at
1123 K for 10 h. The sample was then gradually cooled under the same
gas condition to room temperature. The furnace was purged with Ar,
and nitride foils were removed.
The Mo2N foils were
characterized using both X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) and
X-ray diffraction (XRD). An ultrahigh vacuum (UHV) chamber equipped
with XPS was used to quantify the Mo/N ratios under a base pressure
of 2 × 10–9 Torr. XPS measurements were conducted
using a PHI 5600 XPS equipped with a hemispherical analyzer and an
Al X-ray source. XRD measurements were conducted using a Cu Kα
X-ray source in a PANalytical XPERT3 Powder X-ray diffractometer that
measured both symmetric and 3° glancing incidence (GI) scans.
6
Structural Analysis of Ordered Starch
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
The ordered starch structure in the discs was analyzed by an X’Pert3 Powder X-ray diffractometer (PANalytical, Amsterdam, The Netherlands) and a Spectrum100 FT-IR spectrometer (Perkin-Elmer, Waltham, MA, USA). The diffractometer was operated at 40 kV and 40 mA across the diffraction angle range of 4°(2θ)–40°(2θ) at a scanning rate of 2°/min. The MDI-Jade 6.0 software (Material Date, Sacramento, CA, USA) was utilized to calculate the relative crystallinity. For FT-IR, the obtained spectrum was processed by deconvolution using a PeakFit software (version 4.12, SeaSolve Software Inc., Boston, MA, USA) [32 (link)].
7
Structural Analysis of Silk Fibers
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
Single silk fibers were used for attenuated total reflectance Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy (ATR-FTIR) and X-ray diffraction (XRD) as described previously [17 (link)]. ATR-FTIR was performed using a Nicolet iN10 with a Slide-On ATR objective lens (Thermo Scientific). The spectra of silk fibers were measured in the 650–4000 cm–1 range at a resolution of 8 cm–1 with 256 scans. The applied ATR was set to 75 current pressure. The spectral data were collected and processed using OMNIC v. 9 (Thermo Scientific) and PeakFit v. 4.12, including baseline correction, deconvolution of amide I bands, and peak fitting. XRD was performed using an X’Pert3 Powder X-ray diffractometer (PANalytical, Almelo, Netherlands) with Cu Kα radiation from a source operated at 40 kV and 40 mA. Following a previously described method [17 (link)], all samples were mounted on aluminum frames and scanned from 5° to 50° (2θ) at a speed of 2.0°/min. MDI JADE 6.5 was used to calculate the relative crystallinity, according to the following formula: crystallinity (%) = (X/Y) × 100; where, X is the net area of diffracted peaks and Y is the net area of diffracted peaks + background area [17 (link)].
8
X-ray Diffraction of ABZ Powders
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
The ABZ and ABZ-BA powders were characterized by an X’Pert3 Powder X-ray diffractometer (PANalytical, Inc. U.K.), a voltage of 40 kV, and a current of 40 mA. The samples were scanned from 2θ = 5 to 35° at a scanning speed of 1°/min, and the step size was at 0.01° 2θ [10 (link)].
9
Advanced Characterization of Novel Materials
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
The SEM images were obtained on a Hitachi S4800 scanning electron microscope. The XRD measurements were performed on a PANalytical X'Pert3 Powder X-ray diffractometer using monochromatic Cu-Kα radiation (λ = 1.5406 Å, 40 kV, 40 mA). XPS measurements were performed on a Kratos Analytical AXIS Ultra X-ray photoelectron spectroscope with Al-Kα radiation (hν = 1486.71 eV). The X-ray source was operated at 225 W with 15 kV acceleration voltage. The C 1s line at 284.8 eV was used to calibrate the binding energies. The TEM study was performed on an FEI Tecnai F20 electron microscope. The 3D electron diffraction data were collected by the rotation electron diffraction method, which was processed on a JEOL-2100 transmission electron microscope with an operation voltage of 200 kV. Raman spectroscopy measurements were carried out on a Horiba Jobin-Yvon LabRAM ARAMIS spectrometer with a 532 nm laser excitation.
10
Characterization of PET-Reinforced Cement
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
The compressive strengths of the prepared samples were measured according to displacement control at a constant rate of 1.0 mm/min. The hardened cement samples containing PET powder were crushed and ground into powder for characterization. Similarly, the PET powder samples immersed in different solutions were retrieved and vacuum filtered. The characterization techniques employed in this study include isothermal calorimetry, XRD, thermogravimetric analysis (TGA), FT–IR spectroscopy, and Raman spectroscopy.
Isothermal calorimetry was conducted using a three-point multipurpose conduction calorimeter (Tokyo–Riko Co., Ltd., Tokyo, Japan). Dry mixtures and water were mixed in the vessels, allowing the measurement of heat release at the start of mixing. XRD patterns were obtained using an X’Pert3–Powder X–ray diffractometer (PANalytical, Malvern, Worcestershire, UK), operating at 30 mA and 40 kV with Cu K-α radiation. The samples were scanned over a 2ϴ angle range of 5–65° with a step size of 0.026° for 1.5 h. TGA was conducted using DTG–60H (Shimadzu, Kyoto, Japan) at a heating rate of 10 °C/min in N2. FT–IR spectra were obtained using an FT–4100 spectrometer (JASCO, Tokyo, Japan). Raman spectra were obtained using an NRS–5100 Micro Raman Spectrometer (JASCO, Tokyo, Japan) with a 532-nm beam in the spectral range of 98–4000 cm−1.
Isothermal calorimetry was conducted using a three-point multipurpose conduction calorimeter (Tokyo–Riko Co., Ltd., Tokyo, Japan). Dry mixtures and water were mixed in the vessels, allowing the measurement of heat release at the start of mixing. XRD patterns were obtained using an X’Pert3–Powder X–ray diffractometer (PANalytical, Malvern, Worcestershire, UK), operating at 30 mA and 40 kV with Cu K-α radiation. The samples were scanned over a 2ϴ angle range of 5–65° with a step size of 0.026° for 1.5 h. TGA was conducted using DTG–60H (Shimadzu, Kyoto, Japan) at a heating rate of 10 °C/min in N2. FT–IR spectra were obtained using an FT–4100 spectrometer (JASCO, Tokyo, Japan). Raman spectra were obtained using an NRS–5100 Micro Raman Spectrometer (JASCO, Tokyo, Japan) with a 532-nm beam in the spectral range of 98–4000 cm−1.
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
Revolutionizing how scientists
search and build protocols!