The largest database of trusted experimental protocols

15 protocols using nexsa g2

1

Nanomaterials Characterization Techniques

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The nanomaterials’
morphology was investigated by a field emission scanning electron
microscope (FE-SEM, Hitachi SU 6600, Japan). ImageJ was employed to
obtain the Au NP size distribution through a contrast filter. The
calculated diameter of the Au NPs (approximated as a circumference)
was retrieved thanks to the NP areas obtained by ImageJ. XPS analysis
was performed on a Nexsa G2 (Thermo Fisher Scientific) with an Al
Kα source (photon energy of 1486.7 eV; spot size of 100 μm).
The obtained data were evaluated by using Avantage software and CasaXPS.
High-resolution spectra were scaled using the adventitious carbon
peak as a reference. Raman spectra were collected using a DXR Raman
spectrometer (Thermo Scientific, Massachusetts) operating at 633 nm
and 4 mW. The PL spectroscopy measurements were performed on an FLS980
fluorescence spectrometer (Edinburgh Instruments) with double monochromators
on both excitation and emission sides, equipped with an R928P photomultiplier
in a thermoelectrically cooled housing (Hamamatsu Photonics), with
a 450 W xenon arc lamp as the excitation source. Spectral correction
curves were provided by Edinburgh Instruments.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
2

XPS and Contact Angle Analysis of Plasma-Treated THV Films

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The chemical surface compositions of the pristine (non-plasma-treated) and the O2 plasma-treated (setting given in Table 1 with 2 min exposure time) THV films were analyzed by a thermoscientific Nexsa G2 (Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc., Waltham, MA, USA) XPS system. The instrument used a monochromatized Al Kα X-ray source. The analyzer operated with a pass energy of 20 eV and a step size of 0.100 eV. The CF2 peak (292 eV [21 (link)]) was used for the calibration of the binding energy (BE) scale.
Likewise, the contact angles with distilled water (WCA) of the THV films were measured using a KRÜSS DSA100 (KRÜSS GmbH, Hamburg, Germany) drop shape analyzer (liq. vol. 2 µL, drops per setting n = 7).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
3

Structural and Compositional Analysis of LSCFP Nanofibers

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
X-ray diffraction (XRD) patterns of the LSCFP nanofibers were analyzed over a 2θ range of 20°–80° using a high-resolution X-ray diffractometer (Smartlab, Rigaku) with CuKα radiation (λ = 1.54 Å). The crystal structures were refined using Smartlab Studio II software package (Rigaku). The microstructure of the nanofibers and cell components was observed using field-emission scanning electron microscopy (FE-SEM, S-8230, Hitachi). Morphology and compositional properties of the LSCFP nanofibers were examined using high-resolution transmission electron microscopy (HR-TEM, Talos F200X, FEI) equipped with energy-dispersive X-ray (EDX) spectroscopy (Bruker). Surface oxidation states of the LSCFP nanofibers were analyzed by X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS, Nexsa G2, Thermo Fisher) with the CASA XPS software package. The CO2-temperature programmed desorption (CO2-TPD) was performed using an Autochem II 2920 (Micromeritics) equipped with a thermal conductivity detector. Measurements were conducted in a U-type quartz reactor using 0.2 g of sample. The sample was pre-treated in 50 sccm He at 400 °C for 1 h. Then, the CO2 adsorption experiment was carried out in CO2 of 50 sccm at 900 °C for 1 h. After cooling the sample to room temperature, the TPD curves were measured in 50 sccm He from room temperature to 900 °C.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
4

Characterization of Red Blood Cell-derived Quantum Dots

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
High resolution transmission electron microscopy (Talos F200S G2, Thermo Scientific) was employed to analyze the morphology and size of RBCQDs with an acceleration voltage set at 200 kV. Fourier transform infrared spectrometry (Nicolet iS50, Thermo Scientific) was used to investigate the infrared absorption spectra of ginsenoside Rb1, anhydrous ethylenediamine, and RBCQDs, with samples prepared using a potassium bromide pellet method. X-ray photoelectron spectrometry (Nexsa G2, Thermo Scientific) was utilized to analyze ginsenoside Rb1 and RBCQDs with a 300 W Al K radiation source. The fluorescence spectrometer (F-4700, HITACHI) was employed to evaluate the 3D fluorescence characteristics of RBCQDs. NanoBrook 90Plus PALS (BROOKHAVEN) was used for determining the hydrodynamic diameter and potential of RBCQDs.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
5

Structural Analysis of Sn3O4-RGO Nanocomposites

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The crystal structure and phase composition of each as-prepared sample were evaluated by the X-ray diffraction (XRD) system (PANalytical Empyrean diffractometer with Cu Kα radiation: λ = 1.5418 Å). The oscillation modes of each composite were investigated using 473 nm laser Raman spectroscopy (NTEGRA Spectra MT-MDT). The microstructure and morphology of Sn3O4-RGO nanocomposites were inspected by transmission electron microscope (TEM) with an accelerating voltage of 120 kV (Talos, L120C from Thermo Fisher Scientific, Eindhoven, The Netherlands). The composition of S, O, and C were analyzed by X-ray photoemission spectroscopy (XPS) system (NEXSA G2 from Thermo Fisher Scientific) using a monochromated Al Kα source (voltage source: 12 kV, beam size: 100 µm, pass energy survey scan: 200 eV, pass energy narrow scan: 100 eV).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
6

XPS Analysis of Rat Molars

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Two mandibular (M1) rat molars, one from Fer + SnF2 treated group and one from control group, were dissected and attached using copper tape (Electron Microscopy Sciences). XPS analysis was conducted using a Thermo Scientific Nexsa G2 using an Al-Ka X-ray source, with the following parameters: pressure of 2·10−9 torr (2.5·10−7 Pa), an X-ray gun power of 150 W, a spot diameter of 100 μm, and a takeoff angle of 0°. XPS survey spectra were acquired under a pass energy of 100 eV, using a step size of 1 eV. High-resolution spectra for F, Fe, Ca, P, O, Sn, Na, and Mg were acquired under a pass energy of 50 eV, using a step size of 0.1 eV, and averaging over 10 scans. For depth profiling, the surface was excavated using an argon ion beam (4 keV, diameter 500 μm, ‘high current’ mode, 30–300s increment) between successive spectra. All data were processed using Avantage (Thermo Scientific), and spectra were referenced to adventitious carbon at 284.8 eV.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
7

Characterization of Metal Nanostructures

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The metals and their alloys deposited on CC were subjected to X-ray diffraction (XRD), Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM), Energy Dispersive X-ray Spectroscopy (EDX), and Elemental Mapping. The morphology and microstructure were observed by SEM (FESEM thermoscientific Apreo C), XRD (Bruker D8 ADVANCE diffractometer) with CuKα radiation and by X-ray Photoelectron Spectroscopy (XPS, Nexsa G2, Thermoscientific, U.K equipped with mono-chromatised Al-Kα radiation (1486.6 eV)). The chemical composition of the nanostructures was analyzed using EDX and elemental mapping (Tescan Vega 3, Tescan Analytics).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
8

Advanced Characterization of Graphene Oxides

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The surface chemical composition of both GO and rGO was investigated by using various techniques, including Raman spectroscopy (inVia confocal Raman microscope, Renishaw), XRD (SmartLab, Rigaku), FT-IR (Spectrum 400, PerkinElmer) and XPS (Nexsa G2, Thermo Fisher Scientific). The surface morphologies of GO and rGO were examined through SEM (Verios G4, Thermo Fisher Scientific), TEM (Talos F200X G2, Thermo Fisher Scientific) and BET surface area analyzer (ASAP 2020, Micromeritics),.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
9

Multi-Modal Characterization of Advanced Materials

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Optical images are collected by optical microscopy (Nikon DS-Ri2). AFM topography is acquired on a Bruker Dimension 3000 in a tapping mode. SEM images are taken on Zeiss Supra 55. XPS spectra are collected from PHI Versaprobe II. TEM measurements are performed on a FEI Tecnai Osiris TEM, operating at a 200 keV accelerating voltage. SAED is measured on a JEOL 2100 TEM. The SAED simulation is performed through STEM_CELL software. PXRD scanning are performed on a Bruker D2 Phaser with Cu Kα radiation of wavelength λ = 1.54184 Å at 30 kV and 10 mA. SERS measurement is performed on a Horiba-JY T64000, using a triple-grating mode with 1800 g mm–1 gratings, and a 532 nm laser line. Solution- and solid-state UV–Vis spectra are taken with Agilent Cary 5000. REELS measurement is carried out on Thermo Scientific Nexsa G2 and data is analyzed using Avantage software.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
10

XPS and Contact Angle Analysis of Material Surfaces

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Chemical compositions of material surfaces were analyzed by X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) (Thermo Fisher Scientific ESCALAB 250X, USA). Monochromated Al Kα X-ray source of 1486.6 eV was used. XPS etching was performed with in situ XPS ion beam sputtering with argon (Thermo Fisher Scientific Nexsa G2, USA). The binding energy (BE) of the XPS was calibrated with respect to the pure bulk Au 4f7/2 (BE = 84.0 eV) and Cu 2p3/2 (BE = 932.7 eV) lines. The BE was referenced to the Fermi level (Ef) calibrated by using pure bulk Ni as Ef = 0 eV. The narrow spectra were further deconvoluted with XPSpeak 41 software.
The contact angles of materials investigated were measured by a drop-shape analysis system (JY-82B Kruss DSA, Germany) at room temperature with 2 μl of simulated body fluid (SBF).
+ 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!