Dsx510

After drug treatment, the rats were killed by deep anesthesia with isoflurane. Bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) fluid was collected [19 (link)] by instilling 1 mM EDTA/PBS into the lungs through a tracheal cannula using 0.5 ml solution five times, for a total of 2.5 ml. Following collection of the BAL fluid, AMs were isolated by centrifugation at 2400 rpm (1000 g) for 10 min at 4°C [20 (link)]. Cells were resuspended in 1 ml RPMI-1640 mediaum(Sigma–Aldrich) supplemented with 10% FBS (Gibco). Subsequently, 200 μl of resuspended cells were seeded in a 12-well culture plate (Corning Life Sciences) with 800 μl medium. The cells were allowed to adhere for 4 h at 37°C with 5% CO₂ and observed under a light microscope (DSX510, Olympus, Japan). Then, the non-adherent cells were removed. The purity of the AMs was confirmed by flow cytometry with anti-CD14 antibody.

Optical images of the metal mesh were captured through an optical microscope (DSX510, OLYMPUS, Japan; Phenix MC‐D500U(C), China). The microstructure and cross‐section of the metal mesh was characterized via field‐emission SEM (MERLIN Compact, Zeiss, Germany). The printing process of the embedded metal mesh was captured by a high‐speed camera (i‐SPEED221, IX Cameras, UK). The embedded metal mesh was conductivity‐treated in a vacuum drying oven (DHG‐903385‐III, Shanghai Shengke Instrument Equipment Co., Ltd., China). The optical transmittance of the metal mesh was measured with a UV–vis spectrophotometer (UV‐6100, Metash, China). The heating performance of FTE was captured by infrared thermal imaging (TG165, FLIR Systems. USA). The R_s of the FTE is measured by a milliohmmeter (AT516, Applent Instruments Co., Ltd., China). The damp heat test of embedded metal mesh was measured by constant temperature and humidity test chamber (Dongguan Seth Testing Equipment Co., Ltd., China). The bending fatigue test was completed via a self‐developed test system.

The joint appearances were captured by a Nikon D7200 digital camera (Bangkok, Thailand). The cross-sectional samples were cut into proper sizes by an electro-discharge machine and mechanically polished to mirror-like surfaces. The etching solutions were 20 g of NaOH with 100 mL of distilled water for Al alloy and 4% HNO₃ ethanol for Mg alloy. The macroscopic morphologies were observed by the optical microscopy (OM, DSX-510, Olympus, Tokyo, Japan). The microstructures and chemical compositions were investigated via scanning electron microscopy (SEM, JSM 6480, JEOL, Tokyo, Japan) and energy dispersive X-ray spectrometer (EDS, Oxford Instruments, Abingdon, UK) in the secondary electron mode.

After treatment or patterning, graphene was first evaluated by optical microscopy using a DSX 510 instrument (Olympus, Tokyo, Japan) with 10× and 50× lenses. Images were captured using bright field (BF) mode, and samples were checked by micro Raman spectroscopy (inVia, Renishaw, UK). Raman measurements were taken at an excitation wavelength of 532 nm. Raman mapping of patterned graphene was performed by measuring the peak intensities for 2D-bands at ~ 2683 cm^-1, G-bands at ~ 1590, and D-bands at 1350 cm^-1. SEM using an SU8220 instrument (Hitachi High Tech Corporation, Tokyo, Japan) combined with EDS using a 5060FlatQUAD instrument (Bruker Corporation, Yokohama, Japan) were employed to assess the structure of patterned graphene, and to investigate the elemental distributions by mapping of carbon and oxygen in the graphene arrays. SEM and EDS measurements were performed at an acceleration voltage of 5 kV and an emission current of 10 µA. AFM images were obtained by a Nanosearch scanning probe microscope combined with an optical/laser microscope (Shimadzu, Tokyo, Japan).

An optical digital microscope (Olympus, DSX 510, Tokyo, Japan) was utilized to capture images of the etched surfaces, while Olympus stream software was used to determine the grain size of the friction-stir-processed surface as well as the base material, following ASTM 112-13 [20 (link)]. A line intercept procedure (average of horizontal and vertical intercept lengths) was adopted in measuring the average grain size as per the recommendation of the ASTM-112-13 standard. More insights into grain morphology parameters, as well as the method used to measure grain size, are shown in Figures and Tables S1–S4 (Supplementary Material). In addition, images of corroded samples were acquired using a field emission Scanning Electron Microscope (FESEM) (Quanta 250, Bruno, Czech Republic). Analysis of the present phases for the base and all processed samples was performed using X-ray Diffraction (XRD) in a Bruker diffractometer (D2 PHASER) that operated at 30 kV with CuK_α (λ_α = 1.54 Å). A micro indenter (Micro Combi, CSM Instruments, Peseux, Switzerland) was utilized to measure the hardness and elastic modulus of the base and processed samples. A pyramidal indenter was used at a normal force of 3 N for 10 s dwell time. The test was repeated six times and the average values of microhardness and elastic modulus were recorded.