Questions related to Surface Science
It is known that the surface/interfacial tension tension can be measured by pendant drop method and the following equation: IFT=deltaro*g*de^2/H. 1/H is function of ds/de (1/H=f(ds/de)). I used this function for 1/H and it is okay for gas/liquid systems. When I used this this function for liquid-liquid mixtures, such as water-hexane (T=298.15 K and P=1 bar), it does not answer. Is 1/H different for liquid-liquid mixtures?
I am currently working on cosmetic formulations.
I transferred the samples of emulsion into 50 ml bottles.
They were then held for a week at either room temperature (23 ±1 °C) or -15 ±1 °C before being heated to 23±1 °C.
However, when I measured the viscosity of samples, it appears that the cold sample is more viscous after thawing.
Does anyone have any ideas on the cause of the increase?
Having a background in health science I am aware that the term "interphase" is a biological one which describes a stage of cell division. Specifically it is defined as the resting phase between successive mitotic divisions of a cell, or between the first and second divisions of meiosis.
This may be compared to a materials science definition for "interface" as the region formed when two phases (systems) are in contact through which the intensive properties of one phase transfer to the other.
When I would read "SEI" defined as solid electrolyte interphase in papers within my current field, I would always have a quiet giggle to myself and wonder how it gets past the editors, even in high impact publications. But I recently found myself forced to reassess my position, after digging around in foundational work on the SEI thing by Peled et al (1979). This paper has "interphase" in its title, and I believe there are peers who consider this to be the original work defining SEI. An excerpt from the paper:
It acts as an interphase between the metal and the solution and has the properties of solid electrolyte, through which electrons are not allowed to pass. Therefore, it is called "Solid Electrolyte Interphase (SEI)."
So the discussion is this, if these authors coined the term SEI, shouldn't it be acceptable for us as materials scientists to misappropriate "interphase" for our own purposes, and to hold our ground on it? On the other hand, what is science without clarity in our terminology? And how is "interphase" in a materials context saying anything more or less than the previously defined term "interface"?
The one thing I feel confident about is that we shouldn't be reading interchangeable definitions for the same thing, just depending on the source. Let alone seeing it arbitrarily interchanged within a single source - yes I have read individual papers where SEI is both "interphase" and "interface"...
it means that, if want generate active sites onto latex glove waste via chemical modification. what is procedure and chemical that can be use. your response is highly needed. thank you
I'm starting to work with DDSCAT (http://www.astro.princeton.edu/~draine/DDSCAT.html). In the examples there structures standards. But still do not understand how I can create new structures and what software to use it. I need to create a cluster of nanoparticles.
Most of the reported mixed metal oxides are prepared from their precursor materials. I want to prepare mixed metal oxides from already prepared metal oxide materials. For example, CaO and Fe2O3 are available commercially, I want to combine them together via a suitable chemical method like making a core-shell structure, or CaO coating on Fe2O3 surface. Please give me an idea on how to make mixed metal oxides from prepared metal oxide and send me any reference articles.
The materials that are in contact with food are supposed to be classified as not only environmentally friendly but also potentially non-toxic to humans. Nowadays, some researchers suggest that organic and bio-based waxes could be good choices for lowering the surface energy and thus fabricating super-liquid-repellent surfaces. What else besides waxes do you recommend to be used for fabricating superhydrophobic and/or superomniphobic surfaces?
I have used FTIR to measure both the gas phase CO and surface adsorbed CO (on Ni powder catalyst with Al2O3 and SiO2 as substrate, DRIFTS mode). The Ni-C bond should lower the strength of the C-O bond (backdonation theory, etc), thus lower its vibrational frequency, but we have consistently observed the opposite: the surface CO has higher wavenumber than the gas phase CO. I am wondering how could this be possible?
I have attached a graph which compare the two spectra.
I am going to order 300nm oxide SiO2/Si wafers as a substrate for MoS2 growth by CVD and I am confused with the characteristics of these wafers. I have got quotations for dry thermal oxides with TTV<2um and I am not sure what parameter shows the best surface for the growth.
I appreciate your time and response to this question.
The problem I have is that the film is not uniform. It is CVD grown on 270 nm SiO2 on Si substrate. I have tried using Tauc-Lorentz model according to a paper. But, in my opinion the problem comes from the fact that I have voids and thus the fitted data didn't follow the paper's prediction. Any suggestion is greatly appreciated. Thanks!
I try to find a solution to the navigation problem. There is a navigation system consists of three navigation positions, forming two bases (one position belongs two bases) and emitting three different signals. It provides us the opportunity to get two navigation parameters - two Time Differences of Arrival. So we have two surfaces - hyperboloids. But I need to complement my system with another navigation parameter, like Time of Arrival to find the 3d coordinates of my position.
What should I use as the third parameter to get the simplest equations, expressing my coordinates?
It could be Time of Arrival only from one position; Time of Arrival between two positions. But it could be two Times of Arrival which provide me the opportunity of having more information.
How can I find the equations, expressing my 3d coordinates in this navigation system?
I have a system of equations:
x1 = a*cosh(m1)*cos(n1)
y1 = a*sinh(m1)*sin(n1)
x2 = b*cosh(m2)*cos(n2)
y2 = b*sinh(m2)*sin(n2)
alpha - the angle between the bases.
I can suppose that the bases are equivalent and m1=m2. Then I obtain the problem of intersection of tho circles. It is the right way?
I know helium is the most commonly used gas in the discharge lamps used in UPS, and that you can also use Neon or Argon. But I can't seem to find any information on why helium is the go to choice?
Is it because of the higher photon energy or higher intensity or something else entirely?
Thanks in advance for any responses.
I'm trying to analyze a thin film using a rotational sample holder. I hope azimuthal rotation would help to reduce the effect of induced surface roughness. How fast should I rotate the sample to improve the surface sensitivity?
Thanks in advance
I have scanned some of my experimental surfaces using Zeta and Alicona optical profilometers. Is there any opensource software to perform measurement of areal texture parameters on the output files of these instruments.
PS: I have take readings of major areal texture parameters from these instruments. I am expecting that such software will allow me to analyse more areal texture parameters than those given in the interface of the above mentioned profilometers.
I have grafted a layer of epoxysilane on a thermoset silane-crosslinked polyethylene. The thickness of the grafted layer is below 30 nm and the thickness of the crosslinked polyethylene substrate is 2 mm. A reviewer has asked me to perform 1HNMR and 13C-NMR analysis, in addition to ATR-FTIR and XPS, to characterize the functionalities in the nanometric layer. I should add that both the epoxy-silane layer and substrate are crosslinked and not soluble. I was wondering if you could guide me on how can I perform NMR analysis in order to detect the variations only in the nanometric layer on the surface (i.e., a surface-specific NMR).
Suppose avg. grain size, crystal structure, young's Modulus, fracture strength, velocity of sound and surface roughness of both the crushed crystals (before and after crushing ) and the crushing surfaces, as well as load on grinding surface, static/dynamic friction coefficients are known. Then, is it possible to estimate the crushing sound of the crystals?
Conversely, if crushing sound of the crystals are analyzed, is it possible to find any mathematical relation between the variables outlined?
I am asking the questions since crushing minerals and recording-analyzing the sound require no sophisticated instrument at all.
Please provide relevant research links.
I applied epoxy coating over hot rolled mild steel substrate using film applicator. After a while some of the areas are devoid of any resin or there are empty spaces wherein I can clearly feel the substrate ? They are not air bubbles, but what could be reason for this and how to prevent it ? Refer the attached image
I have a gold nanoparticle which is functionalized with a tetraethylene glycol trimethylammonium ligand and I'm looking to deposit it on a surface. Thus far I've had a difficult time finding similar systems so reaching out to the scientific community to see if anyone knows of any literature which has done something similar.
Thanks in advance!
I want to adsorb C7H7NO2 (PABA) on ZnO surface. I know POSCAR file for ZnO surfaces 1 1 0, 1 0 0 etc.
How to give PABA positions in POSCAR file of ZnO. How does know PABA molecular positions ?
I would like to know how the increase/decrease of the pH or ionic strength of the environment in which two negatively charged bodies are immersed will affect the "thickness" of the electrostatic double layer (EDL)? I have heuristically witnessed that low pH (e.g. 2) makes two negatively charged particles agglomerate, but I have not conducted experiments with high pH, and I have not played with solutions of different ionic strength. Some references would be helpful.
In my setup, I am intending to evaporate gold on mica substrate. After that, I intend to clean the gold surface and smooth it using nitrogen plasma (as we have some problems related to the vacuum if we use hydrogen). I looked up at the literature and found no article about that (they investigated hydrogen, argon, and oxygen so far). What could be the drawbacks or precautions that I need to put in mind? Any advice?
Contact angles are usually determined by goniometry. However, more often than not, this method reveals apparent contact angle (which reflects the net effect of surface chemistry and surface topography), rather than the intrinsic contact angle (or Young's contact angle, which reflects the contact angle of a liquid on an ideal surface - a nanosmooth, chemically homogeneous surface). Is there a way to predict the intrinsic contact angles (or surface energy) of an ideal surface using the chemical composition and/or molecular structure (e.g. through molecular dynamics)?
I am using the isotherm obtained by the BET technique to calculate the pore size of some materials; I obtained an average pore size of approximately 10 nm in all my samples (I think that means that I have mesopores in my material), but I am not sure if these results are correct since the standard pressure used in BET may won't be enough (mesopores require greater pressures (>0.3) to be calculated than micropores). Should I use a different technique?
Thanks for all your help!
I am an undergraduate who is trying to synthesize mesoporous particles by mixing several compounds.
Something is wrong with the experiment, I need advice.
Briefly, there is a problem in changing the composition of the dispersed phase in the emulsion.
I use a total of five compounds, A, B, C, D and surfactant(Pluronic).
A mixture of A and B is a dispersed phase(oil), and C, D and a surfactant are continuous phases(water).
Only A and C participate in the reaction, D is the catalyst, and B affects the morphology of the particles.
Prior to the experiment, the adviser was given the molar ratio of the reactants.(A : B : suf : C : D = 1 : x : y : z : w)
I dripped the dispersed phase in the continuous phase of stirring.
At this molar ratio, the reaction took place very well.
I now have to change the mole ratio of A and B in the dispersed phase.
For example, I need to change A : B from 1 : x to 1 : 2x etc.
(I thought I could just change it to 1 : x : y : z : w → 1 : 2x : y : z : w etc.)
My advisor said you shouldn't just stretch B into simple arithmetic.
He also advised me to find out about Spreading Coefficient.
What is the relationship between the spreading coefficient and the composition of the dispersed phase?
What is the relationship between the spreading coefficient and the amount of dispersed phase?
I am currently optimizing the production process for the battery packs.
I would like to know how the great the increase in contact resistance with an aluminium oxide layer on the battery terminals?
I am going to use laser welding to bind the terminals together. If I file the terminal just before the welding to remove the top layer, will it make any difference? how quick is the passivation of aluminium?
Any literature would be very helpful. Is it possible to find out experimentally using the Impedance spectroscopy?
Thanks in advance.
We wish to create an APTES monolayer within a channel. We are currently using 10% APTES in Ethanol, for 10 minutes incubation followed by washing. We have also tried 2% APTES for 1 hour. Both have given inconsistent results.
Could you suggest what would be a good method to achieve more repeatable performance?
P.S. before APTES we are activating the surface using H2O2 with HCL & H2O to generate reactive OH group on surface.
Hello everyone! If an oxygen vacancy is the lack of an oxygen in a site in the lattice, what is a possible explanation for the ability to probe the presence/quantity of oxygen vacancies in an oxide film such as SnO2 and SiO2 by deconvoluting the O-1s XPS spectrum into various components, of which one is assigned to oxygen vacancies?
Especially since no O-1s XPS signals can be emitted if there is no oxygen at that vacancy.
Thank you so much!
I need to study the surface of nylon-6 blank fibres with a thickness of nearly 40 micrometre, I work in optics lab with many optical components such as beam splitters, lenses, mirrors ... etc, can I build a system to study the topology of this fibre?
Also, how do these hydrodynamic interparticle forces compare against hydration/depletion solvation-type interparticle forces? Are they all of the same nature?
It seems to me that liquid bridging interparticle forces are mainly relevant for humid gas-particle systems. It also seems to me that hydration forces between particles with hydrophilic surfaces are of the same origin as interparticle lubrication forces. However, I am not entirely certain about any of these statements.
In a more general sense, for liquid-particle colloidal suspensions (e.g., solid micro- and/or nano-particles in water), what interparticle forces of hydrodynamic nature are in play?
If the answer is yes, then does the charge acquisition mechanism change with respect to metallic, metal oxide, and carbon-based nanoparticles?
And would it also change between totally pure water and tap water?
Assume no coatings, surfactants, or any stabilizing agents, and pH = 7.
As a founder of silicoflask.com and as a scientist I wondering in what kind of molecular systems (or topic) you are interested in?
The SilicoFlask.com is a platform for molecular systems cloud computing. We use the Scheutjens-Fleer Self Consistent Field (SF-SCF) method to predict or confirm experimentally determined behaviour of the molecules. Our aim is to provide super-fast computer approach with a coarse-grained detailing level to help the scientists and pharmacy industry get the solid answer on their questions as soon as possible.
We recently added the list of topics we can deal with and it will be good if you may find them useful.
You can find the above mentioned list here: https://silicoflask.com/about
I will be very thankful if you can write below your favorite system from the list. The results will be taking into account for future tutorials.
Thank you for your time.
Wish you a very good day!
We got 0.2 m2/g-1 as the pore size in a BET study for Nitrogen adsorption.
Is this data is reliable enough for include in a research paper or are there any conclusions can be made why we got this value?
We grow thin film material A on top the substrate with other material B. In some situations, grown material is the same as the material of the substrate. Briefly, for epitaxial growth , they are 'hetero-epitaxial' and 'homo-epitaxial' growth respectively.
So, how can I measure (experimentally) or calculate (theoretically) the interface energy of the A-B interface?
I am investigating the COF of Aluminium surface before and after a surface finishing process. Before surface finishing the Ra is 15 um and after surface finishing assume Ra becomes <1um. COF increases with decrease in surface roughness. I expected the Vice versa. How to explain this?
However, the starting COF is Zero for Ra< 1 um. Is COF value 0 possible at start?
My test frequency is 5 Hz, Humidity - 65%. steel ball on aluminium sample.
in order to bind catalytic active (CuO-precursor-doped) zeolith onto the surface of ceramic fibers, the impragnated fibers were calcinated at 500°C. However the ceramic fibers become brittle after the sintering process. The Zeolith particles were not firmly bound to the surface of the fiber. After washing in destilled water for 4 hours the zeolith particles were almost completely washed away.
From the abovementioned test it was concluded that the temperature required for a successful sintering is higher than 500°C but it will alter the internal structure of the ceramic fibers and make it brittle.
Is there a way to optimise the sintering process so that the zeolith particles can be bound firmly to the fiber surface without damaging the fiber itself? Is there an alternative to sintering to bind the zeolith particles onto ceramic fibers?
I have a cluster of water molecules. I want to model amorphous ice from that cluster. But for that I need to find out (best possible) minimum energy structure of that system. I tried Avogadro (https://avogadro.cc/) to search global minima but problem is I need to specify the rotational bonds. A cluster of water molecules do not have any rotational bond. Also I give interatomic distance as rotational bond then program wont work. I am attaching a starting structure of my ice model (CH4+nH2O+OH-) from which I want to start calculations. Please help me in this regard. I am using Gaussian 09 for my ab initio calculations.
Is it possible to have different particle structure at different deposition powers under the same background gas pressure?
I am depositing Ni-cermet thin films of about 250nm on avg. thickness via RF sputtering at various sputtering powers of 50W-200W. Regardless of the background reactive gas pressure, the micro-structure for 50W Ni-cermet is rice like, for 100W it changes to granular, for 150 one can see a mix of granular and circular while for 200W the structure of the Ni-cermet is completely circular.
Can anyone please explain what is causing this phenomenon.
I prefer a silane with low boiling point as I am going to deposit it in the vapor phase (chemical vapor deposition).
I have tried TMS (Chlorotrimethylsilane) using CVD on Si wafer and I got water contact angle of ~55 which is not suitable for my purpose. I need something less hydrophobic (30-40 degree).
Your answers will be much appreciated.
I am in the process of building a new setup and have a discussion with my colleague on the subject.
We will measure several monolayers on a flat reflective surface inside a vacuum chamber with ~1 wavenumber resolution. The two 38mm windows will be placed at ~300 mm distance from the surface. The angle of incidence is 75 degrees. The window ports are normal to the IR beam axis. The beam is focused at the sample surface with a parabollic mirror placed before the entrance window.
As far as I understand, when the interference fringes are highly reproducible, background subtraction deals with them just fine. In my case of measurements in vacuum, the only irregularities I can think of are thermal expansion due to lab T variations, a slight misalignment of the reflective sample surface, and T variations at a liquid nitrogen cooled MCT detector assembly depending on the Dewar fill level, I guess. The room T variations can affect the distance between the KBr windows, and between the exit window and the external MCT detector. But these distances are so large that interferences do not survive at 1 cm-1 resolution. The fringes created via multiple reflections inside individual KBr windows will be highly reproducible, in my view. I cannot do much to improve the detector assembly.
Do I miss something and wedge/tilt in KBr windows could be useful?
how to bring metallized spheres at the surface of the formulation. what I am facing is that metal coated glass spheres are sinking in resin system so it could not get the light reflection that I want. Is there any ways that - plausible in solid compositions-
that I can use to bring glass spheres on top ?
I was thinking to create surface tension difference which might lead to phase separation but since there is NO solvent\water , I could not accomplish.
I'm not familiar with microscope types, features etc. and our R&D group wants to purchase a new microscope to characterize our sensors, materials, etc.
Can anyone recommend a good type or brand? Pros & Cons of various types? Stereoscope, Upright Brightfield, Inverted, Digital?
I hear that some new microscopes even offer profilometry analysis. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
I seek a method to hydrophilization of channels surface in assembled (bonded) pmma chip. I tried to use for this purpose UV/ozone treatment of pmma surface before bonding. However thermal bonding of pmma chip led to decrease of surface hydrophilicity (contact angle increase after thermal bonding).
Perhaps anybody know what kind of chemical reagents allow the surface of channels to be hydrophilized by pumping them through the pmma chip.
After plasma treatment of some polymer, both functionality and surface roughness is obtained. Total surface energy is increased. which component of surface energy includes the contribution from surface roughness ?
Our institution is buying a new XPS machine. Now we have to make a decision between Kratos Axis supra and Thermo Scientific Escalab Xi+. For this reason I would like to know about the experience from user's side. So maybe there is some users who has one of those machnes? If so, is there some issues with the equipment which could not be forseen before purchasing?
How often you had repairs (excluding replacement of consumables) Is service was fluent?
Is the Autimatics reliable in Axis supra?
Any comments regarding those machines would be very helpful.
What happens to the substrate kept in high vacuum and a high temperature of 773K (500oC) and above inside the Vacuum Chamber for a long time?
a) Will the contamination on the substrate removed at high vacuum? b) Any change in the surface of the substrate?
c) Will the surface get oxidized?
d) Destruction of the substrate
e) Any other phenomena. Please give your answer.
Does anyone have any experiences with bioadhesive and biocompatible materials (except dopa/dopamine), which can be used for surface coating and improving biofilm growth on them??
I am performing pool boiling experiment using water as the working fluid. To avoid any type of solid deposition on the boiling surface (copper in my case), which type of water should be preferred- distilled, deionized or millipore?
Historically we've studied organic molecules on metal samples mounted using tantalum clips to the sample plate. We are interested in performing experiments on HOPG but are unsure of the best way to mount. Metal clips block off part of the crystal, and so make clean cleaving of the crystal more difficult. However I am unsure if any UHV compatible adhesive can manage temperatures down to 77 K, while also surviving a several hundred degree annealing step.
Will it be possible to repeatedly study different organic monolayers on HOPG without repeatedly cleaving, i.e. only cleaning by annealing? In this case metal clips would be best.
Or would a low -T contact adhesive be best, and simply cleave the HOPG everytime a new molecule is studied, with no annealing?
Or is there some other mounting option that combines the best of both methods?
There are many kinds of communition present in industry (as well as) during processing of some (kind of) operation. Particle size reduction can be achieved by applying force externally or by internal mass transfer during processing of some operation in reactive or non-reactive environment. Can any modification be proposed for reactive environment to the existing laws, Bond's etc., for size reduction?
i am working with PTFE suspension, using dip-coating approach i am making superhydrophobic surface. as we all know at certain temperature heating PTFE shows certain change in property and make surface hydrophilic to hydrophobic. why after heating that PTFE np coated surface changes it properties? what can be the possible changes are there, which help PTFE surface change its behaviour at 250 degree c.?
What can be the explanation if before heating that Teflon coated surface was showing water contact angle 24 degree, and after heating at curing temperature the contact angle changes and shows 142 degree.
Using calcite and kaolinite as seeding materials, how does the BET surface of these seeds affect the precipitation of calcium carbonate in supersaturated medium.
To determine capacitance or charge build up of some material can one use material coated onto graphite electrode as the working electrode?
What I mean is let`s say we have a material (some polymer carbon nanotube composite) now we coat it onto graphite electrode and perform cyclovoltammetry. My doubt here is that when we will use graphite electrode, it will have some charge build up of its own i.e. capacitance of its own, so we will not be calculating the capacitance of our material rather we will end up measuring cyclovoltammetry of the combined system.
If we cannot use, what is so special about glassy carbon electrode?
Thanks in advances.
It is argued that corrosion starts at grain boundaries or other imperfections because of (amongst other things) the higher energy level compared to the bulk material. Also in grain boundary engineering the lower susceptibility to corrosion of low sigma grain boundaries is adressed to the low energy levels of this special grain boundaries. But the energy of a free surface of stainless steel is up to two to three times higher compared to the energy of grain boundaries.
Can one imagine a grain boundary at the surface of a metall as a combination of free surface and grain boundary?
I need to correlate the ionic state of Fe with the magnetic properties of Fe doped ferroelectric material. My way of synthesis is solid state reaction method.can I correlate the reason for magnetic properties of that ferroelectric material by taking core level spectra of Fe 2p and parent material site Ti? through XPS we do only surface characterization so is it useful or not? Can we confirm the incorporation of Fe ion in the parent Ti site through shifting of Ti corresponding BE peaks?
I did annealing of polyethylene of 200um(size 2x2 mm) on Silicon at 300 °C for 10 min. After the annealing process i saw the thickness of polyethylene increased to 500um approx!!!!!!
Can anyone explain why there is increase in the thickness of 200um to 500um of polyethylene????.
A reviewer comment is:
Keeping on the quantum chemistry aspect, a single Fe atom cannot represent entirely a carbon-steel surface and this is was already debated on the computer simulations on surface science literature. In other words, it is clear that a single Fe atom would easily transfer electrons to the inhibitor due to an absence of the C neighborhood. However, does this behavior will still be kept in a metallic surface? The authors must adapt the text being clear that it was a model and also discuss the limitations for this approximation. Another important test might be a calculation with a carbon steel cluster instead of a single Fe atom.
I want to calculate surafce stress in Si (001) surface after reconstruction by using software quantum espresso. As in the output it is displaying stress matrix ..my z - component (sigma zz) of stress is not zero, but I have taken a enough vaccum , no external force acts on the surafce and therfore it should be zero .So I am not understanding why it is giving z - component (sigma zz) of stress ?
I am studying pool boiling of water on copper surface at saturated temperature and atmospheric pressure. After the experiment I observe some sort of deposition (I am attaching an image) on the boiling surface. I clean each and every part of the setup with acetone before the experiment. I use millipore water. I polish the boiling surface with 600 grit size emery paper before the experiment. I am not sure whether there is actually deposition happening on the surface or not. So, I request the experts to observe the image and comment on it. Also, any suggestions related to this are highly appreciated.
Optical bandgap (Eg) of bulk anatase TiO2 is known to 3.2 eV .
However, some references report that
the Eg of TiO2 can be around 3.8 eV when the film is deposited by
e-beam evaporation method.
Applied Surface Science 254 (2008) 2685–2689
Semicond. Sci. Technol. 31 (2016) 125012 (9pp)
What's the reason that makes the change of Eg depending on the
deposition method of TiO2?
Questions: Is it true that the maximum spread factor(the ratio of the maximum spread diameter to the original droplet diameter) during droplet impaction on a substrate target should be always larger than one?
Could anyone who is familiar with this area help with this? Many thanks.
For preparation of reconstructed Si(hkl) substrates, we generally employ direct current (DC) heating method in ultra-high vacuum (UHV) condition. In this case, initially we degas the Si(hkl) substrates at ~ 600 0C for 12-15 hours. Thereafter, we perform repetitive 'flash heating' at ~ 1200 0C for 30 sec. It consequences formation of very large ( 1μm × 1μm), well-ordered and atomically smooth reconstructed template.
Can we use such methods (inside the molecular beam epitaxy (MBE) chamber) for preparation of reconstructed Ge(001), Ge(111) substrates ?
My enquiry is about any chemical/electrochemical species maybe ions or gas, etc. that adsorbs on Pb surface exposed to that species.
Various methods as finding capacitance have already been discussed in some papers but it seems that reliable figures and data is not available. BET is out of question as metal catalyst is carbon supported. Is there any other method that could be used to determine the electroactive surface area of non-noble metals.
After printing on glass with UV curable inks, delamination is seen around the printed areas. Does anyone know of any techniques/methods that can improve lamination on the printed sections?
I have attached file with 2 sorption isotherms for cobalt ferrites. I want to know how to classify these them among standard IUPAC isotherms (Type I to Type VI). Is it necessary it has to go to one of these? How to exactly go for the analysis?
As XPS has the ability to determine the moieties from which the polymers are adsorbed onto the surface of the nanoparticles, can it also give any clues about the number of the adsorbed components?