Comparing Different Cross-Section Cutting Methods for SEM Analysis of Membrane-Electrodes Assemblies

dc.contributor.authorMerino, Susana
dc.contributor.authorNovillo, Carlos
dc.contributor.authorDiego, Gonzalo
dc.contributor.authorConde, Julio J.
dc.contributor.authorFolgado, M.A
dc.contributor.authorFerreira-Aparicio, Paloma
dc.contributor.authorChaparro, Antonio M.
dc.date.accessioned2019
dc.date.available2019
dc.date.issued2019
dc.description.abstractA study is presented to compare different methodologies for the cross-sectional visualization of membrane-electrode assemblies (MEAs) with SEM. Four techniques for cutting MEAs have been tested and analyzed: the sharp-edge cutting, CO2 laser, embedded-mechanical polishing, and ion-milling. Characteristics of each procedure are compared. Sharp-edge cutting, being fast and low cost, may preserve layers porous morphology rather unaltered, but obtaining a good cross-section in a wide area is stochastic and with low probability. CO2-laser beam cutting alters severely carbon and Nafion layers as a consequence of the burning of carbon based materials. Embedded-mechanical polishing is a well stablished and reproducible method that shows accurately the thickness of the layers, however it is too aggressive with highly porous structures that may appear smoothed or removed. Ion-milling is also good for accurate thicknesses measurements, and more conservative with the porous morphologies than the previous one, but they are also smoothed.es_ES
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1149/09208.0087ecst
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14855/2452
dc.language.isoenges_ES
dc.relation.ispartofseriesECS Transactions;Volume 92, Number 8
dc.rights.accessRightsopen accesses_ES
dc.subjectMEAs, SEM, Cross-Sectiones_ES
dc.subjectCharacterizationes_ES
dc.titleComparing Different Cross-Section Cutting Methods for SEM Analysis of Membrane-Electrodes Assemblieses_ES
dc.typejournal articlees_ES

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
2019 ECSTrans9287-942019.pdf
Size:
27.33 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format