MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1449230783 · doi:10.1149/ma2015-02/37/1427

Nano-Scale X-Ray Computed Tomography of Micro-Porous Layers 

2015· article· en· W1449230783 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mehdi Andisheh-Tadbir, Anish Pokhrel, Yadvinder Singh, Robin White, Mohamed El Hannach, Monica Dutta, Erik Kjeang

Bibliographic record

VenueECS Meeting Abstracts · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNuclear Physics and Applications
Canadian institutionsBallard Power Systems (Canada)Simon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectron tomographyMaterials sciencePorosityFocused ion beamTomographyNanoscopic scaleTransmission electron microscopyNanotechnologyScanning transmission electron microscopyComposite materialChemistryIonOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent advances in the development of polymer electrolyte fuel cells have proven that application of a thin micro-porous layer (MPL) on top of the macro-porous fibrous gas diffusion layer (GDL) can significantly enhance the fuel cell performance. Therefore, specific information on the structure of this layer could assist the understanding of the underlying mechanisms. Porosity and pore size distribution (PSD) are the main quantities that reveal important information about the structure. Mercury intrusion porosimetry (MIP) technique has been used previously to characterize the pore phase of the MPL [1]. Focused ion beam integrated with scanning electron microscopy (FIB-SEM) technique is another method of determining the MPL structure, in terms of both solid and pore phases [1,2]. However, these two approaches are generally destructive in nature, and may therefore skew the results by altering the MPL structure either during imaging or during post-processing. In addition, neither method can distinguish between carbon and PTFE inside the MPL [3]. The recent emergence of lab scale micro- and nano-scale X-ray computed tomography facilities provides a new opportunity for obtaining the 3D structure of porous materials by means of a non-destructive approach that can provide high quality images. This approach was used to study the cathode catalyst layer by Nano-scale X-ray computed tomography (NXCT) [4]. The reliability of the approach was assessed by comparing the obtained images by NXCT with transmission electron microscopy (TEM) images [4]. To our knowledge, there is only one published investigation with the focus on MPL imaging using NXCT [5]. In [5], an MPL was used as the sample for comparison of NXCT and FIB-SEM imaging capabilities, and some properties were calculated based on the obtained structures. By increasing the application of NXCT in the field of fuel cell materials, there will be a need for standardized imaging techniques. Hence, the objective of the present work is to develop suitable NXCT imaging, reconstruction, and post-processing protocols for MPLs. For this purpose, commercially available Sigracet SGL 24BC is used as the sample GDL material in this analysis. Two different sample preparation techniques are compared. Furthermore, various algorithms for automatic thresholding of the images are discussed and the most appropriate one for MPL segmentation is recommended. Fig. 1 shows the obtained raw versus segmented image on a cross section of the MPL, for which the porosity is obtained to be 50-52%. Shown in Fig. 2 is also the pore size distribution for the same MPL.MPL thermo-physical properties are also calculated based on the reconstructed images and compared to literature data. Moreover, for the first time, we explore the viability of determining the nanoscale PTFE distribution inside the MPL using the low energy X-ray beam of the Zeiss Xradia 810 Ultra facility. This instrument is considered state-of-the-art for laboratory NXCT and generates a monochromatic X-ray beam with 5.4 keV of energy. The low energy of the X-ray beam provides a good image contrast even for chemical compounds with low effective atomic numbers. Aknowledgment Funding for this research was provided by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, Canada Foundation for Innovation, British Columbia Knowledge Development Fund, and Ballard Power Systems through an Automotive Partnership Canada grant. References [1]A. Nanjundappa, A.S. Alavijeh, M. El Hannach, D. Harvey, E. Kjeang, Electrochimica Acta 110 (2013) 349. [2]H. Ostadi, P. Rama, Y. Liu, R. Chen, X.X. Zhang, K. Jiang, Journal of Membrane Science 351 (2010) 69. [3]M. El Hannach, R. Singh, N. Djilali, E. Kjeang, Journal of Power Sources 282 (2015) 58. [4]W.K. Epting, J. Gelb, S. Litster, Advanced Functional Materials 22 (2012) 555. [5]E. a. Wargo, T. Kotaka, Y. Tabuchi, E.C. Kumbur, Journal of Power Sources 241 (2013) 608. Figure 1

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.147
Threshold uncertainty score0.526

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.221 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueECS Meeting AbstractsSame topicNuclear Physics and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207