Specifications

Lacey Carbon Type-A

A Lacey carbon film with a removable Formvar backing on the opposite side of the grid. When the Formvar is removed, by dipping in solvent, the Lacey carbon film remains. These films are stable under all EM(electron microscopy) operating conditions and for use where the presence of Formvar can not be tolerated. Pure Lacey Carbon is more delicate than those with Formvar backing and require more careful handling during specimen preparation. Holes are completely open.

Support Film Product Note, How the Material is Layered on the Grid

Most of the grids used have a distinct “shiny” side and “dull” side when viewed with the naked eye. Generally, the film type as specified in the product name lies on the shiny side of the grid.

Lacey carbon Type A

The Lacey formvar film is applied to the dull side of the grid and carbon depositied onto the shiny side. When the formvar is removed in solvent the carbon film is left on the shiny side.

Grid Cross Section

Measurement data

(d) HR-TEM results showing the atomic lattice structures of RT-CVD graphene. The graphene samples were prepared with holey carbon grid (upper inset). The aberration-corrected scanning TEM image provides an atom-by-atom analysis of graphene (mid inset). The diffraction pattern indicates the corresponding graphene is a highly crystalline monolayer (lower inset).

(e) Graphene domain distribution investigated by selected area diffraction patterns (SADP) and TEM imaging. (f) Graphene boundaries of RT-CVD graphene characterized by dark-field TEM and aberration-corrected HR-TEM images . The left and right parts of the grain boundary are imaged with an aperture at the red and blue circled spots of the diffraction pattern (upper inset). The atomic image shows that two graphene domains are smoothly connected with an angle of 36° (lower inset). See also Supporting Figure S2 for more dark-field TEM analyses.

Figure 4. Grain boundary analyses by TEM and OM. (a-c) Grain boundary mapping of RT-CVD graphene films by TEM corresponding to the sheet resistance of spots 1, 2, and 3 in Figure 3a, respectively. (d-f) Grain boundary mapping of H2O2-treated RT-CVD graphene on Cu foils by optical microscopes, corresponding to the red spots 1, 2, and 3 in Figure 3a, respectively. The grain size of graphene in the center region is a few times larger than the edge region. But actually, there is no significant difference in sheet resistance (226, 227, and 230 Ω/sq for spots 1, 2, and 3, respectively).

Figure 1 | Morphology of nanobubbles in graphene liquid cell. (a?d) A graphene liquid cell fabricated on a ?at TEM grid (copper or molybdenum) showing the top views of nanobubbles. (c and d) In-situ snapshot images of nanobubbles obtained by ultra-high vacuum (UHV) TEM (200 keV, ~5X10-9 Torr). Scale bars, 10 nm. (e?g) A folded graphene liquid cell showing the side views of nanobubbles. The contact angles were roughly measured to be 6o°?90°. Scale bars for f and g, 10 and 5 nm, respectively.

Figure 2 l Time evolution of different kinds of single and double nanobubbles. (a,b) The snap shots of Tem images showing the vanishing and stable nanobubbles, respectively. The nanobubbles smaller than critical radius tend to shrink with time and disappear in ~40s, whereas the larger bubbles persist for more than 10 min. Scale bar, 5 nm. The full movie is available in Supplementary Movie 2. (c,d) The snap shots of TEM images showing the merging of adjacent two nanobubbles observed for 15 and 50 s, respectively. When the nanobubble sizes are significantly different, it show an Ostwald ripening-like merging process, whereas the similar-sized bubbles are coalescing as their inter-bubble boundary breaks. Scale bar, 10nm. The full movie is available in Supplementary Movie 3.