Haoran Yu1, Michael J Zachman1, Kimberly S Reeves1, Jae Hyung Park2, Nancy N Kariuki2, Leiming Hu3, Rangachary Mukundan4, Kenneth C Neyerlin3, Deborah J Myers2, David A Cullen1. 1. Center for Nanophase Materials Sciences, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37831, United States. 2. Chemical Sciences and Engineering Division, Argonne National Laboratory, Lemont, Illinois 60439, United States. 3. Chemistry and Nanoscience Center, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, Colorado 80401, United States. 4. Materials Physics and Applications Division, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico 87545, United States.
Abstract
Nanoparticles are an important class of materials that exhibit special properties arising from their high surface area-to-volume ratio. Scanning transmission electron microscopy (STEM) has played an important role in nanoparticle characterization, owing to its high spatial resolution, which allows direct visualization of composition and morphology with atomic precision. This typically comes at the cost of sample size, potentially limiting the accuracy and relevance of STEM results, as well as the ability to meaningfully track changes in properties that vary spatially. In this work, automated STEM data acquisition and analysis techniques are employed that enable physical and compositional properties of nanoparticles to be obtained at high resolution over length scales on the order of microns. This is demonstrated by studying the localized effects of potential cycling on electrocatalyst degradation across proton exchange membrane fuel cell cathodes. In contrast to conventional, manual STEM measurements, which produce particle size distributions representing hundreds of particles, these high-throughput automated methods capture tens of thousands of particles and enable nanoparticle size, number density, and composition to be measured as a function of position within the cathode. Comparing the properties of pristine and degraded fuel cells provides statistically robust evidence for the inhomogeneous nature of catalyst degradation across electrodes. These results demonstrate how high-throughput automated STEM techniques can be utilized to investigate local phenomena occurring in nanoparticle systems employed in practical devices.
Nanoparticles are an important class of materials that exhibit special properties arising from their high surface area-to-volume ratio. Scanning transmission electron microscopy (STEM) has played an important role in nanoparticle characterization, owing to its high spatial resolution, which allows direct visualization of composition and morphology with atomic precision. This typically comes at the cost of sample size, potentially limiting the accuracy and relevance of STEM results, as well as the ability to meaningfully track changes in properties that vary spatially. In this work, automated STEM data acquisition and analysis techniques are employed that enable physical and compositional properties of nanoparticles to be obtained at high resolution over length scales on the order of microns. This is demonstrated by studying the localized effects of potential cycling on electrocatalyst degradation across proton exchange membrane fuel cell cathodes. In contrast to conventional, manual STEM measurements, which produce particle size distributions representing hundreds of particles, these high-throughput automated methods capture tens of thousands of particles and enable nanoparticle size, number density, and composition to be measured as a function of position within the cathode. Comparing the properties of pristine and degraded fuel cells provides statistically robust evidence for the inhomogeneous nature of catalyst degradation across electrodes. These results demonstrate how high-throughput automated STEM techniques can be utilized to investigate local phenomena occurring in nanoparticle systems employed in practical devices.
Nanoparticles
are studied and
used across multiple disciplines, including heterogeneous catalysis,[1−4] energy storage and conversion,[5−8] electronics,[9−11] sensors,[12−14] medicine,[15−18] biomedical engineering,[19−21] and environmental remediation.[22,23] Nanoparticles offer special surface,[24] electronic,[12] optical,[18] magnetic,[25] and catalytic[26] properties due to their high surface area-to-volume
ratio and tunable physicochemical characteristics, resulting in enhanced
performance compared to their bulk counterparts. For both physical[26−28] and biological systems,[29,30] the performance of
nanoparticles can be impacted by both particle size distribution and
chemical composition. Current methods for quantifying nanoparticle
size distributions include X-ray diffraction (XRD),[31] small-angle X-ray scattering (SAXS),[32] scanning probe microscopy (SPM),[33] and scanning/transmission electron microscopy (S/TEM).[34] STEM is often chosen for nanoparticle characterization
when atomic-scale information or local variations in properties are
sought, as direct imaging and spectroscopy can be performed with sub-Ångstrom
spatial resolution.[35,36] However, application of STEM
to practical nanoparticle systems used in devices is often met with
challenges of statistical significance arising from limitations in
the area/quantity of material that can be examined.For example,
STEM is frequently utilized for characterizing proton
exchange membrane fuel cell (PEMFC) catalysts,[28,37−40] which typically comprise Pt-based nanoparticles supported on carbon
black. Minimizing degradation of the Pt-based oxygen reduction reaction
(ORR) cathode catalyst is one of the main challenges for implementing
PEMFCs in heavy-duty vehicles,[41] where
catalyst durability and efficiency become increasingly important.[42] Analysis of the distributions of catalyst particle
sizes and compositions is crucial for understanding catalyst degradation
during fuel cell operation,[43,44] and STEM can provide
direct insight into the relative contributions of different degradation
mechanisms, such as Ostwald ripening, particle coalescence/migration,
and particle detachment,[37,45] to performance loss.
The small volume analyzed during manual instrument operation and time-consuming
conventional data analysis methods yield potential operator bias and
often poor statistics, with particle size distribution measurements
typically limited to hundreds of particles.[28,37−40]In this work, we employ automated data acquisition and analysis
methods that significantly improve the throughput and statistical
robustness of STEM particle analysis while reducing operator bias
and generating spatially resolved results. Using the PEMFC cathode
as a model system, we utilize these techniques to study the local
effects of accelerated stress tests (ASTs) on catalyst particle degradation
within the cathode. Automated STEM image and energy-dispersive X-ray
spectroscopy (EDS) map acquisition using commercial software was paired
with high-throughput data analysis using custom Python codes to provide
particle size distribution, number density, chemical composition,
and precious metal loading as a function of position in the electrode.
Using these methods, the physical properties of over 100,000 particles
at the beginning of test (BOT) and 40,000 particles at the end of
test (EOT), after 90,000 potential cycles, were analyzed in cross-sectional
electrode slices taken from PEMFC membrane electrode assemblies (MEAs).
To verify the accuracy of the average automated STEM results, cathode
catalyst particle size distributions were determined for the same
set of samples using small-angle X-ray scattering (SAXS), a bulk technique
providing particle size distributions based on scattering from trillions
to quadrillions of particles at typical PEMFC catalyst loadings. In
addition, site-specific compositional information was obtained by
EDS for thousands of particles for the BOT and EOT electrodes, respectively.
Combined, these advancements greatly improve the statistical relevance
of STEM data sets, enhance the efficiency in instrument use, reduce
human bias and error, and allow spatially resolved information to
be obtained across functional devices.
Results and Discussion
Workflow
of Automated Imaging and High-Throughput Image Analysis
The
general workflow of automated imaging and high-throughput image
analysis is shown in Figure . Automated image acquisition was performed using the Thermo
Scientific MAPS software. As shown in Figure a, the process begins by manually positioning
an array of “tiles” over a region of the electrode cross
section. A slight overlap allows for minor backlash and drift in the
stage movement from one tile to the next to be corrected in postprocessing,
in this case using image cross-correlation realized by a custom Python
code. Once the image acquisition parameters are set, the software
iteratively moves through the tile set, autofocusing at each position
before recording and saving an image. In addition to the high-angle
annular dark-field (HAADF) signal, spectroscopic data can also be
recorded automatically to correlate particle size with composition.
The STEM-EDS arrays cover a smaller area of the electrode due to the
longer acquisition times required to generate spectra with sufficient
signal-to-noise for reliable quantification.
Figure 1
Diagram of workflow for
(a) automated HAADF-STEM and spectrum image
acquisition using the Thermo Scientific MAPS software and (b) high-throughput
image analysis using custom python codes employing geodesic active
contour and watershed algorithms to measure individual particle properties.
Diagram of workflow for
(a) automated HAADF-STEM and spectrum image
acquisition using the Thermo Scientific MAPS software and (b) high-throughput
image analysis using custom python codes employing geodesic active
contour and watershed algorithms to measure individual particle properties.Following completion of the automated acquisition,
the large data
sets are transferred to high-performance computers for analysis. Particle
size measurements are generally performed by separation of the particle
area from the background through thresholding, with additional segmentation
to separate overlapping particles. A brief review of this topic can
be found in the Supporting Information.
Semiautomated procedures following these basic steps have previously
been developed to identify and analyze nanoparticles from TEM micrographs.[46−48] Here, we expand on this initial work by fully automating the process[49−60] to provide spatially resolved statistical measurements of physical
and compositional properties. Figure b illustrates our workflow for automated particle size
measurements from HAADF images. Briefly, the boundaries, or contours,
of particles were identified using a morphological geodesic active
contour (GAC) method (scikit-image Python package) based on the concept
and algorithm introduced previously in the literature.[61−63] The morphological GAC method is able to distinguish particles on
a varying background created by the porous carbon support and accurately
estimate their boundaries, whereas more common methods like Otsu thresholding
tend to underestimate the particle sizes at this step. To separate
overlapping particles, further segmentation was performed using a
watershed algorithm (OpenCV Python package). Particle size was then
defined as the diameter of a circle with area equal to the particle
region. Objects <1 nm in diameter were excluded from the analysis,
as features of this size exclusively originated from morphological
GAC artifacts. Particles >30 nm, which account for <1% of total
number of particles, were also excluded as these tended to be dense
agglomerates consisting of smaller particles that could not be segmented
properly using the watershed algorithm. The coordinates of each particle
within a given image were also determined. Combined with positions
of the tiles obtained from the automated image acquisition (Figure a), the position
of each particle could be determined, allowing spatially resolved
measurements to be made. For spectrum images, the segmented particles
defined in the simultaneously recorded HAADF-STEM images were used
as masks to obtain a summed spectrum for each particle that could
be quanitified. For additional details on the automated acquisition
and analysis, see the Methods section.
Particle
Size Distribution at BOT vs EOT
Automated
STEM data sets acquired from the cathodes of BOT and EOT MEAs are
presented in Figure a,b. Each data set is composed of an array of over 100 images spanning
the full electrode from the gas diffusion layer (GDL) to the membrane.
As average particle size generally increases with cycling, a larger
pixel size, and hence reduced number of images, was used to capture
the EOT data.
Figure 2
Area of MEA cathodes used for particle measurements at
(a) BOT
and (b) EOT. (c) Particle size distribution obtained from three manually
selected images containing a total of ∼1000 particles for each
sample. (d) Particle size distribution obtained from high-throughput
STEM analysis of ∼108k particles at BOT and ∼43k particles
at EOT. (e) Particle size distribution obtained from SAXS with high-throughput
STEM data overlaid in dotted lines.
Area of MEA cathodes used for particle measurements at
(a) BOT
and (b) EOT. (c) Particle size distribution obtained from three manually
selected images containing a total of ∼1000 particles for each
sample. (d) Particle size distribution obtained from high-throughput
STEM analysis of ∼108k particles at BOT and ∼43k particles
at EOT. (e) Particle size distribution obtained from SAXS with high-throughput
STEM data overlaid in dotted lines.Figure c shows
the particle size distributions obtained from a set of three STEM
images containing ∼1000 particles chosen manually from the
image array to avoid agglomerates, as is the typical practice for
conventional STEM particle size measurements. This is compared with
the particle size distributions of the full BOT and EOT data sets
consisting of tens of thousands of particles spanning the full electrode
(Figure d), along
with the particle size distributions of the same MEAs obtained by
SAXS (Figure e). The
overall particle size distributions appear to roughly agree among
the three methods, but the conventional approach (Figure c) shows more variation in
the histogram than the high-throughput analysis (Figure d). The particle size distribution
obtained using SAXS (Figure e) agrees with the STEM data, where the BOT effective particle
diameter peaks around 3–4 nm and the EOT peaks above 5 nm with
a tail that extends to ∼25 nm.To establish the lower
limit for the number of particles that must
be analyzed to achieve accurate results, we analyzed the effect of
sampling on the BOT and EOT particle size distributions. As opposed
to Figure c, where
images avoiding particle agglomerates were intentionally chosen, a
random number generator was used to select subsets of particles from
the full data set. In this case, no operator bias should be present. Figure shows the results
for subsets of the data consisting of 100, 250, 500, 1000, and 2500
randomly selected particles. For each sample size, the random selection
process was repeated five times to capture the degree of variation.
With increasing sample size, the median particle size gradually trends
toward the value of the full data set (indicated by the blue arrows
in Figure a), and
the standard deviation of the measured medians decreases. Correspondingly,
the standard deviation in the particle size distributions also decreases
with increased sample size. It is noted that the EOT electrode shows
higher standard deviation than the BOT electrode because the particle
sizes are generally larger and distributed over a wider range as the
catalyst degrades. Based on the standard deviations presented Figure , at least 1000 particles
are recommended for reliable particle size measurement of a given
region. This is consistent with Figure c, where the conventional-sized data set, albeit noisier,
reasonably matches the larger sample sizes of the automated data set
and SAXS measurement. It is acknowledged that this work only examines
the through-plane inhomogeneity of catalyst particles from a very
small volume of the original MEA. Degraded fuel cell electrodes can
also exhibit in-plane particle growth and metal dissolution inhomogeneities
depending on the location relative to the gas flow field.[64,65] Capturing these broader variations will be the subject of future
efforts.
Figure 3
(a) Variations in measured median particle size as a function of
the number of particles measured. Median particle sizes were measured
from five random sets of particles at each sample size, and results
are displayed as the mean (points) and standard deviation (shaded
regions) of these measurements. Blue arrows indicate median particle
sizes from the full data set. (b) BOT and (c) EOT particle size distributions
displayed as the means (solid lines) and standard deviations (shaded
regions) for the data shown in (a).
(a) Variations in measured median particle size as a function of
the number of particles measured. Median particle sizes were measured
from five random sets of particles at each sample size, and results
are displayed as the mean (points) and standard deviation (shaded
regions) of these measurements. Blue arrows indicate median particle
sizes from the full data set. (b) BOT and (c) EOT particle size distributions
displayed as the means (solid lines) and standard deviations (shaded
regions) for the data shown in (a).
Particle Size Variations as a Function of Electrode Position
In addition to improved statistics, the high-throughput automated
STEM approach unlocks the ability to track changes in particle properties
as a function of the position across the electrode. For spatially
resolved particle size distribution analyses, we separated the overall
data sets into sections along the through-plane direction from the
GDL to membrane. Each section contained approximately 3000 particles,
resulting in section widths of 200 and 400 nm for BOT and EOT, respectively.Figure shows plots
of the variation in particle size between the GDL and membrane for
the BOT and EOT cathodes. The red dots represent the median particle
size in each slice, the blue region represents the middle 50% of particle
sizes, and the green region represents the middle 90% of particle
sizes. These results show that the distribution of particle sizes
is skewed toward large particles for both the BOT and EOT MEAs. The
entire particle size population shifts toward larger sizes after cycling,
including the median particle size as well as all boundaries. Along
the through-plane direction, the median particle size at BOT is relatively
constant, whereas at EOT, the median size decreases from the GDL to
the membrane. This phenomenon is attributed to a faster Pt dissolution
rate near the membrane, where dissolved Pt ions diffuse quickly toward
hydrogen that has crossed over from the anode and are reduced to Pt
metal in the membrane.[28,37,66−69] While this has been observed by conventional imaging[28,37,66,67] and derived by modeling[68,69] previously, Figure offers a direct
and statistically robust observation of this trend. In addition, Figure S1 shows particle size distributions corresponding
to each point in Figure . Interestingly, the fraction of small particles increases near the
membrane/cathode interface for the EOT MEA, in agreement with Figure b, whereas the distributions
at BOT are similar throughout the electrode.
Figure 4
Variations in particle
size as a function of through-plane position
for (a) BOT and (b) EOT electrodes. Median particle sizes (red dots)
are plotted along with the middle 50% (blue) and 95% (green) of particle
sizes.
Variations in particle
size as a function of through-plane position
for (a) BOT and (b) EOT electrodes. Median particle sizes (red dots)
are plotted along with the middle 50% (blue) and 95% (green) of particle
sizes.Acquiring images across the whole
electrode also enables the absolute
number of particles and consequently the catalyst loading to be estimated.
This analysis reveals a staggering loss of over 75% of the smaller
Pt particles (<10 nm) as a result of AST cycling (Figure a–c), which is not fully
captured by the change in particle size distribution alone. Figure a,b displays the
number of particles per square micron across the MEA cross section,
termed particle number density, at BOT and EOT, respectively. Figure c then displays the
estimate of the total particle loading per unit electrode area (cm2) based on particle number densities in Figure a,b and a nominal microtome cross section
thickness of 75 nm. Unlike the smaller particles, the number of larger
particles and agglomerates (>10 nm) remains mostly unchanged after
cycling (Figure S2a), except in the region
near the membrane (Figure S2b). According
to the Gibbs–Thomson relation, the rate of Pt dissolution increases
as Pt particle size decreases.[70] Thus,
the more drastic loss of smaller particles relative to larger particles
and agglomerates is to be expected. The decreased particle number
density near the membrane at EOT suggests enhanced Pt dissolution
in this region[28,37,67−69] (Figures b and S2b). This is caused by hydrogen
crossover from the anode which reduces the dissolved Pt ions into
metallic Pt particles near the cathode and further drives the diffusion
of Pt ions from the cathode into the membrane.[68,69] Thus, a depleted region is observed in the region of the cathode
near the membrane, and a Pt band is formed in the membrane, as shown
in Figure b and the
STEM-EDS maps of Figure S3. A net Pt loss
of ∼36% was estimated by taking the ratio of the net Pt-L counts
from the electrode to that from the Pt band (Table S1).[50] The significant loss in total
precious metal loading was corroborated from the automated particle
size measurements by calculating the Pt loading from the particle
size distributions. As shown in Figure d,e and Figure S2c,d, the
Pt loading profile from GDL to the membrane follows a trend similar
to that of the number density. The estimation of the total Pt loading
at BOT (Figure f)
is comparable to the nominal Pt loading of 0.25 mg/cm2 as
measured by X-ray fluorescence (XRF). In line with the STEM-EDS quantification
(Table S1), the estimated Pt loading at
EOT dropped by ∼25% (Figure f), with nearly three-fifths of that loss arising from
the dissolution of particles <10 nm in size. It is worth noting
in Figure f that particles
>10 nm contribute to the majority of estimated Pt loading at both
BOT and EOT. This agrees with SAXS results where a similar trend can
be seen in Table S2. While SAXS measures
several orders of magnitude more particles than the high-throughput
automated STEM method, Table S2 shows that
both techniques arrive at comparable values of median particles and
percentages of Pt volume (or loading) attributed to small (<10
nm) and large (>10 nm) particles. Considering that the two techniques
sampled different regions from the same MEAs, such agreement provides
a strong validation for the high-throughput method developed in this
work. Furthermore, the estimated geometric surface area (GSA) between
the two techniques is in close agreement with each other and with
the MEA measurement of electrochemical surface area (ECSA) of 34 m2/gPt at BOT. The ECSA is measured in a fuel cell
using cyclic voltammetry where the adsorption of hydrogen on Pt can
be quantified and represents the ratio of the electrochemically active
Pt surface area to the Pt loading (m2/gPt).
Conventionally, ECSA calculated at EOT is normalized to the Pt loading
at BOT, which convolutes surface area losses from particle growth
with Pt migration into the membrane (Figures and S2 and S3). Not surprisingly, the EOT GSA determined by STEM and SAXS are
significantly larger than the EOT ECSA, as these values are normalized
to the EOT Pt loading. Taking the range in Pt loss (25% from Figure f and 36% from Table S1) into account, the ECSA at EOT can be
corrected to 21–24 m2/gPt, which is in
good agreement with the high-throughput method and SAXS (Table S2). This analysis also indicates that
roughly two-thirds of the ECSA loss originates from particle growth,
while the other one-third can be attributed to irreversible Pt migration
into the membrane. Operating schemes or specially designed electrode
structures which prevent Pt migration out of the electrode may help
reduce ECSA losses and consequently improve fuel cell durability.
Figure 5
(a,b)
Particle number density as a function of through-plane position
from the GDL to the membrane at BOT and EOT, respectively. (c) Particle
loading at BOT and EOT for particles <10 nm and >10 nm. (d,e)
Pt
loading as a function of through-plane position from the GDL to the
membrane at BOT and EOT, respectively. (f) Estimated electrode Pt
loading for BOT and EOT.
(a,b)
Particle number density as a function of through-plane position
from the GDL to the membrane at BOT and EOT, respectively. (c) Particle
loading at BOT and EOT for particles <10 nm and >10 nm. (d,e)
Pt
loading as a function of through-plane position from the GDL to the
membrane at BOT and EOT, respectively. (f) Estimated electrode Pt
loading for BOT and EOT.
Particle Compositions
The change of Co atomic percent
(at. %) relative to Pt, i.e., Pt1–Co, from BOT to EOT is another important
indicator of electrocatalyst degradation, as the presence of Co in
the nanoparticle core contributes to the enhancement of ORR activity
by modifying the surface lattice strain and Pt d-band center of the
catalyst particles.[24,28] The Co at. % obtained from wide-angle
X-ray scattering (WAXS) (Figure S4) is
comparable with STEM-EDS quantification of the spectrum from the entire
electrode (Table S3). Averaged line scans
extracted from the STEM-EDS maps of the entire electrode show an uneven
distribution of Co composition for the EOT MEA, as plotted in Figure S5a. Areas near the membrane show relatively
higher Co at. % (with higher standard deviation, as well) than the
rest of electrode. In addition to Co leaching, Pt dissolution and
redeposition contribute to the relative change of Co at. %. Areas
near the membrane show higher loss of PtCo particles and smaller particle
size due to a higher Pt dissolution rate (Figures and 5), which results
in a higher net Co at. %. On the other hand, areas near the GDL maintained
the BOT Pt loading, despite a large decrease in the total number of
particles. This suggests Pt dissolved in these regions is much more
likely to redeposit on other particles than move through the electrode
and into the membrane. Known as the Ostwald ripening mechanism, Pt
from the more rapidly dissolving small particles redeposits onto the
larger particles in this process, leading to a concomitant decrease
in particle number and increase in particle size. This Pt redeposition
has an additive effect with any Co dissolution that occurs, resulting
in lower relative Co at. % in regions further away from the membrane.The automated method allows us to push beyond electrode-level STEM-EDS
mapping and conduct a spatially resolved analysis of Co at. % versus
particle size across the MEA. Results of automated STEM-EDS mapping
and analysis are presented in Figure as scatter plots of Co at. % as a function of particle
size, along with the corresponding particle size and Co at. % distributions.
The STEM-EDS spectrum images were collected from four areas across
the electrode, as indicated in Figure S6. The four regions are color-coded in Figure ; blue data points represent particles near
the GDL, whereas red points represent particles near the membrane.
The size of the points is proportional to the particle volumes, based
on their measured size and assuming a spherical shape. At BOT, the
scatter plots show a wide range of Co at. % for particles <5 nm,
from 0 to 40%. As particle size increases, the average Co at. % trends
to a higher value until plateauing for particles >10 nm.
Figure 6
Co atomic percent
(at. %) plotted versus particle size (nm) for
individual particles as a function of position in the cathode at (a)
BOT and (b) EOT. Color indicates the relative position in the cathode.
Median values are indicated by the dashed lines in the histograms.
BOT and EOT MEA data sets contained 1560 and 1857 particles, respectively.
Dashed boxes highlight the particles with high Co content observed
near the membrane at EOT.
Co atomic percent
(at. %) plotted versus particle size (nm) for
individual particles as a function of position in the cathode at (a)
BOT and (b) EOT. Color indicates the relative position in the cathode.
Median values are indicated by the dashed lines in the histograms.
BOT and EOT MEA data sets contained 1560 and 1857 particles, respectively.
Dashed boxes highlight the particles with high Co content observed
near the membrane at EOT.Volume averaging all of the particles used in the individual particle
measurements yields a decrease in Co at. % from 25–30% at BOT
to 10–15% at EOT, in agreement with WAXS and EDS data from
the entire electrode (Table S3), and the
correlation between Co at. % and particle size becomes less pronounced
at EOT. Interestingly, an unexpected bimodal distribution arises for
the particles in the depletion zone near the membrane. Here, the automated
imaging and high-throughput analysis reveal an ensemble of larger
particles (>10 nm) within this depletion zone that exhibit exceptionally
high Co at. %, in the range of 30–40%, as indicated by dashed
boxes in the scatter plot. This likely contributes to the increased
Co at. % near the membrane that was observed in the STEM-EDS line
scans spanning the electrode (Figure S5).To further explore the bimodal distribution revealed in
the depletion
zone, aberration-corrected STEM-EDS mapping of single particles was
performed. Representative particles are shown in Figure at BOT and EOT, with additional
data such as size and Co at. % summarized for these particles in Tables S4 and S5 and corresponding HAADF images
in Figures S7 and S8. At BOT, Co is distributed
homogeneously throughout the particles, with a thin (1–2 monolayer)
Pt skin on the surface. By EOT, a strong core–shell morphology
emerges, consistent with previous observations,[28,71−74] with most particles exhibiting either a thick, uneven Pt shell over
a small PtCo core or showing nearly complete loss of Co from the particle
core. Consistent with the bimodal particle composition observed in Figure b, a mix of smaller,
Co-depleted nanoparticles and larger, Co-rich nanoparticles were observed
in the depleted zone at the EOT. The average Co at. % and its variations
measured from individual particle EDS maps fall in line with the high-throughput
analysis (Figure ).
The identification of particles with high Co content in the depleted
zone shows the benefit of the automated method which led to targeted
analysis for high-resolution STEM-EDS mapping. The mechanism behind
this bimodal distribution in the depletion zone merits future investigation.
Figure 7
Overlaid
STEM-EDS maps of representative individual nanoparticles
showing decrease in (green) Co content and increase in (red) Pt-skin/shell
thickness from BOT to EOT. The Co atomic percent (at. %) of each particle
is labeled at its top right. The bimodal distribution of low and high
Co content nanoparticles in the depletion zone is also shown.
Overlaid
STEM-EDS maps of representative individual nanoparticles
showing decrease in (green) Co content and increase in (red) Pt-skin/shell
thickness from BOT to EOT. The Co atomic percent (at. %) of each particle
is labeled at its top right. The bimodal distribution of low and high
Co content nanoparticles in the depletion zone is also shown.It is worth noting that particle faceting is not
obvious after
cycling, although some facets can be observed for large particles
(>10 nm). Most particles have round edges or close to a spherical
shape after cycling. To show the evolution of particle shape after
cycling, we calculated eccentricity during the high-throughput analysis.
Eccentricity is defined as the ratio of the distance between two focal
points and the length of the major axis for an ellipse that has the
same normalized second central moments as the region of the particle.
An eccentricity of 0 represents a perfect circle. The resulting histograms
(Figure S9) show a decreasing trend in
eccentricity for particles <10 nm from BOT to EOT, suggesting that
particles become more spherical due to degradation. For particles
>10 nm, there is no obvious change of the distribution, suggesting
that they may be more stable against degradation. The peak at 0.8–0.9
for particles <10 nm could be an artifact due to overlapping particles
that are not separated by the software, leading to a highly elliptical
shape.
Conclusion
This work demonstrates
the combination of high-throughput automated
data acquisition and analysis techniques that significantly improve
the statistical relevance of STEM-derived nanoparticle size distributions
and compositional measurements. The larger data sets allow for changes
in particle size distribution, number density, composition, and loading
to be determined as a function of location in real devices, demonstrated
here using fuel cell electrodes before and after ASTs. We observed
that Pt dissolution led to a pronounced loss of small particles, resulting
in a shift of the particle size distribution toward larger sizes.
In addition, we found that loss of Pt was most severe in the region
near the membrane, with this depletion region showing a slightly smaller
median particle size compared with the rest of the EOT electrode.
The geometric surface area losses from automated STEM and SAXS measurements
suggest two-thirds of the observed ECSA losses arise from particle
growth, with the other third attributed to Pt migration into the membrane.
Individual particle compositions extracted from STEM-EDS spectrum
images and paired with size measurements using automated methods revealed
an unexpected bimodal distribution in the Co at. % of the alloy nanoparticles
in the depletion region near the membrane. This motivated additional
targeted high-resolution STEM-EDS mapping, which confirmed the presence
of the bimodal distribution. Our results show that automated acquisition
and high-throughput analysis can reveal details about the inhomogeneity
of catalyst degradation in electrodes that are unavailable by other
methods. The methods used in this work are applicable to a range of
real devices that contain either supported or unsupported nanoparticles.
For heavier supports with varying contrast, such as alumina-supported
noble metal catalysts for pyrolysis of biomass, oxidation of CO and
hydrocarbons, and water–gas shift reactions, the contrast between
the support and particles can be enhanced by adjusting parameters
associated with background removal. As the commonly used watershed
has limitations dealing with overlapping particles, future work will
focus on better algorithms and explore machine learning for segmenting
overlapping particles, which would also be beneficial for characterizing
unsupported nanoparticles, such as mixed metal oxide nanoparticles
for gas sensing and metal or macromolecule nanoparticle-based therapeutics.
Methods
Materials
High
surface area carbon (HSC)-supported
PtCo (PtCo/HSC, ElystPt500690, Umicore) was used as the cathode catalyst
in this study. Catalyst-coated membranes (CCMs) were fabricated by
Umicore with a nominal cathode loading of 0.25 mgPt/cm2 and cathode ionomer to carbon ratio (I/C ratio) of 0.83.
The anode utilizes Pt/HSC catalyst (ElystPt200390, Umicore) with a
loading of 0.05 mgPt/cm2. The CCM was sandwiched
between two 50 cm2 Freudenberg H23C8 (Fuel Cell Store)
gas diffusion layers (GDLs) to form the membrane electrode assembly
(MEA).
MEA Testing Protocols
The MEAs were tested using fuel
cell hardware with a 14 channel serpentine flow field and 50 cm2 active area on both the anode and the cathode and installed
with a bolts’ torque of 40 in-pounds. The assembled cells were
installed with a counter-flow configuration. During the break-in procedure,
H2 and air were supplied to the anode and cathode with
a stoichiometric ratio of 0.8 and 2.5. The cell temperature was kept
at 80 °C and went through a series of voltage cycles between
0.6 and 0.9 V, with each potential hold of 4 min. The voltage recovery
(VR) is conducted by holding the cell voltage at 0.1 V with a flow
rate of 0.9 slpm H2 at the anode and 0.5 slpm air at the
cathode for 2 h at 40 °C and 150% RH. The VR improves the electrochemical
performance of the cell across the entire fuel cell potential range,
as has been previously reported.[75] H2/O2 polarization curves were obtained at 80 °C
cell temperature, 100% RH, and 150 kPa backpressure. The current density
value was recorded at each cell voltage for 4 min and in an anodic
direction from 0.75 V to open-circuit voltage (OCV). H2/air polarization curves were obtained at a range of cell temperatures
and RH conditions using constant current mode (2.25–0.01 A/cm2). The stoichiometric ratios at the anode and cathode are
1.5 and 2, respectively.The catalyst durability AST was performed
by applying square-waveform potential cycling between 0.6 and 0.95
V to the cell. The holding time at each potential was 2.5 s, with
a ramping time of 0.5 s and a ramping rate of 700 mV/s between the
potential hold. During the AST cycles, the cell was operating at 80
°C in H2 (anode)/N2 (cathode) environment
and 100% RH. More details can be found in Table P.1 of ref (76). A total of 90,000 (90k)
AST cycles were performed.
Microscopy Sample Preparation and Characterization
To prepare cross sections of the BOT and EOT cathodes for STEM
analysis,
portions of the MEA were embedded in epoxy resin and then cut by diamond-knife
ultramicrotomy, with a target thickness of ∼75 nm. High-angle
annular dark-field scanning transmission electron microscopy (HAADF-STEM)
and energy-dispersive X-ray spectrum (EDS) images were recorded using
a Talos F200X transmission electron microscope (TEM) (Thermo Fisher
Scientific) operated at 200 kV and equipped with Super-X EDS system
with 4 SDD windowless detectors. The Co composition for each MEA cathode
was obtained from EDS elemental maps (21 nm pixel resolution, 10.9
μm field of view) which was processed with the Esprit 1.9 software
(Bruker). HAADF images and EDS maps of individual PtCo particles were
recorded using a JEM-ARM200F “NEOARM” analytical electron
microscope (JEOL Ltd.) operated at 80 kV and equipped with dual SDD
windowless detectors each with a 100 mm2 active area.
Automated Imaging
Automated imaging and EDS acquisition
were performed on the Talos F200X using the Thermo Scientific MAPS
software. Imaging for particle measurements utilized a pixel size
of 0.098 nm and a 200 nm field of view for each image of the BOT MEA.
Considering the reduced density and increased size of particles at
the EOT, a pixel size of 0.195 and 400 nm field of view were used
for the EOT MEA to increase the total imaging area. The 200 kV electron
beam was set to a current of ∼600 pA and a semiconvergence
angle of 10.5 mrad. An array of images (tiles) covering the entire
cathode cross section was generated using the MAPS software with the
above parameters, forming a tile set. Adjacent tiles were overlapped
by 10% for alignment during analysis. Automatic focusing was performed
for each tile. Automated imaging of the BOT MEA was performed over
∼7 h for a total of 408 images, acquired overnight without
operator intervention or oversight. For the EOT MEA, 150 images were
acquired over approximately 2 h of automated imaging time.Automated
STEM-EDS acquisition followed a similar workflow with the addition
of recording of a spectrum image before iterating to the next tile.
The spectrum image was recorded with the same field of view and semiconvergence
angle as the image for particle measurement but with a higher beam
current of 2 nA to increase X-ray counts of individual particles.
Each spectrum image was recorded with a pixel size of 0.098 nm and
a dwell time of 5 μs, with a total of 150 drift-corrected frames. Figure S6 shows EDS acquisition areas for each
MEA. As each spectrum image requires ∼15 min acquisition time,
the number of EDS maps acquired was fewer than the number of images
used for the full electrode particle measurements. Maps were recorded
from four zones representing different locations across the cathode.
Notably, the zone near the membrane/cathode interface represents the
“depleted zone” for the degraded cathode at the EOT.
Eight maps were acquired in each zone.
High-Throughput Automated
Image Analysis
A custom Python
code was developed to automatically identify particles in an image
and analyze their properties. The code utilized open-source packages
including NumPy, SciPy, scikit-image, OpenCV, and Matplotlib and was
run on high-performance computing resources in the Compute and Data
Environment for Science (CADES) facility at ORNL.Contour evolution
algorithms (morphological GAC)[61] were used
to define the boundary of particles. Following the identification
of particles, segmentation is performed on overlapping or agglomerated
particles using the watershed algorithm which is employed in most
works of automated image analysis.[47,52−54,59] Euclidian distance transformation
is performed to compute the Euclidean distance to the closest zero
of each foreground pixels. The local maxima of the Euclidean distance
map are then fed into the watershed function where a matrix of labels
is returned. A label value is assigned to each pixel and pixels that
have the same label value belong to the same object (particle). Correspondingly,
coordinates of the local maxima are regarded as the position of the
particle. The relative shifts between neighboring images were then
determined by cross-correlation of their overlapping regions, and
the particle positions within individual images were combined with
these shifts to define the overall positions of the particles within
the full image array.Quantification of spectrum images was
performed using a custom
Python code on the raw data files recorded by the MAPS software (Thermo
Fisher Scientific). Particles with a signal-to-noise ratio threshold
below five were not considered for quantification.[77] In this context, “signal” refers to background-subtracted
and summed Co-K and Pt-L peak counts, and “noise” is
represented by the square root of the total counts at these peaks,
including background. The Python codes developed for particle size
and compositional analysis are available upon request.
SAXS/WAXS
X-ray scattering at beamline 9-ID-C at the
Advanced Photon Source was utilized to determine the catalyst particle
size and lattice spacings of the PtCo nanoparticles. The cathode catalyst
layers were removed from the catalyst-coated membranes using a press
and peel technique to transfer the layers to Scotch Magic tape (3M).
Monochromatic X-rays with an energy of 21 keV were used and focused
to a beam spot size of 0.8 × 0.2 mm. The scattered X-ray intensity
was obtained over a range of scattering angles/scatterer dimensions
utilizing a Bonse-Hart camera for small-angle X-ray scattering, a
Pilatus 100 K detector for pinhole SAXS (pinSAXS) and Dectris detector,
which is a modified Pilatus 300 K-W detector, for wide-angle X-ray
scattering.[78,79] The complete scattered intensity, I(q), was then obtained by combining the
SAXS (10–4 to 6 × 10–2 Å–1) and the pinhole SAXS (3 × 10–2 to 1 Å–1). The WAXS data covered a d-spacing range from approximately 6 to 0.8 Å. Scattering
from the Scotch tape was subtracted from that of the cathode catalyst
layers. The WAXS data analysis utilized powder diffraction multi peak
fitting 2.0, an Irena macro.[80] The position
of the (311) scattering peak was utilized to determine the lattice
spacing and this spacing was then utilized to calculate the Pt to
Co ratio in the crystalline portions of the catalyst particles using
Vegard’s law and the nearest neighbor (NN) distances of 2.7747
and 2.4917 Å for Pt and Co, respectively. The SAXS data were
corrected and reduced with the NIKA software package,[80] and data analysis was conducted using the IRENA software
package.[81] Both packages were run on IGOR
Pro 7.0 (Wavemetrics). Particle size distributions were obtained from
the measured scattering data using the maximum entropy (MaxEnt) method,
which involves a constrained optimization of parameters to solve the
scattering equation:where I(q) is the
scattered intensity, ϱ is the scattering length density
of the particle, and F(q,r) is the scattering function at scattering vector q of a particle of characteristic dimension r. V is the volume of the particle, and Np is the
number density of particles in the scattering volume.
Authors: Thomas J A Slater; Yi-Chi Wang; Gerard M Leteba; Jhon Quiroz; Pedro H C Camargo; Sarah J Haigh; Christopher S Allen Journal: Microsc Microanal Date: 2020-12 Impact factor: 4.127
Authors: Wieland N Reichelt; Andreas Kaineder; Markus Brillmann; Lukas Neutsch; Alexander Taschauer; Hans Lohninger; Christoph Herwig Journal: Biotechnol J Date: 2017-04-28 Impact factor: 4.677