Search Results for mass

Fig. 7 Time-of-flight secondary ion mass spectroscopy mass spectrum of polyethylene terephthalate (PET) More

Fig. 16 Time-of-flight secondary ion mass spectrometry spectrum showing mass separation of Cu and C 5 H 3 peaks, both at a nominal mass of 63 More

Fig. 8 Time-of-flight secondary ion mass spectrometry total positive ion mass spectrum of polyethylene terephthalate More

Fig. 64 Schematic diagram of time-of-flight secondary ion mass spectrometer/mass spectrometer (MS/MS). ESA, electrostatic analyzer; CID, collision-induced dissociation; SED, secondary electron detector; GCIB, gas cluster ion beam; FIB, focused ion beam; LMIG, liquid metal ion gun. Courtesy More

Fig. 65 Time-of-flight secondary ion mass spectrometer/mass spectrometer spectrum of polyethylene terephthalate sample. Courtesy of Physical Electronics Inc., Chanhassen, MN More

Fig. 8 Time-of-flight secondary ion mass spectrometry positive ion spectrum of stainless steel surface More

Fig. 15 Time-of-flight secondary ion mass spectrometry negative ion spectrum of stainless steel surface. Postive ion spectrum is in Fig. 8 . More

Fig. 17 Time-of-flight secondary ion mass spectrometry images of 50 by 50 μm stainless steel surface area. (a) Map of Cr (b) Map of Fe, (c) Map of Na More

Fig. 9 Mass loss vs. number of compound impact cycles for aluminium 2011 T3 specimens tested against 17-4 PH stainless steel counterfaces with varying sliding velocities (impact stress 10.8 MPa). Source: Ref 5 More

Fig. 10 Mass loss vs. number of compound impact cycles for 17-4 PH stainless steel counterfaces tested with CPM-10V steel specimens (impact stress 69 MPa). Source: Ref 26 More

Fig. 11 Mass loss vs. sliding velocity for compound impact testing of titanium alloy RMI 5522S specimens against 17-4 PH stainless steel counterfaces (impact stress 18.6 MPa). Source: Ref 20 More

Fig. 12 Mass loss vs. number of compound impact cycles for 1410 steel specimens of varying length run against 17-4 PH stainless steel counterfaces (impact stress 69 MPa; sliding velocity 10 m/s). Source: Ref 21 More

Fig. 11 Mass loss versus number of compound-impact cycles for aluminum 2011-T3 specimens tested against 17-4 PH stainless steel counterfaces with varying sliding velocities (impact stress: 10.8 MPa, or 1.6 ksi). Source: Ref 8 More

Fig. 12 Mass loss versus number of compound-impact cycles for 17-4 PH stainless steel counterfaces tested with CPM-10V steel specimens (impact stress: 69 MPa, or 10 ksi). Source: Ref 31 More

Fig. 13 Mass loss versus sliding velocity for compound-impact testing of titanium alloy RMI 5522S specimens against 17-4 PH stainless steel counterfaces (impact stress: 18.6 MPa, or ksi). Source: Ref 23 More

Fig. 14 Mass loss versus number of compound-impact cycles for 1410 steel specimens of varying length run against 17-4 PH stainless steel counterfaces (impact stress: 69 MPa, or 10 ksi; sliding velocity: 10 m/s, or 33ft/s). Source: Ref 24 More

Fig. 9 Time-of-flight secondary ion mass spectrometry total positive ion spectrum of polypropylene surface showing unexpected peaks at 304 and 481 Daltons More

Fig. 10 Time-of-flight secondary ion mass spectrometry total ion image of polypropylene surface with suspected contamination present More

Fig. 15 Time-of-flight secondary ion mass spectrometry spectra showing MS 2 spectra for mass-to-charge ( m / z ) ratios of 304 and 481 precursor ions More

Fig. 16 Time-of-flight secondary ion mass spectrometry (TOF-SIMS) MS 2 spectrum at 304 compared to National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) database spectrum for benzalkonium, a polymer additive More