In situ SEM imaging at temperatures as high as 1450 degrees C

Our plain-English summary of In situ SEM imaging at temperatures as high as 1450 degrees C, by G. Gregori, H.J. Kleebe, F. Siegelin, et al (Journal of Electron Microscopy, 2002).

The study

• Authors: G. Gregori, H.J. Kleebe, F. Siegelin, G. Ziegler
• Journal: Journal of Electron Microscopy
• Published: 2002;51(6):347-52
• Cited by: 9 articles, as counted by NIH iCite
• Read it: PubMed · Publisher

Abstract

Modifications to a scanning electron microscope (SEM) and a commercially available heating stage permits in situ imaging at temperatures as high as 1450 degrees C. Here we report on the technical modifications necessary to allow such high-temperature in situ imaging. In addition, in order to underline the potential of this technique in the field of materials science, three heating-stage experiments are presented, which reveal microstructural changes occurring at high temperature. The respective in situ experiments are: (i) surface crystallization of a cordierite glass at 1050 degrees C; (ii) thermal recovery of asbestos (chrysotile) fibers at 1250 degrees C; and (iii) residual pore-structure evolution of tricalcium phosphate during sintering at 1450 degrees C.

In plain English

This was a technical methods paper, not a health study. The authors described modifying a conventional scanning electron microscope and heating stage so samples could be imaged while heated, up to 1450°C. They ran three demonstration experiments, one using chrysotile asbestos fibres. The chrysotile appeared unaffected by heating up to about 600°C. Decomposition through loss of hydroxyl groups (dehydroxylation) began at about 900°C. In the final stage the fibres showed drop-like features at their tips and thick elongated crystals of forsterite. The image of this stage was taken at 1270°C. Citing earlier work, the authors said heat treatment is used to turn chrysotile into forsterite, which they called inert and non-hazardous. This study did not test that. The other two experiments used a cordierite glass and tricalcium phosphate. The authors noted that measured temperatures could differ from the sample surface depending on the sample; the largest difference they found, using an aluminium oxide reference sample, was 40°C. The electron beam itself could also add energy to the sample. They concluded that the method gave good-quality images of high-temperature changes.

We wrote this plain-English summary from the full article with the help of AI, and a second AI model checked each sentence against the article. It is not the authors' wording; the abstract and the article are their own account.

What the study did and found

• Design: Technical methods paper describing a modified scanning electron microscope (SEM) heating stage, illustrated with three laboratory heating experiments on materials
• Who was studied: No people were studied. The samples were chrysotile asbestos fibres (amount not stated), a cordierite glass and a tricalcium phosphate (TCP) body
• Exposure: Chrysotile fibres were heated inside the microscope under vacuum to document their transformation into forsterite. The authors framed this as relevant to the thermal treatment used to neutralize asbestos.
• Main results:
  • Chrysotile fibres appeared unaffected by heating up to about 600°C, and their fibrous structure was still recognizable
  • Decomposition of the chrysotile by dehydroxylation began at about 900°C
  • In the final stage the chrysotile showed drop-like features at the fibre tips and thick elongated forsterite crystals
  • The image of the transformed chrysotile (forsterite) was recorded at 1270°C
  • In the cordierite glass, nucleation began at about 1050°C
  • In the tricalcium phosphate body, there was no pronounced densification or grain growth between 1250 and 1450°C
• The authors' conclusion: The authors concluded that their three applications showed that the modified set-up gives good-quality images of high-temperature changes
• Limitations the authors state:
  • Because of where the thermocouple sits, the measured temperature can differ from the actual sample-surface temperature. The authors said this difference depends on the sample's composition, thickness and porosity and on the maximum temperature. The largest difference they found, using an aluminium oxide (Al2O3) reference sample, was 40°C.
  • The electron beam itself can add energy to the sample, so some changes may occur at slightly lower temperatures than they would without it
  • The geometry of the heating stage forced a longer working distance, which lowered image resolution

Topics

Medical terms in this study, explained in our Lexicon: Chrysotile.

Related studies

• High-temperature calcined fullerene nanowhiskers as well as long needle-like multi-wall carbon nanotubes have abilities to induce NLRP3-mediated IL-1β secretion — H. Cui, W. Wu, et al. (2014)
• Crystal chemistry of the high temperature product of transformation of cement-asbestos — A. Viani, A.F. Gualtieri, et al. (2013)
• Attenuation of oxidative stress and chromosomal aberrations in cultured macrophages and pulmonary cells following self-sustained high temperature synthesis of asbestos — S. La Maestra, R.T. Micale, et al. (2020)
• Preparation of porous glass-ceramics from coal fly ash and asbestos tailings by high-temperature pore-forming — L. Zeng, H. Sun, et al. (2020)
• Can microwave radiation at high temperatures reduce the toxicity of fibrous crocidolite asbestos? — M. Gulumian, Z.L. Nkosibomvu, et al. (1997)
• High temperature ablation of kaolinite layered silicate/phenolic resin/asbestos cloth nanocomposite — A.R. Bahramian, M. Kokabi, et al. (2008)

Browse return to medical research.