I agree with Artur Braun, you have to make it by yourself. You can look this paper "Walter Vogel, Laure Timperman and Nicolas Alonso-Vante, Applied Catalysis A: General, 377 (2010) 167".

Best

I agree with Artur Braun, you have to make it by yourself. You can look this paper "Walter Vogel, Laure Timperman and Nicolas Alonso-Vante, Applied Catalysis A: General, 377 (2010) 167".

Best

It is better that you make the cell by yourself. The best configuration is the coffee bag cell. In the literature there are many papers in which you can find examples. You can see  the perspective of my research group "Phys.Chem.Chem.Phys., 2014, 16, 10353" in which we designed the cell for synchrotron measurements

Nowadays the biggest diffractometer producers like PANalytical or Rigaku provide their own solutions for the in situ studies of the cells. Also there are small vendors, for example MTI (http://www.mtixtl.com/CR2016CasewithKaptonWindow10mmforin-situX-RayAnalysisEQ-CR20.aspx). You can by their cells in Russia via http://www.est-nano.ru/

The standard solutions should be enough for the laboratory experiments, but if you plan to visit any synchrotron facility, it is better to contact with the staff of the specific beamline to discuss details. It might be necessary to modify the standard cell or design the completely new one. On the other hand, it is possible that something already exists at the beamline and you will only need to bring the prepared electrodes.

We use an ECC-Opto-Std from ElCell (http://el-cell.com/). While it has some limitations, like the lowest possible angle or the cell preparation, for us it was usefull and suitable. But this depends strongly on your geometry and the question you want to ask.

I fully agree with Artur - you may perfectly adapt your self-made cell to your specific requirements. All commercial products have several drawbacks, because they are meant to satisfy a broad range of users with strongly different demands. So no question: Go for your own solution! In our group, we have developed at least 10-15 different cells for different requirements, in terms of X-ray technique (diffraction, absorption, small angle scattering, (T)XRF, ...) the used X-ray energy, the amount of sample material (e.g. surface or bulk sensitivity), reactivity of the used liquids or sensitivity of the electrodes (towards air, humidity, ...), and the list can even be made longer. But, as proposed by others, you may google the net and will find a basket of different solutions. Good luck with your own development, Dirk

Thank you all for useful information!

Hi,

I've been using a similar electrochemical cell as described in here

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S001346860600185X

exactly for XRD/XRR/GISAXS measurements at hn = 15-25 keV. Our EC cell was made from PEEK (Polyether ether ketone), because it survives quite a harsh acidic environment, and we've been working a lot with metals anodization. The only modification we made to the cell in Foresti paper, which I am referring to here, is that we have made the walls in the working area .1 mm thickness (100 um vs. 1 mm (?) in the original paper). This makes the cell quite brittle, of course, but if you are careful with it, there is no danger of breaking it. And, yes, the sample has to be hat-shaped.

Hope this information would be of some use for you/other readers.

Best regards