Figure 1 shows examples of good and poor sample preparations for cryo-SEND experiments. When preparing battery samples by cryogenic FIB/SEM, avoiding frost contamination is essential to achieve sufficient electron transparency without introducing artifacts. After lamellae are created in the cryo-FIB/SEM stage, the samples are moved to ambient environments. The lamellae are highly vulnerable to ice formation until it is fully submerged in liquid nitrogen. To mitigate this issue, we developed a cryogenic FIB/SEM shuttle with a cover attachment to prevent ice contamination.

Figure 1: Good and poor examples for cryo-SEND preparations. (A) SEM image of a cryo-liftout of the Li metal deposits formed in a conventional carbonate electrolyte (1 M LiPF6 in ethylene carbonate/DMC (1:1 v/v ratio). (B) Cryo-SEM image of the same lamella after the transfer from the cryo-FIB/SEM stage. The lamella is severely contaminated with heavy frost. (C) Another cryo-liftout from the Li metal depositions formed in a high-concentration ether electrolyte (4 M LiFSI in DME). (D) Cryo-TEM image of the lamella after the transfer through the shuttle attached with a cover. No ice contamination was visible after the transfer. The 110 reflection of Li is clearly visible, and no diffraction from ice was observed. (E) A magnified STEM image with a well-preserved feature of battery morphology, suitable for further cryo-SEND experiments. Abbreviations: SEND = scanning electron nanobeam diffraction; DMC = dimethyl carbonate; DME = dimethoxyethane. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 1A,B illustrate a case where ice contamination is severe, and subsequent analysis is heavily impaired by the presence of ice layers. Although little ice is observed at the time of milling in the FIB/SEM chamber, heavy frost layers were deposited on the lamella after the sample transfer in the TEM column, as demonstrated in the HAADF-STEM image. In this case, the transfer procedure was performed using a standard SEM stub without a protective cover. When the shuttle equipped with the anticontaminator cover is used, the ice contamination level was markedly reduced, as demonstrated in Figure 1C-E. In detail, a lift-out lamella was prepared in the cryo-FIB/SEM stage (Figure 1C) and transferred back into liquid nitrogen. During this step, when the vacuum was released, the protective cover prevented exposure to ambient moisture, keeping the sample ice-free. Figure 1D shows a clean lift-out lamella with the diffraction shown in the inset, displaying a 110 reflection of Li. This indicates the absence of signatures for hexagonal close-packed (HCP) or cubic ice phases. Although the contrast of ice is more noticeable in STEM mode, the lamella was entirely free of ice in Figure 1E.
While this new SEM/FIB shuttle substantially prevents frost contamination, it is still possible that residual large ice crystals suspended in liquid nitrogen can adhere to lamellae during handling. This cannot be fully eliminated in cryo-EM workflows. However, it can be minimized by handling samples in a dry room (10-15% humidity) and using clean liquid nitrogen that has not been exposed to air for more than 20 min. One may consider removing ice with electron irradiation. However, the battery electrolytes and SEIs are as beam-sensitive as ice, and such an attempt is likely to damage the structures prior to subsequent characterization. The on-grid method has been routinely carried out in multiple studies3,15,17, with minimal frost contamination. This is because it does not require additional sample preparation steps from cryo-FIB/SEM to a TEM column. However, frost formation and large ice crystal attachment can still be problematic in the workflow if experiments are not carefully controlled. As the method inherently creates many regions of interest, ice contamination is less problematic overall.

Figure 2: SEM images of the Li metal grains, vitrified electrolytes, and SEI. (A) Cryo-lift-out lamella of electrochemically deposited lithium metal from an ether electrolyte (a mixture of 4.6 M LiFSI and 2.3 M LiTFSI in DME). Large Li grains were shown, showing that the electrolyte and the resultant SEI played a key role in the creation of dense Li grains. (B) SEI at the interface between the Li metal deposition and the electrolyte imaged by high-angle annular dark-field STEM (HAADF-STEM) image. The generated lamella was thin enough (~100 nm) to resolve all the features of Li metal grains, electrolytes, and SEIs. The magnified STEM image shows that the vitrified electrolytes exhibited few bubbles, which represents an ideal condition for continuous SEND acquisition. Otherwise, the electrolytes released gas bubbles. Scale bars = 5 µm (A), 1 µm (B). The figures were adapted with permission from Ref.9. Copyright 2025 American Chemical Society. Abbreviations: LiFSI = (Lithium bis(fluorosulfonyl)imide) LiTFSI = Lithiumbis(trifluoromethanesulfonyl)imide, DME = Dimethoxyethane, SEI = solid-electrolyte interphase, SEND = scanning electron nanobeam diffraction Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 2A shows an SEM image of the battery components from an electron-transparent cryo-lift-out lamella. A vitrified electrolyte was well preserved, and a corresponding HAADF-STEM in Figure 2B reveals a 40 nm-thick battery interface layer between the Li metal deposition and the vitrified electrolyte, where cryo-SEND experiments will be performed. Again, the lamella is free of ice, allowing us to maximize the number of usable regions for structural characterization. The presence of the SEI layer between the electrolyte and the Li metal grains indicates that the sample preparation protocol was successful.

Figure 3: Diffraction analysis of the SEIs formed in the two battery electrolytes. The high concentration in the figure refers to the mixture of 4.6 M LiFSI and 2.3 M LiTFSI in DME. (A) HAADF-STEM images from the Li metal depositions formed in each electrolyte (left) and the diffraction patterns of the SEI from their corresponding electrolytes. (B) Diffraction profiles from the SEI reveal that SEIs are structurally distinct. Scale bars in A are 100 nm for the STEM images and 5 nm-1 for the diffraction patterns, respectively. The structures of SEIs are identified as amorphous, which is the key result of the careful dose selection described in the protocol. In addition, the lamella without ice provided diffraction patterns free from frost-related diffraction, allowing us to isolate the diffraction patterns of the SEIs. The figures were adapted with permission from Ref.10. Copyright 2025 American Chemical Society. Abbreviations: LiFSI = (Lithium bis(fluorosulfonyl)imide) LiTFSI = Lithiumbis(trifluoromethanesulfonyl)imide, SEI = solid-electrolyte interphase, HAADF-STEM = high-angle annular dark-field scanning transmission electron microscopy. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 3A compares the structure of SEIs formed in a low-concentration ether electrolyte (1 M LiFSI in dimethoxyethane (DME)) and a high-concentration ether electrolyte (4.6 M LiFSI and 2.3 M LiTFSI in DME). After cryo-SEND at a controlled electron dose, the structures appear amorphous, as indicated by the isotropic features in the SEIs. Within the ~1 nm probe-size resolution, the amorphous features are smaller than the length scale of the probe, resulting in the isotropic amorphous features. The SEI structures are distinct: the SEI from the mild-concentration electrolyte did not show a detectable structural correlation, whereas the SEI from the high-concentration electrolyte exhibits short-range order. The short-range order exhibits two characteristic bond features, with maxima at approximately 0.3 and 0.65 Å-1, as shown in Figure 3B. This indicates that SEIs from the two distinct electrolyte systems form structurally distinct SEIs, which may influence their mechanical and chemical properties. These conclusions are based on diffraction measurements acquired from multiple regions (typically 10-20 regions) within the same lamella, and were reproduced across at least two independently prepared lamellae for each electrolyte system. The corresponding diffraction mapping associated with these measurements is reported in Ref.10.
Furthermore, rigorous regulation of accumulated dose is essential to improve the data reliability and obtain the chemical and structural information in native states (Figure 4). We found that the native structures of SEIs can be severely damaged by excessive beam dose. For example, when the dose is limited to ~500 e-/Å2, the SEI structure formed in the high-concentration electrolyte remained amorphous, but began to crystallize when the accumulated dose exceeded the threshold. The EELS spectra in Figure 4A,B show the progressive formation of Li2O with electron dose. Repetitive SEND measurements confirm that the beam exposure drives SEIs to form Li2O (Figure 4C). The critical electron dose for different electrolytes was studied using selected-area electron diffraction9. The high-concentration ether-based electrolyte shows nanocrystal nucleation at doses above 500 e-/Å2. In contrast, the critical dose for 1 M-concentrated electrolytes was approximately 1000 e-/Å2.

Figure 4: Beam damage study of SEIs. (A) Li K-edge and (B) O-K edge of the SEIs from the high concentration electrolytes with electron dose. (C) Diffraction profiles of the SEI before and after the excessive electron dose. The native SEIs are free of Li2O with broad spectra in both Li and O K-edge, but they can easily form Li2O nanocrystals when excessive doses above the threshold are used. Therefore, the use of the recommended dose is important. Otherwise, the SEIs are readily damaged, leading to structural change. The figures were adapted with permission from Ref.9,10. Copyright 2025 American Chemical Society. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.