scholarly journals Features of combining scanning probe microscope with optical and scanning electron microscopes

2019 ◽  
Vol 699 ◽  
pp. 012040
Author(s):  
I D Sapozhnikov ◽  
O M Gorbenko ◽  
M L Felshtyn ◽  
M V Zhukov ◽  
A O Golubok
Keyword(s):  
Scanning Probe Microscope ◽  
Scanning Probe ◽  
Probe Microscope ◽  
Electron Microscopes ◽  
Scanning Electron Microscopes ◽  
Scanning Electron

High-precision calibration of a scanning-probe microscope (SPM) for manufacturing applications

1996 ◽  
Vol 54 ◽  
pp. 868-869
Author(s):  
Donald A. Chernoff ◽  
Jason D. Lohr ◽  
Douglas Hansen ◽  
Michael Lines
Keyword(s):  
Standard Deviation ◽  
Integrated Circuits ◽  
Scanning Probe Microscope ◽  
Scanning Probe ◽  
Measurement Tool ◽  
Critical Dimensions ◽  
Probe Microscope ◽  
Manufacturing Applications ◽  
Electron Microscopes ◽  
Scanning Electron Microscopes

Introduction. For ordinary SPM (Scanning Probe Microscope) work, accuracy of XYZ length measurements of about 5% is acceptable. This is accomplished by periodic calibration checks (and adjustments, if required). Measurement of critical dimensions such as feature width and spacing on integrated circuits or compact discs requires much higher accuracy. For example, the new DVD (digital video disc) standard calls for a mean track pitch of 740 nm with a maximum allowable jitter (range) of 30 nm. To achieve a range of 30 nm, the standard deviation should be 10 nm or less. According to the gage-maker's rule, the measurement tool should be 4x more precise than the object being measured, so we need a standard deviation of 2.5 nm. This report describes the combined use of a new type of calibration standard and new software to meet these requirements.Materials. Recently, MOXTEK has produced 1- and 2-dimensional holographic gratings as calibration standards for use with SEMs (Scanning Electron Microscopes).

Carbon-Nanotube Engineering for Probes and Tweezers Operating in Scanning Probe Microscope

2003 ◽  
Vol 772 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yoshikazu Nakayama ◽  
Seiji Akita
Keyword(s):  
Electron Microscope ◽  
Carbon Nanotube ◽  
Scanning Electron Microscope ◽  
Scanning Probe Microscope ◽  
Scanning Probe ◽  
Knife Edge ◽  
Maximum Current ◽  
Probe Microscope ◽  
Carbon Nanotube Devices ◽  
Scanning Electron

AbstractWe have developed a series of processes for preparing carbon nanotube devices of probes and tweezers that operate in scanning probe microscope (SPM). The main developments are a nanotube cartridge where nanotubes are aligned at a knife-edge to be easily picked up one by one and a scanning-electron-microscope manipulator by which a nanotube is transferred from the nanotube cartridge onto a Si tip under observing its view.We have also developed the electron ablation of a nanotube to adjust its length and the sharpening of a multiwall nanotube to have its inner layer with or without an end cap at the tip. For the sharpening process, the free end of a nanotube protruded from the cartridge was attached onto a metal-coated Si tip and the voltage was applied to the nanotube. At a high voltage giving the saturation of current, the current decreased stepwise in the temporal variation, indicating the sequential destruction of individual nanotube layers. The nanotube was finally cut at the middle of the nanotube bridge, and its tip was sharpened to have an inner layer with an opened end. Moving up the cartridge before cutting enables us to extract the inner layer with an end cap.It is evidenced that the maximum current at each layer during the stepwise decrease depends on its circumference, and the force for extracting the inner layer with ∼ 5nm diameter is ∼ 4 nN.

Nanoengineering of Carbon Nanotubes and the Status of its Applications

2001 ◽  
Vol 706 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yoshikazu Nakayama ◽  
Seiji Akita
Keyword(s):  
Carbon Nanotubes ◽  
Electron Microscope ◽  
Scanning Electron Microscope ◽  
Arc Discharge ◽  
Scanning Probe Microscope ◽  
Scanning Probe ◽  
Gas Temperature ◽  
The Status ◽  
Probe Microscope ◽  
Scanning Electron

AbstractWe have developed a well-controlled method for manipulating carbon nanotubes. The first crucial process involved is to prepare a nanotube array, named nanotube cartridge. We have found the ac electrophoresis of nanotubes by which nanotubes are aligned at the knife-edge. The nanotubes used were multiwalled and prepared by an arc discharge with a relatively high gas temperature. The second important process is to transfer a nanotube from the nanotube cartridge onto a substrate in a scanning electron microscope. Using this method, we have developed nanotube tips and nanotube tweezers that operate in a scanning probe microscope. The nanotube probes have been applied for observation of biological samples and industrial samples to clarify their advantages. The nanotube tweezers have demonstrated their motion in scanning-electron-microscope and operated to carry nanomaterials in a scanning probe microscope.

scholarly journals A Scanning Probe Microscope in My Scanning Electron Microscope?

1995 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 22-23
Author(s):  
George J. Collins
Keyword(s):  
Electron Microscope ◽  
Scanning Electron Microscope ◽  
Scientific Literature ◽  
Scanning Probe Microscope ◽  
The Other ◽  
Scanning Probe ◽  
Primary Reason ◽  
Probe Microscope ◽  
Scanning Electron

Scanning probe microscopes (SPMs) designed to fit into scanning elec- tron microscopes (SEMs) are now becoming commercially available and you might ask, "Why would I want to put an SPM in my SEM"? The primary reason is that the too forms of microscope are very complimentary. Each microscope extends the power of the other. The SEM can do things that are hard to do with an SPM, and vice versa.Not long after the introduction of the STM and the AFM, a few re- searchers built custom SPMs and installed them in their SEMs. The reports of these projects to build hybrid microscopes and examples of the data they produced can be found in the scientific literature.

scholarly journals The Difference Between Calibration and Image Linearity

1996 ◽  
Vol 4 (7) ◽  
pp. 20-21
Author(s):  
Douglas Hansen
Keyword(s):  
System Performance ◽  
Regular System ◽  
Performance Evaluations ◽  
Imaging Systems ◽  
Scanning Probe ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Electron Microscopes ◽  
Scanning Electron Microscopes ◽  
Scanning Electron

In my last article, I discussed the need for scheduled system checks on scanning electron microscopes. The article used an experience at a local SEM laboratory to point out the importance of monitoring your instrument by performing simple but regular system performance evaluations.In this article I will discuss some principles behind the performance of imaging systems such as scanning electron and scanning probe microscopes. We will talk about the concepts of image linearity and dimensional calibration.

Current State of Biological High-Resolution Scanning Electron Microscopy

1988 ◽  
Vol 46 ◽  
pp. 180-181 ◽  
Author(s):  
Klaus-Ruediger Peters
Keyword(s):  
High Performance ◽  
Low Voltage ◽  
Backscattered Electrons ◽  
Lens Position ◽  
Low Voltage Operation ◽  
Signal Collection ◽  
Probe Size ◽  
Electron Microscopes ◽  
Scanning Electron Microscopes ◽  
Scanning Electron

A new generation of high performance field emission scanning electron microscopes (FSEM) is now commercially available (JEOL 890, Hitachi S 900, ISI OS 130-F) characterized by an "in lens" position of the specimen where probe diameters are reduced and signal collection improved. Additionally, low voltage operation is extended to 1 kV. Compared to the first generation of FSEM (JE0L JSM 30, Hitachi S 800), which utilized a specimen position below the final lens, specimen size had to be reduced but useful magnification could be impressively increased in both low (1-4 kV) and high (5-40 kV) voltage operation, i.e. from 50,000 to 200,000 and 250,000 to 1,000,000 x respectively.At high accelerating voltage and magnification, contrasts on biological specimens are well characterized1 and are produced by the entering probe electrons in the outmost surface layer within -vl nm depth. Backscattered electrons produce only a background signal. Under these conditions (FIG. 1) image quality is similar to conventional TEM (FIG. 2) and only limited at magnifications >1,000,000 x by probe size (0.5 nm) or non-localization effects (%0.5 nm).

Scanning-probe microscope analysis of optical thin films: A new analytical tool in a manufacturing environment

1994 ◽  
Vol 52 ◽  
pp. 1068-1069
Author(s):  
S. P. Sapers ◽  
R. Clark ◽  
P. Somerville
Keyword(s):  
Thin Film ◽  
Thin Films ◽  
Thermal Control ◽  
Scanning Probe Microscope ◽  
Scanning Probe ◽  
List Type ◽  
Manufacturing Environment ◽  
Physical Measurements ◽  
Probe Microscope

OCLI is a leading manufacturer of thin films for optical and thermal control applications. The determination of thin film and substrate topography can be a powerful way to obtain information for deposition process design and control, and about the final thin film device properties. At OCLI we use a scanning probe microscope (SPM) in the analytical lab to obtain qualitative and quantitative data about thin film and substrate surfaces for applications in production and research and development. This manufacturing environment requires a rapid response, and a large degree of flexibility, which poses special challenges for this emerging technology. The types of information the SPM provides can be broken into three categories:(1)Imaging of surface topography for visualization purposes, especially for samples that are not SEM compatible due to size or material constraints;(2)Examination of sample surface features to make physical measurements such as surface roughness, lateral feature spacing, grain size, and surface area;(3)Determination of physical properties such as surface compliance, i.e. “hardness”, surface frictional forces, surface electrical properties.

Observation of GaAs/AlAs Superlattice Structures in both Secondary and Backscattcred Electron Imaging Modes with an Ultrahigh Resolution Scanning Electron Microscope

1990 ◽  
Vol 48 (1) ◽  
pp. 404-405
Author(s):  
K. Ogura ◽  
A. Ono ◽  
S. Franchi ◽  
P.G. Merli ◽  
A. Migliori
Keyword(s):  
Gaas Layer ◽  
Objective Lens ◽  
Superlattice Structure ◽  
Backscattered Electron ◽  
Instrumental Resolution ◽  
Electron Microscopes ◽  
Superlattice Structures ◽  
Electron Imaging ◽  
Scanning Electron Microscopes ◽  
Scanning Electron

In the last few years the development of Scanning Electron Microscopes (SEM), equipped with a Field Emission Gun (FEG) and using in-lens specimen position, has allowed a significant improvement of the instrumental resolution . This is a result of the fine and bright probe provided by the FEG and by the reduced aberration coefficients of the strongly excited objective lens. The smaller specimen size required by in-lens instruments (about 1 cm, in comparison to 15 or 20 cm of a conventional SEM) doesn’t represent a serious limitation in the evaluation of semiconductor process techniques, where the demand of high resolution is continuosly increasing. In this field one of the more interesting applications, already described (1), is the observation of superlattice structures.In this note we report a comparison between secondary electron (SE) and backscattered electron (BSE) images of a GaAs / AlAs superlattice structure, whose cross section is reported in fig. 1. The structure consist of a 3 nm GaAs layer and 10 pairs of 7 nm GaAs / 15 nm AlAs layers grown on GaAs substrate. Fig. 2, 3 and 4 are SE images of this structure made with a JEOL JSM 890 SEM operating at an accelerating voltage of 3, 15 and 25 kV respectively. Fig. 5 is a 25 kV BSE image of the same specimen. It can be noticed that the 3nm layer is always visible and that the 3 kV SE image, in spite of the poorer resolution, shows the same contrast of the BSE image. In the SE mode, an increase of the accelerating voltage produces a contrast inversion. On the contrary, when observed with BSE, the layers of GaAs are always brighter than the AlAs ones , independently of the beam energy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document