Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T02:04:45.585Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Specimen Charging on Thin Films with One Conducting Layer: Discussion of Physical Principles

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 December 2004

Robert M. Glaeser  and
Kenneth H. Downing
Robert M. Glaeser
Affiliation:
Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, Stanley/Donner ASU, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720-3206, USA Life Sciences Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA
Kenneth H. Downing
Affiliation:
Life Sciences Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA
Get access

Abstract

Although the most familiar consequences of specimen charging in transmission electron microscopy can be eliminated by evaporating a thin conducting film (such as a carbon film) onto an insulating specimen or by preparing samples directly on such a conducting film to begin with, a more subtle charging effect still remains. We argue here that specimen charging is in this case likely to produce a dipole sheet rather than a layer of positive charge at the surface of the specimen. A simple model of the factors that control the kinetics of specimen charging, and its neutralization, is discussed as a guide for experiments that attempt to minimize the amount of specimen charging. Believable estimates of the electrostatic forces and the electron optical disturbances that are likely to occur suggest that specimen bending and warping may have the biggest impact on degrading the image quality at high resolution. Electron optical effects are likely to be negligible except in the case of a specimen that is tilted to high angle. A model is proposed to explain how both the mechanical and electron-optical effects of forming a dipole layer would have much greater impact on the image resolution in a direction perpendicular to the tilt axis, a well-known effect in electron microscopy of two-dimensional crystals.

Keywords

chargingresolutiontransmission electron microscopy
Type
Research Article
Information
Microscopy and Microanalysis , Volume 10 , Issue 6 , December 2004 , pp. 790 - 796
Copyright
© 2004 Microscopy Society of America

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Brink, J., Gross, H., Tittmann, P., Sherman, M.B., & Chiu, W. (1998a). Reduction of charging in protein electron cryomicroscopy. J Microsc 191, 67–73.Google Scholar
Brink, J., Sherman, M.B., Berriman, J., & Chiu, W. (1998b). Evaluation of charging on macromolecules in electron cryomicroscopy. Ultramicroscopy 72, 41–52.Google Scholar
Cazaux, J. (1995). Correlations between ionization radiation damage and charging effects in transmission electron microscopy. Ultramicroscopy 60, 411–425.Google Scholar
Downing, K. (1991). Spot-scan imaging in transmission electron microscopy. Science 251, 53–59.Google Scholar
Downing, K.H., McCartney, M.R., & Glaeser, R.M. (2004). Experimental characterization and mitigation of specimen charging on thin films with one conducting layer. Microsc Microanal 10, 783–789 (this issue).Google Scholar
Jakubowski, U., Baumeister, W., & Glaeser, R. (1989). Evaporated carbon stabilizes thin, frozen-hydrated specimens. Ultramicroscopy 31, 351–356.Google Scholar
Joy, D. (1995). Monte Carlo Modeling for Electron Microscopy and Microanalysis. New York: Oxford University Press.
Panofsky, W. & Phillips, M. (1962). Classical Electricity and Magnetism. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Pub. Co.
Reimer, L. (1998). Scanning Electron Microscopy: Physics of Image Formation and Microanalysis. Berlin, New York: Springer.