Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T07:26:36.221Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On the Progress of Scanning Transmission Electron Microscopy (STEM) Imaging in a Scanning Electron Microscope

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2018

Cheng Sun ,
Erich Müller ,
Matthias Meffert  and
Dagmar Gerthsen
Cheng Sun*
Affiliation:
Laboratorium für Elektronenmikroskopie, Karlsruher Institut für Technologie (KIT), Engesserstr. 7, 76131 Karlsruhe, Germany
Erich Müller
Affiliation:
Laboratorium für Elektronenmikroskopie, Karlsruher Institut für Technologie (KIT), Engesserstr. 7, 76131 Karlsruhe, Germany
Matthias Meffert
Affiliation:
Laboratorium für Elektronenmikroskopie, Karlsruher Institut für Technologie (KIT), Engesserstr. 7, 76131 Karlsruhe, Germany
Dagmar Gerthsen
Affiliation:
Laboratorium für Elektronenmikroskopie, Karlsruher Institut für Technologie (KIT), Engesserstr. 7, 76131 Karlsruhe, Germany
*
*Author for correspondence: Cheng Sun, E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) with low-energy electrons has been recognized as an important addition to the family of electron microscopies as it may avoid knock-on damage and increase the contrast of weakly scattering objects. Scanning electron microscopes (SEMs) are well suited for low-energy electron microscopy with maximum electron energies of 30 keV, but they are mainly used for topography imaging of bulk samples. Implementation of a scanning transmission electron microscopy (STEM) detector and a charge-coupled-device camera for the acquisition of on-axis transmission electron diffraction (TED) patterns, in combination with recent resolution improvements, make SEMs highly interesting for structure analysis of some electron-transparent specimens which are traditionally investigated by TEM. A new aspect is correlative SEM, STEM, and TED imaging from the same specimen region in a SEM which leads to a wealth of information. Simultaneous image acquisition gives information on surface topography, inner structure including crystal defects and qualitative material contrast. Lattice-fringe resolution is obtained in bright-field STEM imaging. The benefits of correlative SEM/STEM/TED imaging in a SEM are exemplified by structure analyses from representative sample classes such as nanoparticulates and bulk materials.

Keywords

scanning transmission electron microscopyscanning electron microscopylow-energy electronscorrelative SEM and STEM
Type
Materials Science Applications
Information
Microscopy and Microanalysis , Volume 24 , Issue 2 , April 2018 , pp. 99 - 106
Copyright
© Microscopy Society of America 2018 

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

Ambacher, O (1998) Growth and applications of Group III-nitrides. J Phys D Appl Phys 31, 2653–2710.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Belin, T and Epron, F (2005) Characterization methods of carbon nanotubes: A review. Mater Sci Eng B 119, 105–118.Google Scholar
Bell, DC and Erdman, N (2013) Low Voltage Electron Microscopy: Principles and Applications. West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Bell, DC, Mankin, M, Day, RW and Erdman, N (2014) Successful application of low voltage electron microscopy to practical materials problems. Ultramicroscopy 145, 56–65.Google Scholar
Bell, DC, Russo, CJ and Kolmykov, DV (2012) 40keV atomic resolution TEM. Ultramicroscopy 114, 31–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blank, H, Schneider, R, Gerthsen, D, Gehrke, H, Jarolim, K and Marko, D (2014) Application of low-energy scanning transmission electron microscopy for the study of Pt-nanoparticle uptake in human colon carcinoma cells. Nanotoxicology 8, 433–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brodu, E, Bouzy, E, Fundenberger, J-J, Guyon, J, Guitton, A and Zhang, Y (2017) On-axis TKD for orientation mapping of nanocrystalline materials in SEM. Mater Character 130, 92–96.Google Scholar
Cao, J, Liu, F, Lin, Q and Zhang, Y (2008) Hydrothermal synthesis of xonotlite from carbide slag. Prog Nat Sci 18, 1147–1153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cazaux, J (2012) From the physics of secondary electron emission to image contrasts in scanning electron microscopy. J Electron Microsc 61, 261–284.Google Scholar
Cretu, O, Lin, Y-C and Suenaga, K (2015) Secondary electron imaging of monolayer materials inside a transmission electron microscope. Appl Phys Lett 107, 063105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dellby, N, Bacon, NJ, Hrncirik, P, Murfitt, MF, Skone, GS, Szilagyi, ZS and Krivanek, OL (2011) Dedicated STEM for 200 to 40 keV operation. Eur Phys J Appl Phys 54, 33505.Google Scholar
Demers, H, Brodusch, N and Gauvin, R (2017) Low accelerating voltage scanning transmitted electron microscope: Imaging, diffraction, X-ray microanalysis, and electron energy-loss spectroscopy at the nanoscale. Microsc Microanal 23, 528–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Egerton, RF (2014) Choice of operating voltage for a transmission electron microscope. Ultramicroscopy 145, 85–93.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goudsmit, S and Saunderson, JL (1940) Multiple scattering of electrons. Phys Rev 57, 24–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Han, M-G, Garlow, JA, Marshall, MSJ, Tiano, AL, Wong, SS, Cheong, S-W, Walker, FJ, Ahn, CH and Zhu, Y (2017) Electron-beam-induced-current and active secondary-electron voltage-contrast with aberration-corrected electron probes. Ultramicroscopy 177, 14–19.Google ScholarPubMed
Hejny, C and Armbruster, T (2001) Polytypism in xonotlite Ca6Si6O17(OH)2 . Z Kristallogr 216, 396–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hondow, N, Harrington, J, Brydson, R, Doak, SH, Singh, N, Manshian, B and Brown, A (2011) STEM mode in the SEM: A practical tool for nanotoxicology. Nanotoxicology 5, 215–227.Google Scholar
Howie, A (1979) Image contrast and localized signal selection techniques. J Microsc 117, 11–23.Google Scholar
Iakoubovskii, K, Mitsuishi, K, Nakayama, Y and Furuya, K (2008) Thickness measurements with electron energy loss spectroscopy. Microsc Res Techniq 71, 626–631.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Joy, DC and Luo, S (1989) An empirical stopping power relationship for low-energy electrons. Scanning 11, 176–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaiser, U, Biskupek, J, Meyer, JC, Leschner, J, Lechner, L, Rose, H, Stöger-Pollach, M, Khlobystov, AN, Hartel, P, Müller, H, Haider, M, Eyhusen, S and Benner, G (2011) Transmission electron microscopy at 20kV for imaging and spectroscopy. Ultramicroscopy 111, 1239–1246.Google Scholar
Keller, RR and Geiss, RH (2012) Transmission EBSD from 10 nm domains in a scanning electron microscope. J Microsc 245, 245–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, YJ, Kriven, WM and Mitsuda, T (1993) TEM study of synthetic hillebrandite (Ca2SiO4· H2O). J Mater Res 8, 2948–2953.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klaar, H-J and Hsu, F-Y (1996) A new preparation method for cross-sectional TEM specimens. Mater Charact 36, 365–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klein, T, Buhr, E and Georg Frase, C (2012) TSEM: A review of scanning electron microscopy in transmission mode and its applications. Adv Imag Elect Phys 171, 297–348.Google Scholar
Konno, M, Ogashiwa, T, Sunaoshi, T, Orai, Y and Sato, M (2014) Lattice imaging at an accelerating voltage of 30kV using an in-lens type cold field-emission scanning electron microscope. Ultramicroscopy 145, 28–35.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Krivanek, OL, Chisholm, MF, Nicolosi, V, Pennycook, TJ, Corbin, GJ, Dellby, N, Murfitt, MF, Own, CS, Szilagyi, ZS, Oxley, MP, Pantelides, ST and Pennycook, SJ (2010) Atom-by-atom structural and chemical analysis by annular dark-field electron microscopy. Nature 464, 571–574.Google Scholar
Krumeich, F, Müller, E, Wepf, RA and Nesper, R (2011) Characterization of catalysts in an aberration-corrected scanning transmission electron microscope. J Phys Chem C 115, 1080–1083.Google Scholar
Linck, M, Hartel, P, Uhlemann, S, Kahl, F, Müller, H, Zach, J, Haider, M, Biskupek, J, Lee, Z, Lehnert, T, Börrnert, F, Rose, H and Kaiser, U (2016) Chromatic aberration correction for atomic resolution TEM imaging from 20 to 80 kV. Phys Rev Lett 117, 076101.Google Scholar
Merli, PG and Morandi, V (2005) Low-energy STEM of multilayers and dopant profiles. Microsc Microanal 11, 97–104.Google Scholar
Michael, JR, Joy, DC and Griffin, BJ (2009) Challenges in achieving high resolution at low voltages in the SEM. Microsc Microanal 15, 660–661.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morandi, V and Merli, PG (2007) Contrast and resolution versus specimen thickness in low energy scanning transmission electron microscopy. J Appl Phys 101, 114917.Google Scholar
Morandi, V, Merli, PG and Quaglino, D (2007) Scanning electron microscopy of thinned specimens: From multilayers to biological samples. Appl Phys Lett 90, 163113.Google Scholar
Negreanu, C, Llovet, X, Chawla, R and Salvat, F (2005) Calculation of multiple-scattering angular distributions of electrons and positrons. Radiat Phys Chem 74, 264–281.Google Scholar
Pfaff, M, Klein, MFG, Müller, E, Müller, P, Colsmann, A, Lemmer, U and Gerthsen, D (2012) Nanomorphology of P3HT: PCBM-based absorber layers of organic solar cells after different processing conditions analyzed by low-energy scanning transmission electron microscopy. Microsc Microanal 18, 1380–1388.Google Scholar
Pfaff, M, Müller, E, Klein, MFG, Colsmann, A, Lemmer, U, Krzyzanek, V, Reichelt, R and Gerthsen, D (2011) Low-energy electron scattering in carbon-based materials analyzed by scanning transmission electron microscopy and its application to sample thickness determination. J Microsc 243, 31–39.Google Scholar
Reimer, L (1998) Scanning Electron Microscopy: Physics of Image Formation and Microanalysis. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Rose, ME (1940) Electron path lengths in multiple scattering. Phys Rev 58, 90.Google Scholar
Sasaki, T, Sawada, H, Okunishi, E, Hosokawa, F, Kaneyama, T, Kondo, Y, Kimoto, K and Suenaga, K (2012) Evaluation of probe size in STEM imaging at 30 and 60kV. Micron 43, 551–556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sasaki, T, Sawada, H, Hosokawa, F, Sato, Y and Suenaga, K (2014) Aberration-corrected STEM/TEM imaging at 15kV. Ultramicroscopy 145, 50–55.Google Scholar
Suenaga, K, Sato, Y, Liu, Z, Kataura, H, Okazaki, T, Kimoto, K, Sawada, H, Sasaki, T, Omoto, K, Tomita, T, Kaneyama, T and Kondo, Y (2009) Visualizing and identifying single atoms using electron energy-loss spectroscopy with low accelerating voltage. Nat Chem 1, 415–418.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Uhlemann, S, Müller, H, Hartel, P, Zach, J and Haider, M (2013) Thermal magnetic field noise limits resolution in transmission electron microscopy. Phys Rev Lett 111, 046101.Google Scholar
Van Ngo, V, Hernandez, M, Roth, B and Joy, DC (2007) STEM imaging of lattice fringes and beyond in a UHR In-lens field-emission SEM. Microscopy Today 15, 12–16.Google Scholar
Volkenandt, T, Müller, E and Gerthsen, D (2014) Sample thickness determination by scanning transmission electron microscopy at low electron energies. Microsc Microanal 20, 111–123.Google Scholar
Volkenandt, T, Müller, E, Hu, DZ, Schaadt, DM and Gerthsen, D (2010) Quantification of sample thickness and In-concentration of InGaAs quantum wells by transmission measurements in a scanning electron microscope. Microsc Microanal 16, 604–613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weidner, A and Biermann, H (2015) Case studies on the application of high-resolution electron channelling contrast imaging–Investigation of defects and defect arrangements in metallic materials. Philos Mag 95, 759–793.Google Scholar
Williams, DB and Carter, BC (2009) Transmission Electron Microscopy: A Textbook for Materials Science. New York, NY: Springer Science Business Media.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yi, G-C, Wang, C and Park, WI (2005) ZnO nanorods: Synthesis, characterization and applications. Semicond Sci Technol 20, 22–34.Google Scholar
Zhu, Y, Inada, H, Nakamura, K and Wall, J (2009) Imaging single atoms using secondary electrons with an aberration-corrected electron microscope. Nat Mater 8, 808–812.Google Scholar