Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T19:07:33.875Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Hybrid Tomography of Nanostructures in the Electron Microscope

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2011

Zineb Saghi
Affiliation:
[email protected], University of Sheffield, eng Materials, sheffield, United Kingdom
Thirunavukkarasu Gnanavel
Affiliation:
[email protected], university of sheffield, eng materials, sheffield, United Kingdom
xiaojing xu
Affiliation:
[email protected], University of Sheffield, eng Materials, sheffield, United Kingdom
Guenter Möbus
Affiliation:
[email protected], University of Sheffield, eng Materials, sheffield, United Kingdom
Get access

Abstract

A variety of tomographic experiments and modes for electron tomography of nanostructures are introduced, derived from the general concepts of quantitative computed tomography, binarised geometric tomography, including shape-from-silhouette, and spectroscopic chemical mapping. Our emphasis is on working out concepts of combining at least two of these tomography modes in order to share their respective advantages and improve the overall reconstruction quality. In this work, the following three hybrid modes are presented: (i) ADF-STEM tomography and EDX tomography into high-resolution 3D chemical mapping, (ii) geometric tomography and lattice-resolved backprojection into HREM-tomography for convex bodies, and (iii) geometric tomography and e-beam nanosculpting into “tomographic nanofabrication”.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2009

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

1. Frank, J (Ed.) 2007 Electron Tomography: Methods for Three-Dimensional Visualization of Structures in the Cell, 2nd ed. (New York:Plenum Press).Google Scholar
2. Midgley, P A and Weyland, M 2003 Ultramicroscopy 96 413.Google Scholar
3. Möbus, G and Inkson, B J 2001 Appl. Phys. Lett. 79 1369.Google Scholar
4. Möbus, G and Inkson, B J 2003 Ultramicroscopy 96 433.Google Scholar
5. Gardner, R J 1995 Geometric Tomography (New York:Plenum Press).Google Scholar
6. Tam, KC 1987, J nondestructive evaluation, 6 189.Google Scholar
7. Saghi, Z, Xu, X J and Möbus, G 2007 Appl. Phys. Lett 91 , 251906.Google Scholar
8. Xu, X J, Saghi, Z, and Möbus, G 2007 MRS Symp.Proc. 1026E 1026–C08.Google Scholar
9. Qin, W and Fraundorf, P 2003 Ultramicroscopy 94 245.Google Scholar
10. Möbus, G, Doole, R and BJ, Inkson 2003 MRS Symp.Proc. 738, G1.2, 15.Google Scholar
11. Xu, X, Saghi, Z, Gay, R and Möbus, G 2007 Nanotechnology 18 No 22 225501.Google Scholar
12. JCH, Spence 1988 Experimental High-Resolution Electron Microscopy (New York: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
13. O'Keefe M, A and Radmilovic, V 1993 Proceedings - Annual Meeting, Microscopy Society of America 980.Google Scholar
14. Saghi, Z, Gnanavel, T, Peng, Y, Inkson B, J, Cullis A, G, Gibbs M, R and Möbus, G 2008 Appl. Phys. Lett. 93 153102.Google Scholar
15. Kremer, JR, Mastronarde, DN and McIntosh, JR 1996 J. Struct. Biol. 116 71.Google Scholar