Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-25wd4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T07:05:30.919Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Determining Grain Boundary Potential from Electrostatic Force Based Scanning Probe Imaging

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 July 2020

Dawn A. Bonnell
Affiliation:
Dept. Mat. Sci. Eng., University of Pennsylvania, 3231 Walnut St., Philadelphia, PA19104
Sergei V. Kalinin
Affiliation:
Dept. Mat. Sci. Eng., University of Pennsylvania, 3231 Walnut St., Philadelphia, PA19104
Get access

Extract

A combination of electrostatic force microscopy (EFM) and scanning surface potential microscopy (SSPM) is used to quantify nanometer scale field variations for the general case of electronically inhomogeneous surfaces. The specific example illustrated here is the intersection of a Σ5 grain boundary in donor doped SrTiO3 intersecting the (100) surface. ‘The topographic structure is compared to the surface potential, the positive and the negative electrostatic force images in figure 1. The EFM contrast changes sign with the polarity of the applied bias, as expected for an electrostatic attractive/repulsive interaction. There is a significant localization of surface potential at the grain boundary that is manifest as a protrusion in the SPPM image.

To quantify the properties at the surface, rather than above the surface where the measurements are acquired, a relationship connecting the sample-tip interaction is required. It has been shown that models based on simple geometric assumptions do not represent the behavior well.

Type
Scanned Probe Microscopy
Copyright
Copyright © 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:

1. We are grateful to G. Duscher and.S. Pennycook for the bicrystal samples.Google Scholar
2.Huey, B., Bonnell, D. A., Applied Physics Letters 76 (2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3Henning, A. K. and Hochwitz, T., Mater. Sci. Eng. B-Solid State 42 (1-3), 88 (1996).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4Belaidi, S., Girard, P., Leveque, G., J. Appl. Phys. 81, 1023 (1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5Hao, H.W., Baro, A.M., Saenz, J.J., Journ. Vac. Sci. Tech. B 9, 1323 (1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Kalinin, S.Bonnell, D. submitted to Physical ReviewGoogle Scholar