Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-txr5j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-02T02:14:37.245Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

EFTEM and STEM EELS Spectrum Imaging

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 July 2020

J. A. Hunt
Affiliation:
Gatan Research & Development, 5933 Coronado Lane, Pleasanton, CA, 94588, USA
R. H. Harmon
Affiliation:
Gatan Research & Development, 5933 Coronado Lane, Pleasanton, CA, 94588, USA
Get access

Extract

Electron energy-loss spectroscopy (EELS) in the transmission electron microscope (TEM) is a powerful technique that analyzes the inelastic scattering distribution of the fast TEM electrons after they have lost energy within the sample. The resultant energy-losses are characteristic of elemental, chemical, and dielectric properties and are typically measured in one of two ways. Parallel-detection EELS spectrometers (PEELS) acquire spectral data over a large range of energy-loss simultaneously for rapid acquisition of spectral data at a single point. In contrast, the energy filtering TEM (EFTEM) acquires only a single energy band at once, but does so for thousands or even millions of image pixels simultaneously.

Spectrum-imaging concerns the acquisition of spectroscopic data of sufficient detail for rigorous analysis at each pixel in a digital image. (Fig. 1) A STEM EELS spectrum image “data cube” can be acquired by stepping a focused electron probe to each pixel and filling the spectrum image one spectrum at a time.

Type
Compositional Mapping With High Spatial Resolution
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

1. Hunt, J.A. (1989), Proc. 47th Ann. Meet, of Electron Micros. Soc. Am., ed. Bailey, G.W., 398399.Google Scholar

2. Jeanguillaume, C., and Colliex, C. (1989), Ultramicroscopy 28, 252257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

3. Hunt, J.A., and Williams, D.B. (1991), Ultramicroscopy 38, 4773CrossRefGoogle Scholar

4. Botton, G., and L'Espérance, G. (1994), J. Microsc. 173, 925.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

5. Lavergne, J.-L., Martin, J.-M., Belin, M. (1992), Microsc. Microanal. Microstruct. 3: 517528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

6. Leapman, R.D. and Hunt, J.A. (1995), J. Micros. Soc. Am. 1, 93108.Google Scholar