Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-nwzlb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-28T21:19:57.467Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Dark Side of EDX Tomography: Modeling Detector Shadowing to Aid 3D Elemental Signal Analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 March 2015

Catriona S.M. Yeoh*
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Metallurgy, University of Cambridge, 27 Charles Babbage Road, Cambridge, CB3 0FS, UK
David Rossouw
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Metallurgy, University of Cambridge, 27 Charles Babbage Road, Cambridge, CB3 0FS, UK
Zineb Saghi
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Metallurgy, University of Cambridge, 27 Charles Babbage Road, Cambridge, CB3 0FS, UK
Pierre Burdet
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Metallurgy, University of Cambridge, 27 Charles Babbage Road, Cambridge, CB3 0FS, UK
Rowan K. Leary
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Metallurgy, University of Cambridge, 27 Charles Babbage Road, Cambridge, CB3 0FS, UK
Paul A. Midgley
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Metallurgy, University of Cambridge, 27 Charles Babbage Road, Cambridge, CB3 0FS, UK
*
*Corresponding author. csmy2@cam.ac.uk
Get access

Abstract

A simple model is proposed to account for the loss of collected X-ray signal by the shadowing of X-ray detectors in the scanning transmission electron microscope. The model is intended to aid the analysis of three-dimensional elemental data sets acquired using energy-dispersive X-ray tomography methods where shadow-free specimen holders are unsuitable or unavailable. The model also provides a useful measure of the detection system geometry.

Type
Techniques and Equipment Development
Copyright
© Microscopy Society of America 2015 

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

Genc, A., Kovarik, L., Gu, M., Cheng, H., Plachinda, P., Pullan, L., Freitag, B. & Wang, C. (2013). XEDS STEM tomography for 3D chemical characterization of nanoscale particles. Ultramicroscopy 131, 2432.Google Scholar
Goldstein, J.I. (1979). Principles of thin film X-ray microanalysis. In Introduction to Analytical Electron Microscopy, Hren J.J., Goldstein, J.I. & Joy D.C. (Eds.), pp. 83120. New York, NY and London: Springer.Google Scholar
Goris, B., Polavarapu, L., Bals, S., Van Tendeloo, G. & Liz-Marzán, L.M. (2014). Monitoring galvanic replacement through three-dimensional morphological and chemical mapping. Nano Lett 14, 32203226.Google Scholar
Hawkes, P.W. (2006). The electron microscope as a structure projector. In Electron Tomography SE – 4, Frank, J. (Ed.), pp. 83111. New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
Leary, R., Midgley, P.A. & Thomas, J.M. (2012). Recent advances in the application of electron tomography to materials chemistry. Acc Chem Res 45, 17821791.Google Scholar
Lepinay, K., Lorut, F., Pantel, R. & Epicier, T. (2013). Chemical 3D tomography of 28nm high K metal gate transistor: STEM XEDS experimental method and results. Micron 47, 4349.Google Scholar
Midgley, P.A. & Dunin-Borkowski, R.E. (2009). Electron tomography and holography in materials science. Nat Mater 8, 271280.Google Scholar
Midgley, P.A. & Weyland, M. (2003). 3D electron microscopy in the physical sciences: The development of Z-contrast and EFTEM tomography. Ultramicroscopy 96, 413431.Google Scholar
Möbus, G., Doole, R.C. & Inkson, B.J. (2003). Spectroscopic electron tomography. Ultramicroscopy 96, 433451.Google Scholar
Newbury, D.E. (2005). X-ray spectrometry and spectrum image mapping at output count rates above 100 kHz with a silicon drift detector on a scanning electron microscope. Scanning 27, 227239.Google Scholar
Pantel, R. (2011). Coherent bremsstrahlung effect observed during STEM analysis of dopant distribution in silicon devices using large area silicon drift EDX detectors and high brightness electron source. Ultramicroscopy 111, 16071618.Google Scholar
Reed, S.J.B. (1975). Electron Microprobe Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Saghi, Z., Xu, X., Peng, Y., Inkson, B. & Möbus, G. (2007). Three-dimensional chemical analysis of tungsten probes by energy dispersive X-ray nanotomography. Appl Phys Lett 91, 251906.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schlossmacher, P. (2010). Nanoscale chemical compositional analysis with an innovative S/TEM-EDX system. Microsc Anal 24, S5S8.Google Scholar
Slater, T.J.A., Camargo, P.H.C., Burke, M.G., Zaluzec, N.J. & Haigh, S.J. (2014 a). Understanding the limitations of the Super-X energy dispersive X-ray spectrometer as a function of specimen tilt angle for tomographic data acquisition in the S/TEM. J Phys 522, 012025.Google Scholar
Slater, T.J.A., Macedo, A., Schroeder, S.L.M., Burke, M.G., O’Brien, P., Camargo, P.H.C. & Haigh, S.J. (2014 b). Correlating catalytic activity of Ag–Au nanoparticles with 3D compositional variations. Nano Lett 14(4), 19211926.Google Scholar
Tixier, R. & Philibert, J. (1969). Analyse quantitative d'échantillons minces. In Proceedings of the 5th International Congress on X-Ray Optics and Microanalysis, Mollenstedt, G. & Gaukler, K.H. (Eds.), pp. 180. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
von Harrach, H.S., Dona, P., Freitag, B., Soltau, H., Niculae, A. & Rohde, M. (2010). An integrated multiple silicon drift detector system for transmission electron microscopes. J Phys 241, 012015.Google Scholar
Watanabe, M. (2011). X-ray energy-dispersive spectrometry in scanning transmission electron microscopes. In Scanning Transmission Electron Microscopy: Imaging and Analysis, Pennycook, S.J., Nellist, P.D. & Peter D. (Eds.), pp. 291352. New York, NY: Springer Science+Business Media.Google Scholar
Williams, D.B. & Carter, C.B. (2009). Transmission Electron Microscopy: A Textbook for Materials Science, 2nd ed. New York, NY: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zaluzec, N.J. (2014). Analytical formulae for calculation of X-ray detector solid angles in the scanning and scanning/transmission analytical electron microscope. Microsc Microanal 20(1), 19.Google Scholar