Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-42gr6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T23:29:29.056Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Influence of Tip Wear on Atomic Force Acoustic Microscopy Experiments

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 February 2011

Get access

Abstract

Tip wear and its corresponding change in geometry is a major impediment for quantifying atomic force acoustic microscopy (AFAM). To better understand the process of tip wear and its influence on AFAM measurements of material elastic properties, we have performed a series of experiments and compared tip geometries calculated from experimental data with direct tip visualization in the scanning electron microscope (SEM). Using a sample with known elastic properties, the tip-sample contact stiffnesses for several different cantilevers were determined. Hertz and Derjaguin-Müller-Toporov (DMT) contact-mechanics models were applied to calculate values of the tip radius R from the experimental data. At the same time, values for R before and after each sequence of AFAM measurements were obtained from SEM images. Both methods showed that the tip radius increased with use. However, values of R calculated with the theoretical models varied indeterminately from those obtained from the SEM images. In addition, in some cases analysis of the AFAM measurements suggested a hemispherical tip, while the corresponding SEM images showed that the end of the tip was flat. We also observed other changes in tip shape, such as an increase in the tip width. By combining theoretical models for contact mechanics with visual information on the tip geometry we hope to better understand contact characteristic in AFM-based systems.

Contribution of NIST, an agency of the US government; not subject to copyright.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2005

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. Dinnelli, F., Castell, M. R., Ritchie, D. A., Mason, N. J., Briggs, G. A. D., and Kolosov, O. V., Phil. Mag. A 80, 2299 (2000).Google Scholar
2. Yamanaka, K., Maruyama, Y., Tsuji, T., and Nakamoto, K., Appl. Phys. Lett. 78, 1939 (2001).Google Scholar
3. Rabe, U., Amelio, S., Kopycinska, M., Hirsekorn, S., Kempf, M., Göcken, M., and Arnold, W., Surf. Interface Anal. 33, 65 (2002).Google Scholar
4. Hurley, D. C., Shen, K., Jennett, N. M., and Turner, J. A., J. Appl. Phys. 94, 2347 (2003).Google Scholar
5. Cappella, B. and Dietler, G., Surf. Sci. Rep. 34, 1 (1999).Google Scholar
6. Johnson, K. L., Contact Mechanics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK, 1985), p. 9096.Google Scholar
7. Young, W. C., and Budynas, R. G., Roark's formulas for stress and strain (McGraw-Hill, New York, 2002), p. 189.Google Scholar
8. Simmons, G. and Wang, H., Single crystal elastic constants and calculated aggregate properties: A Handbook (The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1971), p. 85.Google Scholar