Electrostatic forces between metallic tip and semiconductor surfaces

Hudlet, Sylvain; Jean, M.; Roulet, B.; Berger, Jacques; Guthmann, C.

doi:10.1063/1.358616

Cited by 109 publications

(82 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The description of non-metallic surfaces is more difficult because the simple boundary condition of constant potential is not valid anymore and no simple analytical expressions can be derived to describe the interaction between insulating tips and samples [230,231]. Two cases have attracted special attention: The interaction between metallic tips and semiconductors [232,233] and the interaction between two metals, one being covered with an insulating layer [234]. The latter case is important for polarization force microscopy [234].…”

Section: Electrostatic Forcementioning

confidence: 99%

Force measurements with the atomic force microscope: Technique, interpretation and applications

Butt

Cappella

Kappl

2005

Surface Science Reports

3,198

2,949

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Electrostatic Forcementioning

confidence: 99%

Force measurements with the atomic force microscope: Technique, interpretation and applications

Butt

Cappella

Kappl

2005

Surface Science Reports

3,198

2,949

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Variations of flexion of the cantilever holding the tip during a scan allow us to construct an electrical image [6] on inhomogeneous materials as well as on nanostructures (superlattices, nanoelectronics, etc.) [7][8][9]. In the simple case where the tip is in front of a conductive plane sample, we can deduce the force applied on the sensor by means of analytical expressions [10][11][12] or an equivalent charge model [13].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Finite element simulations of the resolution in electrostatic force microscopy

Belaidi

Lebon²,

Girard

et al. 1998

Applied Physics A: Materials Science & Processing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, we present simulation results for the electrostatic force between two conducting parts placed at different voltages: an atomic force microscope (AFM) sensor and a metallic sample. The sensor is composed of a cantilever supporting a conical tip terminated by a spherical apex. The simulations are based on the finite element method. For tip-sample distances (5-50 nm) and for an electrically homogeneous plane, the electrostatic force can be compared to the results obtained with the equivalent charge model and experiment. By scanning a plane with a potential step, the variation of the electrostatic force near the discontinuity gives the spatial resolution in electrostatic force microscopy (EFM). We establish then the relationships between the resolution, tipsample distance, and tip apex radius.The electrostatic force microscope results from one of many specializations of tip sensor in near-field microscopy [1, 2]. More precisely, this type of microscope is realized by applying a voltage on a conducting AFM tip. It is a good tool for imaging samples that present a gradient of electrical properties [3][4][5]. Variations of flexion of the cantilever holding the tip during a scan allow us to construct an electrical image [6] on inhomogeneous materials as well as on nanostructures (superlattices, nanoelectronics, etc.) [7][8][9]. In the simple case where the tip is in front of a conductive plane sample, we can deduce the force applied on the sensor by means of analytical expressions [10][11][12] or an equivalent charge model [13]. As soon as the geometry of the sample becomes complex (integrated circuits, dielectrics), the theoretical behavior of the system can be obtained by numerical methods such as the surface charge method [14], finite difference method [15], or finite element method [16].To determine the properties of the electrostatic force microscope in front of a sample with areas at different potentials, we propose to use the finite element method. In Sect. 1 we verify the results obtained by this numerical method in the simple case of a tip in front of a plane sample at constant potential [13]. In Sect. 2 we consider the response of the microscope near a potential step [17]. For this, we study the 3-dimensional tip-object system and determine the force applied on the tip by the finite element method and then we deduce the resolution for a potential step. Mathematical model The electrostatic problemThe problem consists in determining the interaction between an AFM sensor (tip + cantilever) and an infinite plane (both conducting). If the tip is long enough or the distance d between the tip and the sample is small, we can neglect the effect of the cantilever [18]. Then, the study is reduced to the calculation of the force exerted on a conical tip in front of a metallic plane. We treat the problem in 3-dimensional space because heterogeneities, as introduced in Sect. 2, cause the revolution symmetry to disappear. First, we must obtain the potential distribution in the space between the tip and the plan...

show abstract

“…Kelvin probe microscopy allows one to measure the local contact potential difference across the surface by measuring the applied bias voltage required to compensate the capacitance force due to contact potential (Jacobs and Stemmer, 1999). The capacitance force can be easily calculated analytically as a function of the tip/ sample geometry and U (Hudlet et al, 1995;Jean et al, 1999). Note that, although in principle electrons can transfer between the end of tip and the surface, at the scanning ranges used in NC-SFM this effect is negligible.…”

Section: Macroscopic Electrostatic Forces In Scanning Force Microscopymentioning

confidence: 99%

Theories of scanning probe microscopes at the atomic scale

2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Significant progress has been made both in experimentation and in theoretical modeling of scanning probe microscopy. The theoretical models used to analyze and interpret experimental scanning probe microscope (SPM) images and spectroscopic data now provide information not only about the surface, but also the probe tip and physical changes occurring during the scanning process. The aim of this review is to discuss and compare the present status of computational modeling of two of the most popular SPM methods-scanning tunneling microscopy and scanning force microscopy-in conjunction with their applications to studies of surface structure and properties with atomic resolution. In the context of these atomic-scale applications, for the scanning force microscope (SFM), this review focuses primarily on recent noncontact SFM (NC-SFM) results. After a brief introduction to the experimental techniques and the main factors determining image formation, the authors consider the theoretical models developed for the scanning tunneling microscope (STM) and the SFM. Both techniques are treated from the same general perspective of a sharp tip interacting with the surface-the only difference being that the control parameter in the STM is the tunneling current and in the SFM it is the force. The existing methods for calculating STM and SFM images are described and illustrated using numerous examples, primarily from the authors' own simulations, but also from the literature. Theoretical and practical aspects of the techniques applied in STM and SFM modeling are compared. Finally, the authors discuss modeling as it relates to SPM applications in studying surface properties, such as adsorption, point defects, spin manipulation, and phonon excitation. CONTENTS

show abstract

Electrostatic forces between metallic tip and semiconductor surfaces

Cited by 109 publications

References 8 publications

Force measurements with the atomic force microscope: Technique, interpretation and applications

Force measurements with the atomic force microscope: Technique, interpretation and applications

Finite element simulations of the resolution in electrostatic force microscopy

Theories of scanning probe microscopes at the atomic scale

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About