Nanoscale mapping of electromechanical response in ionic conductive ceramics with piezoelectric inclusions

Abstract

Size effect of cubic ZrO2 nanoparticles on ionic conductivity of polyethylene oxide-based composite Electromechanical (EM) response in ion conductive ceramics with piezoelectric inclusions was spatially explored using strain-based atomic force microscopy. Since the sample is composed of two dominant phases of ionic and piezoelectric phases, it allows us to explore two different EM responses of electrically induced ionic response and piezoresponse over the same surface. Furthermore, EM response of the ionic phase, i.e., electrochemical strain, was quantitatively investigated from the comparison with that of the piezoelectric phase, i.e., piezoresponse. These results could provide additional information on the EM properties, including the electrochemical strain at nanoscale. V C 2015 AIP Publishing LLC. [http://dx.

Origin of Hysteresis in CH3NH3PbI3 Perovskite Thin Films

“…However, above the Curie temperature (343 K), the ferroelectricity in the MAPbI 3 thin films disappears due to the phase transition from a tetragonal to a cubic structure. Furthermore, the observed domain structures, which exhibit a 180° phase difference as shown in Figure d, can also be evidence for the presence of ferroelectricity because a 180° phase difference cannot generally be observed if the ion migration is the dominant origin . Unlike the case of ferroelectricity, if ion migration is the underlying origin of the observed PFM hysteresis loop, the magnitude of the PFM response will increase with temperature due to the activation of the ionic motion by thermal energy, as shown in Figure S4 (Supporting Information).…”

“…In principle, the PFM response cannot always explicitly demonstrate the presence of ferroelectricity because non‐piezoelectric effects such as the surface volume change caused by ion migration can also contribute to the PFM response in ionic systems such as Li‐ion conductors . The observed hysteresis loop in the MAPbI 3 thin films can also be attributed to the concurrent ion migration.…”

Non-piezoelectric effects in piezoresponse force microscopy

“…[94] Despite having significantly different fundamental mechanisms, the electrochemical strain and piezoresponse are eventually detected as an EM response in PFM and ESM, respectively. This fact implies that the EM response produced by electrochemical strain is potentially misinterpreted as that produced by the piezoresponse.…”

Recent Progress in the Nanoscale Evaluation of Piezoelectric and Ferroelectric Properties via Scanning Probe Microscopy

“…The static-sensitivity-based quantification method uses the force-distance (F-D) curve for measuring the static sensitivity, that is, the inverse optical lever sensitivity (InvOLS). [61][62][63] In the F-D curve, static sensitivity in units of nm V −1 can be obtained by calculating the reciprocal slope of the F-D curve. In general, because the OP-PFM amplitude detected by the OBD is expressed as a voltage unit, the representation in units of distance can be obtained by multiplying this quantification factor by the measured the OP-PFM amplitude signal.…”

“…In general, the effective piezoelectric coefficient can be measured by monitoring the PFM amplitude with respect to the magnitude of the V ac amplitude in PFM, which is referred to as the V ac amplitude sweep. [41,62,113,114] This approach can be implemented by applying a gradually increasing V ac amplitude (Figure 3a) to the SPM tip. Subsequently, the PFM amplitude is be varied by gradually increasing the V ac amplitude and plotted against the mag-nitude of the V ac amplitude.…”