2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.ultramic.2021.113221
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Precise measurement of the electron beam current in a TEM

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Measuring the beam current as indicated by the built-in screen ampere meter can also often be inaccurate. Installing a Faraday cup, or using the drift tube of a spectrometer as a Faraday cup, is often the most accurate method (Krause et al, 2021), and can also be used to properly calibrate the screen ampere meter. We compared the symptoms of RD (specifically the rates of intensity decay, disulphide bond breakage, and decarboxylation) at cryo-temperatures in MicroED and X-ray crystallography, and determined that both global and specific damage events happen at similar doses.…”
Section: Discussion: Raddose-edmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Measuring the beam current as indicated by the built-in screen ampere meter can also often be inaccurate. Installing a Faraday cup, or using the drift tube of a spectrometer as a Faraday cup, is often the most accurate method (Krause et al, 2021), and can also be used to properly calibrate the screen ampere meter. We compared the symptoms of RD (specifically the rates of intensity decay, disulphide bond breakage, and decarboxylation) at cryo-temperatures in MicroED and X-ray crystallography, and determined that both global and specific damage events happen at similar doses.…”
Section: Discussion: Raddose-edmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since account is now taken of primary beam energy and specimen composition, the biggest error in dose is likely to be the fluence measurement itself. Methods to measure this as accurately as possible are discussed by Krause et al ( 2021 ). Unless beam currents are very low, one must be careful when using the counts from a direct electron detector, because of coincidence loss (Li et al, 2013 ).…”
Section: Raddose‐edmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…If one electron lights up one pixel, this corresponds to a current of 6.4 pA which compared to conventional STEM imaging is somewhat on the low side. In the Section 3, it is shown that this estimate has to be adjusted with more technical details but the order of magnitude is correct [29]. In Fig.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since the incoming electron current is lower than the detection threshold for measuring the current via the fluorescent screen or spectrum drift tube method, no absolute measurement of the electron current could be performed here. However in the work of Krause et al [29] it is shown that direct electron detectors provide an accurate estimate for low currents. Since the 7 keV threshold loses the least amount of electrons (see Fig.…”
Section: Timepix3 Characterizationmentioning
confidence: 99%