1998
DOI: 10.1103/physrevb.58.5078
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Surface charge density and evolution of domain structure in triglycine sulfate determined by electrostatic-force microscopy

Abstract: A dynamic contact mode operation of electrostatic-force microscopy ͑EFM͒ with an ac modulation has been developed and used to investigate the domain strucutre and dynamics of a triglycine sulfate single crystal. Well-separated topographic and domain contrast images have been obtained by detecting the force instead of the force gradient in the dynamic contact mode operation of EFM. Surface charge density and the anisotropic domain wall thickness have been measured. The evolution of domains embedded in an opposi… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
96
0

Year Published

2002
2002
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 139 publications
(96 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
0
96
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The presence of the electrostatic forces hypothesis is also supported by observations of nonpiezoelectric surfaces. 32 In contrast, the existence of a lateral PFM signal [33][34][35] and the absence of relaxation behavior in PFM contrast as opposed to SSPM contrast, 36,25 as well as numerous observations using both EFM-SSPM and PFM, 37,38 clearly point to a significant electromechanical contribution to PFM contrast. In order to resolve the controversy regarding the origins of PFM contrast, we analyze the contrast formation mechanism and relative magnitudes of electrostatic versus electromechanical contributions to PFM interactions for the model case of c ϩ , c Ϫ domains in tetragonal perovskite ferroelectrics.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 86%
“…The presence of the electrostatic forces hypothesis is also supported by observations of nonpiezoelectric surfaces. 32 In contrast, the existence of a lateral PFM signal [33][34][35] and the absence of relaxation behavior in PFM contrast as opposed to SSPM contrast, 36,25 as well as numerous observations using both EFM-SSPM and PFM, 37,38 clearly point to a significant electromechanical contribution to PFM contrast. In order to resolve the controversy regarding the origins of PFM contrast, we analyze the contrast formation mechanism and relative magnitudes of electrostatic versus electromechanical contributions to PFM interactions for the model case of c ϩ , c Ϫ domains in tetragonal perovskite ferroelectrics.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 86%
“…The electrostatic effect originates essentially from the Coulombic electrostatic force between the 8 AFM tip/cantilever and the sample surface, [75,76] described as [77,78] .…”
Section: Fig 3 Local and Non-local Electrostatic Effects In The Afmmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For the same experimental setup the term "dynamic-contact electrostatic force microscopy" (DC-EFM) was introduced and domain contrast was explained by specific electrical properties of the +z and the −z domain faces [19]. Differences in the work functions were also proposed for causing the domain contrast [20].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%