Везде

RAS PhysicsКристаллография Crystallography Reports

  • ISSN (Print) 0023-4761
  • ISSN (Online) 3034-5510

POSSIBILITIES OF MODERN SCANNING TRANSMISSION ELECTRON MICROSCOPY FOR STUDYING BORON CARBIDES

You can
PII
10.31857/S0023476123010198-1
DOI
10.31857/S0023476123010198
Publication type
Status
Published
Authors
I. S. Pavlov
  • Affiliation: Shubnikov Institute of Crystallography, Federal Scientific and Research Center “Crystallography and Photonics,”Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, 119333 Russia
P. A. Aleksandrov
  • Affiliation:
    National Research Centre “Kurchatov Institute,” Moscow, 123182 Russia
    Shubnikov Institute of Crystallography, Federal Scientific and Research Center “Crystallography and Photonics,”Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, 119333 Russia
    Moscow Institute of P
Volume/ Edition
Volume 68 / Issue number 1
Pages
153-159
Abstract
A promising method of scanning transmission electron microscopy is the use of integrated differential phase contrast. Its advantages include high sensitivity to light elements, almost linear relation between the generated image contrast and atomic numbers of Z atoms contained in a sample, noise suppression, and much more. Using the modeling and mathematical processing, prospects of this technique for studying the crystal structure of materials consisting of light atoms have been analyzed by the example of boron carbide polytypes. It is shown that the sensitivity of the technique makes it possible to distinguish columns of boron atoms from columns consisting of carbon. Recommendations on using this technique for analyzing the structures consisting of light elements are formulated.
Keywords
SCANNING TRANSMISSION ELECTRON MICROSCOPY BORON CARBIDES
Date of publication
15.09.2025
Year of publication
2025
Number of purchasers
0
Views
13

References

  1. 1. Williams D.B., Carter C.B. The transmission electron microscope. Berlin: Springer, 1996. 757 p.
  2. 2. Lazić I., Bosch E.G.T. // Adv. Imaging Electron Phys. 2017. V. 199. P. 75. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.aiep.2017.01.006
  3. 3. Hetherington C. // Mater. Today. 2004. V. 7. P. 50. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1369-7021 (04)00571-1
  4. 4. Rosenauer A., Gries K., Müller K. et al. // Ultramicroscopy. 2009. V. 109. P. 1171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2009.05.003
  5. 5. Molina S.I., Sales D.L., Galindo P.L. et al. // Ultramicroscopy. 2009. V. 109. P. 172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2008.10.008
  6. 6. LeBeau J.M., Findlay S.D., Allen J.M. et al. // Phys. Rev. Lett. 2008. V. 100. P. 206101. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.206101
  7. 7. Dwyer C., Maunders C., Zheng C.L. et al. // Appl. Phys. Lett. 2012. V. 100. P. 191915. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4711766
  8. 8. Yücelen E., Lazić I., Bosch E.G.T. // Sci. Rep. 2018. V. 8. P. 2676. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-20377-2
  9. 9. Dekkers N.H., De Lang H. // Optik (Stuttg). 1974. V. 41. P. 452.
  10. 10. Shibata N., Kohno Y., Findlay S.D. et al. // J. Electron Microsc. (Tokyo). 2010. V. 59. P. 473. https://doi.org/10.1093/jmicro/dfq014
  11. 11. Lazić I., Bosch E.G.T., Lazar S. // Ultramicroscopy. 2016. V. 160. P. 265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2015.10.011
  12. 12. Waddell E.M. // Optik (Stuttg). 1979. V. 54. P. 83.
  13. 13. Bosch E.G.T., Lazić I. // Ultramicroscopy. 2015. V. 156. P. 59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2015.02.004
  14. 14. Thévenot F. // J. Eur. Ceram. Soc. 1990. V. 6. P. 205. https://doi.org/10.1016/0955-2219 (90)90048-K
  15. 15. Domnich V., Reynaud S., Haber R. et al. // J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 2011. V. 94. P. 3605. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-2916.2011.04865.x
  16. 16. Chen M., McCauley J.W., Hemker K.J. // Science. 2003. V. 299. P. 1563. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1080819
  17. 17. Ghosh D.S., Ghatu S., Tirumalai S.R. et al. // J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 2007. V. 90. P. 1850. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-2916.2007.01652.x
  18. 18. Madhav R.K., Guo J.J., Shinoda Y. et al. // Nat. Commun. 2012. V. 3. P. 1052. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms2047
  19. 19. Reddy K., Liu P., Hirata A. et al. // Nat. Commun. 2013. V. 4. P. 2483. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms3483
  20. 20. Brook R.J., Cahn R.W., Bever M.B. Concise encyclopedia of advanced ceramic materials. N.Y.: Pergamon Press, 1991. 592 p.
  21. 21. Ashbee K.H.G. // Acta Metall. 1971. V. 19. P. 1079. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-6160 (71)90040-X
  22. 22. Bai H., Ma N., Lang J. et al. // Mater. Des. 2013. V. 46. P. 740. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2012.09.053
  23. 23. Sankaranarayanan S., Sabat R.K., Jayalakshmi S. et al. // Mater. Des. 2014. V. 56. P. 428. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2013.11.031
  24. 24. Жданов Г.С., Севастьянов Н.Г. // Докл. АН СССР. 1941. Т. 32. С. 432.
  25. 25. Clark H.K., Hoard J.L. // J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1943. V. 65. P. 2115. https://doi.org/10.1021/ja01251a026
  26. 26. Ekbom L.B., Amundin C.O. // Sci. Ceram. 1981. V. 11. P. 237.
  27. 27. Beauvy M. // J. Less Common Met. 1983. V. 90. P. 169. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-5088 (83)90067-X
  28. 28. Silver A.H., Bray P.J. // J. Chem. Phys. 1959. V. 31. P. 247. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1730302
  29. 29. Lee D., Bray P.J., Aselage T.L. // J. Phys. Condens. Matter. 1999. V. 11. P. 4435. https://doi.org/10.1088/0953-8984/11/22/314
  30. 30. Mauri F., Vast N., Pickard C.J. // Phys. Rev. Lett. 2001. V. 87. P. 855061. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.87.085506
  31. 31. Lazzari R., Vast N., Besson J.M. et al. // Phys. Rev. Lett. 1999. V. 83. P. 3230. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.83.3230
  32. 32. Hoard J.L., Hughes R.E. // Chem. Boron Its Compd. 1967. P. 26.
  33. 33. Morosin B., Mullendore A.W., Emin D. et al. // AIP Conference Proceedings. 1986. V. 140. P. 70. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.35589
  34. 34. Larson A.C. // AIP Conference Proceedings. 1986. V. 140. P. 109. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.35619
  35. 35. Kwei G.H., Morosin B. // J. Phys. Chem. 1996. V. 100. P. 8031. https://doi.org/10.1021/jp953235j
  36. 36. Walters K.L., Green G.L. Thes. speech. Los Alamos Natl. Lab. “Adv. Plutonium Fuels”, Los Alamos, 1970. P. 14.
  37. 37. Kirfel A., Gupta A., Will G. // Acta Cryst. B. 1979. V. 35. P. 1052. https://doi.org/10.1107/s0567740879005562
  38. 38. Emin D. // Phys. Rev. B. 1988. V. 38. P. 6041. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.38.6041
  39. 39. Yakel H.L. // Acta Cryst. B. 1975. V. 31. P. 1797. https://doi.org/10.1107/S0567740875006267
  40. 40. Fujita T., Guan P., Madhav Reddy K. et al // Appl. Phys. Lett. 2014. V. 104. P. 021907. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4861182
  41. 41. Демиденко Е.З. Линейная и нелинейная регрессия. М.: Финансы и статистика, 1981. 304 с.
  42. 42. Van Aert S., Verbeeck J., Erni R. et al. // Ultramicroscopy. 2009. V. 109. P. 1236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2009.05.010
  43. 43. Бондаренко В.И., Васильев А.Л. Тез. докл. XXVIII Рос. конф. по эл. микр. “Количественный анализ изображений точечных дефектов в ПРЭМ”, Черноголовка 2020. С. 24.
  44. 44. Гонзалес Р., Вудс Р. Цифровая обработка изображений. М.: Техносфера, 2005. 1072 с.
QR
Translate

Индексирование

Scopus

Scopus

Scopus

Crossref

Scopus

Higher Attestation Commission

At the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation

Scopus

Scientific Electronic Library