1887
banner image
No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
Role of the gold film nanostructure on the nanomechanical response of microcantilever sensors
Rent:
Rent this article for
USD
10.1063/1.2434011
/content/aip/journal/jap/101/3/10.1063/1.2434011
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aip/journal/jap/101/3/10.1063/1.2434011

Figures

Image of FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.

(Color online) Atomic force microscopy topography images of thick gold films deposited on the silicon cantilevers at (a) , (b) , and (c) . An intermediate thick chromium layer was deposited at to enhance the adhesion between the gold layer and the cantilever.

Image of FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.

(Color online) Atomic force microscopy topography images of gold films deposited on the cantilevers at for different thicknesses: (a) , (b) , (c) , (d) , and (e) . An intermediate thick chromium layer was deposited at to enhance the adhesion between the gold layer and the cantilever.

Image of FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.

Profiles of silicon cantilevers from the same array without gold coating (-●-) and coated with a thick gold layer deposited at different rates: (-▵-), (◻∕), and (line). A schematic depiction of the cantilever is also shown to relate the sign of the cantilever bending to the orientation of the bimetallic cantilever. The profiles were obtained in water.

Image of FIG. 4.
FIG. 4.

Profile of silicon cantilevers from the same array coated with different thicknesses of gold at a constant deposition rate of . (a) Profiles of the cantilevers before (10 and ) and after the coalescence process of the gold layer (60, 70, and ). (b) Profiles of the cantilevers for which the gold film is at the coalescence stage (30, 40, and ). The profiles were measured in water.

Image of FIG. 5.
FIG. 5.

Relative change of the deflection profile due to the MCH adsorption for arrays of five cantilevers coated with of gold at deposition rates of (a) , (b) , and (c) . The measurements were performed in water.

Image of FIG. 6.
FIG. 6.

(a) Cantilever free end deflection as a function of gold film thickness. (b) Relative displacement of the cantilever free end induced by the adsorption of MCH in water vs the gold layer thickness. The gold deposition rate was . The continuous line in (b) represents the theoretical decrease in the cantilever response only due to the cantilever stiffening caused by the gold coating. Positive values correspond to tensile stress, whereas the negative values correspond to compressive stress.

Tables

Generic image for table
Table I.

Experimental values of the grain size, roughness (root mean square) of the gold surface, surface stress induced by the gold film on the silicon cantilever, and surface stress induced by the MCH adsorption on the gold-coated cantilever as a function of the thickness and deposition rate of the gold film. The surface roughness was determined by calculating the root mean square (rms) of the AFM images for areas of .

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/aip/journal/jap/101/3/10.1063/1.2434011
2007-02-05
2014-04-19
Loading

Full text loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
Scitation: Role of the gold film nanostructure on the nanomechanical response of microcantilever sensors
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aip/journal/jap/101/3/10.1063/1.2434011
10.1063/1.2434011
SEARCH_EXPAND_ITEM