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.
Nanomechanical properties of piezoresistive cantilevers: Theory and experiment
Rent:
Rent this article for
USD
10.1063/1.3018944
/content/aip/journal/jap/104/10/10.1063/1.3018944
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aip/journal/jap/104/10/10.1063/1.3018944

Figures

Image of FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.

Definition of the various lengths and widths in the spring constant and resonance frequency models.

Image of FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.

Model behavior for the modified spring constant of a cantilever of the general form expressed in Fig. 1 as derived in Eq. (2).

Image of FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.

Model behavior of the resonance frequency of the modified cantilevers from Eq. (5).

Image of FIG. 4.
FIG. 4.

The total mass of a modified cantilever, .

Image of FIG. 5.
FIG. 5.

Model behavior of the effective mass of a modified cantilever which is mass loaded at from Eq. (11).

Image of FIG. 6.
FIG. 6.

Distributed mass sensitivity over the hole parameter space as determined by Eq. (14). Although the range of the function is , the vertical scale is presented from 0 to 2 so as to display clearly the behavior of the function across the entire parameter space.

Image of FIG. 7.
FIG. 7.

Point mass sensitivity, , over the hole parameter space determined from Eq. (15).

Image of FIG. 8.
FIG. 8.

Mass sensitivity regions of increased and decreased mass sensitivity with respect to the URC. The open symbols represent data points generated from the analytical model, whereas the solid lines represent empirical fits to Eq. (16) with fitting parameters presented in Table II. Cantilevers above the curves within the , plane will exhibit increased mass sensitivity with respect to the URC, whereas cantilevers below the curves will exhibit decreased mass sensitivity. Between the curves, the cantilevers will exhibit increased distributed mass sensitivity, but decreased point mass sensitivity.

Image of FIG. 9.
FIG. 9.

Representative lever from a cantilever array, (a) before and (c) after modification with the FIB, as well as the thermal noise spectra for the same lever (b) before and (d) after modification. The cantilever width in both images is . The box appearing in (a) is the template for the hole pictured in (c).

Image of FIG. 10.
FIG. 10.

Mesh for FEA of a representative MRC (hole fractions and ). The properties of interest (, , ) are determined from the (a) the URC, and the modified properties (, , ) from (b) the MRC. The base of each lever (fixed end) is the left of the image, and the free end is the right of the image.

Image of FIG. 11.
FIG. 11.

Comparison of the analytical models (—) with the FEA results (◻),and the experimental results (◯). Plots (a), (c), and (e), represent variation in the width of the hole (variable ) while keeping the length constant . Plots (b), (d), and (f) represent variation in the length of the hole (variable ) while keeping the width constant .

Tables

Generic image for table
Table I.

Graphic representation of the limiting cases of the modified cantilever geometry and the expected behavior of the levers in the limiting cases.

Generic image for table
Table II.

Fitting parameters for Eq. (16) from the analytical model.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/aip/journal/jap/104/10/10.1063/1.3018944
2008-11-20
2014-04-20
Loading

Full text loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
Scitation: Nanomechanical properties of piezoresistive cantilevers: Theory and experiment
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aip/journal/jap/104/10/10.1063/1.3018944
10.1063/1.3018944
SEARCH_EXPAND_ITEM