Journal of Applied Physics
Feedback | Help | Exit
Journal of Applied Physics
   
 
 
 
Previous Article
Epitaxial growth of 20 nm InAs and GaAs quantum dots on GaAs through block copolymer templated SiO2 masks
We report on selective area growth of InAs and GaAs quantum dots (QDs) on GaAs through ~20  nm SiO2 windows prepared by block copolymer lithography. We discuss the mechanisms of growth throu...
Next Article
Phosphorus ion implantation in silicon nanocrystals embedded in SiO2
We have investigated phosphorus ion (P+) implantation in Si nanocrystals (SiNCs) embedded in SiO2, in order to clarify the P donor doping effects for photoluminescence (PL) of SiNCs in wide P concentr...

The relationship between material properties, device design, and the sensitivity of resonant mechanical sensors

J. Appl. Phys. 105, 054306 (2009); doi:10.1063/1.3079793

Published 9 March 2009

You are not logged in to this journal. Log in

Philip S. Waggoner and Harold G. Craighead
School of Applied Physics, Cornell University, 212 Clark Hall, Ithaca, New York 14583, USA
In this work we study three distinct resonant micromechanical sensor geometries and their ability to detect the addition of material at different locations on the devices. Small regions of gold were patterned on the resonators, and changes in frequency due to the presence of gold were measured as a function of position, device geometry, and the resonant mode. We have demonstrated the conditions under which micromechanical resonators are sensitive to the mechanical properties of added material as well as its mass and have quantified how these qualities have competing effects on resonant frequency using finite element analysis and analytical techniques. In cases where this competition significantly reduces frequency shift amplitudes, localized binding of the analyte is required, and we will compare different sensor designs and their frequency responses. When material is uniformly added to resonators, however, device geometry has little to no effect on sensitivity. While cantilevers may be the most commonly used geometry in this field, we show that they are not necessarily the most sensitive in all situations. In most biosensing applications, flexural rigidity is not expected to have an impact on resonant frequency, suggesting that all available resonator surface area should be used for analyte binding. ©2009 American Institute of Physics
History: Received 18 November 2008; accepted 7 January 2009; published 9 March 2009
Permalink: http://link.aip.org/link/?JAPIAU/105/054306/1
BUY THIS ARTICLE   (US$28)
Download HTML Download Sectioned HTML Download PDF (1558 kB) View Cart

KEYWORDS and PACS

Keywords
PACS
  • 07.07.Df
    Sensors (chemical, optical, electrical, movement, gas, etc.); remote sensing
  • 07.10.Cm
    Micromechanical devices and systems
  • 87.85.Ox
    Biomedical instrumentation and transducers
  • 85.85.+j
    Micro- and nano-electromechanical systems (MEMS/NEMS) and devices
  • YEAR: 2009

PUBLICATION DATA

ISSN:
0021-8979 (print)   1089-7550 (online)
Publisher:
AIP is a member of CrossRef AIP

REFERENCES (43)
View in Separate Window/Tab
For access to fully linked references, you need to log in. For access to fully linked references, you need to Log in.
  1. J. Fritz, Analyst (London) 133, 855 (2008).
  2. P. S. Waggoner and H. G. Craighead, Lab Chip 7, 1238 (2007).
  3. L. G. Carrascosa, M. Moreno, M. Alvarez, and L. M. Lechuga, Trends Analyt. Chem. 25, 196 (2006).
  4. N. V. Lavrik, M. J. Sepaniak, and P. G. Datskos, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 75, 2229 (2004).
  5. C. Ziegler, Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 379, 946 (2004).
  6. K. E. Petersen and C. R. Guarnieri, J. Appl. Phys. 50, 6761 (1979).
  7. W. Weaver, Jr., S. P. Timoshenko, and D. H. Young, Vibration Problems in Engineering, 5th ed. (Wiley, New York, 1990).
  8. A. K. Gupta, P. R. Nair, D. Akin, M. R. Ladisch, S. Broyles, M. A. Alam, and R. Bashir, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 103, 13362 (2006).
  9. J. Tamayo, D. Ramos, J. Mertens, and M. Calleja, Appl. Phys. Lett. 89, 224104 (2006).
  10. J. Fritz, M. K. Baller, H. P. Lang, H. Rothuizen, P. Vettiger, E. Meyer, H. -J. Güntherodt, Ch. Gerber, and J. K. Gimzewski, Science 288, 316 (2000).
  11. G. Wu, R. H. Datar, K. M. Hansen, T. Thundat, R. J. Cote, and A. Majumdar, Nat. Biotechnol. 19, 856 (2001).
  12. J. Lagowski, H. C. Gatos, and E. S. Sproles, Jr., Appl. Phys. Lett. 26, 493 (1975).
  13. M. E. Gurtin, X. Markenscoff, and R. N. Thurston, Appl. Phys. Lett. 29, 529 (1976).
  14. P. Lu, F. Shen, S. J. O'Shea, K. H. Lee, and T. Y. Ng, Mater. Phys. Mech. 4, 51 (2001).
  15. K. S. Hwang, K. Eom, J. H. Lee, D. W. Chun, B. H. Cha, D. S. Yoon, T. S. Kim, and J. H. Park, Appl. Phys. Lett. 89, 173905 (2006).
  16. J. Dorignac, A. Kalinowski, S. Erramilli, and P. Mohanty, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 186105 (2006).
  17. G. -F. Wang and X. -Q. Feng, Appl. Phys. Lett. 90, 231904 (2007).
  18. G. Y. Chen, T. Thundat, E. A. Wachter, and R. J. Warmack, J. Appl. Phys. 77, 3618 (1995).
  19. K. S. Hwang, J. H. Lee, J. Park, D. S. Yoon, J. H. Park, and T. S. Kim, Lab Chip 4, 547 (2004).
  20. J. H. Lee, K. H. Yoon, K. S. Hwang, J. Park, S. Ahn, and T. S. Kim, Biosens. Bioelectron. 20, 269 (2004).
  21. P. Lu, H. P. Lee, C. Lu, and S. J. O'Shea, Phys. Rev. B 72, 085405 (2005).
  22. M. J. Lachut and J. E. Sader, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 206102 (2007).
  23. S. Dohn, R. Sandberg, W. Svendsen, and A. Boisen, Appl. Phys. Lett. 86, 233501 (2005).
  24. D. Ramos, J. Tamayo, J. Mertens, and M. Calleja, J. Appl. Phys. 100, 106105 (2006).
  25. B. Ilic, D. Czaplewski, M. Zalalutdinov, H. G. Craighead, P. Neuzil, C. Campagnolo, and C. Batt, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B 19, 2825 (2001).
  26. A. Gupta, D. Akin, and R. Bashir, Appl. Phys. Lett. 84, 1976 (2004).
  27. B. Ilic, Y. Yang, K. Aubin, R. Reichenbach, S. Krylov, and H. G. Craighead, Nano Lett. 5, 925 (2005).
  28. N. Lobontiu, I. Lupea, R. Ilic, and H. G. Craighead, J. Appl. Phys. 103, 064306 (2008).
  29. N. Lobontiu, Dynamics of Microelectromechanical Systems (Springer, New York, 2007).
  30. D. W. Carr and H. G. Craighead, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B 15, 2760 (1997).
  31. M. Zalalutdinov, K. L. Aubin, R. B. Reichenbach, A. T. Zehnder, B. Houston, J. M. Parpia, and H. G. Craighead, Appl. Phys. Lett. 83, 3815 (2003).
  32. B. Ilic, S. Krylov, K. Aubin, R. Reichenbach, and H. G. Craighead, Appl. Phys. Lett. 86, 193114 (2005).
  33. B. Ilic, S. Krylov, M. Kondratovich, and H. G. Craighead, Nano Lett. 7, 2171 (2007).
  34. C. A. Neugebauer, J. Appl. Phys. 31, 1096 (1960).
  35. L. Sekaric, D. W. Carr, S. Evoy, J. M. Parpia, and H. G. Craighead, Sens. Actuators, A. 101, 215 (2002).
  36. R. Sandberg, K. Mølhave, A. Boisen, and W. Svendsen, J. Micromech. Microeng. 15, 2249 (2005).
  37. S. Timoshenko, Strength of Materials, 2nd ed. (Lancaster, New York, 1940) p. 216–218.
  38. S. Schmid, M. Wendlandt, D. Junker, and C. Hierold, Appl. Phys. Lett. 89, 163506 (2006).
  39. A. R. Burns, J. E. Houston, R. W. Carpick, and T. A. Michalske, Langmuir 15, 2922 (1999).
  40. H. Suda, Y. C. Sasaki, N. Oishi, N. Hiraoka, and K. Sutoh, Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 261, 276 (1999).
  41. Ch. Kargel, B. Trummer, G. Plevnik, C. Pellot-Barakat, J. J. Mai, and M. F. Insana, Proc.-IEEE Ultrason. Symp. 2, 1659 (2001).
  42. M. Radmacher, M. Fritz, C. M. Kacher, J. P. Cleveland, and P. K. Hansma, Biophys. J. 70, 556 (1996).
  43. T. M. Squires, R. J. Messinger, and S. R. Manalis, Nat. Biotechnol. 26, 417 (2008).

CITING ARTICLES
For access to citing articles, you need to log in.
For access to citing articles, you need to Log in.


Copyright © American Institute of Physics