Part IV – April 1969 - Communications - Thickness of Transmission Electron Microscope Specimens

IN transmission electron microscopy, specimen thicknesses quoted are frequently based upon either traditionally familiar values or a few evaluations representing the whole material. Taking aluminum in 100 kv TEM as an example, average and maximum values are widely accepted as being 2000 to 2500 and 6000 to 7OOOÅ, respectively. It is the purpose of this note to revise these figures and to point out the importance of evaluating individual specimens carefully. All evaluations have been based upon slip trace widths and lattice orientations as determined from diffraction patterns. In many cases where two or more slip systems have been operating the geometrical method described by Crocker and Bevis1 has been applied as a check. The foils were usually oriented to within 2 deg from the exact Bragg angle. Kikuchi patterns were used as indications of correct orientations but not applied in the evaluations. The tilt of the foil surface relative to the beam normal may with certain geometrical relations between the tilt axis and the operating slip plane lead to substantial errors.2'3 Where these geometries were inevitable the samples were omitted in the investigations. Various measures were taken in order to overcome ambiguities, e.g., comparison with neighboring grains, tilts, evaluations based upon two or three slip systems,' and comparison with extinction contour evaluations where s = 0 conditions were obtained. Errors caused by misinterpretation of the slip traces on a micrograph are easily avoided by considering the bright-dark sequence on opposite surfaces and by taking into account the tapering of the foil usually leading to a distinguishable divergence of the pair of traces. In the investigations described here the interpretation was further facilitated as the slip trace formation was observed on the microscope screen and sketches taken down. In a few observations slipping was so violent that the distinction of pairs was considered dubious and consequently given up. To assess average values, thickness evaluations carried out in two independent investigations were analyzed: I) 99.998 pct A1 extruded, cold-drawn, and recrys-tallized to grain sizes between 35 and 500 um were deformed in tension at room temperature. In order to determine the dislocation densities as a function of strain,4 specimens prepared by spark machining and electropolishing in a PTFE holder were analyzed in the electron microscope at 100 kv. Thicknesses were evaluated for 569 selected areas. Histogram I in Fig. 1 shows the results, the average thickness being 4900Å. II) Electropolished specimens prepared from 99.9999 pct A1 with magnesium contents from 0.005 to 0.5 pct rolled to foil and annealed were subjected to fission fragment irradiationa2 For volumetric dose and defect concentration determinations thickness evaluations were performed on 123 areas. Histogram II in Fig. 1 shows the thicknesses of these areas averaging 4250Å. Whereas in investigation I no selection related to thickness has been made, some thin as well as thick areas have been omitted from I1 for experimental reasons. This and the application of two different microscopes although of the same type may account for the difference in average thickness. Assuming a mean error of 10 pct for a single evaluation, the error of the average should be negligible. In order to investigate the maximum transmissible foil thickness in aluminum, specimens were prepared from single crystals with (111) and (110) orientations parallel to the beam, and from polycrystalline material. Maximum values of thickness that could be measured were given by the stopping of the dislocations. The visibility often extended far beyond the end of the slip trace, but with no means of knowing the