Chapter/Index: Introduction | A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z | Appendix
| The position of the detectors in SEM systems also affects the image contrast. For specimens having a large topographic contrast, regions located in valleys or wells are more easily imaged using an in-lens detector than a lateral detector (e.g. Everhart-Thornley (ET) detector). Figure 4573 gives an example. The two images were taken at 1 keV with an in-lens detector (Figure 4573 (a)) and a ET detector (Figure 4573 (b)). The shadowing effects are more pronounced for lateral ET detector with respect to the in-lens detector as indicated by circle A. For small hills, the position of the ET detector introduced asymmetries in the imaging of equally inclined surfaces shown by circle B.
[1] J. Cazaux, (2005) Recent developments and new strategies in scanning electron microscopy, Journal of Microscopy, 217, 16–35.
|
