24.01.2013 Views

Noncontact Atomic Force Microscopy - Yale School of Engineering ...

Noncontact Atomic Force Microscopy - Yale School of Engineering ...

Noncontact Atomic Force Microscopy - Yale School of Engineering ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

P.II-25<br />

Contrast formation on cross-linked (1x2) reconstructed titania (110)<br />

Hans H. Pieper 1 , Stefan Torbrügge 1,2 , Stephan Bahr 1,2 , Krithika Venkataramani 1,3 ,<br />

Angelika Kühnle 1 and Michael Reichling 1<br />

1 Fachbereich Physik, Universität Osnabrück, Barbarastraße 7, 49076 Osnabrück, Germany<br />

2 present address: SPECS GmbH, Voltastrasse 5, 13355 Berlin, Germnay<br />

3 present address: iNano, Aarhus University, DK-8000 Aarhus C, Denmark<br />

In NC-AFM imaging, the tip structure plays a prominent role in atomic contrast<br />

formation. It is, for instance, possible to image the cationic or the anionic sub-lattice <strong>of</strong><br />

CaF2(111) by changing the tip termination [1]. For the unreconstructed rutile TiO2 (110)<br />

at least a third mode is known [2].<br />

Here, we investigate the cross-linked (1x2) surface reconstruction <strong>of</strong> rutile<br />

TiO2(110), which has been studied both with STM and NC-AFM, however, the atomic<br />

structure is still discussed controversially. We present NC-AFM results, which will be<br />

interpreted with respect to tip termination and tip-surface distance. A comparison with<br />

existing models provides strong evidence for one <strong>of</strong> these models.<br />

Figure 1: Three consecutive images <strong>of</strong> the cross-linked (1x2) titania surface taken with different<br />

tip terminations. The left image is taken with a positive tip termination. A contact with the sample<br />

leads to a negative tip termination (middle image). The tip in the right picture is unidentified.<br />

Figure 2: High resolution measurements are in good agreement with the surface model suggested<br />

by Bennett [3] as shown to the right.<br />

[1] C. Barth et al. J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 13, 2061 (2001)<br />

[2] G.H. Enevoldsen et al. Phys. Rev. B 76, 205415 (2007)<br />

[3] R.A. Bennett et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 3831 (1999)<br />

153

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!