4.6 Article

Monolithic integration of nanoscale tensile specimens and MEMS structures

Journal

NANOTECHNOLOGY
Volume 24, Issue 16, Pages -

Publisher

IOP Publishing Ltd
DOI: 10.1088/0957-4484/24/16/165502

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NSF [DMR-0706058, ECS-0335765]
  2. AFOSR [FA955009- 1-0048]
  3. Cornell NanoScale Facility (CNF)
  4. Center for Functional Nanomaterials (CFN)
  5. Brookhaven National Laboratory
  6. US Department of Energy, Office of Basic Energy Sciences [DE-AC0298CH10886]
  7. CNF staff

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Nanoscale materials often have stochastic material properties due to a random distribution of material defects and an insufficient number of defects to ensure a consistent average mechanical response. Current methods to measure the mechanical properties employ MEMS-based actuators. The nanoscale specimens are typically mounted manually onto the load platform, so the boundary conditions have random variations, complicating the experimental measurement of the intrinsic stochasticity of the material properties. Here we show methods for monolithic integration of a nanoscale specimen co-fabricated with the loading platform. The nanoscale specimen is gold with dimensions of similar to 40 nm thickness, 350 +/- 50 nm width, and 7 mu m length and the loading platform is an interdigitated electrode electrostatic actuator. The experiment is performed in a scanning electron microscope and digital image correlation is employed to measure displacements to determine stress and strain. The ultimate tensile strength of the nanocrystalline nanoscale specimen approaches 1 GPa, consistent with measurements made by other nanometer scale sample characterization methods on other material samples at the nanometer scale, as well as gold samples at the nanometer scale. The batch-compatible microfabrication method can be used to create nominally identical nanoscale specimens and boundary conditions for a broad range of materials.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available