Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T23:51:55.864Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Quantification of Contrast Difference Between Monoclinic and Tetragonal Zirconia in Low-kV SEM

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 July 2022

Farzin A. Arpatappeh ,
Cleva Ow-Yang ,
Sorour Semsari Parapari ,
Gülcan Çorapçıoğlu ,
Mehmet Ali Gülgün  and
Melih Papila
Farzin A. Arpatappeh
Affiliation:
Sabancı University, Faculty of Engineering and Natural Sciences, Istanbul, Turkey
Cleva Ow-Yang
Affiliation:
Sabancı University, Faculty of Engineering and Natural Sciences, Istanbul, Turkey Sabancı University, SUNUM Nanotechnology Research and Application Center, Istanbul, Turkey
Sorour Semsari Parapari
Affiliation:
Jozef Stefan Institute, Ljubljana, Slovenia
Gülcan Çorapçıoğlu
Affiliation:
Koç University, Central Research Infrastructure Directorate, Istanbul, Turkey
Mehmet Ali Gülgün*
Affiliation:
Sabancı University, Faculty of Engineering and Natural Sciences, Istanbul, Turkey Sabancı University, SUNUM Nanotechnology Research and Application Center, Istanbul, Turkey
Melih Papila
Affiliation:
Sabancı University, Faculty of Engineering and Natural Sciences, Istanbul, Turkey BaX Composites, Istanbul, Turkey
*
*Corresponding author: [email protected]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. As you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Quantitative and Qualitative Mapping of Materials
Information
Microscopy and Microanalysis , Volume 28 , Supplement S1 , August 2022 , pp. 560 - 563
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Microscopy Society of America 2022

References

Perovic, DD et al. , Ultramicroscopy 58 (1995), p. 104. doi: 10.1016/0304-3991(94)00183-NCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castell, MR et al. , Ultramicroscopy 69 (1997), p. 279. doi: 10.1016/S0304-3991(97)00051-XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castell, MR et al. , Appl. Phys. Lett. 74 (1999), p. 2304. doi: 10.1063/1.123832CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jóźwik, I et al. , Ultramicroscopy 228 (2021), p. 113333. doi: 10.1016/j.ultramic.2021.113333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jóźwik, I et al. , Mater. Sci. Semicond. Process. 138 (2022), p. 106293. doi: 10.1016/j.mssp.2021.106293.Google Scholar
Turan, R. et al. , Appl. Phys. Lett. 69 (1996), p. 1593. doi: 10.1063/1.117041CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schönjahn, C. et al. , J. Appl. Phys. 92 (2002), p. 7667. doi: 10.1063/1.1525862CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elliott, SL et al. , J. Appl. Phys. 91 (2002), p. 9116. doi: 10.1063/1.1476968CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Najafi, E. et al. , Science 347 (2015), p. 164. doi: 10.1126/science.aaa0217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sun, J. et al. , J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 7 (2016), p. 985. doi: 10.1021/acs.jpclett.5b02908CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nakamura, T. et al. , Mater. Trans. 60 (2019), p. 1591. doi: 10.2320/matertrans.M2019078CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, KW and Jaksch, H., Micron 40 (2009), p. 724. doi: 10.1016/j.micron.2009.05.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sempf, K et al. , J. Eur. Ceram. Soc. 36 (2016), p. 3531. doi: 10.1016/j.jeurceramsoc.2016.05.034CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thydén, K et al. , Solid State Ionics 178 (2008), p. 1984. doi: 10.1016/j.ssi.2007.12.075CrossRefGoogle Scholar