1. Introduction
A kilogram definition on the basis of a natural quantity or of a fundamental constant is
at the top of the metrological agenda [
1
J. Flowers, “The route to atomic and quantum
standards,” Science
306, 1324–1330
(2004). [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
,
2
J. Robinson, “Weighty matter,”
Scientific American ,
102–109 (December 2006).
[CrossRef]
[PubMed]
]. A way to achieve this goal is to assemble a
number of
28Si atoms into a prototype linking atomic and macroscopic masses
via the constitutive relation
M(
28Si)=
NAm(
28Si),
where
M and
m are the molar and atom masses of
28Si and
NA
is the Avogadro constant. To this end, it is necessary to count the number of
constituent atoms of an almost perfect spherical silicon crystal; this is equivalent to
determining the Avogadro constant.
In addition to the determination of the molar volume, this counting requires the
measurement of the
d
220 spacing of the lattice planes having Miller indices (220) to within an
accuracy of 3×10
-9
d
220 [
3
E. Massa, G. Mana, G., U. Kuetgens, and L. Ferroglio, “Measurement of the lattice parameter of a
silicon crystal,” New J. Phys.
11 (2009) 053013. [CrossRef]
]. This measurement is carried
out by combined x-ray and optical interferometry. To achieve the stated uncertainty, we
designed and manufactured an x-ray interferometer with an unusually long analyzer
crystal, as well as a guide capable of displacements up to many centimeters with guiding
errors commensurate with the requirements of atomic-scale positioning and alignment.
When the lattice spacing value has to be used to count the atoms in the crystal, via the
sphere volume, account must be taken for the different self-weight deformations of the
sphere and of the interferometer. Though very small, at the required accuracy level,
self weight could influence the measurement result. To account for gravity, we
calculated numerically the deformation of the interferometer analyzer-crystal by a
finite element modeling package. To check our measurement and predictive capabilities,
we intentionally loaded the crystal with two 50 g masses and compared the calculated
lattice strain with that observed by phase contrast x-ray topography.
Fig. 1. Combined x-ray and optical interferometer. The analyzer crystal is moved retaining
the angular alignment of the diffracting planes. The intensity of the transmitted
x rays varies according to the relative positions of the moving and fixed crystals
and allows the number of atoms the crystal has shifted to be counted. The
translation distance, angular attitude, and transverse motion are measured using a
laser interferometer and capacitive transducer (not shown in the figure).
2. Triple Laue x-ray interferometer
A triple Laue x-ray interferometer is similar to a MachZehnder interferometer in
classical optics [
4
U. Bonse and W. Graeff, “X-ray and neutron
interferometry,” in: Topics in applied
physics , 22 X-ray optics, applications to solids,
H.-J. Queisser ed. (Berlin, Springer,
1997).
]. As shown in
Fig. 1, it consists of three crystal slabs so cut
that the (220) planes are orthogonal to the crystal surfaces. X rays from a 17 keV Mo
Kα source, having a (10×0.1) mm2 line focus, are split by the first
crystal and then recombined, via two transmission crystals, by the third, called
analyzer. The description of the interference pattern requires the use of the dynamical
theory of x-ray scattering by crystals [
4
U. Bonse and W. Graeff, “X-ray and neutron
interferometry,” in: Topics in applied
physics , 22 X-ray optics, applications to solids,
H.-J. Queisser ed. (Berlin, Springer,
1997).
,
5
G. Mana and E. Vittone, “Scanning LLL x-ray interferometry I.
Theory,” Z. Phys. B
102, 197–206
(1997) [CrossRef]
], but its basic characteristics can be understood
from geometric optics. Accordingly, each ray, when diffracted by any crystal of the
interferometer, acquires a phase delay equal to 2
πux
/
d
220, where ux is the displacement of the crystal atoms in a direction normal
to the diffracting planes and d220 is the diffracting-plane spacing. No phase delay
occurs in the directly transmitted rays.
The interference pattern thus replicates the superposition of the diffracting planes of
the crystals forming the interferometer and crystal strains are visible in it [
6
U. Bonse, W. Graeff, and G. Materlik, “X-ray interferometry and lattice parameter
investigations,” Rev. Phys. Appl.
11, 83–87 (1976).
[CrossRef]
]. Since four sets of diffracting planes
superimpose to form a moirè pattern, an identical deformation in all the
crystals is not observable and the phase-contrast image gives no indication about the
strain in any single crystal. The capability of operating a separate-crystal
interferometer opens the way to surveying the lattice strain of the analyzer crystal
separately from that of the splitter/mirror pair. In fact, traveling fringes can be
obtained by moving the analyzer crystal in a direction orthogonal to the diffracting
planes; actually, by displacing the analyzer atoms. A periodic variation of the
transmitted and diffracted x-ray intensities,
is thus observed, the period being the diffracting-plane spacing. Since, as the analyzer
is moved, different parts of it are observed, the x displacement, with
a reversed sign, is also the horizontal coordinate on the analyzer surface. The analyzer
embeds a front mirror, so that the displacement is measured by optical interferometry;
the necessary picometer resolution is achieved by polarization encoding and phase
modulation. To eliminate the adverse influence of the refractive index of air, the
experiment is carried out in a vacuum.
Fig. 2. Analyzer crystal. The two weights illustrate where the crystal has been loaded; in
practice a Si bridge was put between the weights and the crystal end-pillars.
Crystal dimensions are (70.5×32.2×15.0) mm3. The dashed
rectangle is the surveyed part of the (55×20) mm2 lamella. The two arrows
– and those symmetrical, not visible, on the opposite pillar –
indicate where the load was applied; the stars indicate the support lines. The
reference frame and crystal orientation are also indicated.
The operation of a separate-crystal interferometer is a challenge: the fixed and movable
crystals must be so faced as to allow the atoms to recover their exact position in the
initial single crystal and they must be kept aligned notwithstanding the analyzer
displacement. The key characteristic of our apparatus is a measurement capability over
displacements up to 5 cm. This is obtained by means of a guide where an L shaped
carriage slides on a quasi-optical rail. An active tripod with three piezoelectric legs
rests on the carriage. Each leg expands vertically and shears in the two transverse
directions, thus allowing compensation for the sliding errors and electronic positioning
of the x-ray interferometer over six degrees of freedom to atomic-scale accuracy.
Crystal displacement, parasitic rotations, and transverse motions are sensed via laser
interferometry and by capacitive transducers. Feedback loops provide picometer
positioning, nanoradian alignment, and interferometer movement with nanometer
straightness.
The analyzer is mounted on a silicon plate and it is kept in position by a thin film of
high viscosity silicon oil. This prevents accidental movements without stressing the
crystal; the only crystal deformation is due to the self-weight. The analyzer design was
based on the finite element analysis of self-weight bending and of the response to
surface stress and thermal loads; the compromise between the requirements of a beam-like
crystal and minimum bending ended into the shape shown in
Fig. 2. The analyzer is supported on the Airy’s points,
whose location was optimized to minimize bending or droop. As shown in
Fig. 3, the residual strain is minimum at the
crystal top, but it is nevertheless of the same magnitude as the wanted
d
220 uncertainty and, therefore, it is worth while correcting the measurement
result. This raises a question about the accuracy of the numerical calculation. Although
our d220 measurements should be sensitive sensitive enough to detect the self-weight
deformation, other effect are still prevailing and prevented a direct check of the
numerical results [
3
E. Massa, G. Mana, G., U. Kuetgens, and L. Ferroglio, “Measurement of the lattice parameter of a
silicon crystal,” New J. Phys.
11 (2009) 053013. [CrossRef]
]. Therefore, in order to
make the crystal strain easily observable, we decided to magnify the crystal
bending.
Fig. 3. Finite-element analysis of the analyzer self-weight strain. In the crystal top it
is below 10-9
d
220. The contour levels are spaced by 1 nm/m
3. Phase contrast topography
To assess the predictions of the finite element analysis, we exploited the
interferometer size and the centimeter scan capability to observe the lattice
deformation of the analyzer when it is loaded with a Si bridge carrying two identical 50
g masses at its ends (
Fig. 2). The strain field
εxx
=
∂xux
=(
d
eff-
d
220)/
d
220 is easily obtained from a survey of the effective lattice spacing
d
eff=
d
220(1+
∂xux
) at different crystal points. According to the measurement equation
where n is the number of x-ray fringes of d
eff(x, z) period observed in a millimeter crystal
displacement centered in (x, z) and spanning m optical
fringes of λ/2 period, the effective lattice spacing is determined by comparing
the periods of the x-ray and optical fringes, a comparison made by measuring the x-ray
fringe phases at the displacement ends. The analyzer was then shifted step-by-step while
the splitter/mirror crystal and x rays were maintained fixed and the measurement of the
effective lattice spacing repeated; d
eff measurements were thus carried out over 52 contiguous crystal slices,
about 1 mm wide. Since a temperature difference of 1 mK implies a lattice spacing
variation of about 2.5×10-9
d
220, all measurement results have been reduced to the same 22.5 °C
temperature. The traveling x-ray fringes were recorded by means of a multianode
photomultiplier having a vertical pile of eight NaI(Tl) scintillator crystals.
Eventually, the x-ray fringes were processed to obtain, first, the effective lattice
spacing value in each of the 52×8 image pixels – of size
(1×1.75) mm2 – and, then, the strain field. The reason for
this procedure resides in the impossibility of keeping the coupling between the x-ray
and optical interferometers as stable as desirable; a differential measurement
technique, at each step of which the analyzer is repeatably moved back and forth to
measure d
eff, allows the effects of these instabilities to be removed.
In the measurement, we can not trust linear vertical-strains. The reason is a deficiency
of the optical interferometer. A parasitic analyzer-tilt associated to the displacement
(the
ρ angle in
Fig. 1)
imitates an intrinsic tilt of the lattice planes. To avoid this, the analyzer tilt is
sensed by the optical interferometer, via the differential displacement across the beam
spot, and it is electronically nullified. Since the necessary nanoradian sensitivity of
the tilt measurement corresponds to a picometer sensitivity of the differential
measurement, misalignments and aberrations easily compromise the interferometer
operation and make it to detect non-existent tilts which, at the lowest approximation
order, are proportional to the analyzer displaceme This makes it impossible to
distinguish between a uniform rotation of the analyzer during the measurement and a
uniform tilt of the diffracting planes, which planes will appear fanlike and uniformly
strained in the vertical direction [
7
L. Ferroglio, G. Mana, and E. Massa, “Si lattice parameter measurement by
centimeter x-ray interferometry,” Opt.
Express
16, 16877–16888
(2008). [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
].
Fig. 4. Comparison of phase contrast topography (left) and finite-element analysis (right)
of the loaded lattice planes; displacement (top), strain (middle), and tilt
(bottom). The contour levels are spaced by 0.25 nm (top), 10 nm/m (middle), and 5
nrad (bottom). The dashed rectangle is the surveyed part of the (55×20)
mm2 lamella.
Consequently, we removed a meaningless linear vertical-strain from the
(
d
eff-
d
220)/
d
220 data. In order to retain the information about the strain magnitude, the
removed strain was set to zero at the vertical coordinate of the virtual pixel having a
zero offset with respect to the center of the laser-beam spot. In fact, in this pixel,
both the x-ray and optical interferometers sense the same displacement and the measured
strain is unaffected by faults in the detection and compensation of the analyzer tilt.
Finally, in order to preserve only the strain due to the load, we subtracted the result
of a previous survey of the unloaded analyzer [
3
E. Massa, G. Mana, G., U. Kuetgens, and L. Ferroglio, “Measurement of the lattice parameter of a
silicon crystal,” New J. Phys.
11 (2009) 053013. [CrossRef]
]. The result is shown in
Fig. 4
(middle), where the data have been smoothed by the
fitting polynomial. The polynomial degree is the minimum one which satisfactorily
approximates both the experimentally observed and numerically calculated strains. For
what concerns the vertical direction, also because only eight data points are available,
no more than a cubic polynomial is meaningful. Fit residuals can be assessed from
Fig. 5.
Next, the displacement field
ux
(
x, z) was calculated by integrating (3) along the x axis; the
result is shown in
Fig. 4 (top). Since the fixed
and movable crystal-lattices superimpose to form the interference pattern, we have no
indication about the absolute displacements; only displacement differences are
meaningful. This is expressed by the ambiguity of the origin
x
0 in
where we have ux
(x
0, z)=0. Our choice was x
0=35 mm, because the finite-element analysis indicates an almost perfect
symmetry axis at this point.
Fig. 5. Comparison between the simulated (solid line) and observed strain in the loaded
analyzer. The red line (dashed) is the relevant section of the polynomial
approximation (3).
The shear strain should be calculated as εxz
=(∂zux
+∂zux
)/2, where ux
and uz
are the horizontal and vertical displacements of the crystal atoms. However,
the z displacement is invisible to the x-ray interferometer. Therefore,
we calculated εxz as the rotation of the lattice planes about the
y-axis by differentiating ux
(x, z) with respect to the z variable.
Hence,
The result is shown in
Fig. 4 (bottom).
Obviously, the same εxz definition was used in the finite-element analysis.
4. Finite element analysis
The predictions of the finite-element model are shown in
Fig. 4. Silicon is an anisotropic material; consequently, the
Young modulus and Poisson ratio depend on the crystal direction along which it is
stretched. The values of the non-zero elements of the stiffness tensor, in the [100]
crystal-axes, are
cii
=165.6 GPa,
cij
=63.9 GPa (
i, j=1,2, 3), and
ckk
=79.6 GPa (
k=4,5, 6) [
8
A. G. Every and A. K. Mc Curdy, Low Frequency Properties of Dielectric Crystals: Second and
Higher Order Elastic Constants in: Landolt-Börnstein III/29a,\
D. F. Nelson ed. (Springer, Berlin,
1992).
]. In order to compare theory with practice, the results of the finite-element
analysis have been post-processed to simulate the results of phase-contrast topography.
Consequently, in
Fig. 4 (top), the unobservable
rigid-body displacement and rotation have been eliminated. Similarly, in
Fig. 4 (middle), the unobservable vertical strain
gradient has been eliminated and so have been eliminated the rigid-body rotation and
uniform tilt of lattice planes (indistinguishable from an analyzer rotation proportional
to the displacement) in
Fig. 4 (bottom). Since
the geometry of the actual analyzer was not as symmetric as designed – besides,
the use of three support points will broke any symmetry, the simulated displacement,
strain, and shear are not perfectly symmetric.
In
Fig. 4, the comparison of prediction and
observations points out the agreement between the calculated and observed deformation,
strain, and shear. In order to carry out a more severe test,
Fig. 5 compares some horizontal and vertical section of the
simulated and observed strain fields. The figure evidences that in the vertical sections
the agreement between theory and experiment is less satisfactory. The reason is the
correlation between the errors of the eight strain-values measured in the same vertical
strip. In fact, they are all obtained by using the same optical signal as a reference.
Consequently, any failure in the optical-interferometer adds to all data the same offset
and an apparent strain-gradient; these errors are smoothed only by the global polynomial
fit (3). For this reason, and because only eight data per vertical strip are available,
a polynomial degree in z higher that three is meaningless and some detail of the shear
field is unobservable. This explains the less satisfactory agreement between the
observed and calculated tilts displayed in
Fig.
4.
This investigation can be improved if remedies are applied for the following weak
points. First, surface effects limited the sensitivity of the interferometer to lattice
strains greater than 10 nm/m and prevented the observation of the self-weight
deformation of the analyzer crystal [
3
E. Massa, G. Mana, G., U. Kuetgens, and L. Ferroglio, “Measurement of the lattice parameter of a
silicon crystal,” New J. Phys.
11 (2009) 053013. [CrossRef]
]. In the
second place, when assembling the interferometer we were not fully aware of its
capability to detect the minute differences between the lattice deformations when the
location of the support points or of the load forces is changed by only one millimeter.
Consequently, the contact areas of the analyzer with the base plate and the load,
(4×4) mm
2 and (5×15) mm
2, respectively, were too
large. For this reason, in the numerical simulation, the x coordinates of the lines
where the crystal had been constrained and loaded were adjusted, to within the contact
areas, to best fitting of the experimental data. This is equivalent to adjust the
elasticity coefficients of silicon and prevented the Young modulus in the [110] crystal
direction to be measured from atomic-scale lattice deformations.
5. Conclusions
Recent progress in technology allowed an x-ray interferometer to be moved and positioned
to atomic-scale resolution over centimeter displacements. This opened the way to
measuring the Si lattice parameter to previously unattained accuracy and, in turn, to
count the number of atoms in a crystal of pure silicon to within the accuracy necessary
to relate the kilogram to the mass of a certain number of atoms. Since they ultimately
limit the measurement accuracy and the atom count, the capabilities to predict and
detect minute lattice strains have been assessed by measuring the deformation, strain,
and rotation of the diffracting planes of a loaded x-ray interferometer by
phase-contrast topography. The results are in good agreement with the predictions of a
finite-element analysis of the crystal bending, which were thus proved accurate enough
to support a correction of the measurement value of d
220 for the lattice strain due to the self-weight.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme
ERA-NET Plus (grant 217257), the Regione Piemonte (grant D64), and by the Compagnia di
San Paolo.
References and links
1. |
J. Flowers, “The route to atomic and quantum
standards,” Science
306, 1324–1330
(2004). [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
|
2. |
J. Robinson, “Weighty matter,”
Scientific American ,
102–109 (December 2006).
[CrossRef]
[PubMed]
|
3. |
E. Massa, G. Mana, G., U. Kuetgens, and L. Ferroglio, “Measurement of the lattice parameter of a
silicon crystal,” New J. Phys.
11 (2009) 053013. [CrossRef]
|
4. |
U. Bonse and W. Graeff, “X-ray and neutron
interferometry,” in: Topics in applied
physics , 22 X-ray optics, applications to solids,
H.-J. Queisser ed. (Berlin, Springer,
1997). |
5. |
G. Mana and E. Vittone, “Scanning LLL x-ray interferometry I.
Theory,” Z. Phys. B
102, 197–206
(1997) [CrossRef]
|
6. |
U. Bonse, W. Graeff, and G. Materlik, “X-ray interferometry and lattice parameter
investigations,” Rev. Phys. Appl.
11, 83–87 (1976).
[CrossRef]
|
7. |
L. Ferroglio, G. Mana, and E. Massa, “Si lattice parameter measurement by
centimeter x-ray interferometry,” Opt.
Express
16, 16877–16888
(2008). [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
|
8. |
A. G. Every and A. K. Mc Curdy, Low Frequency Properties of Dielectric Crystals: Second and
Higher Order Elastic Constants in: Landolt-Börnstein III/29a,\
D. F. Nelson ed. (Springer, Berlin,
1992). |