Finding rough spot in surface measurement

July 14, 2005

For makers of computers, disk drives and other sophisticated technologies, a guiding principle is the smoother the surfaces of chips and other components, the better these devices and the products, themselves, will function.

So, some manufacturers might be surprised to learn that a fast and increasingly popular method for measuring surface texture can yield misleading results. As reported at recent conferences and in an upcoming issue of Applied Optics,* a team of National Institute of Standards and Technology researchers has found that roughness measurements made with white light interferometric microscopes, introduced in the early 1990s, differed by as much as 80 percent from those obtained with two other surface-profiling methods.

Interferometric microscopes are used to measure surface heights, lengths and spaces by analyzing the interference patterns created by two light beams--one reflected by a reference specimen and the other by the object of interest.

To date, the team has evaluated a total of five white light instruments from three different vendors. They compared roughness measurements of gratings with both wavelike surfaces and random surfaces.

White light interferometers were compared with "phase shifting" interferometers, which use specialized single-color light sources, and with accurate, but sometimes destructive, stylus profiling instruments that trace a sharp probe over a surface. The latter two tools were in agreement across the spectrum of test samples within the expected measurement range of the phase shift interferometers. For measurements of relatively rough surfaces, white light interferometers also yielded results that corresponded closely. But for measurements of surfaces with an average roughness between 50 and 300 nanometers, results diverged significantly, peaking at about 100 nanometers.

"The discrepancy seems to be unrelated to the specific white light instrument used or to the randomness of the surface profile," explains Ted Vorburger, head of NIST's Surface and Microform Metrology Group.

The comparative study was carried out as part of an effort to develop international standards for three-dimensional measurements of surface texture. NIST researchers are now evaluating theoretical explanations for the observed discrepancies.

* H.G. Rhee, T.V. Vorburger, J.W. Lee and J. Fu, Discrepancies between roughness measurements obtained with phase shifting interferometry and white-light interferometry. Applied Optics, 2005.

Source: NIST

Explore further: A new sunblock that doesn't penetrate the skin

Related Stories

Physicists map the strain in wonder material graphene

September 29, 2015

This week, an international group of scientists is reporting a breakthrough in the effort to characterize the properties of graphene noninvasively while acquiring information about its response to structural strain.

Tracking nanowalkers with light

September 25, 2015

Nanotechnology is taking its first steps. Researchers from the Max Planck Institute for Intelligent Systems in Stuttgart have developed a gold nanocylinder equipped with discrete DNA strands as 'feet' that can walk across ...

Recommended for you

The dark side of Nobel prizewinning research

October 4, 2015

Think of the Nobel prizes and you think of groundbreaking research bettering mankind, but the awards have also honoured some quite unhumanitarian inventions such as chemical weapons, DDT and lobotomies.

Internet giants race to faster mobile news apps

October 4, 2015

US tech giants are turning to the news in their competition for mobile users, developing new, faster ways to deliver content, but the benefits for struggling media outlets remain unclear.

Trade in invasive plants is blossoming

October 3, 2015

Every day, hundreds of different plant species—many of them listed as invasive—are traded online worldwide on auction platforms. This exacerbates the problem of uncontrollable biological invasions.

Fusion reactors 'economically viable' say experts

October 2, 2015

Fusion reactors could become an economically viable means of generating electricity within a few decades, and policy makers should start planning to build them as a replacement for conventional nuclear power stations, according ...


Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.