Weak-Beam Dark-Field Microscopy

  • David B. Williams
  • C. Barry Carter


The term “weak-beam microscopy” refers to the formation of a diffraction-contrast image in either BF or DF. The DF approach has been more widely used, in part because it can be understood using quite simple physical models. It also gives stronger contrast; we see white lines on a dark gray background. This chapter will be concerned only with the DF approach. Historically, the weak-beam dark-field (WBDF, often abbreviated to WB) method became important because, under certain special diffraction conditions, dislocations can be imaged as narrow lines which are approximately 1.5 nm wide. Equally important is the fact that the positions of these lines are well defined with respect to the dislocation cores; they are also relatively insensitive to both the foil thickness and the position of the dislocations in the specimen. The technique is particularly useful if you are studying dissociated dislocations where pairs of partial dislocations may only be ~4 nm apart and yet this separation greatly affects the properties of the material.


Burger Vector Partial Dislocation Diffract Beam Dislocation Core Bloch Wave 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


Specific References

  1. Carter, C.B. (1984) in Dislocations-1984 (Eds. P. Veyssière, L. Kubin, and J. Castaing), p. 227, Editions du CNRS, Paris.Google Scholar
  2. Carter, C.B., Mills, M.J., Medlin, D.L., and Angelo, J.E. (1995) 7th International Conference on Intergranular and Interphase Boundaries in Materials, Lisbon, Portugal.Google Scholar
  3. Cockayne, D.J.H. (1972) Z. fiir Naturforschung. 27a, 452.Google Scholar
  4. Cockayne, D.J.H. (1981) Ann. Rev. Mater. Sci. 11, 75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cockayne, D.J.H., Ray, I.L.F., and Whelan, M.J. (1969) Phil. Mag. 20, 1265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Föll, H., Carter, C.B., and Wilkens, M. (1980) Phys. stat. sol. (A) 58, 393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Geerthsen, D. and Carter, C.B. (1993) Phys. stat. sol. (A) 136, 29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hazzledine, P.M., Karnthaler, H.P., and Wintner, E. (1975) Phil. Mag. 32, 81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hirsch, P.B., Howie, A., Nicholson, R.B., Pashley, D.W., and Whelan, M.J. (1977) Electron Microscopy of Thin Crystals, 2nd edition, p. 164, Krieger, Huntington, New York.Google Scholar
  10. Hirsch, P.B., Howie, A., and Whelan, M.J. (1960) Proc. Roy. Soc. London A252, 499.Google Scholar
  11. Stobbs, W.M. (1975) in Electron Microscopy in Materials Science, Vol. II (Eds. U. Valdrè and E. Ruedl), p. 593, CEC, Brussels.Google Scholar
  12. Stobbs, W.M. and Sworn, C.H. (1971) Phil. Mag. 24, 1365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Wilson, A.R. and Cockayne, D.J.H. (1985) Phil. Mag. A51, 341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • David B. Williams
    • 1
  • C. Barry Carter
    • 2
  1. 1.Lehigh UniversityBethlehemUSA
  2. 2.University of MinnesotaMinneapolisUSA

Personalised recommendations