Microchip Imaging: What Magnification is Needed for Electron Microscopy?

AI Thread Summary
To image a computer microchip at the micrometer level using an electron microscope, a magnification of approximately x10,000 to x100,000 is recommended. Modern scanning electron microscopes (SEMs) can easily achieve this level of magnification. While a good optical microscope can resolve features down to about 2 micrometers, the discussion highlights the shift towards low nanometer geometries in current integrated circuits. The challenge in finding specific SEM images of microchips with included magnification details is noted, suggesting a potential gap in available resources. Overall, achieving high-resolution imaging of microchips requires advanced electron microscopy techniques.
Dr Wu
Messages
183
Reaction score
42
TL;DR Summary
Magnification needed to view microchips
Assuming the use of an electron microscope, what magnification would be needed to image a computer microchip at the micrometer level?

Thanks in advance.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
That obviously depends on what you want to look at "micrometer level" can mean many different things.
I'd say from a x10000 to about x100 000 or so. Any modern SEM will be able to do this.

Note that "micron level" isn't very difficult; a good optical microscope will resolve features down to about 2 um without problem.
Try doing an image search using Google, many SEM images will include a scale and often also the magnification
 
  • Like
Likes Lord Jestocost
Dr Wu said:
image a computer microchip at the micrometer level?
My goodness. How old are these ICs that you want to image? We are in the low nanometer (nm) geometries now...
 
  • Like
Likes sophiecentaur and russ_watters
One of the few images Google coughed up that actually included its magnification was this one by NASA. No such luck when it came to tracking down comparable images of microchips, though. Odd that. Could still be looking in the wrong places, of course.
6747_Send-Your-Name-Journey-To-Mars-Orion-Microchi-100_000X-Magnification-full2.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hi all, I have a question. So from the derivation of the Isentropic process relationship PV^gamma = constant, there is a step dW = PdV, which can only be said for quasi-equilibrium (or reversible) processes. As such I believe PV^gamma = constant (and the family of equations) should not be applicable to just adiabatic processes? Ie, it should be applicable only for adiabatic + reversible = isentropic processes? However, I've seen couple of online notes/books, and...
I have an engine that uses a dry sump oiling system. The oil collection pan has three AN fittings to use for scavenging. Two of the fittings are approximately on the same level, the third is about 1/2 to 3/4 inch higher than the other two. The system ran for years with no problem using a three stage pump (one pressure and two scavenge stages). The two scavenge stages were connected at times to any two of the three AN fittings on the tank. Recently I tried an upgrade to a four stage pump...
Back
Top