484 F.M. Ross
microscopy and AFM have been used successfully to investigate the
overall features of boundary motion, but naturally TEM is unparalleled
in its ability to relate the microstructural features within the material
to boundary motion. In situ experiments are usually carried out by
using a specimen holder with electrical connections to apply an electric
fi eld, although domain motion during heating and straining has also
been studied. A heating biasing holder is preferable as it allows domain
dynamics to be studied at different distances from the transition
temperature.
Ferroelectric biasing has been carried out both on mechanically
thinned polycrystalline or single crystal samples, and on thin fi lms
deposited on a substrate. Depending on the material geometry, the
electrical contacts may either both be on top of the sample or one on
each surface. As in other experiments, for quantitative analysis a well
controlled specimen and fi eld geometry is important. Changes in
sample thickness may change the area of domain walls and therefore
infl uence kinetics. Furthermore, as we show below, defects affect wall
motion, so the defects introduced during sample preparation must be
minimized. For all these reasons, experiments on bulk materials may
provide more qualitative information, whereas thin fi lms, especially
on substrates which can be made into electron transparent membranes
with a controlled electrode geometry and with minimal processing,
provide the best opportunity for quantitative results. For example, thin
fi lm studies provide the opportunity to understand the “dead layer,”
in which surface pinning retards domain motion.
Domain motion has been observed under electron beam heating, for
example in K(Ta,Nb)O
3
(Xu et al., 1993), and during straining, for
example in ferroelastic zirconia (Baufeld et al., 1997). Most studies,
however, have used in situ biasing or controlled heating to achieve
domain motion. The most detailed results have come from studies of
BaTiO
3
and related materials. For example, Ren et al. (1994) observed
domain wall motion in PbTiO
3
, while Snoeck et al. (1994) observed
domain growth in BaTiO
3
by tip motion and then by lateral wall motion,
and noted defects along the domain boundaries. Krishnan et al. (1999,
2000, 2002; Figure 6–23) observed different modes of domain wall
motion in BaTiO
3
and KNbO
3
under heating, biasing, and UV irradia-
tion. These studies showed that the motion of 90
o
boundaries depends
on their curvature and on locking interactions with neighboring
domains, and that motion may occur by rippling rather than rigidly.
Interestingly, images showed the presence of trapped charge at curved
or tilted boundaries or at domain tips. The buildup of charge at bound-
aries observed in situ may be important in fatigue.
In relaxor ferroelectrics such as Pb(Mg,Nb)O
3
-PbTiO
3
, cracking is
important in piezoelectric applications. The structures of domain wall
intersections has been characterized in these materials (Tan and Shang,
2004a, b; Tan et al., 2005). Cycling the electric fi eld causes cracking in
the TEM specimens, thereby providing information on crack propaga-
tion pathways along domain walls (Xu et al., 2000; Tan et al., 2000,
2005).