Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-ckgrl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-23T05:00:23.538Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Prediction of the Diffraction Order Dependence of the Integral Reflection Coefficient of Multilayer Structures using Atomic Force Microscope Measurements

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 March 2019

D.B. Brown
Affiliation:
Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, DC 20375
J.H. Konnert
Affiliation:
Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, DC 20375
J.V. Gilfrich
Affiliation:
Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, DC 20375
P. D'Antonio
Affiliation:
Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, DC 20375
R.K. Freitag
Affiliation:
Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, DC 20375
H.B. Rosenstock
Affiliation:
Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, DC 20375
P.G. Burkhalter
Affiliation:
Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, DC 20375
Get access

Abstract

The evaluation and understanding of the x-ray diffraction properties of multilayer structures is critical in predicting the degree of success in their utilization in x-ray optics applications. A key material parameter affecting the diffracting efficiency of multilayer structures is the roughness of the interfaces between the deposited layers. This paper will use measured roughness to predict the integral reflection coefficient as a function of diffraction order for several multilayer structures.

We have made atomic force microscope (AFM) measurements of the detailed displacement distribution for me surface roughness of W/C and W/Si multilayer structures. This information has been introduced into a theoretical model to predict the reduction of the integral reflection coefficient induced by surface roughness. In a fashion analogous to the Debye-Waller factor, this reduction in diffracted intensity is predicted to be strongly dependent on the diffraction order. These predictions have been compared with experimental integral reflection coefficient data. The measured diffraction results indicate a greater reduction in reflection than is predicted by the AFM measurements. A possible explanation for this discrepancy is that the AFM measurements underestimate the roughness. Possible reasons for the differences between these methods will be discussed.

Type
III. Thin-Film and Surface Characterization by XRD
Copyright
Copyright © International Centre for Diffraction Data 1991

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Binning, G., Quate, C.F. and Gerber, C., Phys. Rev. Lett. 12, 930 (1986).Google Scholar
2. Rosen, D.L., Brown, D., Gilfrich, J., and Burkhalter, P., “Multilayer Roughness Evaluated by X-ray Reflectivity”, J. Appl. Cryst. 21, 136144 (1988).Google Scholar