Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T03:23:04.961Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Quantitative Analysis of Carbon in Silicon Carbide Coated with Carbon

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 August 2013

Hongrim Lee
Affiliation:
Department of Nano Science and Engineering, Kyungnam University, Woryeong-dong, Masanhabpo-gu, Changwon 631-701, Korea
Junsu Kim
Affiliation:
Department of Advanced Engineering, Graduate School, Kyungnam University, Woryeong-dong, Masanhabpo-gu, Changwon 631-701, Korea
Jondo Yun*
Affiliation:
Department of Nano Science and Engineering, Kyungnam University, Woryeong-dong, Masanhabpo-gu, Changwon 631-701, Korea
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

Nonconductive specimens for scanning electron microscopy or X-ray microanalysis are coated with conductive carbon in order to reduce charging. But carbon film absorbs X-ray fluxes causing errors in measuring chemical composition. Especially when the carbon content is measured, carbon coating not only blocks X-rays but also becomes a source of carbon X-rays. It is thus necessary to determine how much errors are induced by carbon coating, and how thick coating is allowed for the accurate measurement. In this study, quantitative analysis of carbon on silicon carbide with carbon coating films was attempted by electron probe microanalyzer. It was found that measured carbon content increased in a nonlinear manner up to 40% with a film thickness, whereas silicon content decreased slightly. Carbon X-ray intensity was determined by computer simulation, which increased in a linear manner with the thickness. The discrepancy was due to a nucleation and growth of islands and thus a change of density with a thickening of coating film.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Microscopy Society of America 2013 

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

Bastin, G.F. & Heijligers, H.J.M. (2004). Quantitative electron probe microanalysis of non-conductive specimens. Microsc Microanal 10, 733738.Google Scholar
Durand, H.-A., Sekine, K., Etoh, K., Ito, K. & Kataoka, I. (1998). Influence of induced defects on the ultra thin film growth by low energy ion beam deposition. Int Conf Ion Implantn Technol Proc 2, 929932.Google Scholar
Goldstein, J.I., Lyman, C.E., Newbury, D.E., Lifshin, E., Echlin, P., Sawer, L., Joy, D.C. & Michael, J.R. (2003). Scanning Electron Microscopy and X-Ray Microanalysis, chapter 15. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.Google Scholar
Jercinovic, M.J. & Williams, M.L. (2005). Analytical perils and progress in electron microprobe trace element analysis applied to geochronology: Background acquisition, interferences, and beam irradiation effects. Amer Mineralogist 90, 526546.Google Scholar
Kerrick, D.M., Eminhizer, L.B. & Villaume, J.F. (1973). The role of carbon film thickness in electron microprobe analysis. Amer Mineralogist 58, 920925.Google Scholar
Lorenz, W.J. & Staikov, G. (1995). 2D and 3D thin film formation and growth mechanisms in metal electrocrystallization—An atomistic view by in situ STM. Surf Sci 335, 3243.Google Scholar
Maheswaran, R., Ramaswamy, S., Thiruvadigal, D.J. & Gopalakrishnan, C. (2011). Systematic study of various stages during the growth process of diamond-like carbon film by atomic force microscopy. J Non-Cryst Solids 357, 17101715.Google Scholar
Yun, J., Yang, C., Kim, J. & Lee, S. (2005). Scanning Electron Microscopy and X-Ray Microanalysis. Seoul, Korea: Cheongmungak.Google Scholar