Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T09:05:09.034Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Imaging and Analysis of Crystal Defects Using Transmission Channeling

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 June 2015

Get access

Extract

The passage of ions through a crystalline material can be affected by the regular and repeating arrangement of atoms within the crystal structure; this is called ion channeling. Channeling occurs when an ion beam is aligned with a planar or axial direction of a crystal lattice. The particles are shepherded through the crystal by the gentle steering effects of the atomic rows and planes so that they travel in the regions of reduced electron density between the atoms. This leads to a significantly reduced energy-loss rate compared with nonchanneled (or “random”) ions: MeV protons channeled in the {111} and {110} planes of silicon suffer an average energy-loss rate of 45% and 60% of the nonchanneled value, respectively. Channeling also lowers the close-encounter probability between the channeled ions and the crystal's atoms, reducing the rate of ion backscattering and ion-induced x-ray production. Comparison of the yields of these signals between channeled and nonchanneled alignment gives information on crystal quality, epitaxy, and the lattice position of interstitial elements.

Table I gives some useful parameters for 3-MeV protons channeled along axial and planar directions of silicon. The channeling critical angle ψ is a measure of how close in angle a channeled ion must be to an axial or planar direction in order for it to become channeled. This is of the order of 0.3° for ⟨110⟩ directions and 0.1° for the planar directions. Even when an ion beam is aligned to within the critical angle of a channeling direction, not every ion becomes channeled, as some are scattered by close interactions with the first few monolayers of the crystal. The fraction of non-channeled ions is given by the minimum yield Xmin and this is ~30% for planar directions and a few percent for axes. Those ions that become channeled eventually leave their privileged trajectories and revert to nonchanneled paths through the crystal. This dechanneling occurs naturally, due to scattering from electrons within the channel and perturbations from the atoms of the channel walls. For planar channeling directions, the fraction of ions remaining channeled decreases exponentially with depth into the crystal and is described by a half-thickness z1/2, the depth within the crystal at which 50% of the initially channeled ions have become dechanneled. This is of the order of 5 μm for 3-MeV protons channeled in the major planes of silicon. Finally, the energy-loss ratio shows the reduction in energy loss for a channeled ion compared with that of a random ion.

Type
Focused MeV Ion Beams for Materials Analysis and Microfabrication
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2000

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.Morgan, D.V., ed., Channeling Theory, Observations and Applications (John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1974).Google Scholar
2.Feldman, L.C., Mayer, J.W., and Picraux, S.T., Materials Analysis by Ion Channeling (Academic Press, New York, 1982).Google Scholar
3.Mayer, J.W. and Rimini, E., eds., Ion Beam Handbook for Materials Analysis (Academic Press, New York, 1977).Google Scholar
4.Quéré, Y., Ann. Phys. 5 (1970) p. 105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Mory, J. and Quéré, Y., Radiat. Eff. Defects Solids 13 (1972) p. 57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Campisano, S.U., Fori, G., Rimini, E., and Picraux, S.T., Nucl. Instrum. Methods 149 (1978) p. 371.Google Scholar
7.Breese, M.B.H., Jamieson, D.N., and King, P.J.C., Materials Analysis Using a Nuclear Microprobe (John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1996).Google Scholar
8.Cholewa, M., Bench, G.S., Legge, G.J.F., and Saint, A., Appl. Phys. Lett. 56 (13) (1990) p. 1236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Quéré, Y. and Couve, H., J. Appl. Phys. 39 (8) (1968) p. 4012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10.McCallum, J.C., Mckenzie, C.D., Lucas, M.A., Rossiter, K.G., Short, K.T., and Williams, J.S., Appl. Phys. Lett. 42 (9) (1983) p. 827.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Williams, J.S., McCallum, J.C., and Brown, R.A., Nucl. Instrum. Methods B 30 (1988) p. 480.Google Scholar
12.Breese, M.B.H. and Bailes, A.A. III, Nucl. Instrum. Methods B 140 (1998) p. 178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13.King, P.J.C., Breese, M.B.H., Booker, G.R., Whitehurst, T., Wilshaw, P.R., Grime, G.W., Watt, F., and Goringe, M.J., Nucl. Instrum. Methods B 77 (1993) p. 320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.Breese, M.B.H., King, P.J.C., and Smulders, P.J.M., Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter 54 (14) (1996) p. 9693.Google Scholar
15.King, P.J.C., Breese, M.B.H., Wilshaw, P.R., Smulders, P.J.M., and Grime, G.W., Nucl. Instrum. Methods B 99 (1995) p. 419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16.Booker, G.R. and Tunstall, W.J., Philos. Mag. 13 (1966) p. 71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17.King, P.J.C., Breese, M.B.H., Wilshaw, P.R., and Grime, G.W., Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter 51 (5) (1995) p. 2732.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18.King, P.J.C., Breese, M.B.H., Smulders, P.J.M., Wilshaw, P.R., and Grime, G.W., Phys. Rev. Lett. 74 (3) (1995) p. 411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19.King, P.J.C., Breese, M.B.H., Wilshaw, P.R., and Grime, G.W., Nucl. Instrum. Methods B 104 (1995) p. 233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20.People, R., IEEE J. Quantum Electron. 22 (9) (1986) p. 1696.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21.Tuppen, C.G., Gibbings, C.J., and Hockly, M., J. Cryst. Growth 94 (1989) p. 392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22.Bean, J.C., J. Vac. Sci. Technol., B 4 (6) (1986) p. 1427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23.King, P.J.C., Breese, M.B.H., Wilshaw, P.R., Booker, G.R., Grime, G.W., Watt, F., and Goringe, M.J., in Proc. Microscopy of Semiconducting Materials Conf., edited by Cullis, A.G., Stanton-Bevan, A.E., and Hutchinson, J.L. (Inst. Phys. Conf. Ser. 134, Bristol, UK, 1993) p. 153.Google Scholar
24.Luryi, S. and Suhir, E., Appl. Phys. Lett. 49 (3) (1986) p. 140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
25.Breese, M.B.H., King, P.J.C., Whitehurst, J., Booker, G.R., Grime, G.W., Watt, F., Romano, L.T., and Parker, E.H.C., J. Appl. Phys. 73 (6) (1993) p. 2640.Google Scholar
26.King, P.J.C., Breese, M.B.H., Smulders, P.J.M., Wilkinson, A.J., Booker, G.R., Parker, E.H.C., and Grime, G.W., Appl. Phys. Lett. 67 (24) (1995) p. 3566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
27.King, P.J.C., Breese, M.B.H., Meekeson, D., Smulders, P.J.M., Wilshaw, P.R., and Grime, G.W., J. Appl. Phys. 80 (5) (1996) p. 2671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
28.King, P.J.C., Breese, M.B.H., Smulders, P.J.M., Wilshaw, P.R., and Grime, G.W., Nucl. Instrum. Methods B 118 (1996) p. 426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
29.King, P.J.C., Breese, M.B.H., Wilshaw, P.R., and Grime, G.W., Nucl. Instrum. Methods B 103 (1995) p. 365.Google Scholar
30.Breese, M.B.H. and Smulders, P.J.M., Phys. Rev. Lett. 81 (23) (1998) p. 5157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
31.Thomas, G. and Goringe, M.J., Transmission Electron Microscopy of Materials (John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1979).Google Scholar
32.Wilkinson, A.J., Anstis, G.R., Czemuska, J.T., Long, N.J., and Hirsch, P.B., Philos. Mag. A 68(1) (1993) p. 59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
33.Leamy, H.J., J. Appl. Phys. 53 (1982) p. R51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
34.Lohnert, K. and Kubalek, E., in Proc. Microscopy of Semiconducting Materials Conf., edited by Cullis, A.G., Davidson, S.M., and Booker, G.R. (Inst. Phys. Conf. Ser. 67, Bristol, UK, 1983) p. 303.Google Scholar
35.Capano, M.A., Hart, L., Bowen, D.K., Gordon-Smith, D., Thomas, C.R., Gibbings, C.J., Halliwell, M.A.G., and Hobbs, L.W., J. Cryst. Growth 116 (1992) p. 260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
36.Booker, G.R., Laczik, Z., and Kidd, P., Semicond. Sci. Technol. 7 (1992) p. A110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
37.Phillips, V.A., Modern Metallographic Techniques and their Applications (John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1971).Google Scholar