LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Publisher: AIP
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects:

Classified by OpenAIRE into

arxiv: Physics::Accelerator Physics, Computer Science::Other
Identifiers:doi:10.1116/1.4926388
In this paper the new term apparent beam size of Focused Ion Beam (FIB) is introduced and an original method of its evaluation is demonstrated. Traditional methods of measuring the beam size, like the knife edge method, provide information about the quality of the beam itself but practically they do not give information on the FIB sputtering resolution. To do this, it is necessary to take into account the material dependant interaction of the beam with the specimen and the gas precursor in the vacuum chamber. The apparent beam size can be regarded as the smallest possible dot that FIB can sputter in a given specimen. The method of evaluating it, developed in this paper, is based on the analysis of a series of scanning electron images of FIB produced nanodots. Results show that the apparent beam size can be up to 5 times larger than the actual physical size of the beam and it is significantly influenced by the presence of gas precursor. It is also demonstrated that the apparent beam size can be used as a reference value for optimisation of the beam step during raster scanning.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • 1R. M. Langford, P. M. Nellen, J. Gierak, and Y. Fu, MRS Bull. 32, 417 (2007).
    • 2M. Rommel, A. J. Bauer, and L. Frey, Microelectron. Eng. 98, 242 (2012).
    • 3A. Joshi-Imre and S. Bauerdick, J. Nanotechnol. 2014, 170415.
    • 4M. Sato and J. Orloff, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B 9, 2602 (1991).
    • 5I. M. Templeton and H. G. Champion, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B 13, 2603 (1995).
    • 6S. Tan, R. Livengood, Y. Greenzweig, Y. Drezner, and D. Shima, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B 30, 06F606 (2012).
    • 7G. B. Assayag, C. Vieu, J. Gierak, P. Sudraud, and A. Corbin, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B 11, 2420 (1993).
    • 8A. Lugstein, B. Basnar, G. Hobler, and E. Bertagnolli, J. Appl. Phys. 92, 4037 (2002).
    • 9S. Shukuri, Y. Wade, M. Tamura, K. Umemura, and T. Ishitani, J. Electrochem. Soc. 134, 1536 (1987).
    • 10R. L. Kubena and J. W. Ward, Appl. Phys. Lett. 51, 1960 (1987).
    • 11“ASTM International,” www.astm.org/database.cart/historical/e986-97.htm.
    • 12T. Ishitani, H. Tamura, and H. Todokoro, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. 20, 80 (1982).
    • 13S. A. Rishton, S. P. Beaumont, and C. D. W. Wilkinson, J. Phys. E: Sci. Instrum. 17, 296 (1984).
    • 14H. Arimoto, A. Takamori, E. Miyauchi, and H. Hashimoto, Jpn. J. Appl. Phys., Part 2 22, L780 (1983).
    • 15J. Orloff, L. W. Swanson, and M. Utlaut, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B 14, 3759 (1996).
    • 16P. W. H. de Jager and P. Kruit, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B 14, 3753 (1996).
    • 17M. Komuro, Appl. Phys. Lett. 52, 75 (1988).
    • 18M. Nastasi, J. Mayer, and J. Hirvonen, Ion-solid Interactions: Fundamentals and Applications (Cambridge University, Cambridge, 1996).
    • 19J. F. Ziegler “SRIM,” Last accessed 12 February 2015, www.srim.org.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article