Ion Beam Induced Surface Modulations from Nano to Pico: Optimizing Deposition During Erosion and Erosion During Depositi
- PDF / 2,288,618 Bytes
- 6 Pages / 612 x 792 pts (letter) Page_size
- 24 Downloads / 124 Views
1059-KK01-07
Ion Beam Induced Surface Modulations from Nano to Pico: Optimizing Deposition During Erosion and Erosion During Deposition. Warren John MoberlyChan1, and Richard Schalek2 1 CMELS-MSTD, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA, 94550-9234 2 Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, 02138 ABSTRACT Ion beams of sufficient energy to erode a surface can lead to surface modulations that depend on the ion beam, the material surface it impinges, and extrinsic parameters such as temperature and geometric boundary conditions. Focused Ion Beam technology both enables site-specific placement of these modulations and expedites research through fast, high dose and small efficient use of material. The DualBeam (FIB/SEM) enables in situ metrology, with movies observing ripple formation, wave motion, and the influence of line defects. Nanostructures (ripples of >400nm wavelength to dots spaced 0.5 [7, 8], the additional SEM in situ caused the average yield to drop to 4.3 at aspect=0.13 and to 3.4 at aspect=0.23. Datta, et al [10] observed wavelength saturation at 220nm at dose35x1018[7], the aspect was increased (and adjusted from 0.1 to 0.8), which caused the yield to drop and caused ripple wavelength to increase to nearly 500nm [8]. By adding electron beam energy during an in situ movie, the wavelength can be increased to ~300nm at an aspect of ~0.13, whereas without movie a wavelength of ~300nm needed an aspect >0.2.
Figure 6: (a) SEM image of carbon pads grown by FIB-CVD, with ion beam at inclinations of: 30° tilt to produce a smooth surface, 45° a set of 1-D ripples, and 60° 2-dimensional steps (akin to erosion angles [9,11, 12]). FIB scan is intentionally normal to ripples (i.e. ripples relate to inclination angle and are not caused by FIB scanning.) Ripples grown on top of pads have more engineering utilities than erosion ripples at bottom of pit (in background of Fig. 6a). 2-beam processing adds flexibility with the SEM for EBAD and FIB only for site-specific erosion modulations [6].
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This work was performed under the auspices of the United States Department of Energy by the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories under contract of No. DE-AC52-07NA27344. UCRL-PROC-236448.
REFERENCES 1. P. Sigmund, J. Materials Science 8 (1973) 1545-1553. 2. R.M. Bradley and J.M.E. Harper, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. A 6 (1988) 2390-2395. 3. E. Chason, et al, J. Appl. Phys: Appl Phys Rev. 81(10) (1997) 6513-6561. 4. A. Cuenat and M.J. Aziz, Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 696 (2002) p. N2.8. 5. S. Ichim and M.J. Aziz, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B 23 (2005) 1068-1071. 6. W.J. MoberlyChan, D.P. Adams, M.J. Aziz, G. Hobler, T. Schenkel, MRS Bull., 32 (2007) 424-432. 7. W.J. MoberlyChan, T.E. Felter, and M.A. Wall, Microscopy Today, Nov. (2006) 28-34. 8. W.J. MoberlyChan, Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 960 (2006) p. N10-02. 9. D.P. Adams, M.J. Vasile, T.M. Mayer, & V.C. Hodges, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B 21 (2003) 2334-2343. 10. A. Datta, Y.R. Wu, and Y.L. Wang, Phys. Rev. B 63 (2001) 125407. 11. W.J. MoberlyChan, Microsc. Mic
Data Loading...
