Adsorption of oxygen on a Cu{110} surface with and without the influence of A keV Ne+ beam

Hupkens, Th.M.; Fluit, J.M.

doi:10.1016/0039-6028(84)90424-2

Cited by 19 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…= argon ion flux with s O (Cu) = 0.24 [29] and s O (Ni) = 0.9 [30]. According to the literature [31] and SRIM, the sputter yield of oxides is assumed as…”

Section: Model For Electron Yields Of Oxidized Surfacesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, the parameters are fitted as f oxide to 2.4 for copper and 3.8 for nickel. Further, sticking coefficients of s O (Cu) = 0.24 [29] and s O (Ni) = 0.9 [30] are used for the modelling. According to the present model approach, per incoming Ar + ion around 2.4 more electrons are released from a copper oxide surface compared to clean copper and around 3.8 more electrons from a nickel oxide surface compared to clean nickel.…”

Section: Modeled Electron Yields For Clean and Oxidized Surfacesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Ion-induced secondary electron emission of oxidized nickel and copper studied in beam experiments

Buschhaus

Prenzel

Keudell

2022

Plasma Sources Sci. Technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ion-induced secondary electron emission at a target surface is an essential mechanism for laboratory plasmas, i.e. magnetron sputtering discharges. Electron emission, however, is strongly aﬀected by the target condition itself such as oxidation. Data of oxidized targets, however, are very sparse and prone to signiﬁcant systematic errors, because they were often determined by modeling the complex behavior of the plasma. Thus, it is diﬃcult to isolate the process of ion-induced electron emission from all other plasma-surface-interactions. By utilizing ion beams, the complex plasma environment is avoided and electron yields are determined with a higher accuracy. In this study, ion-induced secondary electron emission coeﬃcients (SEEC) of clean, untreated (air-exposed), and intentionally oxidized copper and nickel surfaces were investigated in such a particle beam experiment. Pristine and oxidized metal foils were exposed to beams of singly charged argon ions with energies of 200 eV - 10 keV. After the ion beam treatment, the surface conditions were analyzed by ex-situ XPS measurements. Further, a model for the electron emission of a partly oxidized surface is presented, which is in agreement with the experimental data. It was found, that oxidized and untreated/air-exposed surfaces do not show the same SEEC: for intentionally oxidized targets, the electron yields were smaller by a factor of 2 than for untreated/air-exposed surfaces. SEECs of oxides were found to be between the values for clean and for untreated metal surfaces. Further, the SEEC was at maximum for untreated/air-exposed surfaces and at minimum for clean surfaces; the electron yields of untreated/air-exposed and clean surfaces were in agreement with values reported in literature.

show abstract

“…= argon ion flux with s O (Cu) = 0.24 [29] and s O (Ni) = 0.9 [30]. According to the literature [31] and SRIM, the sputter yield of oxides is assumed as…”

Section: Model For Electron Yields Of Oxidized Surfacesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Modeled Electron Yields For Clean and Oxidized Surfacesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ion-induced secondary electron emission of oxidized nickel and copper studied in beam experiments

Buschhaus

Prenzel

Keudell

2022

Plasma Sources Sci. Technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Ions hitting the adsorbate become scattered and will energize the adsorbate, thereby causing not only a vastly increased energy transfer to the surface with the consequence of sputtering, but also adsorbate desorption. This property is used in low-energy ion scattering measurements (LEIS) to determine the structure, coverage and sticking coefficient of adsorbates [2]- [4]. The ion-induced desorption has been studied in detail, however, morphology changes due to large scattering events have not been studied extensively.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%