1991
DOI: 10.1016/0039-6028(91)90649-d
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Field emission and photofield emission energy distributions from LaB6

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

1997
1997
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Already, before 1976, values ranging from 2.3 up to 3.2 eV were published for the (001) surface according to Yamauchi . Later reports of Aono et al, Mogren et al, Marchenko et al, Waldhauser et al, and Kawanowa et al present work functions of, respectively, 2.1, 3.3, 2.5, >2.6, and 2.3 eV.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Already, before 1976, values ranging from 2.3 up to 3.2 eV were published for the (001) surface according to Yamauchi . Later reports of Aono et al, Mogren et al, Marchenko et al, Waldhauser et al, and Kawanowa et al present work functions of, respectively, 2.1, 3.3, 2.5, >2.6, and 2.3 eV.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…We note that that the absorption length of the laser light is small for light above the band gap, however the diffusion length of electrons can be several microns. Previous work on this system suggests that surface electron diffusion accounts for charge transport [7] [8]. This same work has also compared field and photo-field emission and reported increases of !…”
mentioning
confidence: 69%
“…The 0.1-eV and 2.4-eV energies were chosen in order to test the extremes (assuming a photon energy hv = 4.8 eV and a LaB6 work function φ = 2.4 eV), while 1.76 eV was derived as the average initial energy using a free-electron model with a step potential and approximating photoemission by shifting the electronic distribution by hv. 10,11 Momentum was distributed along a profile varying as the cosine of the angle between the wave vector and the normal to the surface, and pulse duration was calculated 2.5 ns after photoexcitation. For each of the energies, the packet duration as a function of emission spot size (i.e., UV probe-laser spot size on the cathode) was simulated for two Wehnelt apertures: a standard 0.7-mm diameter aperture and a larger 1.0-mm diameter aperture.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%