Introducing routine pulse height defect corrections in IBA

Pascual-Izarra, C.; Barradas, N.P.

doi:10.1016/j.nimb.2007.12.073

Cited by 24 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…All spectra analysed in Surrey used the DataFurnace software (NDF version 9.4h 46 ). The electronic gain and PHD of both detectors were fitted from the calibration sample (Au/Ni/SiO 2 /Si) spectra collected at various incident energies 32,47 by assuming a linear calibration with a null offset, which was initially verified using a high precision electronic pulser. The Molodtsov & Gurbich pileup correction 26 was used together with the pileup rejection capability of the shaping amplifiers.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

High accuracy traceable Rutherford backscattering spectrometry of ion implanted samples

Colaux

Jeynes

2014

Anal. Methods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There are few techniques capable of the non-destructive and model-free measurement at 1% absolute accuracy of quantity of material in thin films without the use of sample-matched standards. We demonstrate that Rutherford backscattering spectrometry can achieve this robustly, reliably and conveniently. Using 1.5 MeV He + , a 150 keV ion implant into silicon with a nominal fluence of 5 × 10 15 As/cm² has been independently measured repeatedly over a period of 2 years with a mean total combined standard uncertainty of 0.9 ± 0.3% relative to an internal standard given by the silicon stopping power (a coverage factor k=1 is used for all uncertainties given). The stopping power factor of this beam in silicon is determined absolutely with a mean total combined standard uncertainty of 0.8 ± 0.1%, traceable to the 0.6% uncertainty of the Sb-implanted certified reference material (CRM) from IRMM, Geel. The uncertainty budget highlights the need for the accurate determination of the electronic gain of the detection system and the scattering angle, parameters conventionally regarded as trivial. This level of accuracy is equally applicable to much lower fluences since it is not dominated by any one effect; but it cannot be reached without good control of all of these effects. This analytical method is extensible to non-Rutherford scattering. The stopping power factor of 4.0 MeV lithium in silicon is also determined at 1.0% absolute accuracy traceable to the Sb-implanted CRM. This work used SRIM2003 stopping powers which are therefore demonstrated correct at 0.8% for 1.5 MeV He in Si and 1% for 4 MeV Li in Si.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

High accuracy traceable Rutherford backscattering spectrometry of ion implanted samples

Colaux

Jeynes

2014

Anal. Methods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The sum spectra were analysed using NDFv9.3f [73] and are shown in Figure 2. The PHD of the detectors was fitted from the calibration sample spectra collected at 3 MeV and 1.5 MeV [74] by assuming a linear calibration with an offset of zero (the measured electronic offset of the detection channels). The M&G pileup correction [70] was used together with the pileup rejection capability of the pulse amplifiers.…”

Section: Measurementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accurate Determination of Quantity of Material in Thin Films by Rutherford Backscattering Spectrometry

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ion beam analysis (IBA) is a cluster of techniques including Rutherford and non-Rutherford backscattering spectrometry, and particle-induced X-ray emission (PIXE). Recently, the ability to treat multiple IBA techniques (including PIXE) self-consistently has been demonstrated. The utility of IBA for accurately depth profiling thin films is critically reviewed. As an important example of IBA, three laboratories have independently measured a silicon sample implanted with a fluence of nominally 5.1015As/cm2 at an unprecedented absolute accuracy. Using 1.5 MeV 4He+ Rutherford backscattering spectrometry (RBS), each lab has demonstrated a combined standard uncertainty around 1% (coverage factor k=1) traceable to an Sb-implanted certified reference material through the silicon electronic stopping power. The uncertainty budget shows that this accuracy is dominated by the knowledge of the electronic stopping, but that special care must also be taken to accurately determine the electronic gain of the detection system and other parameters. This RBS method is quite general and can be used routinely, to accurately validate ion implanter charge collection systems, to certify SIMS standards, and for other applications. The generality of application of such methods in IBA is emphasised: if RBS and PIXE data are analysed self-consistently then the resulting depth profile inherits the accuracy and depth resolution of RBS and the sensitivity and elemental discrimination of PIXE

show abstract

“…To achieve this accuracy it is necessary to correct properly for pulse pile-up [36] [37] [38], and to correctly determine the electronic gain of the detectors, including the appropriate pulse height defect correction [39]. Incidentally, it is the absence of this PHD correction that accounts for the misfit at the low energy edge of the N signal in Fig.1b of [40] (this is more clearly seen in Fig.6b of [41]): the effect is surprisingly large.…”

Section: Iba For Accurate (Traceable) Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%