2005
DOI: 10.1063/1.1968444
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Unexpectedly high sputtering yield of carbon at grazing angle of incidence ion bombardment

Abstract: The relative sputtering yield of amorphous carbon with respect to polycrystalline nickel at Ar-ion bombardment was determined by means of Auger electron spectroscopy depth profiling as a function of the angle of incidence and projectile energy in the ranges of 49°–88° and 0.3–1keV, respectively. It was found that the relative sputtering yield YC∕YNi strongly increases with angle of incidence from 49° to 82°. At around 80° the sputtering yield of C is higher than that of Ni. Above 82° no dependence on the angle… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Therefore, reliable sputtering yield data for bismuth are needed both for enriching the sputtering yield data basis and testing theoretical model predictions. The measured sputtering yields can be interpreted in the framework of Sigmund's transport theory [12] and related semi-empirical models [13][14][15][16][17][18][19] or via computer code simulations [20][21][22] often requiring to introduce the composition and specific parameters of the target material as input data [17,23,24].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, reliable sputtering yield data for bismuth are needed both for enriching the sputtering yield data basis and testing theoretical model predictions. The measured sputtering yields can be interpreted in the framework of Sigmund's transport theory [12] and related semi-empirical models [13][14][15][16][17][18][19] or via computer code simulations [20][21][22] often requiring to introduce the composition and specific parameters of the target material as input data [17,23,24].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, it can be challenging to determine shapes of ion beam profiles and the corresponding operational current densities, especially when the projectile energy goes below 1 keV and then further approaches the sputtering threshold. Moreover, under such conditions, the focusing of the ion beam is in question, and the relative spread ∆ε/ε in the initial kinetic energy distribution of ions [2] can have strong influence on experimental results [3,4].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Say, the typical flux we are using in our experimental setup [45] is around U % 1 lA/cm 2 which corresponds roughly to $10 21 ion/s cm 2 . This flux of ions is distributed in the simulations in a 20 Â 20 Å 2 area, hence the local flux is U l = 10 21 ion/s cm 2 Â 10 16 /400 = 4 Â 10 7 ion/s in the 400 Å 2 area.…”
Section: The Shift Of the Waiting Time Approach For The Time Evolutiomentioning
confidence: 99%