Next generation secondary electron detector with energy analysis capability for SEM

Transmission electron microscope (TEM) specimen preparation by focused ion beam (FIB) milling requires delicate polishing of a thin window of material during the final stages of the procedure. Over or underpolishing is common and requires extra microscope resources to correct. Despite some methods for lamella thickness measurement being available, the majority of users judge the final polishing step subjectively from scanning electron microscope (SEM) images acquired between milling steps. Here we demonstrate successful thickness determination of thin silicon lamellae using calibrated secondary electron detectors in a FIB-SEM dual-beam chamber. Unlike previous thickness measurement methods it does not require long acquisition times, the use of in-chamber scanning transmission electron microscope (STEM) or energy dispersive x-ray spectroscopy detectors. The calibration aligns a SEM image to an electron energy loss spectroscopy (EELS) map of lamella thickness acquired in a TEM. This calibration reveals the greyscale-thickness dependence of two secondary electron SEM detectors: the through-lens detector (TLD) and the in-chamber electron detector (ICE). It was found that lamella thickness estimation for TLD images is accurate for areas thinner than 0.4 t/λ, whilst ICE images are most accurate for areas thicker than 0.5 t/λ up to 1.1 t/λ. The procedure presented here allows objective lamella thickness determination during the final stages of FIB specimen preparation using conventional imaging modes for common secondary electron detectors. LAY DESCRIPTION: Successful analysis of a material in a transmission electron microscope requires very thin windows of the material to be fabricated. Despite the quality of this analysis relying heavily on the thickness of the window, measuring thickness during window fabrication is not common practice. The authors show that it is possible to measure the thickness of the window directly in a focused-ion-beam chamber with a scanning electron microscope without altering the fabrication procedure, and using electron detectors common to most microscopes.

A secondary electron (SE) energy analyzer was developed for a transmission electron microscope. The analyzer comprises a microchannel plate (MCP) for detecting electrons, a coil for collecting SEs emitted from the specimen, a tube for reducing the number of backscattered electrons incident on the MCP, and a retarding mesh for selecting the energy of SEs incident on the MCP. The detection of the SEs associated with charging phenomena around a charged specimen was attempted by performing electron holography and SE spectroscopy using the energy analyzer. The results suggest that it is possible to obtain the energy spectra of SEs using the analyzer and the charging states of a specimen by electron holography simultaneously.

Two-dimensional dopant profiling is vital for the modelling, design, diagnosis and performance improvement of semiconductor devices and related research and development. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) has shown great potential for dopant profiling. In this study, the effects of secondary electron (SE) detectors and imaging parameters on the contrast imaging of multilayered p-n and p-i junction GaN specimens via SEM were studied to enable dopant profiling. The doping contrast of the image captured by the in-lens detector was superior to that of the image captured by the side-attached Everhart-Thornley detector at lower acceleration voltages (Vacc ) and small working distances (WD). Furthermore, the doping contrast levels of the in-lens detector-obtained image under different combinations of Vacc and WD were studied, and the underlying mechanism was explored according to local external fields and the refraction effect. The difference in the angular distributions of SEs emitted from different regions, the response of the three types of SEs to detectors, and the solid angles of detectors toward the specimen surface considerably influenced the results. This systematic study will enable the full exploitation of SEM for accurate dopant profiling, improve the analysis of the doping contrast mechanism, and further improve doping contrast for semiconductors.

This paper describes the theory and operation of a new diagnostic tool for the extraction of ions from the main body of a confined plasma. The device, a magnetically shielding tube used in conjunction with an electrostatic energy analyzer and secondary electron detector, can be used for measuring ion energy distributions, plasma potential, and energy dependence of plasma ion lifetimes. Shielding properties and limitations of the device are also discussed.

Secondary electron detection in the scanning electron microscope

A statistical analysis is described of the experimental errors involved in microanalysis using the combined electron microscope and energy analyser. The approach is used to point out the limitations of the present technique and discuss possible improvements.

We investigate targeted and localized material modifications produced by electropulsing of $\mathrm{Al}$-capped $\mathrm{Nb}$ microbridges with a multiterminal configuration. The affected regions of the $\mathrm{Nb}$/$\mathrm{Al}$ bilayer terminals are revealed by an in-lens secondary-electron detector in a scanning electron microscope and by Kelvin-probe force microscopy, both suggesting a decrease in the work function in the modified areas. In contrast, the affected areas are neither apparent through an Everhart-Thornley secondary-electron detector nor through atomic force microscopy, which indicates little morphological change in the microstructure. In addition, we demonstrate that the extent of the electroannealed regions is strongly influenced by the terminal geometry. These results are captured by complementary finite-element modeling, which permits us to estimate that a threshold temperature of $435\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}35$ K is needed to induce material modifications. These findings provide further insights into the subtle modifications produced by gentle electroannealing of $\mathrm{Nb}$/$\mathrm{Al}$ microstructures and represent a step forward towards mastering this emerging nanofabrication technique.

Study on time resolution of single event TOF-RBS measurement

The key to the imaging technology in the ESEM is the ionization of gas molecules by the secondary electrons from the sample and the collection of this amplified signal. Secondary electrons that are generated by the interaction of the primary electron beam with the sample are the signal of choice for high resolution imaging. The primary beam strikes a sample generating both secondary and backscattered electrons. In the ESEM, the secondary electrons are specifically collected by a confined electrostatic field that is generated by gaseous secondary electron detector above the sample. Within this field, the secondary electrons strike gas molecules generating an additional electron; a process termed cascade amplification. The image formed by collection of these electrons is very similar to the image formed by the conventional Everhart-Thornley detector, even though the signal amplification process is different. Scattering of the primary beam electrons also results in the formation of amplified electrons, but contains no relevant image information.

We demonstrate the surface potential sensitivity of secondary electron (SE) imaging of titania thin film by scanning electron microscopy (SEM), and discuss the image formation mechanism. The 1‐nm titania film on Si substrate was imaged as bright region against the substrate. The SE image of the film varied with SE detector, but did not with primary electron energy. The contrast of the film was reversed by only 1‐nm carbon deposition. This result suggests that a slight change of surface potential altered the efficiency of secondary electron emission. This high sensitivity of secondary electrons to the surface potential is promising for improvement of thin‐film observation by SEM. (© 2011 WILEY‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim)

Microscopy is the art and science of visually observing small objects. Electrons are electrically charged subatomic particles typically responsible for the flow of electrical current. Scanning is a method of observation where the focus of attention is moved in a chosen pattern and desired information is gained by assembling observations in sequence. In a scanning electron microscope (SEM), a beam of electrons is scanned in a regular pattern over a small object, and the image of the object appears on a screen by displaying the image points in synchrony with the movements of the electron beam on the object.A familiar example of image scanning is a television receiver, where a picture is created on a screen by rapidly scanning an electron beam across the phosphor face of the television tube. The beam striking the phosphor produces light, which is seen as a picture. The signal that modulates the electron beam in a television set is created in a television camera, which is scanned in the same way that the television screen is scanned. In a SEM, the signals come from special detectors in the microscope, not from an optical camera. Otherwise, the image display in a SEM is very similar to television. Although it is typical for SEM images to be scanned at a slower rate than are television signals, some SEMs display images at the same speed as television.The most common signal for detection in a SEM is the secondary electron signal. Secondary electrons are low‐speed electrons (having energies less than about 50 eV) that result from the interaction of the primary (i.e. beam) electrons with the sample. The secondary electrons are detected, usually by a scintillator/photomultiplier detector, and the resulting signal modulates the display screen.Secondary electrons are popular because they provide a kind of shading that gives a three‐dimensional appearance to an image, making it easy to visualize the structural relationships of parts of the sample (Figure 1).Other signals provide information of a more analytical nature. The signal produced by backscattered electrons is directly (although not exactly proportionally) related to the atomic number of the material being struck by the primary beam. Diffracted electrons provide information about crystal spacings and orientations in the sample. Induced‐current signals are particularly interesting for studying the response of active electronic components.The resolution of a SEM image depends on the quality of the optical system that forms the electron beam, including the nature of the electron source. Most SEMs can typically resolve objects as small as 10 nm. The resolution of specialized SEMs is better than 1 nm. In contrast, the resolution of light microscopes is limited by the wavelength of light to about 500 nm.The magnification of a SEM is not directly related to the optical system, very unlike a light microscope. The magnifying power of a SEM is related to the ratio between the size of the scan on the object compared to the size of the scan on the image display. In this way a SEM functions like a mechanical pantograph that was used, typically in older days, for copying drawings. If the arms of the pantograph were of equal length, the drawing would be copied the same size. If the arms were adjusted to different lengths, the drawing could be magnified or reduced.The primary advantage of a SEM is that it provides familiar‐looking images of surfaces with higher resolution and greater depth‐of‐field than an optical microscope. Although the images are typically familiar looking, the contrast mechanism in a SEM is not the same as the contrast provided by light, and an observer expecting always to interpret a SEM image the same way as a light image could easily be fooled.As the electron beam consists of electrically charged particles, the sample for SEM observation must either be inherently electrically conducting or must be made electrically conducting to yield good images. Otherwise, electrical charge builds up on the sample, the yield of secondary electrons is changed, and the scanning beam can become erratic. Low‐voltage or low‐vacuum SEMs can be used to reduce the charging problem.

An electron signal in the scanning electron microscope (SEM) usually consists of contributions caused by different contrast mechanisms. The most common in practice are material and topographic contrasts. Quantification of material contrast is rather a simple matter. A backscattered electron detector placed over a specimen gives mainly material contrast which can be quantified by the use of a multichannel analyser like in the energy-dispersive x-ray spectrometry.In case of topographic contrast two problems arise. One of them is dimensional metrology, especially linewidth measurements in microelectronics, the second is reconstruction of a surface relief. The first problem needs detection conditions at which the results of SEM measurements correspond exactly with real dimensions, the second needs a signal which is related with a known formula to a local surface inclination and a procedure for converting the signal into the surface relief.Experiments in the SEM and Monte-Carlo calculations have shown that results of dimensional measurements depend on an energy of a primary beam, on a type of detected electrons (secondary electrons (SE) or backscattered electrons (BSE)) and on a type of a detector.The use of low primary beam voltages and BSE is advisable, The problem of a poor efficiency of BSE detectors at low primary beam voltages can be overcome by accelerating BSE, after they have passed through a grid rejecting SE, by high voltage applied to a scintillator in a BSE detector.

Damage in materials is a complex and stochastic process bridging several time and length scales. This dissertation focuses on investigating the damage process in a particular class of precipitate-hardened aluminum alloys which is widely used in automotive and aerospace applications. Most emphasis in the literature has been given either on their ductility for manufacturing purposes or fracture for performance considerations. In this dissertation, emphasis is placed on using nondestructive evaluation (NDE) combined with mechanical testing and characterization methods applied at a scale where damage incubation and initiation is occurring. Specifically, a novel setup built inside a Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) and retrofitted to be combined with characterization and NDE capabilities was developed with the goal to track the early stages of the damage process in this type of material. The characterization capabilities include Electron Backscatter Diffraction (EBSD) and Energy Dispersive Spectroscopy (EDS) in addition to X-ray micro-computed tomography ([mu]-CT) and nanoindentation, in addition to microscopy achieved by the Secondary Electron (SE) and Back Scatter Electron (BSE) detectors. The mechanical testing inside the SEM was achieved with the use of an appropriate stage that fitted within its chamber and is capable of applying both axial and bending monotonic and cyclic loads. The NDE capabilities, beyond the microscopy and [mu]-CT, include the methods of Acoustic Emission and Digital Image Correlation (DIC). This setup was used to identify damage precursors in this material system and their evolution over time and space. The experimental results were analyzed by a custom signal processing scheme that involves both feature-based analyses as well as a machine learning method to relate recorded microstructural data to damage in this material. Extensions of the presented approach to include information from computational methods as well as its applicability to other material systems are discussed.

A simulation model is presented to analyze the topographic contast in the scanning electron microscope (SEM). This simulation takes into account all major mechanisms from signal generation to signal detection in the SEM. The calculated result shows that the resolution of the secondary electron image is better than that of the backscattered electron image for 1 and 3 keV primary electrons incident on an Al target. An asymmetric intensity profile of a signal at a topographic pattern, usually found in the SEM equipped with the Everhart-Thornley detector, is mainly due to the asymmetric profile of the backscattered electron signal.

In environmental scanning electron microscopy applications in the kPa regime are of increasing interest for the investigation of wet and biological samples, because neither sample preparation nor extensive cooling are necessary. Unfortunately, the applications are limited by poor image quality. In this work the image quality at high pressures of a FEI Quanta 600 (field emission gun) and a FEI Quanta 200 (thermionic gun) is greatly improved by optimizing the pressure limiting system and the secondary electron (SE) detection system. The scattering of the primary electron beam strongly increases with pressure and thus the image quality vanishes. The key to high-image quality at high pressures is to reduce scattering as far as possible while maintaining ideal operation conditions for the SE-detector. The amount of scattering is reduced by reducing both the additional stagnation gas thickness (aSGT) and the environmental distance (ED). A new aperture holder is presented that significantly reduces the aSGT while maintaining the same field-of-view (FOV) as the original design. With this aperture holder it is also possible to make the aSGT even smaller at the expense of a smaller FOV. A new blade-shaped SE-detector is presented yielding better image quality than usual flat SE-detectors. The electrode of the new SE detector is positioned on the sample table, which allows the SE-detector to operate at ideal conditions regardless of pressure and ED.