1981
DOI: 10.1103/physrevb.24.3749
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Angular dependence of the ion-induced secondary-electron yield from solids

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

4
32
0

Year Published

1986
1986
2012
2012

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 56 publications
(36 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
4
32
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This is valid due to the large secondary electron yield for ions striking a channel that results from the combination of the dielectric nature of the channel 41 and the glancing angle of incidence of the radiation striking a channel. 39,40 This is consistent with the results of several studies using keV ions as the primary radiation for which Q C Ϸ1. [43][44][45] Therefore, the apparent maximum value of Q W (E), which is obtained when Q C ϭ1 and EϾ1 V/mm, is approximately 0.66 for incident 20 keV H ϩ .…”
Section: A Applied Electric Field Effects On the Quantum Detection Esupporting
confidence: 90%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This is valid due to the large secondary electron yield for ions striking a channel that results from the combination of the dielectric nature of the channel 41 and the glancing angle of incidence of the radiation striking a channel. 39,40 This is consistent with the results of several studies using keV ions as the primary radiation for which Q C Ϸ1. [43][44][45] Therefore, the apparent maximum value of Q W (E), which is obtained when Q C ϭ1 and EϾ1 V/mm, is approximately 0.66 for incident 20 keV H ϩ .…”
Section: A Applied Electric Field Effects On the Quantum Detection Esupporting
confidence: 90%
“…For incident ions striking a channel wall, the secondary electron yield is significantly increased due to the glancing angle of incidence 39,40 and the dielectric properties 41 of the channel walls. Here, we expect that this enhanced secondary electron yield results in a quantum detection efficiency close to unity for ions impacting a channel wall.…”
Section: Secondary Electron Yield Measurementmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[13][14][15][16]21,22 The same equation holds true for the electron-and ion-induced secondary yields and sputter yields. [13][14][15][16]21,22 The same equation holds true for the electron-and ion-induced secondary yields and sputter yields.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 79%
“…A more plausible explanation is the limited accuracy of the stopping cross sections applied in the calculations. The nuclear stopping cross section, Sn, appears firmly established (15), but as discussed by several authors (15,(20)(21)(22)(23)(24) and as illustrated by the large deviations between the different estimates in Fig. 3 (15,(20)(21)(22)(23)(24), and according to the present results Se values close to those-used in TRIM-87 appear reasonable at low BF2 energies (<20 keV), while the estimate by TRIM-89 is more appropriate at the high energies (-140 keV).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The nuclear stopping cross section, Sn, appears firmly established (15), but as discussed by several authors (15,(20)(21)(22)(23)(24) and as illustrated by the large deviations between the different estimates in Fig. 3 (15,(20)(21)(22)(23)(24), and according to the present results Se values close to those-used in TRIM-87 appear reasonable at low BF2 energies (<20 keV), while the estimate by TRIM-89 is more appropriate at the high energies (-140 keV). This presumably indicates a transition from a low-energy regime with low energy loss to a region with more "ordinary" Se values; such a dependence may be anticipated in materials with a bandgap (semiconductors, insulators), since there are few low-energy excitation levels available (15).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%