1987
DOI: 10.1051/jphys:01987004802026100
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Influence of the charge state of 1.16 MeV/u incident ions on the desorption process

Abstract: The heavy ion linear accelerator of the Institut de Physique Nucléaire has been used to study the influence of the projectile charge state q i on secondary ion emission. Ions of Ne, Ar or Kr with a velocity of 1.16 MeV/u bombarded thin films of organic and inorganic solids. The experimental arrangement is described. The ion emission yield is strongly dependent on the charge state of the incident ion qi and of its atomic number (nature of the projectile). The emission yield between the three types of projectile… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

1987
1987
1993
1993

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The incident beam was taken in its equilibrium charge state inside the material as measured in Ref. 6. Figure 4 shows the (cos 0)-' dependence (0 is the angle between the normal to the target surface and the beam direction), as observed in both transmission and reflection modes.…”
Section: Experimental and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The incident beam was taken in its equilibrium charge state inside the material as measured in Ref. 6. Figure 4 shows the (cos 0)-' dependence (0 is the angle between the normal to the target surface and the beam direction), as observed in both transmission and reflection modes.…”
Section: Experimental and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Secondary ion yield is dependent upon the incident velocity of the primary particle and is optimized when that velocity is around 1.2 cm/ns. It is also effected by the "charge state" of the incident ion (5). The yield from a primary particle entering a thin foil from the back side (opposite the sample and analyzer) is approximately 1.4 times greater than from bombardment from the front.…”
mentioning
confidence: 96%