Professional Documents
Culture Documents
t
r
e
(
n
m
)
A/cm
2
sr
Probe with coherent source: see Mory C, Cowley J M,
Ultramicroscopy 21 1987 171
Incoherent source
d
ech
= d
g
2
+ d
sph
2
+ d
ch
2
+ d
d
2
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 12 April 2010
c. Electron probe and resolution
Resolving power ("resolution"): Rayleigh
criterium
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 13 April 2010
c. Electron probe and resolution
probe size and resolution (no noise)
particles 100 nm diam.,
probe dia 2 nm
particles 50 nm diam.,
probe dia 2 nm
particles 25 nm diam.,
probe dia 2 nm
model 100 nm diam.
particles
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 14 April 2010
c. Electron probe and resolution
Probe size and resolution (with noise)
(with noise)
model 100 nm diam.
particles
Particles100 nm
diam.,
probe diam 2 nm
particles 50 nm diam.,
probe diam 2 nm
particles 25 nm diam.,
probe diam 2 nm
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 15 April 2010
c. Electron probe and resolution
How to increase resolving power?
Reduce the probe current at
constant dose
Increase exposure time t
Reduce volume interaction Reduce accelerating voltage
Reduce C
sph
Short focus lenses:
in-lens, semi in-lens, Snorkel
Increase brillance Field emission gun:
Cold emission, thermal assisted,
Schottky effect
Reduce C
sph
and increase
brillance
Dedicated columns: Gemini, XL30,
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
(
n
m
)
Basse tension/haute rsolution:
- observation de la surface relle
- chantillons non-mtalliss
- faible endommagement d au
faisceau
Haute tension/haute rsolution:
- effets de bord
- dtails fins non-rsolus
- fort endommagement d au
faisceau
1985
2000
Shorter objective
lens focal length
and C
s
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 22 April 2010
d. Depth of field
Depth of field as a function of d
probe
h
prof .champ
= max
2
pixel
"image "
G
1
!
2d
sonde
1
!
"
#
$
%
$
h
h
2d
A
2#
d
A
The depth of field is the depth
for which the image is
focussed
The depth of field increases
when # decreases.
Increase the working
distance
Reduce objective
aperture size
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 23 April 2010
d. Depth of field
Effect of working
distance (WD) and
aperture on depth of
field
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 24 April 2010
d. Depth of field
Light bulb filament
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 25 April 2010
d. Depth of field
Other examples
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 26 April 2010
d. Depth of field
Effect of the objective aperture diameter
30 !m
50 !m
100 !m
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 27 April 2010
d. Depth of field
Measuring depth of field: stereoscopy
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 28 April 2010
e. Stereoscopy
The 3
rd
dimension: stereoscopic vision,
anaglyphs
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 29 April 2010
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 30 April 2010
e. Stereoscopy
3
-
D
r
e
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
(
a
n
a
g
l
y
p
h
)
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 31 April 2010
e. Stereoscopy
3-D reconstruction
(pseudo-perspective)
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 32 April 2010
e. Stereoscopy
3
-
D
r
e
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
(
g
r
e
y
l
e
v
e
l
s
)
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 33 April 2010
e. Stereoscopy
3
-
D
r
e
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
(
f
a
l
s
e
c
o
l
o
r
s
)
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 34 April 2010
e. Stereoscopy
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 35 April 2010
e. Stereoscopy
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 36 April 2010
f. Electron-matter interaction volume
Elastic interaction
Total kinetic energy and momentum are constant E
el
+ E
at
= cte
The light electron interacts with the electrical field in the heavy
atom: Rutherford scattering.
Only little energy is transferred, the electron speed does not
change significantly in amplitude but only in direction (elastic
scattering).
Elastic interaction:
Energy transfer
from the electron
to the target
100 kV
1000 kV
angle de
diffusion
C Au C Au
0.5 0.5 meV 0.03 meV 9 meV 0.5 meV
10 0.15 eV 9 meV 2.7 eV 0.17 eV
90 10 eV 0.6 eV 179 eV 11 eV
180 20 eV 1.2 eV 359 eV 22 eV
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 37 April 2010
f. Electron-matter interaction volume
Inelastic interaction
part of the total kinetic energy is dissipated (energy loss)
!vibration in molecules or crystals (phonons "meV-100meV)
! collective oscillations of electrons (plasmons "10 eV)
! intra- et interband transitions ("mev-"1 eV)
! inner shell atom ionisation ("50 to150 keV < eV
0
)
! bond breaking " eV, atom displacement " 10-30eV (requires
V
acc
100kV...1MV, no longer SEM!)
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 38 April 2010
f. Electron-matter interaction volume
Mean free path
Elastic cross-sections $
el
and mean free path %
el
,
total (elastic+inelastic)
mean free path %
t
and
electron range R
The mean free path is
the average path that
an electron does before
having interaction with
an atom
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 39 April 2010
f. Electron-matter interaction volume
Monte-Carlo simulations
Electron Flight Simulator ($$$ Small World / D. Joy)
old DOS !!!!
http://www.small-world.net
Single Scattering Monte Carlo Simulation (Freeware)
"Monte Carlo Simulation" Mc_w95.zip
by Kimio KANDA
http://www.nsknet.or.jp/~kana/soft/sfmenu.html
CASINO (Freeware)
" monte CArlo SImulation of electroN trajectory in sOlids "
by P. Hovongton and D. Drouin
http://www.gel.usherbrooke.ca/casino/What.html
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 40 April 2010
f. Electron-matter interaction volume
Number/Energy of backscattered electrons by
Monte-Carlo simulations
30 kV 3 kV 1 kV
BSE 5% BSE 8% BSE 10%
C
BSE 52% BSE 43% BSE 41%
W
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 41 April 2010
f. Electron-matter interaction volume
Penetration and back-
scattering vs elements (Z)
V
acc
= 20kV = cte
Depth of electron
penetration vs Z and yield of
electron backscattering BSE
(Monte-Carlo simulation):
1
C 20 keV
BSE=6%
BSE=33%
1
U 20 keV
BSE=50%
Cu 20 keV
1
BSE=33%
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 42 April 2010
f. Electron-matter interaction volume
Penetration and back-
scattering vs elements (Z)
10 nm
C 1keV
U 1keV 10 nm
Cu 1keV
10 nm
BSE=14%
BSE=34%
BSE=44%
V
acc
= 1 kV = cte
Depth of electron
penetration vs Z and yield of
electron backscattering BSE
(Monte-Carlo simulation):
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 43 April 2010
f. Electron-matter interaction volume
Penetration and back-
scattering vs elements (Z)
V
acc
= 5 kV = cte
Depth of electron
penetration vs Z and yield of
electron backscattering BSE
(Monte-Carlo simulation):
200 nm
C 5 keV
Cu 5 keV
200nm
U 5 keV
200 nm
BSE=8%
BSE=33%
BSE=47%
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 44 April 2010
f. Electron-matter interaction volume
Penetration and backscat-
tering vs energy(E)
Z = cte
Depth of electron
penetration in Cu vs
energy E
0
and yield of
electron backscattering
BSE (Monte-Carlo
simulation):
BSE=33%
Cu 20 keV
1#m
Cu 5 keV
1#m
Cu 1 keV
Cu 1keV
1#m
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 45 April 2010
g. SE and BSE
"true" secondary electrons SE1 and "converted
BSE" secondaries SE2+SE3
Various SE types from
SE1: incident probe
SE2: BSE leaving the sample
SE3: BSE hitting the surroundings
although this signal is gathered around the
probe, its intensity is only attributed to the
pixel corresponding to the actual probe
position
x
0
,y
0
intensity and delocalisation of SE
stemming from the probe at x
0
,y
0
(leading
to the X
0
,Y
0
pixel intensity on the image)
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 46 April 2010
g. SE and BSE
"true" secondary electrons SE1 and "converted
BSE" secondaries SE2+SE3
x
0
,y
0
intensity and delocalisation of SE
stemming from the probe at x
0
,y
0
(leading
to the X
0
,Y
0
pixel intensity on the image)
The SE signal always contain a high resolution part (SE1
from the probe) and an average (low resolution) part
from SE2+SE3!
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 47 April 2010
g. SE and BSE
Relative contribution of SE1 and SE2 (+SE3) vs
primary energy
The total intensity (green and brown) is
attributed to the (x,y) pixel, here at 0
nm on this 1-D model
(adapted from D.C. Joy
Hitachi News 16 1989)
total
total
total
SE1
SE2
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 48 April 2010
g. SE and BSE
Yield for SE and BSE emission per incident
electron vs atomic number Z
&
:
': SE: low or no chemical contrast but for
light elements
the topographical contrast will
dominate on rough surfaces
I
SE
=I
pe
$' +I
SE3
=I
pe
('
pe
+'
pe
$&+'
sur
$&)
with ' the total SE yield, '
pe
the yield for SE1
and '
sur
the SE3 yield for materials surrounding
the sample (pole-pieces...)
SE1 SE2 SE3
Al Ni
0.11
0.28
(SE1)
BSE: chemical contrast for all the
elements
(sensitivity (DZ=0.5)
A fast way to phase mapping
I
BSE
=I
pe
$& with I
pe
the intensity of
the primary beam, & the BSE
yield
sample surface polished (no topography) and
perpendicular to the incident beam direction
(intermediate energy E
0
( 15 keV)
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 49 April 2010
g. SE and BSE
Yield for SE and BSE emission per incident
electron vs tilt
BSE yield ! SE yield " ~1/cos#
Cu
Al
'
SE
~1/cos)
'
SE
(40)/'
SE
(0)(1.30
Monte-Carlo:
for Al:
&
BSE
(0)(0.15
&
BSE
(40)(0.24
&
BSE
(40)/&
BSE
(0)(1.60
for Cu:
&
BSE
(0)(0.31
&
BSE
(40)(0.40
&
BSE
(40)/&
BSE
(0)(1.30
(adapted from L. Reimer,
Scanning electron
microscopy)
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 50 April 2010
g. SE and BSE
Dust on WC (different Z materials)
SE 25 kV BSE
low Z material flat material rough material low Z material
thin low Z material
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 51 April 2010
g. SE and BSE
Contaminated area around a soldering spot
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 52 April 2010
g. SE and BSE
Toner particle (penetration in light material)
SE 28 kV BSE
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 53 April 2010
g. SE and BSE
Topographical contrast
in SE mode
Effet de l'inclinaison de la surface
)
I
0
I())
(1-10nm
penetration depth ("range") >>SE escape length
(adapted from D.C. Joy Hitachi News 16 1989)
Relative yield of SE vs angle of
incidence on the sample
surface
!
I " ( ) = I
0
# " ( ) $
I 0 ( )
cos"
)
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 54 April 2010
h. Contrast
Topographical contrast at low energy
Effect of the incidence angle
(adapted from D.C. Joy Hitachi News 16 1989)
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 55 April 2010
h. Contrast
Size and edge effects
Do not forget, in SEM:
The signal is displayed at the probe
position, not at the actual SE
production position!!!
intensity profile on image intensity profile on image
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 56 April 2010
h. Contrast
Size and edge effects
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 57 April 2010
h. Contrast
Size and edge effects
(From L. Reimer, Image Formation in
Low-Voltage Scanning Electron
Microscopy, (1993))
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 58 April 2010
h. Contrast
SE and BSE topography contrast
For one position (x,y) of the electron probe:
BSE escape from a "pear" volume around the probe position
SE1 escape from a thin layer under the entrance surface of the probe
SE2 escape from a thin layer under the escape surface of BSE
contrast = 2(I
1
-I
2
)/(I
1
+I
2
)
I
SE
(0)=I
PE
'=I
PE
10% I
SE
(40) = I
PE
'1/cos40=I
PE
13% SE1 contrast = 26%
I
BSE
(0)=I
PE
&=I
PE
31% I
BSE
(40)=I
PE
37% BSE contrast = 18%
I
SE2+3
= I
BSE
'= I
PE
&'
I
SE2+3
(0) = I
PE
37%10%= I
PE
3.1% out of 10%
I
SE2+3
(40) = I
PE
37%10%=I
PE
3.7% out of 13%
BSE topographical contrast is not negligible! Chemical contrast is well observed only on polished samples
I
BSE
31%
I
BSE
37%
incidence normale )=0 incidence )=40
Ni Ni
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 59 April 2010
h. Contrast
Comparison of SE and BSE contrast modes
SE BSE
ET detector ET detector
(0V)
+200V +200V
BSE BSE are are
absorbed
The observator looks down to the column and the
"light" seems to come from the Everhardt-Thornley
detector.
backscattered and
transmitted e
-
create
SE, some of them are
driven to the ET
detector by the
electric field
The trajectories of BSE are not
strongly affected by the
electrical field, most BSE miss the
detector
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 60 April 2010
h. Contrast
What does it suggest?
Which objective information?
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 61 April 2010
h. Contrast
What does it suggest?
Which objective information?
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 62 April 2010
h. Contrast
What does it suggest?
Which objective information?
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 63 April 2010
pyramid?
Detector ? Detector ?
etch-pit?
h. Contrast
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 64 April 2010
(from L.Reimer, Image formation in the low-voltage SEM)
Change in SE contrast with the voltage
h. Contrast
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 65 April 2010
h. Contrast
SE, 5 kV SE, 30 kV
An example: a fracture in Ni-Cr alloy
Contraste enhancement at low voltage: less
delocalization by SE2.
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 66 April 2010
h. Contrast
SEM: Effect of the accelerating voltage on
penetration and SE signal
20 kV: strong penetration, SE3 is a much larger
signal than SE1/SE2.
It reveals the copper grid under the C film via the
electron backscattering, but the structure of the
film itself is hidden
2 kV: low penetration, only a few electrons
reach the copper grid and most of the SE3 are
produced in the C film together with SE1/SE2.
The C film and its defects become visible
(from D.C. Joy
Hitachi News 16 1989)
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 67 April 2010
i. Examples
Tin grains on a thin carbon
film (TEM supporting grid)
HRSEM 25 kV 1 nm nominal
resolution
left: SE
right: scanning transmitted
electrons (STEM)
(from B. Ocker, Scanning Microscopy 9
(1995) 63)
SE: e
-
/e
-
coulombian
STEM: Rutherford
(e-/electric field in atom)
Physical limit to the
imaging in
secondary electron
mode
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 68 April 2010
The average grain size looks larger in SE (12.3 nm) than in STEM
(9.1 nm)
"Delocalisation": the elastic scattering in STEM (Rutherford)
occurs at a much closer distance from the atom nucleus than
the inelastic coulombian e
-
/e
-
interaction required to eject a SE
(from B. Ocker,
Scanning
Microscopy 9 (1995)
63)
Physical limit to the
imaging in
secondary electron
mode
i. Examples
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 69 April 2010
i. Examples
SE and BSE images of a geologic polished
sample
A B
A B
BSE COMPO
(A+B)
BSE TOPO
(A-B)
SE
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 70 April 2010
i. Examples
Al
x
Ga
1-x
As/GaAs "quantum wire" (2-D
quantum well)
(by courtesy of Dr. K. Leifer, IPEQ/EPFL)
GaAs
x=0.55
x=0.20
SE mode image on a
cleaved surface. The
SE
2
(BSE chemical)
contrast dominates
this image in absence
of topographical
contrast (SE
1
=cte)
QW
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 71 April 2010
i. Examples
Contrast reversal in BSE mode at low
accelerating voltage
Ag Au Cu Si
from L.Reimer, Image formation
in low-voltage SEM
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 72 April 2010
j. Charging effects
Fiberglass on epoxy
1 kV 1 kV
5 kV, low 5 kV, low current
5 kV, high 5 kV, high current
(by courtesy of B. Senior CIME/EPFL)
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 73 April 2010
j. Charging effects
by courtesy B. Senior/CIME
fiberglass on epoxy
Which polarity ??????
Improving SE contrast at low voltage
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 74 April 2010
j. Charging effects
Total yield for electron emission (SE + BSE) on
insulators
E
1
and E
2
are critical energies
where 1 electron leaves the
surface for each incident
electron: neutrality
when eV
acc
= E
2
charging-up
disappears!
eV
acc
= E
1
is unstable,
eV
acc
= E
2
is stable
Caution: E
1
and E
2
are specific
to the material, but also
change with the incidence
angle )!
Caution: this simple (simplist!) model is not
quantitative for insulators because charge
implantation and removal depends of the
scanning speed and precise sample geometry
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 75 April 2010
j. Charging effects
Charging-up on a mask for microelectronic
V
acc
>> E
2
V
acc
"E
2
(SiO
2
substrate, photoresist, SE mode)
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 76 April 2010
j. Charging effects
Charging-up on spherical silica particles
5 kV
TV scan slow scan
1.5 kV at 1.5 kV, close to
the neutrality point,
particles recover
their sphere
contrast
charges at the
particle surface
lead to anomalous
contrast as a
flying saucer
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 77 April 2010
j. Charging effects
Observation of insulating samples
Charging-up is reduced or even
cancelled when working at E
2
Charging-up may be cancelled
under partial atmosphere in a
"low vacuum" or "low pressure"
SEM, ESEM
Caution the "skirt" (incident
electrons from the probe are
scattered out of it by the
atmosphere
reduced resolution and contrast
delocalized microanalysis (may
attain mm!)
Clich Kontron (Kuschek)pour CIME
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 78 April 2010
j. Charging effects
Contrast reversal in SE mode close to the
neutrality point
SiO
2
-Cr mask for TEG-FET transistors production
3.0 kV 3.0 kV 1.8 kV 1.8 kV
Cr (E
2
~1.8keV) SiO
2
(E
2
~3.0keV)
Clich Kontron (Kuschek)pour CIME
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 79 April 2010
j. Charging effects
Some values of the neutrality E
2
energy
E
2
: upper neutrality
energy
E
m
: maximum emission
energy
d
m
: maximum yield at
E
m
adapted from:
E. Plies, Advances in
Optical and Electron
Microscopy,13 (1994)
p 226
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 80 April 2010
j. Charging effects
Charging-up of an
insulating particle of
dust
Negative charges left on
the particle create an
electric field that repells the
SE toward the substrate
around the dust
0V
2
0
0
V
o
b
j
p
o
l
e
-
p
i
e
c
e
(adapted from L. Reimer Scanning Electron Microscopy)
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 81 April 2010
j. Charging effects
Extreme charging-up: electrons are reflected
by the sample and hit the microscope sample
chamber!!!
+
-
-
- -
- -
- -
ET ET
(adapted from Philips Bulletin)
Intensive SEM/TEM training: SEM Acha Hessler-Wyser 82 April 2010
j. Charging effects
Surface potential (voltage) contrast
(from Golstein et al, Practical SEM (1975))