About methodical errors in studies of mass transfer processes induced by intense pulsed ion beams in solids
The present paper briefly discusses the questions of accuracy of depth profiling techniques in studies of mass transfer processes induced by intense pulsed ion beams (IPIB) in solids. The best measurement tools provide good precision only. An acceptable reproducibility, correctness, and, finally, accuracy of measurement are a result of complete elimination all of the systematic errors. The first ones are caused by a dependence of main SIMS and AES analytical characteristics, ionization coefficients and sputtering factors, on a degree of IPIB exposure. It is shown that the preferable application of nuclear analysis methods, RBS and PIGE, avoids these errors. A mechanical polishing conventionally applied for surface preparation of specimens under investigation engenders to unpredictable changing of mechanical, electric and thermodynamic properties of the surface layer, for at least 1 /spl mu/m depth in the case of Cu surface polishing and for the depth less than the previous one by the factor of 3-5 for /spl alpha/-Fe, steel, Zr, etc. Surface preparation with electrochemical polishing allows a second kind of error to be avoided. A third kind of systematic error is connected with vagueness of the main IPIB parameters (ion species, energy distribution, flux) at the investigated section of the modified sample. Use of more detailed specimens analyzed by cross section is suggested in order to avoid these errors.
Intense Ion-Beam Treatment of Materials
Nastasi, J. Olson, A. Potyomkin, H. Schmidt, B. Semukhin, D. Tallant, M. Thompson, W. Waganaar, K. Walter, D. Williams, and A. Zakowtayev, in Proc. 3rd Int. Conf. on Applications of Diamond Films and Related Materials, edited by A. Fe ldman , Y. Tzeng,. W. Yarbrough, M. Yoshikawa, and M. Murakawa (National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD, 1995) p. 723. 14. Yu.F. Ivanov, V.M. Matvienko, A.V. Potyomkin, G.E. Remnev, and A.N. Zakoutayev, in Ion-Solid Interactions for Materials Modification and Processing, edited by D.B. Poker, D. Ila, Y-S. Cheng, L.R. Harriott, and T.W. Sigmon (Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 396, Pittsburgh) in press. 15. A.D. Pogrebnjak, Phys. Status Solidi A 86 (1984) p. 191. 16. R. Fastow, Y. Maron, and J. Mayer, Phys. Rev. B 31 (1985) p. 893. 17. E.Yu. Bojarko, A.A. Verigin, V.P. Koscheev, Yu. Krjuchkov, and A.D. Progrebnjak, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. in Phys. Res. B 17 (1986) p. 162. 18. A.N. Didenko, I.F. Isakov, and G.E. Remnev, ibid. p. 165. 19. A.D. Pogrebnjak, G.E. Remnev, and S.V. Plotnikov, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 115 (1989) p. 175. 20. R. Fastow, R. Brener, M. Eizenberg, and J.W. Mayer, /. Vac. Sci. Technol. A 5 (1987) p. 164. 21. R. Fastow and J.W. Mayer, /. Appl. Phys. 61 (1987) p. 175. 22. A.D. Pog rebn j ak , I.F. I sakov, M.S. Opekunov, Sh.M. Ruzimov, A.E. Ligachev, A.N. Nesmelov, and I.B. Kurakin, Phys. Lett. A 123 (1987) p. 410. 23. A.G. Pogrebnjak, G.E. Remnev, S.A. Chistjakov, and A.E. Ligachev, Physika 1 (1987) p. 52. 24. Y. Nakagawa, T. Ariyoshi, M. Itami, and Y. Fujii, Jpn. }. Appl. Phys. 27 (1988) p. L719. 25. A.D. Pogrebnjak , G.E. Remnev, I.B. Kurakin, and A.E. Ligachev, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. in Phys. Res. B 36 (1989) p. 286. 26. S.A. Chistjakov, A.G. Pogrebnjak, and G.E. Remnev, ibid. 42 (1989) p. 342. 27. Y. Nakagawa, T. Ariyoshi, H. Hanjo, S. Tsutsumi, Y. Fujii, M. Itami, A. Okamoto, S. Ogawa, T. Hamada, and F. Fukumaru, ibid. 39 (1989) p. 603. 28. G.E. Remnev and V.A. Shulov, Lasers and Particle Beams 11 (1993) p. 707. 29. R.W. S t i n n e t t , R.G. Buchhe i t , F.A. Greulich, C.R. Hills, A.C. Kilgo, D.C. Mclntyre, J.B. Greenly, M.O. Thompson, and D.J. Rej, in Materials Synthesis and Processing Using Ion Beams, edited by R.J. Culbertson, O.W. Holland, K.S. Jones, and K. Maex (Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 316, Pittsburgh, 1994) p. 521. 30. V.A. Shwlov, N.A. Nochevnaya, G.E. Remnev, I.F. Isakov, I.G. Polyakova, and N.I. Shabanov, Sov. Tech. Phys. Lett. 17 (1991) p. 38. 31. W.K. Chu, S.R. Mader, E.F. Gorey, E.E. Baglin, R.T. Hodgson, J.M. Neri, and D.A. Hammer, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. in Phys. Res. 194 (1982) p. 443. 32. T. Feuer, S. Wahl, and H. Langhoff, J. Appl. Phys. 74 (1993) p. 3523. 33. K. Yatsui, C. Grigoriu, H. Kubo, K. Masugata, and Y. Shimotori, Appl. Phys. Lett. 67 (1995) p. 1214. 34. D.J. Rej, R.R. Bartsch, H.A. Davis, R.J.
Nanophase Materials Assembled from Atomic Clusters
The synthesis of nanometer-sized atomic clusters of metals and ceramics by means of the gas-condensation method, followed by their in situ consolidation under high-vacuum conditions, has resulted in a new class of ultrafine-grained interface materials. These nanophase materials, with average grain sizes presently ranging from about 5 to 25 nm, exhibit properties that are often rather different and improved relative to those of conventional materials. In addition, their processing characteristics appear in some cases to be greatly improved over their conventional coarser grained counterparts. The synthesis of nanophase materials by means of cluster assembly under controlled conditions should enable the design of materials, heretofore unavailable, with improved or unique properties. As such, it is likely that the combination of new capabilities to synthesize, characterize, anc) engineer the properties of materials based on the assembly of atomic clusters will significantly impact materials science and engineering in the coming years. The assembly of matter by the consolidation of gas-condensed atomic clusters is probably as old as the universe itself, since this is thought to be the way condensed matter formed during the cooling period that followed the “big bang,” as evidenced by the structure of the earliest meteorites. The modern synthesis of ultrafine-grained materials by the in situ consolidation of nanometer-sized gas-condensed ultrafine particles or atomic clusters, however, was first suggested by Gleiter.