Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-2n9c9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T19:55:25.789Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Quantitative Microprobe Analysis by Means of Target Current Measurements*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 March 2019

J. W. Colby,
W. N. Wise and
D. K. Conley
J. W. Colby
Affiliation:
National Lead Co. of Ohio Cincinnati, Ohio
W. N. Wise
Affiliation:
National Lead Co. of Ohio Cincinnati, Ohio
D. K. Conley
Affiliation:
General Electric Co., NMPO Cincinnati, Ohio
Get access

Abstract

In the microprobe analyzer, a portion of the high energy electrons impinging on the surface are backscattered from the sample and re-emitted at high energy levels. Low energy (less than 50 eV) or secondary electrons also ate emitted. Both the electron backscatter yield and the secondary electron yield are related to the mean atomic number of the target material and, hence, may be used to provide information about the target composition. Unfortunately, however, the secondary electron yield is very sensitive to the surface condition of the specimen and various instrument parameters. This complicates the otherwise simple linear relationship between sample composition and electron backscatter yield.

It is shown that the effects due to secondary electrons can be minimized by biasing the sample, and that good results can be obtained in the analysis of binary systems. The limitations and utility of the method are discussed, and backscatter yields are determined.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Advances in X-Ray Analysis , Volume 10: Fifteenth Annual Conference on Applications of X-ray Analysis, August 10-12, 1966 , 1966, pp. 447 - 461
Copyright
Copyright © International Centre for Diffraction Data 1966

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

*

Present address: Bell Telephone Laboratories, Inc., Allentown, Pennsylvania.

*

The work reported herein was performed for the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission under contract AT(30-1)-115.6.

References

1. Hachenberg, O. and Brauer, W., “Secondary Electron Emission from Solids,” Advances in Electronics and Electron Physics, Vol. II, Academic Press, New York, 1959, pp. 413–499.Google Scholar
2. McKay, K. G., “Secondary Electron Emission,” Advances in Electronics and Electron Physics, Vol. I, Academic Press, New York, 1948, pp. 65–130.Google Scholar
3. Stemglass, E. J., “Secondary Electron Emission and Atomic Shell Structure,” Phys. Rev. 80: 925, 1950.Google Scholar
4. Baroody, E. M., “A Theory of Secondary Electron Emission from Metals,” Phys. Rev. 78: 780, 1950.Google Scholar
5. Salow, H., “Angular Dependence of the Secondary Electron Emission from Insulators,” Phys, Z. 41: 434, 1940.Google Scholar
6. Bruining, H., “Secondary Electron Emission, Parts I, II, and III,” Physiea Haag 5: 17, 901, 913, 1938.Google Scholar
7. Stemglass, E. J., Westinghouss Research Lab. Set. Paper No. 1772, 1954.Google Scholar
8. Lye, R. G. and Dekker, A. J., “Theory of Secondary Emission,” Phys. Rev. 107: 977, 1957.Google Scholar
9. Kanter, H., “Contributionof BaekscatteredElectrons to Secondary Electron Formation,“Phys. Rev. 121: 681, 1961.Google Scholar
10. Heinrich, K. F. J., “Interrelationships of Sample Composition, Backscatter Coefficient, and Target Current Measurement,” Advances in X-Ray Analysis, Vol. 7, Plenum Press, New York, 1964, pp. 325–339.Google Scholar
11. Heinrich, K. F. J., “Electron Probe Microanalysis by Specimen Current Measurement,” paper presented at Fourth International Congress of X-Ray Optics and Microanalysis, Paris, France, September 7-10, 1965 (to be published).Google Scholar
12. Colby, J. W. and Wise, W. N., “Backscatter and Secondary Electron Measurements in the Microprobe Analyzer,” Summary Technical Report for the Period April 1, 1966-Jung 30, 1966, USAEC Report NLCO—980, pp. 1-8.Google Scholar
13. Wittry, D. B., “Secondary Electron Emission in the Electron Probe,” paper presented at Fourth International Congress of X-Ray Optics and Microanalysis, Paris, France, September 7-10, 1965 (to be published).Google Scholar
14. Bishop, H. E., “Some Electron Backscattering Measurements for Solid Targets,” paper presented at Fourth International Congress of X-Ray Optics and Microanaiysis, Paris, France, September 7-10, 1965 (to be published).Google Scholar
15. Poole, D. M. and Thomas, P. M., “Quantitative Electron-Probe Microanalysis,” J. Inst. Metals 90: 228, 1962.Google Scholar
16. Castaing, R., “Electron Probe Microanalysis,” Advances in Electronics and Electron Physics, Vol. 13, Academic Press, New York, 1960, pp. 317–386.Google Scholar
17. Philibert, J. and Weinryb, E., “The Use of Specimen Current in Electron-Probe Microanalysis,” X-Ray Optics and X-Ray Microanalysis, Academic Press, New York, 1963, pp. 451–476.Google Scholar
18. Colby, J. W., “Microprobe Analysis of Binary Systems Containing Uranium, “Advances in X-Ray Analysis, Vol. 8, Plenum Press, New York, 1965, pp. 352–361.Google Scholar
19. Colby, J. W., “The Applicability of Theoretically Calculated Intensity Corrections in Microprobe Analysis,” The Electron Microprobe, John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1966, pp. 95–188.Google Scholar
20. Weinryb, E., “Etude de la Retrudiffusion entre 5 et 35 keV,” Metaux, Corrosion Industries 40: 131-157, 181–201, 1965.Google Scholar
21. Brown, D. B., “Application of an Electron Transport Equation to Electron-Specimen-X-Ray Interactions in the Electron Microanalyzer,” Thesis, M.I.T., 1965.Google Scholar
22. Brown, D. B., private communication.Google Scholar
23. Burkhalter, P. G., “Measurements of Backscattered Electrons in an. Electron Probe Microanalyzer,” Bureau of Mines Report RI 6681, 1965.Google Scholar