Filtern
Dokumenttyp
- Zeitschriftenartikel (21)
- Vortrag (4)
- Beitrag zu einem Tagungsband (3)
Sprache
- Englisch (28)
Schlagworte
- EDX (28) (entfernen)
Organisationseinheit der BAM
Eingeladener Vortrag
- nein (4)
The Key Comparison K67 and the parallel Pilot Study P108 on quantitative analysis of thin alloy films have been completed in the Surface Analysis Working Group (SAWG) of the Consultative Committee for Amount of Substance (CCQM). The aim of these inter-laboratory comparisons is to determine the degree of equivalence in the measurement capability of national metrology institutes (NMIs) and designated institutes (DIs) for the determination of the composition of thin alloy films. The measurand is expressed in atomic percent. A Fe-Ni alloy film with a certified composition was available for the participants of the inter-laboratory comparison. It has been used as a reference specimen to determine the relative sensitivity factors (RSF) of Fe and Ni for the different analytical methods used by the participants to determine the composition of the test sample. As was shown in the preceding Pilot Study P98, the degrees of equivalence in the measurement capabilities of the participants can be improved in that way. The composition of the reference specimen was certified by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) using the isotope dilution method. The in-depth and lateral homogeneity, determined in terms of elemental composition, of the certified reference sample and the unknown test sample were confirmed by secondary ion mass spectrometry (SIMS) using C60 primary ions by the leading laboratory. Five laboratories participated in the key comparison. Four of them used x-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) and one Auger electron spectroscopy (AES). One laboratory participated in the parallel P108 pilot study using electron probe micro analysis with an energy-dispersive spectrometer (ED EPMA) and XPS.
Simple procedures for specifying and checking the performance of energy dispersive X-ray spectrometers (EDS) have been since 2002 available in form of the international standard ISO 15632:2002 [1]. When specifying their spectrometers all major EDS manufacturers refer meanwhile to this standard. Main spectrometer parameters such as energy resolution can be determined as recommended in there. Just several years ago the Si-Li detector has been the mostly widespread type of detector. Since four-five years, silicon drift detector (SDD) EDS providing comparable (in many cases even better) energy resolutions at much higher count rates than the conventional Si-Li’s have got the breakthrough on the market.
It is a latent wish of any SEM/EDS (scanning electron microscope with an energy dispersive spectrometer) analyst to “see more” of the analyzed specimen, i.e. to improve the existing analytical figures of merit.
One key issue are the relatively poor limits of detection (not below 0.1 mass-%) provided by energy dispersive X-ray spectrometry (EDX) with the conventional electron excitation (ED-EPMA). This is a consequence of relatively low peak-to-background ratios and reduced energy resolution when compared to wavelength dispersive spectrometry (WD-EPMA). Recent technological developments make possible to equip the SEM with a wavelength dispersive spectrometer (WDS), so that
significantly better energy resolution can be attained. Also a relative new product that can be easily attached to a SEM/EDS system is a micro-focus X-ray source. Hence, it is possible to perform (micro-focus) X-ray fluorescence spectrometry (μ-XRF) and take advantage of the enhanced peak-to-background ratios (well suited for trace analysis). However, there are also some disadvantages: an increased measurement time and excitation with a high current in the 10s of nA range are usually required for WDS. μ-XRF provides more bulk information and poor limits of detection for light elements. By combining the advantages of these analytical techniques “seeing more” becomes possible.
CCQM (Consultative Committee for Amount of Substance - Metrology in Chemistry) is an international body of the Meter Convention (BIPM) established as a framework of National Metrology Institutes running inter-laboratory of comparisons to demonstrate the international comparability of chemical measurements, with traceability to international or national reference standards. In 2003 the surface analysis working group (SAWG) was established at CCQM and since then several inter-laboratory comparisons in the field of EPMA have been carried out. In many cases the EPMA results deviated significantly from each other and the expanded uncertainties were greater than expected. Both methods EDS and WDS were employed. However, light elements such as carbon and nitrogen were the major elements analyzed and it is known that the corresponding lowenergy characteristic X-ray lines are more challenging to quantify by EPMA than the higher energy lines of elements with higher atomic numbers. Moreover, the standards selected and their qualities were variable, the quantification models were different, and the acquisition parameters were not specified sufficiently in the analysis instructions.
More and more sub-micro and nano-materials shall be "quickly", but accurately characterized with respect to their morphology, shape, size or size distribution, but also to the chemical composition as well by means of an SEM/EDX (Scanning Electron Microscopy / X-Ray Energy Dispersive Spectrometry) system. This undertaking is becoming successful indeed if the transmission mode at low voltages such as those at a SEM, i. e. mostly up to 30 kV, and EDX, respectively is employed. The transmission mode at conventional SEM can e "activated" firstly by re-defining the specimen to be analyzed and preparing it as a thin specimen, which is quasi-transparent to electrons and by finding a way of collecting only the transmitted electrons for analysis. The first issue can be easily realized by using the conventional TEM grids (and the respective sample preparation); the second one becomes feasible either (i) by placing a socalled STEM semiconductor detector directly under the thin specimen or (ii) by using a Special transmission set-up, which enables to the conventional Everhart-Thornley detector to collect only transmitted electrons by blocking the direct collection of secondary electrons and guiding only the transmitted electrons onto it.
One of the crucial characteristics of functionalized thin films is their porosity (i.e., the ratio between the pore volume and the volume of the whole film). Due to the very low amount of material per coated area corresponding to thin films, it is a challenge for analytics to measure the film porosity. In this work, we present an Approach to determine the porosity of thin films by means of electron probe microanalysis (EPMA) either by wavelength-dispersive X-ray spectrometry (WDX) or by energy-dispersive X-ray spectrometry (EDX) with a scanning electron microscope (SEM). The procedure is based on the calculation of the film mass deposition from electron-excited X-ray spectra. The
mass deposition is converted into film density by division of measured film thickness.
Finally, the film porosity is calculated from the measured film density and the density of bulk, nonporous film material. The general applicability of the procedure to determine the
porosity is demonstrated on thin templated mesoporous TiO₂
films, dip-coated on silicon
wafer, with controlled porosity in the range of 15 to 50%. The high accuracy of the mass deposition as determined from X-ray spectra was validated with independent methods (ICP-OES and weighing). Furthermore, for the validation of the porosity results, ellipsometry, interference fringes method (IFM), and focused ion beam (FIB) cross sectioning were employed as independent techniques. Hence, the approach proposed
in the present study is proven to be suited as a new analytical tool for accurate and relatively fast determination of the porosity of thin films.
Ionic liquids (ILs) are proposed as simple and efficient test materials to evaluate the performance of energy dispersive X-ray spectrometers (EDS) in the low energy range below 1 keV. By only one measurement, C Kα, N Kα, O Kα, and F Kα X-ray lines can be excited. Additionally, the S Kα line at 2.3 keV and, particularly, the S L series at 149 eV complete the picture with X-ray lines offered by the selected ILs. The well-known (certifiable) elemental composition of the ILs selected in the present study can be used to check the accuracy of results produced with the available EDS quantification routines in the low energy range, simultaneously, for several low atomic number elements. A comparison with other reference materials in use for testing the performance of EDS in the low energy range is included.
To compare the performance of different energy dispersive X-ray spectrometers (EDS), it is important to define characteristic spectrometer parameters. The ISO 15632 standard defines parameters like energy resolution as FWHM for the Kα lines of carbon, fluorine and manganese. The quantum efficiency, which is the ratio of the detected photons divided by the number of incoming photons for different energies, is another significant spectrometer property. It is important for the light element and low energy line detection sensitivity as well as for higher photon energies above 10 keV. A striking EDS feature, provided and marketed by many manufactures, is the active area of the detector, although actually, the solid angle available for photon collection is the more relevant geometrical parameter. It is defined as: Ω = A /r2 with A being the active area of a spherical detector and r being the distance between the point of the radiation origin and the center of the surface of the active detector chip. A more accurate calculation should be used for large flat detector areas. One should note that the solid angle Ω is not an intrinsic spectrometer property. It can only be defined for a specific detector in combination with a specific system (e.g. SEM, EPMA or TEM). Thus, the minimal possible distance r is determined by the particular geometry e.g. a possible interference with the pole piece or other detectors/components in the chamber of a microscope. New EDS technologies use e.g. integrated SDD chips or inclined chips in thinner detector fingers which can be placed closer to the sample with the final result of larger real solid angles. Therefore, the knowledge of the real solid angle is one of the crucial parameters of an EDS microscope combination. A straightforward way to estimate the real solid angle is to simply determine A and r. If respective data are not provided by the manufacturer, this approach can be difficult.