Abstract—
The precision fabrication of microstructures and nanostructures by the focused-ion-beam method is significantly simplified by the simulation of sputtering of materials by accelerated ions. A widely used approach to such simulation is the Monte Carlo method, which, to be correctly used, requires data on the surface binding energy of sample atoms. In this study, to obtain data on the surface binding energy for silicon carbide, test structures in the form of rectangular areas sputtered using gallium ions with a dose of 1017 cm–2 are fabricated. Their cross sections are studied by transmission electron microscopy and energy-dispersive X‑ray microanalysis. The average gallium concentration in the vicinity of its maximum is found to be \({{\langle {{C}_{{{\text{Ga}}}}}\rangle }_{{\exp }}}\) = 25 at %. This value and a sputtering yield of Yexp = 2.1 are used for comparison with the results of calculation in the SDTrimSP 5.07 software package using the R factor. The comparison is made using available continuous and discrete models and the proposed discrete-continuous model for calculating the surface binding energy. The best agreement between the calculated and experimental data is obtained with the discrete-continuous model, which yields \(\left\langle {{{C}_{{{\text{Ga}}}}}} \right\rangle \) = 30 at % and Y = 2.57, as well as the physically adequate values of the surface binding energy, by varying two fitting parameters. The efficiency of the discrete-continuous model is due to the fact that it takes into account the weak chemical interaction of sample atoms and the ion beam atoms and the formation of implanted gallium precipitates in irradiated silicon carbide.
REFERENCES
R. Menzel, T. Bachmann, F. Machalett, et al., Appl. Surf. Sci. 136, 1 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-4332(98)00333-X
Y. Yang, S. Taylor, H. Alshehri, and L. Wang, Appl. Phys. Lett. 111, 051904 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4996865
T. Tsvetkova, S. Takahashi, A. Zayats, et al., Vacuum 79, 100 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vacuum.2005.02.001
W. Wesch, A. Heft, R. Menzel, et al., Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. B 148, 545 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-583X(98)00826-X
J. Gierak, Nanofabrication 1, 35 (2014). https://doi.org/10.2478/nanofab-2014-0004
F. Stumpf, A. A. Abu Quba, P. Singer, et al., J. Appl. Phys. 123, 125104 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5022558
S. K. P. Veerapandian, S. Beuer, M. Rumler, et al., Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. B 365, 44 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nimb.2015.07.079
B. J. Cowen and M. S. El-Genk, Comput. Mater. Sci. 151, 73 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.commatsci.2018.04.063
K. Nordlund, J. Nucl. Mater. 520, 273 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnucmat.2019.04.028
R. Menzel, T. Bachmann, W. Wesch, and H. Hobert, J. Vacuum Sci. Technol. B 16, 540 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1116/1.589859
H. Plank and W. Eckstein, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. B 124, 23 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-583X(97)00113-4
R. Kosiba and G. Ecke, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. B 187, 36 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-583X(01)00848-5
R. Kosiba, G. Ecke, O. Ambacher, and M. Menyhard, Rad. Eff. Def. Solids 158, 721 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1080/10420150310001599180
G. Ecke, R. Kosiba, V. Kharlamov, et al., Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. B 196, 39 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-583X(02)01273-9
H. Hofsäss and A. Stegmaier, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. B 517, 49 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nimb.2022.02.012
J. B. Malherbe, Crit. Rev. Solid State Mater. Sci. 19 (2), 55 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1080/10408439408244588
J. Mayer, L. A. Giannuzzi, T. Kamino, and J. Michael, MRS Bull. 32, 400 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1557/mrs2007.63
J. Huang, M. Loeffler, U. Muehle, et al., Ultramicroscopy 184, 52 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2017.10.011
A. V. Rumyantsev, N. I. Borgardt, A. S. Prikhodko, and Yu. A. Chaplygin, Appl. Surf. Sci. 540, 148278 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsusc.2020.148278
A. V. Rumyantsev, N. I. Borgardt, and R. L. Volkov, J. Surf. Invest.: X-ray, Synchrotron Neutron Tech. 12, 607 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1134/S1027451018030345
A. Mutzke, R. Schneider, W. Eckstein, et al., SDTrimSP Version 5.05 (IPP, Garching, 2015).
W. Eckstein, Computer Simulation of Ion-Solid Interactions (Springer, Berlin, 2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-73513-4
N. I. Borgardt, A. V. Rumyantsev, R. L. Volkov, and Yu. A. Chaplygin, Mater. Res. Express 5, 025905 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1088/2053-1591/aaace1
W. Jiang, Y. Zhang, M. H. Engelhard, et al., J. Appl. Phys. 101, 023524 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.2431941
N. Hansen, in Towards a New Evolutionary Computation, Ed. by J. A. Lozano, P. Larrañaga, I. Inza, and E. Bengoetxea (Springer, Berlin, 2006), p. 75. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-32494-1_4
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We would like to thank M. Rommel, the Fraunhofer Institute for Integrated Systems and Device Technology IISB for providing the silicon carbide samples irradiated by gallium ions.
Funding
This study was supported by the Russian Science Foundation, project no. 21-79-00197 and carried out on equipment of the Center for Collective Use “Diagnostics and Modification of Microstructures and Nanoobjects.”
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
We declare that we have no conflicts of interest.
Additional information
Translated by E. Bondareva
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Rumyantsev, A.V., Podorozhniy, O.V., Volkov, R.L. et al. Simulation of Silicon Carbide Sputtering by a Focused Gallium Ion Beam. Semiconductors 56, 487–492 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1134/S1063782622130085
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1134/S1063782622130085