Advertisement

Characterization of Particles in High-Purity Gases

  • W. R. GerristeadJr.
  • E. F. Ezell
  • R. Sherman

Abstract

Sub-micron particle analysis methods for VLSI gas distribution systems include laser particle counting and SEM/microprobe evaluation of particles collected on membrane filters. In this paper, the performance of automated SEM/microprobe methods is compared to the performance of laser particle counters in counting and sizing submicron particles. This comparison of particle counting methods involves analyses of membrane filters exposed to gas streams that were simultaneously sampled by laser particle counters. Experimental results demonstrate the ability of the SEM/microprobe technique to count, size, and compositionally identify submicron particles that are typically found in high purity gas streams. The advantages and disadvantages of SEM/microprobe analysis and laser particle counter analysis are also discussed.

Keywords

Relative Efficiency Submicron Particle Filter Surface Error Treatment Backscatter Intensity 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    J.F. Kelly, R. J. Lee, and S. Lentz, Automated characterization of fine particulates, in “Scanning Electron Microscopy 1980 (I)”, pp. 311-322, SEM Inc., AMF O’Hare, IL.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    J.F. Kelly, and R. J. Lee, Overview of SEM-based automated image analysis, in “Scanning Electron Microscopy 1980 (I)”, pp. 303-310, SEM Inc., AMF O’Hare, IL.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    R.M. Edwards, J. Lebiedzik, and G. Stone, Fully automated SEM image analysis, Scanning, 3, 221–231 (1986).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    G. J. Stone, Automated SEM/EDS image analysis of particles on filter blanks, in “Particles on Surfaces 1: Detection, Adhesion, and Removal” K.L. Mittal, editor, pp. 293–306, Plenum Press, New York, 1988.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    W.R. Gerristead Jr., R. Sherman, and J. Davidson, Automated SEM/microprobe finds gas contaminants, determines sources, Research and Development, 29, 93–100 (1987).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    G.S. Fritz, J.J. McCarthy, and R.J. Lee, Interactive software for automated particulate analysis, Proceedings of the 16th Annual Conference of the Microbeam Analysis Society, Vail, CO, July 1981, pp. 57-60.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    M. Cox, Experimental determination of x-ray intensities, in “Quantitative Electron-Probe Microanalysis”, V.D. Scott and G. Love, editors, pp. 137–140, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1983.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • W. R. GerristeadJr.
    • 1
  • E. F. Ezell
    • 1
  • R. Sherman
    • 1
  1. 1.Technical CenterThe BOC Group Inc.Murray HillUSA

Personalised recommendations