4.6 Article

Sensitivity of ion implantation to low-energy electronic stopping cross-sections

Journal

RADIATION PHYSICS AND CHEMISTRY
Volume 204, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.radphyschem.2022.110681

Keywords

Electronic stopping; Ion implantation; Sensitivity

Ask authors/readers for more resources

It is critical to understand the sensitivity of ion implantation to low-energy electronic stopping cross-sections (ESCS) in various fields. By using the Monte Carlo code IM3D and a proposed analytical model, this study found that the ratio of electronic to nuclear energy loss determines the sensitivity of ion depth distribution to ESCS. Based on the assessment, the recommended ESCS for simulating ion implantation are the upgraded SRIM database and BT with shell correction for light ions, and UCA with Bloch correction for heavy ions to match experimental results.
Clarifying the sensitivity of ion implantation to low-energy electronic stopping cross-sections (ESCS) is critical to assess different ESCS for simulating radiation damage in the fields like materials science, space exploration and electronic industry. The Monte Carlo code IM3D improved with a users' ESCS module and a proposed analytical model are used to investigate the sensitivity of ion depth distribution to different ESCS including Stopping and Range of Ions in Matter (SRIM), Binary Theory (BT) and Unitary Convolution Approximation (UCA) at low energies (lower than 75 keV/u). The analytical model is consistent with IM3D well and thus provides a simple way to assess arbitrary ESCS. We found that the larger the ratio of electronic to nuclear energy loss is, the stronger sensitivity of ion depth distribution to ESCS is. Based on the assessment, the upgraded SRIM database and BT with the shell correction for light ions while UCA with the Bloch correction for heavy ions are recommended for simulating ion implantation to agree with experimental results.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available