Divergence effects in monochromatic x-ray microdiffraction using tapered capillary optics

Review of Scientific Instruments

Volumn 71, Issue 5, 2000, Pages 1991-2000

  Noyan, I C ^a   Wang, P C ^b   Kaldor, S K ^a   Jordan Sweet, J L ^a   Liniger, E G ^a  

^a IBM T J WATSON RESEARCH CENTER   (United States)

^b IBM   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0038930908     PISSN: 00346748     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1063/1.1150567     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. E. Nahring, Z. Tech. Phys. (Leipzig) 15, 151 (1934).
2. P. B. Hirsch and J. N. Kellar, Proc. Phys. Soc. London 64, 369 (1951).
3. E. A. Stern, Z. Kalman, A. Lewis, and K. Lieberman, Appl. Opt. 29, 5135 (1988).
4. E. I. Denisov, V. I. Glebov, and N. K. Zhevago, Nucl. Instrum. Methods 308, 400 (1991).
5. D. J. Thiel, D. H. Bilderback, A. Lewis, and E. A. Stern, Nucl. Instrum. Methods A 317, 597 (1992).
6. D. H. Bilderback, S. A. Hoffman, and D. J. Thiel, Nature (London) 263, 210 (1994).
7. H. J. Sanchez, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. B 145, 567 (1998).
8. N. Yamamoto and Y. Hosokawa, Jpn. J. Appl. Phys., Part 1 27, 2203 (1988).
9. B. R. York, H. L. Pfizenmayer, C. H. Lee, and R. O. Carnes, Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 428, 557 (1996).
10. H. P. Klug and L. E. Alexander, X-ray Diffraction Procedures for Polycrystalline and Amorphous Materials, 2nd ed. (Wiley, New York, 1974), pp. 579-581.
11. I. C. Noyan and J. B. Cohen, Residual Stress, Measurement by Diffraction and Interpretation (Springer, New York, 1987), pp. 192-196.
12. I. A. Blech and E. S. Meieran, J. Appl. Phys. 38, 2913 (1967).
13. For γ≫β, the length of the line segment D1D2 is independent of the beam divergence 2γ and is defined solely by the bandpass range 2β of the sample and the angle of diffraction θ. Consequently, for single-crystal specimens D1D2 will be much shorter than the second (orthogonal) dimension of the diffracting area on the sample, which is set by γ and the distance of the source from the sample.
14. H. P. Klug and L. E. Alexander, X-ray Diffraction Procedures for Polycrystalline and Amorphous Materials, 2nd ed. (Wiley, New York, 1974), pp. 272.
15. I. C. Noyan, J. L. Jordan-Sweet, E. G. Liniger, and S. K. Kaldor, Appl. Phys. Lett. 72, 3338 (1998).
16. I. C. Noyan, S. K. Kaldor, P.-C. Wang, and J. L. Jordan-Sweet, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 70, 1300 (1999).
17. I. C. Noyan, P.-C. Wang, S. K. Kaldor, and J. L. Jordan-Sweet, Appl. Phys. Lett. 74, 2352 (1999).
18. P. M. Mooney, J. L. Jordan-Sweet, I. C. Noyan, S. K. Kaldor, and P.-C. Wang, Appl. Phys. Lett. 4, 726 (1999).
19. SPEC™ X-ray Diffraction Software, Certified Scientific Software, Cambridge, MA.
20. This FWHM value contains the convolution of the Ni-dot diameter and the beam size.
21. L. Vincze, K. Janssens, F. Adams, A. Rindby, P. Engstorm, and C. Riekel, Adv. X-Ray Anal. 41, 252 (1999) [CD-ROM].
22. Changing the inclination of the capillary not only changes the orientation of the capillary bore with respect to the detector [Fig. 6(a)], but may also change the shape of the intensity profile measured by an arm scan.
23. During a radial scan the detector arm (2θ) and the sample (θ) are rotated in synchronization. The step size of the detector arm is twice that of the sample rotation.
24. Obtained by operating the CEN function on each rocking curve.
25. I. C. Noyan and J. B. Cohen, Residual Stress, Measurement by Diffraction and Interpretation (Springer, New York, 1987), pp. 196-198.
26. We could not use the Joint Committee on Powder Diffraction Standards values in our analysis since our wafers were semiconductor grade doped (not pure) Si.
27. Bragg , made the data unacceptable.
28. It might be possible to minimize this problem by using a variant of the parallell-beam method used in polycrystalline macrobeam diffraction. This technique is under investigation and will be reported later.
29. P.-C. Wang, G. S. Cargill, I. C. Noyan, and E. G. Liniger, Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 403, 213 (1996).