Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 4, 2026
10:25
Single-Digit Nanometer Electron-Beam Lithography with an Aberration-Corrected Scanning Transmission Electron Microscope
Published on: September 14, 2018
Ultrahigh resolution focused electron beam induced processing: the effect of substrate thickness
W F van Dorp1, I Lazić, A Beyer
1Faculty of Applied Sciences, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands. w.f.van.dorp@rug.nl
Nanotechnology
|February 9, 2011
Summary
Secondary electrons (SEs) significantly influence focused electron beam induced processing (FEBIP). Our study reveals that small deposits, not substrate thickness, dominate SE emission, impacting FEBIP growth rates.
Area of Science:
- Materials Science
- Nanotechnology
- Surface Science
Background:
- Focused electron beam induced processing (FEBIP) is crucial for nanofabrication.
- The role of secondary electrons (SEs) in FEBIP growth rates is debated.
- SE yield is theoretically dependent on substrate properties like thickness.
Purpose of the Study:
- To investigate the influence of substrate thickness on FEBIP growth rates.
- To reconcile discrepancies between theoretical simulations and experimental observations of SE yield.
- To determine the primary factors governing SE emission during FEBIP.
Main Methods:
- Monte Carlo simulations were employed to model SE yield.
- Experimental FEBIP was conducted using varying carbon substrate thicknesses.
- SE emission was simulated from substrates with and without nanoscale deposits.
Main Results:
- Simulations indicated strong SE yield dependence on substrate thickness below the SE escape depth.
- Experimental FEBIP growth rates were found to be independent of substrate thickness.
- Simulations showed that nanoscale platinum deposits (even 0.32 nm³) dominated SE emission over the carbon substrate.
Conclusions:
- Substrate thickness does not significantly affect FEBIP growth rates under typical experimental conditions.
- Nanoscale deposits on the substrate play a dominant role in SE emission.
- This finding clarifies the apparent contradiction between simulation and experiment in FEBIP.
