You are on page 1of 2

ION-IMPLANTATION DOPING OF SEMICONDUCTORS

6. w. J. KING, Proc 4th Photovoltaic Specialists Confer- 21. P. B. I.IIRSCI-I, A. H O W I E , R . B. NICI-IOLSON,
ence, Chicago (1964) D. W . P A S t t L E Y , and M. J. WlffELAN, "Electron
7. N. BO~R, Math-fys Medd. 18 No. 8 (1948). Microscope of Thin Crystals" (Butterworths, 1965),
8. J. L I N D H A R D , M. SCHARFF~ and H. E. S C H I O T T , pp. 1-23.
ibid 33 No. 14 (1963). 22. M. v. ASHBY and L. M. BROWN, Phil. Mag. 8 (1963)
9. J. A. D A V I E S , J. D. M C I N T Y R E , R. L. C U S H I N G , and 1649.
M. L O U N S B I I R Y , Canad. J. Chem. 3 8 ( 1 9 6 0 ) 1 5 3 5 . 23. L. N. LARGE and H. roLL, Proc. of the 2nd Inter-
10. G . R. P I E R C Y , F. B R O W N , J. A. D A V I E S , a n d national Conference on Electron and Ion Beam
M. M C C A R G O , Phys. Rev. Lett. 1 0 (1963) 399. Science and Technology, New York, 1966 (Wiley, in
11. M. W. R O B I N S O N a n d o . s . O E N , Appl. Phys. Lett. 2 press).
(1963) 30. 24. R. S. N E L S O N , D. J. M A Z E Y , M. D. M A T T H E W S , a n d
12. G. DEARNALEY ( U K A E R E , Harwell, Berks), D . F. I r I O L L O W A Y , Phys. Lett. 2 3 (1966) 18.
private communication. 25. P . v . P A V L O V , E. I. Z O R I N , D. I. T E T E L ' B A U M , a n d
13. J. R. PARSONS, Phil. Mag. 12 (1965) 1159. E. K . G R A N I T S Y N A , Fiz. Tverdoge Tela. 7 ( 1 9 6 5 )
14. v. F. GIANOLA, J. AppL Phys. 28 (1957) 868. 2940 (translation: Soviet Phys. Solid State 7 (1966)
15. G. R. BOOKER and R. STICKLER, Brit. J. Appl. 2386).
Phys. 13 (1962) 446. 26. L. N. L A R G E , It. H I L L , a n d M. P . B A L L , lilt. J.
16. a. HOWIE and M. J. WHELAN, Proc. Roy. Soc. 267 Electronics, 2 2 ( 1 9 6 7 ) 153
(1962) 206. 27. J. E. G I B B O N S , A. EL-I-IOSHY, K . E. M A N C H E S T E R ,
17. D. J. M A Z E Y , R . S. B A R N E S , a n d R . s . N E L S O N , and r. L. VOGEL, Appl. Phys. Lett. 8 (1966) 46.
Proc. of the 6th International Congress for Electron 28. R. H. WENTORF and K. A. DARROW, Phys. Rev. 137
Microscope, Kyoto, 1966 (Maruzen, Tokyo, 1966), (1965) 1614.
p. 363. 29. v. s. V A V I L O V , M. I. GUSEVA, E. A. K O N O R O V A ,
18. EI. v. KLUO and L. E. ALEXANDER, "X-ray Diffrac- V. V. K R A S N O P E V T S E V , V. F. S E R G I E N K O , a n d
tion Procedures" (Wiley, 1954), pp. 586-620. v . v . T U T O V , Fiz. Tverdogo Tela (USSR) 8 (1966)
19. H. VON RICI-ITERand G . B R E I T L I N G , Z . Naturforsch. 64.
13a (1958) 988. 30. w. SHOCKLEY, US Patent No. 2 787, 564 (1957).
20. w. L. BELL and G. THOMAS, Phil. Mag. 13 (1966)
395.

Letter
Anisotropy in the Shear Modulus of Glassy p h t h a l a t e ) film with a d r a w ratio o f 5. T h e
Polymers a p p a r a t u s used was similar to t h a t described b y
R o b e r t s o n a n d J o y n s o n [1], having two c l a m p s
R o b e r t s o n a n d J o y n s o n [1] have studied the s e p a r a t e d by 0.0195 c m c o n s t r a i n e d to m o v e
stress/strain p r o p e r t i e s o f some uniaxially d r a w n , p a r a l l e l to one a n o t h e r b y low-friction linear
glassy p o l y m e r i c films, in simple shear, as a bearings, a n d c o u l d be a t t a c h e d to a n I n s t r o n
f u n c t i o n o f the angle (0) between the direction tensile testing m a c h i n e for m e a s u r e m e n t s o f
p e r p e n d i c u l a r to the shear a n d the o r i e n t a t i o n force a n d displacement.
axis o f the material. T h e sense o f the angle 0 is T h e initial shear m o d u l i o f the film in different
i n d i c a t e d in fig. 1. The m a t e r i a l s studied were directions c o u l d n o t be m e a s u r e d accurately
uniaxially d r a w n p o l y ( 2 , 6 - d i m e t h y l p h e n y l e n e because o f the impossibility o f c l a m p i n g the
oxide) a n d p o l y ( 4 , 4 ' - d i o x y d i p h e n y l - 2 , 2 - p r o p a n e film so that it was c o m p l e t e l y flat, the stress/
c a r b o n a t e ) with d r a w ratios 1.65 a n d 1.46 res- strain curve h a v i n g therefore a curved toe.
pectively. F o r b o t h materials, it was o b s e r v e d T h e r e were, however, two a p p r o x i m a t e l y equal
t h a t the shear stress, at a t o t a l shear strain o f 4/3, m a x i m a when 0 was equal to 45 o r 135 ~ Such a
passed through a pronounced maximum at 0 result is t o be expected. A f t e r drawing, the
between 55 a n d 60 ~ a n d a less p r o n o u n c e d increase in the tensile m o d u l u s in the d r a w
m i n i m u m at 0 between 145 a n d 150 ~ direction is m u c h greater t h a n the r e d u c t i o n in
Similar studies have n o w been m a d e o n uni- the tensile m o d u l u s in the p e r p e n d i c u l a r direc-
axially d r a w n a m o r p h o u s poly(ethylene tere- tion. Since, for small strains, shear is equivalent
609
J O U R N A L OF M A T E R I A L S SCIENCE 2 (1967) , LETTER

8
I
O

E7

03
.~J 6
CI
O

ce 5
,l,LI
"1-
Q
I-- |
z,< 8 o

O3

0 20
' 4b i ........ 60
' 0b I 0' 0 120
' 140
' 160
' ,0 0
l 3

Figure I Secant shear modulus (at 100% total shear strain) as a function of 0, the angle between the direction
perpendicular to the shear and the orientation axis of the material, for poly(ethylene terephthalate), draw ratio 5.

to simultaneous extension and compression at maximum and one minimum in the range
45 ~ to the shear direction [2], maxima in the 0 ~ ~ 0 ~< 180 ~ but this difference could be due
shear modulus should occur when either com- simply to the residual stress effect being relatively
pression or extension in the draw direction is larger with their polymers. A possible explan-
greatest. ation at a molecular level is that both the poly-
The results are shown in fig. 1 for the secant carbonate and poly(phenylene oxide) investi-
modulus (stress referred to initial cross-section gated by Robertson and Joynson would be
over total strain) at 100% shear strain. (The expected to be much more sterically hindered
nominal shear strain rate was 256% /min.) At than the poly(ethylene terephthalate) of the
such a strain, drawing has occurred in all the present investigation.
samples and, as the stress/strain curve thereafter It is intended to extend this investigation to a
is relatively flat, the secant modulus gives a number of polymers showing different degrees of
measure of the shear yield stress. Again there are steric hindrance and to investigate the effect of
two maxima at 0 approximately equal to 45 and different degrees of orientation.
135 ~ but in this case the first maximum is
appreciably the larger. Fig. 1 also shows the References
relationship between the shear and draw direc- 1. R . E. R O B E R T S O N and c. w. JOYNSON, General
tions, the latter being also the direction of the Electric (Schenectady, N Y ) R e p o r t 66-C-235 (June
maximum of the angular distribution function 1966).
for the polymer chain segments in the drawn 2. A. E. H. LOVe, " A Treatise o n the M a t h e m a t i c a l
polymer. It will be seen that the maxima occur T h e o r y of Elasticity" (Dover, N e w York, 1944), p.
when the polymer chains are being most severely 33.
extended or compressed. The maximum corres-
ponding to chain extension is more pronounced, 12 June 1967 C. B R I D L E
as would be expected if the oriented polymer A. B U C K L E Y
chains were in a state of metastable equilibrium J. S C A N L A N
and under a residual tensile stress. Petrochemical and Polymer Lab
The results of Robertson and Joynson [1] Imperial Chemical Industries Ltd
differ markedly from ours in showing only one Runcorn, Cheshire, UK
610