Professional Documents
Culture Documents
673703, 1993
Printed in Great Britain. All rights reserved
AbstractAn unified description of the transport theory for charged particles including electrons, ions
and atoms has been formulated and is presented. The main content of the paper includes: the Boltzmann
equation and its different approximations, the theory of electron slowing down spectra, multiple
scattering theory, the theory of deep penetration and the theory ofsecondary particle emission. The scaling
properties of the transport of charged particles are also presented. Although some discussion of
stochastic (Monte Carlo) methods is included, the main focus of this review is on analytical approaches.
Finally, some important unsolved problems in the transport theory for charged particles are discussed.
1. INTRODUCTION
Since the
Bohrs article on
charged particle
673
674
Field of Application
Atomic &
Nuclear Physics
Electron &
Ion Beam Fusion
Radiation Therapy
Bohr (1948)
Scott (1963)
Radiation Protection
~~and
I~~3Electrons~lons1
Energy Range/eV
Reissence
_____________
_______________
Brahme end
Nilison
.~.
~.
Keller (1967)
...
.S.
_______________
RadiationDosiinetry
Space Radiation
Shielding
Radiation Processing
_________________
,.
~.
;...
~.
___________________________________
WUIOn end
Dean (1977)
_______________
_____________
Seller (1983)
_______________
i.s.glry (1~s4
________________________________
oec~w(19s4
__________
_____________________________
.
..
.~
Lithography
theory neglect of such influences can usually only
achieve rough results.
2 THE BOLTZMANN EQUATION OF CHARGED
PARTICLE TRANSPORT
the actual energy deposition distribution. Under certam conditions, for example, if the kinetic energy of
secondary cascade atoms (or electrons) is so low that
penetration of these secondary particles into a region
far away from their emergence point is impossible,
the distribution of energy transfer is very close to that
of energy deposition. The instances where the mass of
incident ions M1 is far larger than the mass of target
atoms M2 or conversely M, 4 M2, both belong to
the above-mentioned situation. The cascade collision
675
Equation
(1) is M
also applicable to electron transport.
1
For electrons,
Considering
the 1=rn,
identityy,~4rn/M2~0,
of electronelectron
but Y2=collision, the electrons with larger energy after each
collisions is considered as incident electrons, then
equation (I) can be rewritten as
U
Vf + (~,,(E)+ E
1(E)Jf(r, a, E)
=N
J4,i
According to the principle of statistical equilibrium, the Boltzmann equation of primary charged
particles can be written as
+ N,,
rz2
dEf(r, a, E)u1(E, E
E)
+ S(r,u,E)
,LI
=
(6)
dE
JE
duf(r, a, E)
ftL2
+ N,
dEf(r, u, E)o~,(E,E E)
Jr
+ S(r, a, E)
(1)
N ~E
E/(l
E2{Eo
V2)
E>E0(l71)
E<E0(ly1)
(2)
E>E0(ly2)
E <E0(l ~2).
(3)
E0
1.
E~
dE .142 duf,(r, a, E)
x a(E, E
+ N,
E/(lyi)
EI{Eo
(7)
E2 {Eo E ~ E0/2
2E E.<E0/2.
)4~
E, a a)
(1 +4m/M2)E
dEf,~r,a, E)u?(E, E
(8)
+ S~(r,u,E)+S,(r,u,E)
Here,
2, V2 = 4M, m/(M
2.
4M, M2/(M1 + M2)
1 + rn)
M,, M
2,rn are the muses of charged particles, target
atoms and electrons, respectively, and E0 is the initial
S,,(r, a, E)
duf(r
dE
U, E)
x a?(E,E+Ed,uu)
I~EoLa
S~(r,u, E) = NJ
E)
(9)
dE
duf~(r,a, E)
~ + La
E + Ed, uu)
(10)
ft
=
dT
.10
dua~,(E,T, ~ 0)
J4~
t~~
L
=
I
Jo
N,
dTK,(E, T)
ft72E
(4)
dTa1,(E, ~
dTK,,(E, j~,
(5)
Generally, the
initial
condition
The boundary
condition
at the
surface
or is
thezero.
interface
is very
676
(11)
transformation
dTa,(E,T,uu)
(16)
IEf(l y~)
N,
dEf(r, u, E)ti,(E, E
E)
C1(r, a, E)
Jo
dE
JE
duf(r,
(17)
Thus
equation
under the
the Boltzmann
CSDA is given
by for charged particles
fp
uVf~
NjdUCn(E~UU)
(18)
E, ~ii)
particles
as the
distance.
doing so,ofit charged
is more
convenient
to unit
compare
the By
transports
particles under different conditions. Let us first
(12)
E)c,(E, E
~,
J4i~
E,(E)f(r, U, E).
C7 (r, u, E) = N
I e~dE
Jco
du
ation is
ls
J4~i
7IF
Jo
(13)
J4*
_____
(14)
then
y=r/R0.
Cf=N
R0N
dii~,(t,uu)
J4~
I dua,,(E,u~u)
[f(y, U, t)
+ S(y, u, t).
X
(19)
(15)
f(y, U, t)]
(21)
8!
+~ ~
____
3x
(22)
AJ
(23)
where
677
EnASEeAS)F(ruAS;u,E).
(26)
T(E) = R
29.
(24)
0N
duo,(E, cos 9)sin
+ N~J dTa,(E, T)F(r; a, E fl]. (27)
T is the scattering power which is a function of
0
particle energy. The analogy of this basic interaction
quantity with the ordinary stopping power concept The total contribution made by the two parts form
is quite clear. Now, we obtain the FokkerPlanck the
we range
have distribution of charged particles. Therefore,
approximation to the CSDA Boltzmann equation as
follows
a VF = NJ
dT
~+uVf=~A
8:
9f+S(r,u,t).
(25)
dua,,(E, T, u u)
[F(r;u, E
T) F(r; u, E)]
+ N,
dTu,(E, T)
Jo
x [F(r;a, E T) (r; u, E)J.
(28)
678
Thus, we have
04(E)p(E)
(EE
0)
(35)
(/)(E) = l/p(E)
(36)
where p(E) is the electron stopping power. Now lets
consider the contribution of secondary electrons to
slowing-down spectrum. When E <E0/2, the electrons in the energy range 2E ~ E ~ E~are able to
produce secondary electrons with energy E, the
equation (30) can thus be written as
~(E)
Ff2
K,(E, 7) dT
Jo
25
4i(E) =
f f(u, E) du
(29)
dE41(E)Ke(E, E
J4~
and
S(E) =
ftE/2
4i (E)
N,r,(E, T) dT
Jo
!E2
N,
4(E)c,(E, E
E) dE
5 (E
(30)
E0).
~b(E) Oi~E~E0
.c(9
E <0 or E > E0
(31)
~(E)
r1 +
dEb(E)K,(E, E).
.<
dW
JE
~(E~)K,(E~,
W) dE]/P(E).
(39)
~(E)k(E, E) dE]/P(E)
(40)
J2E
and
2E
JR
q~(E)K,(E,EE)dE
k(E
+(EE
0).
2 [~E_T+2(E+l)2
1
E2T
fl 2mr~NZIl
p
(32)
2E+l
(38)
25
ftE0/2
cb(E) =11 +
E) + S(E) (37)
K,(E,T)dT
JR
dE4(E) eiPE
+ E(E +
1)2 ln
(ET)
T
(41)
If ignoring the interfering terms of the Mller formula, equation (41) becomes
(E, T) = 27tr~NZ
E~
(42)
-~
IE/2
dTK,(E, T)(l
JO
(34)
679
tides, R0, and about 100 times larger than the mean
free path for single interactions of the charged partides. In this way, it guarantees the establishment of
a steady state distribution of the charged particles
that have suffered sufficiently many collisions with
the atoms in solids, and ensures that the average
energy of charged particles having penetrated
through this layer changes only slightly, and at the
same time the angular spread is still small. By doing
so~it is possible to simplify the Boltzmann equation
tremendously and to obtain the analytical solutions.
Whats more, the techniques that have been developed in the study of the transport ofcharged particles
in thin layers can also serve as a starting point and
as reference for the deep penetration of charged
particles.
4.1. The L~d~theory
Landau (1944) developed the theory for the energy
spectrum of charged particles passing through thin
layer. By definition, the energy spectrum of charged
particles is given by
#(x, E)
duf(x, p E)
(43)
layers.
a ~
CF
iD
xj 0 K,(E,T)dT+(ERo)(x). (44)
In Landaus paper, K,(E, E E) did not include
10~
-I
4(x, E) = f~(x,E) 0 ~ E ~ E
(0
E<OorE>E0.
0
.~
(45)
(44), we have
io-~
dE~(E)K,(E,E E) b(E)
io~
14
10s
,A
0
0)
5
io~
10Electron
102energy
1o~
io
in eV i~
above bottom
III~
I lid
I 111111
liii
106~
of
III
While applying the Fourier transformation to equation (44), we replace k(E, T) with k(E0, T) and use
the 1~~utliet~1orc.l
cioss section
K (E
0 ~
band
Fig. 1. Flux of electronsconduction
in copper containing
uniformly
distribution MCu. (~) SpencerAttix theory and
SpencerFano theory. The former is broken down into
primary and secondary contributions as shown
The
step in the theoretical primary flux is calculated from
experimental Auger emission data (McConnell eta!., 1965).
Thus, we have
2ivNZr~12
T
(47)
(.. )
().
d~*
(to
_4~*~~~0)j
CITK,(EO, 7)(e~T_ 1)
+ (x) e~.
(48)
680
i~
JO dTKe(Eo,T)(lC~T)
;E
800
iPB+IPIJrtolpl
dx
~(1cosx)
0
rtoIpI dx
+iPj
~.
U 700
.~600
,~5OO
U
dTK~(E~,
T)(l
Most probable
total energy loss
1, we have
~.400
Jo
(49)
1(sinxx).
Landau-Synion theory
Experimental points
e~~T)
U
0.
oo300
=p{41_~(lnIPIEo_l+cI+IPI~}
(50)
So
Q 200
Maximum
energy
loss
100 _in
a single
collision
~ *(X, p)
eXP{iPE0
ippx
x [i
On
I~ 1E0
8
12
16
20
24
28
Pulse height (arbitrary units)
px ir
2 dT.
(to
r E~
px L
ln e
x cos[u(A + ln u)] du
(52)
px (ln px +
(53)
~ c)]
Be
~
12
(54)
2,nv2
Here, B is the stopping number of charged particles,
p is the stopping power, C is the Euler constant,
which is 0.5772. 1 is the mean excitation energy.
Figure 2 shows the energy spectrum of 37 MeV
protons after penetrating through thin layers
(Gooding and Eisberg, 1957). It can be seen that the
experiment confirms the asymmetry characterised by
the Landaus theoretical spectrum. Landaus results
can be interpreted such that the low energy part of the
energy spectrum is constituted by single collisions
with large energy losses and the high energy part is
constituted by multiple coffisions with small energy
losses. As the high energy part of the, spectrum
consists of multiple small energy loss events, according to the central limit theorem of probabilitytheory,
their distribution will tend to be Gaussian, which is
just the results of the Landau theory. Actually, if
e~nin the equation (48) is expanded to 2 orders, the
solution under the FokkerPlanck approximation is
obtained, the energy spectrum of charged particles
under this approximation is a Gauss function
= ~
4o(x, E)
~/2C~xe~~S/~~x
(55)
E0 = E0 px, (I
K(EO, T)T
To understand the scattering behaviour of electrons after penetrating through thin layers, various
multiple scattering theories were developed during
1920s1950s. Wentzel (1922), Williams (1939),
Goudsmit and Saunderson (1940), Moliere (1948),
Snyder and Scott (1949) and Want and Guth (1951)
had developed the multiple scattering theories in
different ways. Among these theories Molieres and
Goudsmit-Saundersons results have been most widely
used. Lewis (1950) and Bethe (1953) theoretically
analysed the inherent relation among these theories.
f(x,p)=
f(x,p,E)dE.
Jo
Integrating equation (18) over energy, we have
-~=N
3X
J4R
681
xex
(56)
(E+ 1)2
~ E2(E + 1)2 1(1 + 1)
dua
0(Eo,uu)(f(x,p)f(x,p)J
(57)
+ S(x)5(1 p)/2ir.
~ 21 + 1 P(p)A()
(58)
/...0
X [_~in~
+ l)_E~]}.
(65)
4.2.2. The Moliere theory of small angle multiple
scattering. From the deduction of Goudsmit and
Saunderson (1940), their theory is valid for arbitrary
large scattering angles. The difference between the
Moliere theory and the GoudsmitSaunderson
theory is that the former chiefly investigates the small
angle scattering of charged particles. In the smallangle approximation, sin 8 ~ 0, cos 8
I 82/2 and
simultaneously the upper limit of the angular variable
changes from it to c~.Consequently, equation (57)
becomes
~
Using the addition theorem for the Legendre polynomials, equation (57) becomes
S
1(Eo)A1(x)+ 5(x)
(59)
-~
2nN
Jo
and
(66)
According to Bethes derivation of the Moliere
theory, using FourierBessel transformation to the
distribution function and equation (66), one obtains
g(x, v) =
~ dOJ0(vO)f(x, 0)
Jo
+ 5(x)S(02/2)/2n.
S,(E0) = 2nN
I dp[l
oo
21
As a result
f(x,p)= ~
+
4ir
1
P,(jz)e.
(61)
10
113
0(E0,8)[110(vO)]+S(x)
(68)
and
g(x, v)2itN
8d0a
hence
~
\2
I Z\2(E+l)2j
1 / Z
~ _121.25)[l.l33.7~UY)E(E+2)J
1
E(E + 2)~
(63)
(67)
jo
v dvJ0(vO)g(x, v)
f(x 0) =
g(x,v)=ex
2itNx
0d0a~(E
0,0)
x [I J0(vO)J
).
(69)
From FourierBessel inverse transformation, we
have
vdvl0(vO)
f(x,0)=Jx exp(_2nNx
0 d0a,,(E
0, 0)
~
xE_~on~)_
kI
Jo
(64)
x [I Jo(vO)]).
(70)
682
OdOtr0[1J0(v0)].
(71)
I
Thus
0)0 dO = ~ d~[fb0) +
Here
t~0].
t01(C) = 2 e~2
(72)
(80)
(81)
fw(C)=2e~(Cz~
l)[E,(C2)lnC9
Cl = 2~$ 0 dO(l
2 + 4~)2 (73)
0(vO)]/(0
Divide the integral interval into two parts: [0,k] and
[k, cc], let k satisfy 2,.J~4k 4 ~ then, in the range
[0,k], .1
2v2/4, but
in the range
0(Ov) can
[k, cc],
be approximated
q can be ignored,
as 1 thus
0 we may
have
~ ~(x~v)2[In(x~v)
+ ~+ In 2
/
y2\
= ~~2I
b In -i-)
CJ
(74)
and
dO
~
2
~*
+ ~ Ink
AdA
y dyJ
0(Ay)
2\l
xexpJ~y2fb+ln)J.
(76)
I
I
y
L \
Defining a new variable u = B~~y,
,~= B22, then B
should satisfy a transcendental equation
f~(C)
is the
_1 ln 4
dO =
(82)
LJo (0 + 4i)
f(x, 8)0
2(1 2 e~2)
r
ln L~ limi I
=
In B
10_i
_______
18.66mg/cm2Au
~ io~..M~
37.28
~.~
mg/cm2 Au
then
Single scattering
~d~$
f(x, 0)0 dO =
u duJo(uC)
u2
x exp(_
u2
u2
7+~.j In7).
(77)
10
._~-.S..
Gaussian
10~ -
~d~(~ f(N)/B0)
~j1
(.0
,~
0.1
(78)
1tJ-~
0
Oi~U~1
2\Iu2 /u2\l~
x expi/ fl
u ln{ ) I
\ 4/L4
.
\4JJ
(79)
I
5
I
10
I
15
I
20
I
25
I
30
Transport
683
of
~
Of
R.~NI d~a0(t,u-u)
+~
.140
-~--
~~~it)S(l
(83)
p).
2ir
Expanding f(x, p, t) into a Legendre polynomial
series
21 + 1 P1~)N,(x,t).
(84)
f(x, p. t) = ~
.0
Applying the addition theorem and the orthogonal theorem of L.egendre polynomials. From the
equation (83), we have
~
t)
(85)
~0I
p)[l
P,(p)] dp.
(86)
~,-
S,(t) =
t(t + o~
(87)
684
= .10
I
to
dxN,(x, t)x,
J-1
dt(\t+(LJ
17(t).
/ ~
(88)
= 1
{z=t
(93)
~.
.0
2l+l,~0d,+p+i+l
x [(1+
1)J7;lI.~+1+1+
+S,(t)N,(y,t)(1e)(lyt). (94)
The domain for the variable y and t are (0, cc)
and (0, 1) respectively. Making the Laplace transformation for N, and equation (94), we have
l17:~~]
i+l
+oOfla.;d,+P+!+lO+2)P+,+I.
N~(t,p)=fdye_P7N,(y,t)
(89)
Jo
dtp(t)N0(x, t)
(90)
N,(y,
Thus, we have
1/2
+ A2
\3/2
+ A31
/
~.
dp 8 N~(t,p). (95)
ONf
11+1 N*
N7+21~1N~*_1]
~T~L2l+1 1+I
\1/2
+A1(~~---)
p(t)=Ao(__L)
t+a
t) =
(91)
\5/2
Thus, we have
ON*(I,p,t)
Ot
p
~N*(1,p, t)
2
+S,N*(l,p,t)=5(l_t)
~N(l, p, t) = 2N* + ~I ON~
0
_________
dxD(x)x
= A
+2A, j~/2 + A 312+ A
512 (92)
0I~~
21~
317,~
17.1 can be obtained through equation (89). The
problem is now changed to how to get D(x) from
D
0. This problem is relevant to the study of the
asymptotic distribution of energy deposition.
The asymptotic trend in deep penetration for
electron
provides
important
knowledge
about thetransport
electron energy
deposition
which
is a key
factor for the recovery of the electron energy deposition from the first several spatial moments. Before
formulating Spencers result, lets pay attention to the
fact that the deeply penetrating electrons which can
almost reach the end of electron range must have only
suffered the successive collisions with extremely small
angular deflections, therefore their tracks are almost
straight lines and their angular distribution must be
concentratedin a very small cone around the incident
direction. This means that the orders of the spherical
Jl
-~
-~--.
(97)
(98)
~j
= A(p, t)~fr
(l,p, t). (99)
Equation (99) is the Schrodinger equation for a two
dimensional oscillator, and its eigenvalues are as
follows (Spencer and Coyne, 1962)
(~+ I) [ 2adp
t(t +
]1/2
n =0,
1,2,...
(100)
0p~
t)
(t
.0
N*(l,p, t) = ~ a
5(p, t)1/i0(l,p, t).
(102)
.0
~ M,,,,a~(p,t)+2~a0=A0(p)(103)
m-0
and
685
(111)
Spencer assumes that D(x) consists of an odd
function Dodd and an even function D~, which can
be written respectively as
1/,,,1~-~!!
dl
M,.,,,, =
Jo
00
0Co)=
(104)
hfr(I,p,l)dI.
As a zeroth order approximation, Spencer neglected the cross term involving the coefficients Ma,,
/1 +(l+a)~
(106)
_~)exP(_~~~)(113)
Dod(x) = ~ ;F(x, fl
1)
a,(~
~.
x exp[_ph12(8ad)h12in~~+~)].
Ax
(112)
x~ I
Ax \
~,)
ex~(~:~).
(114)
we
have
(115)
Ea,fl7=D0/co~, n=l,3,5,...
N0(y,t)=
~
When p
~.
1, y
t)
vary
(116)
discontinuous
condition
at x = 0 and
the discontinuApart
from that,
satisfy
the
ous condition
of Dwe
(x)also
at xrequire
=0. ByD(x)
doingtoso,
we have
two additional conditions, i.e.
therefore, we have
/ A~
N0Q,t)~y01/i0(0,z)
exp(
~--)
2~/~\
12 \2
A = 8ad(ln ~1 +(l
+ ~).
(108)
+a)
~aibi2=Ad~~t_D dt
_____
J(x) ~
N~(x,t)p(t) dt
Jo
(1
x)312
Jo
[_Ao1.
(117)
x)~x0cx
A
(119)
(109)
x exp
X]
1I
dxD (x)x
i-1
1~
~ JoI k(l
exP(i~)xh
dx
1/2
=
RPC 41-4/3--H
1/2
}.(l 10)
686
112
Bipartition model
Moment method
~. 2-
~.
oI,
Fig. 4.
-~~~1
\~.l.
40
ill
Bipartition model
Moment method
4/
Huffmans data
687
procedure. The spatial moments having been calculated, the spatial distribution of ion range can be
similar to that
constructed
fromof spatial
Spencers
moments.
theory. The
But,problem
under the
is
present condition, there is a factor that is specially
advantageous for the construction of range distribution, which is known to people beforehand, the
range distribution of incident ions is roughly
(1
(122)
where p
100
~,
E) as F7(E)
dxF,(x,E)x0.
(125)
AR,=[f
U
1~
U
=
2F(x;E, l)dx]
21+ 1
(x R,)4F(x; E, 1) dx]/(AR,)4.
[F~(E)p0J+ N
jo
(126)
(132)
(133)
(LtR,)(fl + 3)y
(134)
A 2-6)
_~R,,) A
x (F7(E)F7(ET)P,(coso)].
(131)
ciP
(xa)
dxbo+bix+b
b0
dTa0(E, T)
(130)
1
=
(129)
~
00
2x2~)
2(4$ 3y2)
1/2
R,,)3F(x; E, 1) dx]/(AR,)3
J-oo
(128)
(x R,)
-.0
(x
xF(x; E, 1) dx
.0
00
______________
.0
00
2=
(2~3y
A
b1
218.
(135)
(136)
(137)
A=10$12y
~ [iF,:
1+
+NF7
~yE
(1+ l)F7;,] =
[F7(E)p0J
dTa0(E,T)(1P,(cosq,)]
~ d~nr(_l~IE
dra,,(E, T)
~
~
L-rr
x TP,(cos ]
(127)
Having
solved equation
(132),
the range for
distribution
can
be obtained.
When the
ion reflection
a certain
iontarget combination is weak, the moment method
can give good range distributions. Figure 6 shows a
comparison between the calculated range parameters
R, and AR, given by the moment method and the
experimental results (Ziegler et a!., 1985). Generally,
the moment method can give reasonable range distributions for ions incident into amorphous solids.
However, forthe case of ions incident into crystalline
solids, the channelling effect will strongly influence
the ion transport process in solids. Under this condition the moment method will not be valid. The
688
ANDmts Ba~ijan
Ion
Target
ZBL
14N7
-
Ni28
Universal
stopping
Symb
Ref
Year
1
2
3
4
848
1183
796
220
5
6
7
8
9
Zi
Ml
Z2
1976
1979
1975
1960
714
7 14
7 14
7 14
28
28
28
28
1351
1373
104
366
1980
1980
1954
1970
7
7
7
7
14
14
15
15
28
28
28
28
235
1965
15
- -
95 S
- -
28./8
s ~S
S_
5-
fi
0_i
001
-,.-
II
IIIII~
101
113111
Ion
102
energy
(keV)
111111
10~
111111
io
Fig. 6. The range of ions in solids is shown both experimentally and theoretically (Ziegler et a!., 1985).
The letter S indicates straggling data which is defined differently in experiments and theory. The theoretical
straggling curve is about 30% too low.
moment method was also used to evaluate the radiation damage profile and ionization profile resulting
from an ion beam. However, the reliableconstruction
of these profiles is still difficult due to lack of good
fitting functions. The Brice method (1970) seems to be
more reliable,
transport
Transport
charged particle group and a diffusion charged partide group. The angular distribution of the diffusion
group is rather isotropic. When elastic scattering
events occur, their angular distribution becomes even
more isotropic. Therefore scattering does not alter
the diffusion nature of this group. As for theforward
directed charged particle group, when these particles
collide elastically with the atoms, a fraction of them
will be scattered into the large angle direction. Hence
the small angle features of this part of the forward
directed charged particle group will be lost. The
natural solution is thus to treat those rather isotropically scattered charged particles as a source term and
bring them into the diffusion group. The rest of
forward directed charged particles maintain their
small angle features, and remain in the forward
directed charged particle group. The essential step is
to set up the bipartition condition for the collision
term of the Boltzmann equation. In the following, we
shall use the transport of electrons as an example to
illustrate the solution of the bipartition model of
charged particle transport. We start from equation
(83). Following the bipartition model, the distribution function f(x, /4, t) comprises the distribution
function of forward directed electrons f~(x,p, t) and
the distribution function of diffusion electrons
fd(x, p, t), i.e.
(138)
f(x,/4,t)=fs(x,P,t)+fd(x,/4,t).
689
directions are exactly equal to the number of electrons scattered to m + 1 chosen large angle directions
after elastic collisions. Expandingf,,f~
and Sdinto the
Legendre polynomial series, we have
00
fd(X, p, t)
Sd(x, p, t) = 10
E (2/ + l)P,(p)S,(x, t)/4ir. (145)
In this way, the bipartition condition can be
rewritten as
.0
S,(x, t) =
S,(t)A,(x, t)
D,~
S~A~
(x, t),
fm+1
1 =0, 1,.
..
m (146)
M,
~
00
~
D,
1.S,.(t)A,.(x,t)
tm+I
+(x)(lt)
l~m
(147)
+(x)(lt)
l>m
(148)
R,~N dua~(t,vu)
~3j~
J4e
x [f3(x,p,t)f~(x,p,t)]
and
Sd(X, p, t)
+-~(x)(lt)(lp) (139)
2x
ff
Is(x1P~t)thth!1/f
jo.Ji
=
t9t
R0N
du~(t,u~u)
(149)
+Pa:c
x [fd(x,p, t)
fd(x,
i~t)]
+Sd(x,1u,t).
(140)
Assuming the collision term for the forward directed
electrons C~to be
C1,(x, p, t) = R0N
.0
A,(x, t) =
J4e
t) f,(x,
p, t)]
tm+l
D,rA,.(x, 1).
(150)
f duo~(t,vu)
x [J(x, p,
(141)
.4,(x, t) =
p,(x)
51r x
Pa(t)
L
I S,=
Jo
Pa
dt]e_~4 (151)
S,(t)dt.
(152)
ji
At last, we have
A,(x, t) =
o[x
L
~ ~a(t)dt]cti(x)
(153)
690
Li,io Ziuno-MING
ct,(x) =
~ D,,e~
r - m +~
1~m
[e~)
(154)
I > m.
t) =
n, it + 1.
0, p,> 0.
(156)
(157)
0.3
.~
AX
At 1
N,(Ax, t)p, -~j
(160)
Au, Pb
~-c-~
a
I~
~\
~.
Al
o.i~*.\.
5 i03 2
5 i0~2
(159)
~:~~
Cu
1022
(158)
~I,\
~
~02
-.0
0.5
0.4
2! + 1
1=0,l,...,n.
1,2,.
t)
ox
+
X
1 [
ON,, ON,_ ~
I (1+1)+1
I
21+lL
Ox
Ox j
+S,(t)N,(x,t)=S,(x,t),
Ofd(O, p,,
t)
5 i0~2
106 2
s io~2
io
cV
Fig. 7. The dependence ofreflection coefficients on electron energy and the atomic numbers of media. The
solid lines 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 are the calculated results for C, Al, Cu, Tin and Pb respectively. The dashed
lines 3, 4 and 5 are the interpolation results for Fe, Ag and Au (Luo, l985a,b).
1.0
nU
S
4.
4)
\\
\\
Pb\ ~
o00
II-
0.5
1.0
i0~
on
U
00
691
:/
io3
102
/
P11111
100
I 1111111
101
I 1111111
102
I 1111111
692
10
1.0
~0025
005
010
0.25
25
001
10
10(cm)
Fig. 10. A beautiful energy deposition diagram of a practically point monodirectional 10 MeV electron
beam incident on a uniform water phantom. The primary electrons are largely contained inside a sphere
with a radius equal to the continuous slowing down range and centred at a point about half the range
below the point of incidence. The contours outside this range are due to bremsstrahlung generated in the
first few centimetres of their ranges (Brahme, 1985).
scattered mainly over small angles, whereas the deep
penetration rests on quasi-isotropic diffusion.
1~(x)~(x)
(r(x))2J2
L 02(0)r2(0)
Generally, equation (25) can be used to describe
the transport for a pencil beam. Assuming that the
beam is incident along the positive x-axis and y, z are
the other two spatial ordinates. 0~and 0. are the
deflection angles projected on the xy plane and the
xz plane respectively. Thus equation (25) can be
written as follows
~
t3y
(rO(O))2
02(0) +
T(u) du
(166)
(161)
~
4\~02+0,
t) dt.
(162)
~(x,
~,
Jo
r2(x)
,.2(O) +
2r0(0)x + 02(0)x2
Px
(xu)2T(u)du. (168)
Jo
If equation (165) is integrated over all angles the
Tv32~
(164)
(x,y)
~(o,
rr2(x)]2
(169)
-.~
47r
[f
(170)
2
i~f0, s=lt.
693
(171)
6.0
5~5
(172)
Isotropic emission
Cosine distributed emission
5.0
2 C ds
of0
4.0
5.
35
3 0
5
-
Is
4(0,0)
[ti
2.5
~.
2.0
r(o)I
where it is assumed that the source is located at x = 0
and that the value of r depends on the depth x under
consideration.
1.0
o.~
1.5
rL..
.~
1..~
-~
~.
L~
I
(174)
-i
-
L.~
-~~
Depth
I
8
10
(cm)
Fig. 11. Calculated depthdose curves in water at 18 MeV
for difl~erentangular distributions in plane beams. The
smooth curves were obtained by the discrete ordinate
method (Prillinger, 1977) and the histograms by the Monte
Carlo method. The ordinate is the energy imparted AE in a
layer of thickness pAx.
in water
694
S Experimental data
A
Marlowe results
0 ANISN results
ci
Os
~,
1J.
100
200
500
~
~
>.
~
~
~
10
12
Depth
in water (cm)
Depthdose curves of 5, 10, 20 MeV
Fig. 13.
electrons in
water. (---)Monte Carlo data given by Andreo(1985). ()
Numerical data obtained by Huizenga and Storchi (1989).
result, the spatial variance and energy variance must
be carefully divided. All these increase the calculation
time considerably. In addition, as other analytical
theories, the capacity to solve the transport problem
of charged particles in non-homogeneous media
remains a crucial test to the efficiency of the method.
.
with large errors. With the ever increasing performance of computers, the importance of these theories
may therefore be reduced.
CAUSED BY CASCADE
COLLISIONS
50
)-
3
1000 2000
5000
10,000
695
e~0/A).
From2E~35
the
/D, we
energy
have range
x 10
BD.~
relation
(179)
R0 = 1.15
35.lo2(l
_e_1.15I&4iw) (180)
~ =.
1~E~
(181)
= ~m
(182)
f,,, is a parameter
T(E0)/E E 4 E0.
696
0, u0)
dEdu
24ir
xdV
E
(185)
where F(r, u, E) dE dii dV is mean number of atoms
recoiling into the energy interval (E, E + dE), with
directions (u, a + dii) in a volume element d v at r in
a cascade. Equation (185) implies that the angular
distribution of recoil atoms is isotropic. Generally
this assumption is reasonable. Of course, the assumption only is a rough approximation for the region
near a surface. Let S be the ion source with energy
11
5.0
3.0
2.0
0.7
r3 1.0
~A~
~
jS
0.5
0.3
//
I
0.1
0
10
I
20
Measuring uncertainty
I
I ~l
I
I
30 40 50
60 70 80
I
I
90
Z
1
AE =p(E)~x=p(E)v(E)z~t.
(186)
C
I-rn
G(E)p(E)o(E)At
SN(E)ttt
or
SEF(E)
VP
r
y=Fd(O,~,EO)R(;m
(187)
(188)
4irEvp
j u dE
(189)
model
6.3. The sputtering theory based on the bipartition
V
A
$2,,
~2
~
~ F
(193)
~m)NCmU~
where N is the number of atoms per unit volume. m
dp
P(E,
~).
(190)
-i
~ 21+ 1 P
j~,E)
1(p)N7(x, E)
(194)
apN~
+NJ
x
+N
/ M, + M2 IM, E + Ed\
2M1
Sj
M2
~5d- Ed dEN~(x,E)o~(E,E
+ Ed)
~ + + Ed)
~ p(\/E
(195)
a,,
NSE dTa~,(E,r)T
f~(0,~ E) ~
pj,
E)
0< p, < ~
(197)
When
has other
values, the
boundary
condition
is
still thep,same
as equations
(159),
(160). Now
we may
have
N1(0, E),..., at the boundary, in
whichN~(0,E),
the sputtering
yield is
lEo
=
Jo
N~(0,E) dE
(198)
+ ~ 3N~+1+ 13AT~_t
~x j
k 1
S7(E)N~(x,E) + i~2 ~ (co,N7)
~
697
(196)
reflection
transmission
coefficients.
They
also
handle theand
transport
of charged
particles
incan
infinite,
semi-infinite
and multilayered
materials.
Principally,
media,
on such
calculations
Monte though
charged
Carlo
particles
ispublications
capable
in irregular
of treating
and the
inhomogeneous
transportare
of
still rare. Secondly, the Monte Carlo method has
a high precision, as long as the speed of computer
is high enough, the interaction between charged
particles and atoms can be carefully considered
principally in the Monte Carlo calculation, and the
sampled trajectories are sufficiently numerous to
minimize errors. Thirdly, the Monte Carlo method is
easy to grasp. As long as the interaction processes
between charged particles and atoms or the solid are
known, the difficulties of preparing Monte Carlo
programs will be reduced to effectively realizing
statistical sampling of relevant interaction processes.
The development of analytical theories requires that
the researcher has a profound knowledge oftransport
theory. Therefore, the Monte Carlo technique is
698
~j
e4
V
U
V
~\
polystyrene
2~fr
I
0.4
y
~
2
o
~
Water
Comparison
~,Air
~luminium%~
o
.~
1
~,
.n
0
.0
.~0
10
12
14
Depth (cm)
Fig. 16. Depth dose distributions from a 20 MeV beam of
electrons incident on a water phantom with air and Al
cylinder at 2mm depth. (0) Represents homogeneous
phantom data; (X) the case with the Al cylinder; (A) the
case
the air cylinder. The histograms are EGS4 calculated with
results
for a point source of 20 MeV electrons. The
experimental data are all normalized to the calculations via
one point on the homogeneous curve (Rogers and Bielajew,
1988).
8. SCALING PROPERTIES
ylon
tides
of
target
charged
~Satoms.
mainly
particles,
determined,
this can
their
way,
energies
independent
the
and the
ofbyof
the
species
species
of
particles
can
beIn
scaled,
and
the transport
transport
behaviour
of
charged
particles
be
determined
acharged
simple
parameter. We have found that the scaled transport
cross section is the most fundamental scaling parameter. According to its definition, the scaled transport cross section is
0.8
1.2
1.6
2)
15.
mm
z (g/cm
Fig.
20 MeV. 2
:-
Mylar
Polystyrene
of calculated
and
measured
where
2nNRo$,diwn(Eo~!z)E1~J4]
(199)
0.8
699
+,~r
0
0
0
0.6
,~t
0.4
0
0.2
0
.0
I
0
I
0.4
0.2
I
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
z/R~
Fig. 17. Central axis relative depth absorbed distributions obtained Andreo and Brahme (1984),
and Berger and Seltzer MC data for 20 MeV electrons, and experimental results of Harder and
Schulz for 21,2MeV in Lucite (+;
and Brahme and Svensson (1979) for 22.5 MeV in
water (0;
)
).
DIXIS
4Hc I I
Ne (
0
Ar I i 0
Xe
10
Ni
~ 10
~ io~
particles. Empirical
mentioned
penetration
the
phenomena.
remarkable
formulae
Luoscaling
(1967)
of of
pointed
thethe reflection
electron
out the
e
~
13
iii
10
coefficient
tides
are often
and the
needed.
range In
parameters
the studyofoncharged
the scaling
parproperties for electron transport, Spencer (1959)
Ar
Ne
1
102
I
10~
iii
iii
uI
~
I ii
ii
10~
deposition by a pencil beam incident onto a multilayer inhomogeneous medium. Their result is shown
700
s mm
aluminium
Water
8 mm aluminium
100
50 mm
Depth of _~
measurement: 0.73 r0
47 mm
4.~jU
0
C)
n0
01
EU
U
UT
H
He
6
0.01
I
1.0
I I I I
I I
I
10
(s),
.g
0
-
0
V
.0
V
:~
20 MeV
Water
1o~
B
13.3 MeV
10~
1.0
1985).
io~
3
Relative radius (r/rj,e)
Fig. 19.
Corresponding profiles for the equivalent
energy 13.3 MeV. The historgram was obtained by interpolation of Monte Carlo data for 10 MeV and 15MeV to the
energy 13.3 MeV in water at the scaled depth 0.7 to
0.75 csda ranges (Lax and Brahme, 1985).
()
RPC 41.4/5I
701
702
too,
~,
500.
Blunck 0. and Westphal K. (1951) Zur energieverlust
energiereicher elektronen in dnnen schichten. Z. Phys.
130, 641.
Bohr N. (1948) Penetration of atomic particles through
matter. Kg!. Dansk. Videnskab. Selskab Mat. Fys. Medd.
18, 8.
Bothe W. (1949) Einige einfache uberlegungen zur rckdiffusion schneller elektronen. Ann. Phys. 6, 6.
Brahme A. (1971) Multiple scatteringofrelativistic electrons
in air. TRITA-EPP-7l-22.
Brahme A. (1975) Simple relations for the penetration of
Brice D. K.
15, 883.
matter.
electron emission.
Gooding T. J. and Eisberg ft. M. (1957) Statistical fluctuations in energy losses of37 MeV protons. Phys. Rev. 105,
357.
Goudsmit S. and Saunderson J. L. (1940) Multiple scattering of electrons. Phys. Rev. 57, 24.
GrOn A. E. (1957) Lumineszenz-photometrische messungen
der energieabsorption im strahlungsfeld von elektronenquellen eindimensionaler fall in lull. Z. Naturf. 12*, 89.
Halbleib J. A. and Vandevender W. H. (1974) Tiger: a one
dimensional multilayer electron/photon Monte Carlo
transport code, SLA-73-l026, Sandia Laboratories.
Hanson A. 0., Lanzl L. H., Lyman E. M. and Scott M. B.
(1951) Measurement of multiple scattering of 15.7 MeV
electrons. Phys. Rev. 84, 634.
Harder D. (1970) Some general results from the transport
theory of electron absorption. In 2nd Symp. on Microdosimetry, Stress, Italy (Edited by Ebert).
Hoffman T. 3. et at. (1978) Sputtering calculations with
discrete ordinate method. Nucl. Sd. Engng. 68, 204.
Holier W. K. et a!. (1975) Concentration profiles ofboron
implantations in amorphous polycrystalline silicon.
Radial. Eff. 24, 223.
Hogstrom K. R., Mills M. D. and Almond P. R. (1981)
Electron beam dose calculations. Phys. Med. Bin!. 26,445.
Huffman et a!. (1957) Spatial distribution of energy
absorbed from an electron beam penetrating aluminium.
Phys. Rev. 106, 435.
Huizenga H. and Storchi P. R. M. (1989) Numerical
calculation of energy deposition by broad high-energy
electron beams. Phys. Med. Biol. 34, 1371.
Jespersgard P. and Davies J. A. (1967) Ion implantation
depth distribution:
atomic
Kulchitsky L. A. and
Prillinger 0.
Bukarest.
703
Seliger H. H. (1955) Transmission of positrons and deetrons. Phys. Rev. 100, 1029.
Sigmund P. (1969) Theory of sputtering. I sputtering yield
of amorphous and polycrystalline targets. Phys. Rev. 184,
383.
Sigmund P. (1972) Collision theory ofdisplacement damage.
NBS Monograph I.
Spencer L. V. and Attix F. H. (1955) A theory of cavity
ionization. Radiat. Res. 3, 239.
normal incidence.
Radiat. Eff
75, 65.