JOURNAL OF APPLIED PHYSICS 107, 093306 共2010兲

Ion energy distribution near a plasma meniscus with beam extraction

for multi element focused ion beams
Jose V. Mathew, Samit Paul, and Sudeep Bhattacharjeea兲
Department of Physics, Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur 208016, Uttar Pradesh, India
共Received 22 December 2009; accepted 20 February 2010; published online 7 May 2010兲
An earlier study of the axial ion energy distribution in the extraction region 共plasma meniscus兲 of
a compact microwave plasma ion source showed that the axial ion energy spread near the meniscus
is small 共⬃5 eV兲 and comparable to that of a liquid metal ion source, making it a promising
candidate for focused ion beam 共FIB兲 applications 关J. V. Mathew and S. Bhattacharjee, J. Appl.
Phys. 105, 96101 共2009兲兴. In the present work we have investigated the radial ion energy
distribution 共IED兲 under the influence of beam extraction. Initially a single Einzel lens system has
been used for beam extraction with potentials up to −6 kV for obtaining parallel beams. In situ
measurements of IED with extraction voltages upto ⫺5 kV indicates that beam extraction has a
weak influence on the energy spread 共⫾0.5 eV兲 which is of significance from the point of view of
FIB applications. It is found that by reducing the geometrical acceptance angle at the ion energy
analyzer probe, close to unidirectional distribution can be obtained with a spread that is smaller by
at least 1 eV. © 2010 American Institute of Physics. 关doi:10.1063/1.3369287兴

I. INTRODUCTION tant issues. Moreover, the focusing of the ion beams is a

Focused ion beam 共FIB兲 is an important tool for research
in mesoscopic physics involving nanoscale implantation,
nanopatterning, structuring, etc.1,2 The system extracts ions
from an ion source by electrostatic attraction and focuses the
energetic beam to a narrow spot 共submicron to ⬃10 nm兲. In
conventional liquid metal ion source 共LMIS兲 based FIB sys-
tems, only Gallium ions are used and the beam current at the
substrate is very small 共⬃10 pA for 10 nm spot兲. The con-
straint that, available commercial FIB systems use only Ga
ions, limits its applicability.3 Moreover, large processing
times are required to create a desired profile on a metal sur-
face as the beam current is small. For example the time re-
quired to sputter 25⫻ 104 ␮m3 volume using 10 nA Ga ions
at 30 keV is more than 24 h 共sputtering yield ⬃2.7 ␮m3 / s兲.4
Therefore, in order to expand the applications in nanoscience
and technology, there are efforts worldwide to increase the
beam current at the substrate by developing plasma based
FIB systems,3–6 which have the additional advantage of pro-
ducing a variety of ions. Furthermore, it is expected that the
contamination issues resulting from the use of Gallium ions
can be overcome.3
As the ion density in wave based plasma sources is rela-
tively high 共␻ p ⬎ ␻兲 in an overdense plasma
共⬃1010 – 1011 cm−3, e.g., in microwave plasmas兲 the ion cur-
rent is comparatively large Ⰷ10 nA as has been reported
recently for an inductively coupled plasma FIB6 and can
reach as high as 1–10 ␮A as recently observed in our FIB
system. In conventional LMIS based FIB systems the ion
source is rather stable but this is not usually the case in
plasma based sources. The ions gain energy by collisions,
electrons respond to the high frequency wave fields, hence
the plasma stability, confinement and equilibrium are impor-
a兲
Electronic mail: sudeepb@iitk.ac.in.
challenging task if the ions are not monoenergetic, leading to
chromatic aberration. Hence, the study of ion energy distri-
bution 共IED兲 in the plasma meniscus is important.
We have considered the development of a microwave
plasma ion source for multielement FIB systems which can
provide high density plasma 共⬎cutoff density兲 in a compact
cross section.5,7 An earlier study of the axial IED in the ex-
traction region of the ion source revealed that the axial ion
energy spread is indeed small and comparable to that of
LMIS, which makes the ion source a promising candidate for
FIB applications.8
The motivation of the present work is to look at the
radial IED in the extraction region of the ion source both
with and without beam extraction. The axial and radial IED
gives similar energy spread at center of multicusp 共MC兲 共r
= 0兲 and at the meniscus, where the magnetic field is almost
zero, allowing us to compare the ion energy distribution
function 共IEDF兲 in both the orientations. During beam ex-
traction, it is difficult to measure the axial IEDF because of
the presence of the extraction system. We have therefore
measured the IEDF from the radial direction while the beam
extraction is in progress. As we move away from the center
along r, the radial magnetic field increases and can introduce
some anisotropy in the IED 共see Fig. 3兲. The IEDF has been
studied with two identical ion energy analyzers 共IEA兲 em-
ployed both in the bulk plasma and in the beam extraction
region as shown in Fig. 1共a兲. The beam extraction system
consists of a single Einzel lens with extraction potentials
upto ⫺6 kV. Since the chromatic aberrations of electrostatic
focusing lens depend on the ion energy spread, in situ mea-
surement of IEDF at the plasma meniscus when the beams
are extracted is crucial in designing ion beam optics to
achieve control over the beam spot size. We found that the
influence of beam extraction on ion energy spread is negli-

0021-8979/2010/107共9兲/093306/5/$30.00 107, 093306-1 © 2010 American Institute of Physics

[This article is copyrighted as indicated in the article. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://scitation.aip.org/termsconditions. Downloaded to ] IP:
202.3.77.183 On: Thu, 18 Sep 2014 10:47:56
 093306-2 Mathew, Paul, and Bhattacharjee
FIG. 1. 共Color online兲 共a兲 Schematic of the experimental apparatus: 共MW兲
microwaves, 共WG兲 rectangular waveguide, 共W兲 quartz window, 共VC兲
vacuum chamber, 共TMP兲 turbo molecular pump, 共GI兲 gas inlet, 共MC兲 mul-
ticusp, 共P1 and P2兲 ion energy analyzer probes 1 and 2, 共PE兲 plasma elec-
trode, 共EL兲 Einzel Lens, 共FC兲 Faraday cup, 共A兲 ammeter, and 共HV兲 high
voltage power supply. 共b兲 AXCEL-INP simulation of ion beam extracted from
the plasma.
gibly small, which is quite significant from the point of view
of obtaining FIBs.
II. EXPERIMENTAL SETUP
The schematic of the experimental setup is shown in Fig.
1共a兲 and explained in details in Ref. 8. Continuous mode
microwaves from a magnetron generator of frequency 2.45
GHz, with 1.2 kW peak power is launched into a MC plasma
chamber kept inside the vacuum chamber 共VC兲 through a
standard WR 340 rectangular waveguide. Argon is used as
the test gas. The source operates at gas pressures ranging
from 0.1–0.5 mTorr and wave powers from 100 to 250 W.
The plasma is confined using octupole magnetic MC 关see
Fig. 1共a兲兴 providing axially uniform plasma which is also
uniform over a radius of ⬃2 cm.5 The MC is end plugged
by reversing the polarity of the end magnets for axial plasma
confinement. The extraction system as shown in Fig. 1共b兲,
consists of a grounded plasma electrode 共PE兲 and an Einzel
lens 共EL兲 system consisting of three electrodes with E2 held
at ground potential and E1 and E3 varied upto ⫺6 kV. The
triplet serves the purpose of both beam acceleration and fo-
cusing. The AXCEL-INP simulation of ion beam at ⫺5 kV
extraction potential is shown in Fig. 1共b兲, where the lens
elements E1 − E3 and the PE are marked. A Faraday cup 共FC兲
is kept in the beam path to measure the beam current using a
microammeter 共Hameg HM 8112–3兲. The IEA probes, P1
and P2 are inserted through two radial ports of VC. During
Langmuir probe measurements, P1 and P2 are replaced by
two planar Langmuir probes.
The IEA probe, as shown in Fig. 2 consists of a front
plate 共P兲, 3 grids 共G1 − G3兲 and a collector 共C兲, arranged se-
quentially with potentials, G1 = −50 V, G3 = −70 V, C
[This article is copyrighted as indicated in the article. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://scitation.aip.org/termsconditions. Downloaded to ] IP:
202.3.77.183 On: Thu, 18 Sep 2014 10:47:56
J. Appl. Phys. 107, 093306 共2010兲
FIG. 2. 共Color online兲 AXCEL-INP simulation of current collection by IEA
probe.
= −68 V, and the potential of G2 being variable from 0–100
V. The details of the probe can be found in earlier literature.8
An AXCEL-INP simulation of the current collection by the
IEA probe, with single mesh aperture for grids, G1 − G3 is
shown in Fig. 2, where G2 is kept at 0 V.
The IEDF, f共E兲 is proportional to the derivative of the
measured ion current, Ic with respect to the analyzing grid
potential, Vr as given by9–11
冋 册
Mi dIc共Vr兲
f共E兲 = v共E兲f关v共E兲兴/M i, f共v兲 = A − , 共1兲
e2 dVr
where f共v兲 is the ion velocity distribution, A is the normal-
ization constant, M i is the ion mass, and e is the electronic
charge. The ion beam velocity distribution is assumed to be
Maxwellian.12–14 Hence,
f共v兲 ⬀ exp −冋 M i共 v − v b兲 2
2␬Ti
册
, 共2兲
where vb is the ion beam velocity at the collector which is
the sum of the ion velocity in the bulk plasma and the ve-
locity gained in the plasma sheath, ␬ is the Boltzmann con-
stant, and Ti is the ion temperature. The obtained distribution
can therefore be fitted with a Gaussian, from which the full
width at half maximum 共FWHM兲 gives the ion energy spread
information.
While sweeping the retarding grid potential, Vr of the
IEA probe, an Ic-Vr characteristic is obtained. The character-
istic is numerically differentiated and fitted with a Gaussian
共see Fig. 4兲.
The radial plasma density and electron temperature of
the bulk plasma and in the extraction region are measured
using planar Langmuir probes. The Langmuir probe has a
diameter of 4 mm and is made of stainless steel. For probe
measurements MC serves as a reference electrode, grounded
with the chamber, VC. The ratio of the inner surface of MC
to the probe area is ⬃5000, which could be considered as
adequate for obtaining reliable probe characteristics. The De-
bye length, ␭D varies in the range 0.07–0.1 mm which is
much smaller than the probe radius.
During probe measurements, initially, the probe is posi-
tioned at the center of MC where the magnetic field is almost
zero and then it is radially moved toward the wall of the MC.
In the peripheral region, the Langmuir probe surface is al-
 093306-3 Mathew, Paul, and Bhattacharjee J. Appl. Phys. 107, 093306 共2010兲

FIG. 3. 共Color online兲 Radial variation in electron temperature, Te 共triangle兲,

plasma 共ion兲 density, N+ 共square兲, and ion energy spread, ⌬E 共circle兲, in the FIG. 4. 共Color online兲 Comparison of IEDF at the extraction region of the
beam extraction region. The extraction system is not in place. The solid line MC 共square兲 with Maxwellian 共f M 兲 and Druyvesteyn 共f D兲 energy distribu-
shows the radial variation in magnetic field. tions of same mean energy. Also shown is the Ic vs Vr plot 共circle兲.

ways set parallel to the wave vector k and hence perpendicu- sure of 0.25 mTorr and 250 W microwave power. The ex-
lar to B. The ion saturation current IS+ is used to deduce the perimentally obtained IED has been compared with standard
plasma 共ion兲 density N+ from15 model energy distribution functions of same mean energy

IS+ = eSN+ exp共− 1/2兲 冑 ␬Te

Mi
, 共3兲
given by17

冉 冊 冉 冊
冤 冥
where S is the probe area and Te is the electron temperature.
5 3/2 5 m m
Both sides of the probe surface are used for charged particle m⌫ 冑E m⌫ E
2m 2m

冉 冊 冉 冊
collection and it is assumed that singly charged ions are pre- f共E兲 = exp − , 共4兲
dominant. 3 5/2 3/2 3 m m
⌫ Emean ⌫ Emean
2m 2m
III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Figure 3 shows the radial variation in electron tempera-
ture, Te, plasma 共ion兲 density, N+, and ion energy spread, ⌬E, where ⌫ is the complete gamma function and m is an integer
in the beam extraction region without the extraction lens 1 and 2 共m = 1 corresponds to Maxwellian, f M and m = 2 cor-
system. The radial variation in the magnetic field B is also responds to Druyvesteyn, f D兲.
shown which exhibits a magnetic bottle, where the central The comparison shows that the population of low and
region is magnetic field free and the plasma is confined. The high energy tail ions is deficient in the IEDF as compared to
plasma 共ion兲 density, N+, is almost uniform in the central f M and f D. The ions possess medium energy and the distri-
region of MC and decreases toward the wall. The ion beam is bution is largely monoenergetic with spread of ⬃5 eV as has
extracted from the region around r = 0. The electron cyclo- been observed for the axial distribution. The IEDF follows
tron resonance 共ECR兲 zone falls around 2.2 cm which results similar trend near the extraction region but the energy spread
in the sharp rise in Te in the region as observed in the figure. lies in the range 5.5–10.5 eV.
In the central region Te is ⬃5 eV and in the ECR zone it Figure 5 shows the variation in beam current 共open sym-
rises to ⬃14 eV. The ion energy spread is seen to slightly bols兲 with extraction potential at different gas pressures.
increase with r. At r = 0, the energy spread is ⬃5 eV and There is a threshold potential, ⬃−1 kV, beyond which the
matches with the axial ion spread data reported earlier.5 The beam current increases sharply. The current density, Ji, cal-
increase in ion energy spread toward the ECR zone shows culated by the Child Langmuir’s 共CL兲 law is given by18
the ions are also affected by the plasma heating.
In order to obtain a true unidirectional distribution, we
have studied the effect of the acceptance angle with which
the ions enter the IEA on ion energy spread, by employing a
capillary entrance at the front plate, P in Fig. 2. The geo-
metrical acceptance angle is defined by, ␪c = tan−1共d / L兲,
where d is the diameter of aperture of P and L is the thick-
ness of the aperture.16 In the IEA probe that is used for
measurements, ␪c is ⬃45° which has been reduced to ⬃10°
by increasing the aperture thickness of the front plate P from
1 mm to 5.5 mm. It is found that the energy spread got
reduced by ⬃1 eV in the latter case as compared to the
former.
FIG. 5. 共Color online兲 Variation in beam current 共open symbols兲 and ion
Figure 4 shows the variation in ion current 共Ic兲 as a energy spread 共solid symbols兲 with extraction potential at different
function of discriminator grid voltage 共Vg兲 at a neutral pres- pressures.
[This article is copyrighted as indicated in the article. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://scitation.aip.org/termsconditions. Downloaded to ] IP:
202.3.77.183 On: Thu, 18 Sep 2014 10:47:56
 093306-4 Mathew, Paul, and Bhattacharjee
Ji =
4␧0
9
冑 2q V3/2
M i d2
, 共5兲
where ␧o, q, V, and d are the permittivity of free space,
charge of ion, extraction potential, and distance between the
electrodes, respectively. The CL’s equation has been fitted
with the experimental data as shown by the dashed line in
Fig. 5. The maximum beam current at ⫺5 kV extraction
potential for 1 mm PE aperture is ⬃7 ␮A. This current is at
least three orders of magnitude larger at the substrate than
commercially available FIB systems. The total extractable
current density, j p, is a characteristic parameter of the plasma
ion source which depends on the plasma 共ion兲 density, N+,
and the electron temperature, Te, and is given by the Bohm
expression19
J p = eZiN+vi ⬵ 0.6eZiN+冑␬Te/M i ,
which leads to the saturation of beam current at higher ex-
traction potentials.
Also shown in Fig. 5, is the variation in ion energy
spread 共solid symbols兲 with the extraction potentials up to
⫺5 kV at different gas pressures. The IEA probe is kept near
the plasma meniscus at ⬃r = 0.5 cm during these measure-
ments. Figure 5 shows that ⌬E remains almost constant as
the ions are being extracted. This is significant since the
chromatic aberrations of the electrostatic focusing lens aris-
ing from the inherent energy spread of the ions in the source
do not increase with the increase in extraction potentials,
which will be very much helpful to retain the spot size. The
presence of extraction electrode system is found to increase
the ion energy spread near the plasma meniscus as compared
to the case in Fig. 3 where the extraction system is not used,
while the IEA probe measurements are made. The increase in
spread can be attributed to the formation of electromagnetic
standing waves induced by reflections from the PE
boundary.20 This can be overcome by operating at higher
neutral pressures; as only single charged species are of inter-
est. The increase in neutral pressure has twofold advantage;
共a兲 the electromagnetic standing waves are found to be
damped,20 共b兲 the mean free path of ions reduces from
⬃35− 5 cm as the pressure is increased from 0.1–0.5 mTorr,
thereby decreasing the ion energy spread as shown in Fig. 5.
The decrease in ion energy spread leads to reduction in chro-
matic aberrations in the focused beam.
Unlike rf plasmas, microwave plasmas exhibit an almost
monoenergetic behavior for IEDF,8 which is quite important
from the point of view of FIB applications. The variation in
ion energy spread as a function of wave frequency may be
expressed as21
⌬E = 共4eVs␶ion兲/共␲␶w兲,
where Vs is the voltage drop across the plasma sheath, ␶w is
the wave period, and ␶ion is the time taken by the ions to
transverse the sheath which is a function of sheath thickness,
s, and the mean sheath voltage, Vs⬘.
␶ion = 3s共M i/2eVs⬘兲1/2 .
For N+ ⬃ 1 ⫻ 1011 cm−3, Te ⬃ 10 eV, s ⬃ 0.25 mm, and
for Vs ⬇ Vs⬘ ⬃ 35 V, we obtain for waves of 2.45 GHz,
[This article is copyrighted as indicated in the article. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://scitation.aip.org/termsconditions. Downloaded to ] IP:
202.3.77.183 On: Thu, 18 Sep 2014 10:47:56
J. Appl. Phys. 107, 093306 共2010兲
␶ion / ␶w is ⬃100, and hence, the ions will take many wave
cycles to cross the sheath and therefore the effect of the
applied electromagnetic wave is negligible. The monoener-
getic nature of ions in microwave plasmas is evident from
the fact that, ions in the microwave plasma do not respond to
the incident high frequency microwaves 共f o = 2.45 GHz兲,
since the plasma ion frequency, f pi, lies in the MHz range
共f pi ⬃ 10 MHzⰆ f o, for N+ ⬃ 1011 cm−3兲.
IV. SUMMARY
The radial IED has been measured in the extraction re-
gion 共plasma meniscus兲 of a compact microwave plasma ion
source for FIB applications. The radial energy spread in the
plasma meniscus is comparable to the axial spread.8 With the
extraction system in place, the radial spread is found to in-
共6兲 crease by the formation of standing waves in the MC. On
reducing the acceptance angle for the ions from 45° to 10°,
the spread reduced by ⬃1 eV, which can be further im-
proved. The maximum beam current at −5 kV extraction
potential for 1 mm PE aperture is ⬃7 ␮A, considering 共a兲
losses during focusing, this current is at least three orders of
magnitude larger at the substrate than commercially avail-
able FIB systems and 共b兲 the contribution of secondary elec-
trons is rather small at these voltages for substrate material
stainless steel.5 The finding is in agreement with a recent
work on an inductively coupled plasma based FIB system.4
The observation that the IED has a weak dependence on the
extraction potential is crucial from of point of view of fo-
cused beam spot size.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We gratefully acknowledge financial support from DST,
India, under Center for Nanotechnology at IIT Kanpur, for
research undertaken in the area of focused ion beam tech-
nologies. One of the authors 共S.P.兲 is indebted to CSIR, India
for providing a Ph.D. scholorship.
1
A. V. Stanishevsky, Encyclopedia of Nanoscience and Nanotechnology
共American Scientific Publishers, New York, 2004兲, p. 469.
2
L. A. Giannuzzi and F. A. Stevie, Introduction to Focused Ion Beams
Instrumentation, Theory, Techniques and Practice 共Springer, New York,
2005兲.
3
L. Scipioni, D. Stewart, D. Ferranti, and A. Saxonis, J. Vac. Sci. Technol.
B 18, 3194 共2000兲.
4
N. S. Smith, D. E. Kinion, P. P. Tesch, and R. W. Boswell, Microsc.
Microanal. 13, 180 共2007兲.
5
J. V. Mathew, A. Chowdhury, and S. Bhattacharjee, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 79,
063504 共2008兲.
6
N. S. Smith, W. P. Skoczylas, S. M. Kellogg, D. E. Kinion, P. P. Tesch, O.
Sutherland, A. Aanesland, and R. W. Boswell, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B 24,
7
2902 共2006兲.
J. V. Mathew, I. Dey, and S. Bhattacharjee, Appl. Phys. Lett. 91, 041503
共7兲 共2007兲.
8
J. V. Mathew and S. Bhattacharjee, J. Appl. Phys. 105, 096101 共2009兲.
9
C. Bohm and J. Perrin, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 64, 31 共1993兲.
10
S. G. Ingram and N. St. J. Braithwaite, J. Phys. D 21, 1496 共1988兲.
11
M. A. Lieberman and A. J. Lichtenberg, Principles of Plasma Discharges
and Material Processing 共Wiley-Interscience, New York, 1994兲.
12
M. Reiser, Theory and Design of Charged Particle Beams 共Wiley, New
York, 1994兲.
共8兲 13
R. N. Franklin, Plasma Phenomena in Gas Discharges 共Oxford University
Press, United Kingdom, 1976兲, p. 140.
14
R. L. Stenzel, R. Williams, R. Agüero, K. Kitazaki, A. Ling, T. McDonald,
and J. Spitzer, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 53, 1027 共1982兲.
 093306-5 Mathew, Paul, and Bhattacharjee J. Appl. Phys. 107, 093306 共2010兲

15
S. Bhattacharjee and H. Amemiya, Jpn. J. Appl. Phys., Part 1 37, 5742 and Propagation 共Wiley, New York, 1988兲.
共1998兲. 19
H. Zhang, Ion Sources 共Springer, New York, 1999兲.
16
Y. Okuno, Y. Ohtsu, and H. Fujita, J. Appl. Phys. 74, 5990 共1993兲. 20
I. Dey and S. Bhattacharjee, Phys. Plasmas 15, 123502 共2008兲.
17
M. Maeda and H. Amemiya, Jpn. J. Appl. Phys., Part 1 33, 5032 共1994兲. 21
E. Kawamura, V. Vahedi, M. A. Lieberman, and C. K. Birdsall, Plasma
18
A. Theodore Forrester, Large Ion Beams: Fundamentals of Generation Sources Sci. Technol. 8, R45 共1999兲.

[This article is copyrighted as indicated in the article. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://scitation.aip.org/termsconditions. Downloaded to ] IP:
202.3.77.183 On: Thu, 18 Sep 2014 10:47:56