Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Emission
By Bruce Darrow Gaither
In this era of energy shortages we have all daydreamed about owning a device which
would take the energy that we have and multiply it. Imagine how happy we would be if
you could simply plug in a device which would double your electricity. Numerous
researchers, writers and inventors have sought to do just that.
But scientists have cautioned that the law of conservation of energy dictates that energy is
never created nor destroyed, only converted from one form to another. None of these
schemes, they say, would ever work. They are just perpetual motion machines.
The purpose of this book is to discuss advances in electronics and materials science
which have made things possible which were not contemplated when the laws of
Thermodynamics were postulated decades ago.
Advances in electronics and the development of new materials have revealed new
methods and substances which make this secondary electron emission even more
effective. In fact, today the impossible is possible—one electron at a time.
If a beam of electrons is aimed at a target electrode coated with a given substance then
electrons are emitted from that target. The number of electrons emitted from the target
which has been bombarded is compared to the number of primary electrons in the
original electron beam. The electrons emitted after bombardment by primary electrons
are called secondary electrons.
The material’s propensity to emit electrons after bombardment is called the “secondary
electron emission coefficient”. That is expressed as the number of secondary electrons
divided by the number of primary electrons.
A secondary electron coefficient of less than 1 means that the substance does not emit as
many electrons as it is bombarded with. A coefficient of greater than 1.0 means that the
substance emits more secondary electrons than bombarded it
We are interested in this book in those materials which exhibit a high coefficient of
secondary electron emission. The goal is to perfect a device which will emit more
electrons than you started out with. Some devices have been invented to minimize or
eliminate secondary electron emission, but those are not within the scope of this book.
A reference to various charts is now possible to determine at a glance exactly what the
secondary electron emission coefficient is for these materials.
Two variables are of importance as to the materials. One variable is the angle at which
the primary electrons impact the target. In general it has been found that a better result is
obtained when the primary electrons graze the target material at an angle rather than
hitting straight-on. But the physics of the secondary emission process and the atomic and
molecular structure of the target materials mean that the optimum angle is different for
different materials. The second main variable is the voltage of the beam of primary
electrons. Some substances max out their secondary emission coefficient at very low
voltages and some materials reach their highest secondary emission only at much higher
voltages. This is believed to be due to the depth to which the primary electrons impinges
the material and the amount of tunneling into the substance.
Therefore care must be be paid to the research of the variables in the individual research
papers and patents and there is no magical formula which will work for all materials. The
configuration of the device used in the secondary emission process will need to vary to
meet the characteristics of the target material.
Once the primary electrons have impacted the target material and secondary electrons are
released, then the secondary electrons do not form a focused beam. Instead they tend to
just sit there in a cloud of electrons. Meanwhile the primary electrons will usually bounce
off the target at an angle equal to the angle with which they make incidence to the target.
This means that the kinetic energy of the primary electrons is greater than that of the
secondary electrons after impact. In other words the secondary electrons are indeed a
larger number of electrons—but they are of low voltage.
However numerous methods exist to increase the voltage or kinetic energy of the
secondary electrons.
One process which is common in devices which employ secondary electron emission is
that of multiple impacts upon this emissive target material. The great inventor, Philo
Farnsworth, was the first to devise methods to facilitate these multiple impacts upon
emissive materials. He called his devices “multipactors” because of the multiple impacts
they made with secondary electron emissive material. Thus, if a target electrode had a
secondary electron emission coefficient of 2 then the number of primary electrons would
double when they hit the target electrode. If there were two successive impacts then the
primary electrons would double, and then that total would double again—or be four times
the original primary electrons put into the device.
If the primary electrons were somehow sent through a series of 8 target electrodes then
the multiplication factor would become astronomical, and each of the impacts would
result in an exponential increase of electrons based upon the coefficient of secondary
electron emission from that material.
So various devices were designed and perfected to make the primary electrons impact
numerous electrodes one after another. One branch of these devices is employed by
photomultiplier tubes. Many of these devices are capable of multiplying the primary
electrons one hundred million times. Thus minute electric currents can be sensed and
multiplied so that they can register on scientific equipment. But numerous other
configurations and devices are in use today.
One method is to bounce the electrons off of two opposing electrodes over and over again,
like a game of ping pong. Another configuration would be to have the electrons strike
electrodes arranged inside a circular tube so that they impact coated electrodes over and
over again. A third method is that of forming a cascade of specially-coated electrodes and
having the primary electrons bounce off off each successive electrode until they all come
out the end.
Another genre of devices are called “channel” devices. In these designs the primary
electrons are sent down a waveguide or tunnel of some sort and the entire length of the
device is coated with the emissive materials. The electrons keep bouncing off the walls of
these guides until they reach the end and the repeated impacts result in a high
multiplication of the primary electrons.
One of the axioms of electricity is that current will not conduct very well when exposed
to the atmosphere because the gas acts as an insulator. Therefore most secondary electron
emission devices were made in the form of vacuum tubes. The electricity goes through
the vacuum without loss and then the impacts upon emissive material have the desired
result.
However secondary emission and multipactors have been made into semiconductors and
chips. These use the process of “avalanche” multiplication in many instances, where the
electrons hit the emissive substance and are then multiplied and pass through a solid state
stack of materials. Sometimes the semiconductors include a tiny vacuum space and they
act in the same way as a vacuum tube.
However there is a snag or two for the use of secondary emission in chips. The first
problem is “space charge”. That is the effect of completely filling up a given space with
electrons. One you saturate the evacuated space with space charge then an equilibrium
state is achieved and the primary electrons will no longer multiply as desired. As you
might guess, the greater the area the more electrons will fit into the space before the
space charge saturates the area. The space charge, then, has been found to diminish as to
the 4/3 power of the area of the evacuated space. This means that, for instance, if you
triple the size of vacuum space then that would result in 3x 4/3 power= 12/3 power (or
the 4th power). Then a tripling of space would end up in shrinking the space charge by the
4th power. The bottom line is that bigger is better.
The second drawback to micro multipactors is that the vacuums must be higher than in
vacuum tubes, and this is hard to achieve. Also many devices use sharp points as
electrodes because more electrodes will emit from sharp points than from blunt shapes. In
the micro world though the sharpness of the sharp point has to be correspondingly
sharper. The finer the point on the electrode the harder it is to fabricate and fit into the
layered semiconductor devices.
What this book hopes to achieve is not the simple multiplication of electrons to provide
light or brightness but to generate electricity on a larger scale. The aim is not to build a
generator station for thousands of people but to scale the multipactor devices to work
with individual appliances and vehicles. Thus the size and rated capacities of the
components in the proposed multipactors must be designed to be in the range of home
current up to the amount of voltage and current required to power an electric car.
At this point the discussion of secondary electron emission must include some of the
math and physics. Don’t let your eyes glaze over. Everybody knows a little bit about
electricity—and it is pretty simple. But there is a hazy horizon on the amount of
knowledge of the basics of electricity. The terms are VOLTAGE, AMPERAGE and
POWER. The easy rule of thumb is that VOLTAGE x AMPS = POWER.
You need to throw in the RESISTANCE into this formula—but for now we will stick
with VOLTSxAMPS=POWER.
OK—so we will calculate one AMP. An Ampere involves the amount of “charge”, which
is calculated in terms of a COULOMB. A Coulomb is −6.24151 × 1018 electrons.
So the process of secondary electron emission results in a lot of electrons.
The secondary electrons are not moving very much after they are multiplied.
So they have low voltage—but they DO have AMPERAGE because of the presence of
lots of electrons.
The purpose of this analysis is to point out that we have low volts and high amps from
secondary emission. When you remember volts x amps = power then you can see that we
have to have just a high enough voltage to meet the requirements of modern electrical
devices.
There are numerous well-known devices which can act as VOLTAGE MULTIPLIERS.
These devices will increase the voltage, but only at the expense of a proportional
decrease in the amperage.
The end product of these multipactors can be made usable, therefore, by running these
high amperage currents through a voltage multiplier. You just fine-tune the voltage
multiplier to give the right mix of volts and amps.
In short, secondary electron emission creates NEW electrons. We put the new electrons
to use by stepping up the voltage to required levels.
In this way the laws of conservation of energy are negotiated. The multipactor creates
new electrons and THEN the energy is converted from one form into another. But there is
indeed a creation of new electrons in multipactors.
I will leave it to the scientists and inventors in their respective papers and patents to
describe the manner in which the secondary electrons are created and how the
multipactor devices are designed.
The point of my analysis is simply that the multipactors will create new electrons and the
new electrons can be made usable through voltage multipliers.
So we see that there is a problem with voltage in secondary electron emission. The
inventors have figured out a method to use voltage to their advantage in the multipactor
devices. They apply the rule that opposite charges attract. This accelerates the cloud of
secondary electrons so that they will impact the next target with it’s emissive coating.
The electron is a negative charge. So the inventors manipulate the sluggish cloud of
negative charge by providing a positive electrode to put it into motion.
Some designs will make the next electrode one with a positive charge, so when the
primary electrons strike the first target and are multiplied then the cloud of secondary
electrons is accelerated right up to the second electrode coated with emissive materials.
When they make a long chain or cascade of these target electrodes then they give each of
them a successively higher positive charge so that the ever-increasing cloud of secondary
electrons is accelerated one step at a time in the desired direction.
Other designs use an electrode which is positioned between the first impact target and the
second and they give that intermediate electrode a positive charge to accelerate the cloud
of secondary electrons in the desired direction. This intermediate electrode might be in
the form of a screen or grid or a tube. The positive charge, in every instance, attracts the
opposite charge on the electrons and they are suddenly accelerated through the holes in
these intermediate electrodes and then the electrons continue with their increased voltage
until they impact the coated electrode. This step may be repeated again and again.
The positive charge on these attracting electrodes is often provided by using Cockroft-
Walton circuits. So either a single or a multi-step CW circuit may be used to multiply an
initial small current to give a charge bias of increasing strength to a series of attracting
electrodes. Oftentimes the CW circuit contains “taps” which tap the current at a certain
step in that multiplying step ladder. The step would then have one voltage level to apply
to the attracting electrode, and then the next step would have a higher voltage which
could be tapped at that level and applied to the next attracting electrode, and so on.
Going back the purpose of this analysis again: we are trying to get as many electrons as
possible out of the multipactor. So the gameplan is to select the coating material for
electrodes which has the highest secondary electron emission coefficient. Then the
voltage at which the primary electrons must be accelerated to achieve the optimal
secondary emission must be applied. The spatial requirements are important too because
we want the right angle and the right depth for the impact zone. So we get the highest
electron multiplication at each step. Then we take that level of electron multiplication and
exponentially multiply it by the number of impacts in the multipactor device.
Some devices, as aforestated, simply bounce the electrons back and forth between two
opposed electrodes. In these designs the electrons are moving at the speed of light, so
they hit the opposite electrode in a known length of time. Then they bounce back to the
original electrode. The desired effect is to have but one cloud of secondary electrons
bouncing back and forth, and not a lot of different clouds. Therefore the two electrodes
are given opposite charges, positive and negative, and these charges are sequentially
reversed so that the electron cloud always moves away from the first electrode after they
have been multiplied and then toward the target electrode for more multiplication. Since
we know the distance between the two electrodes and because the speed of light is known,
then we can determine the FREQUENCY at which the electric charge is reversed on
these electrodes. So, take the speed of light and divide it by the distance between the
electrodes. Say, 186,000 miles per second divided by 6 inches.
The resulting frequency is in the range of billions of cycles per second.
There are modern oscillator chips which cost pennies which can do that.
The point here is that we take the secondary electron coefficient, and let’s say that this is
2 for the sake of argument. Then we apply the frequency of the impacts on these emissive
electrodes—and that is perhaps one billion times per second. In this example we would
then obtain 2 to the one billionth power!
If we make the device the right size so that the space charge does not saturate the vacuum
then we can generate sufficient electrons so that we can step up the voltage and step
down the amperes to achieve the desired power characteristics for our electric appliance
or motor.
For the purposes of our last example we have a secondary emission coefficient of 2, or a
doubling of the primary electrons at each impact with the electrode with the emissive
coating. But what if the secondary emission coefficient were 10…or 100…or even 1000?
Just apply the math and you can see the possibilities of these multipactors.
Attached to this anthology is one of the latest research papers from Korea where
scientists have obtained a new record for the secondary emission coefficient: 22,000!
Thus reason dictates that the proper coating must be selected for the electrodes. Then the
rest of the components must be selected and positioned so that the size, frequency and
angle of impact are optimal.
I think I heard somebody say, “Hey, Einstein—it still has to be hooked up to electricity to
start up and to power the attracting electrodes. What about that?”
The answer lies in the principle of feedback and self-oscillation. We know that many
oscillators are known to exhibit the characteristic of self-oscillation. Once you get them
going then they tend to keep on oscillating on their own. This process works in
multipactor-oscillators. It just takes a little electricity to get them started and then the
internal processes take over and they self-oscillate, producing electrons without the input
of outside electricity.
Many electronic devices apply the principle of feedback, especially in audio devices. We
can remember Jimi Hendrix hitting a note on his guitar and then holding the guitar in
front of his amplifier. The amp’s sound creates a feedback loop with the guitar and a
sound is created which is self-sustaining without the additional input of playing another
note. Numerous transistors work with feedback loops to take the electrical output of the
device and split that output and send part of it back to the original input where it is again
amplified. So the coupling of the output to the input wires is what is required.
So using either feedback or self-oscillation or both a multipactor device can be fabricated
so that it will have self-sustaining output of electrons.
That still leaves us the positive bias charge that is placed upon the attracting electrodes to
accelerate those sluggish clouds of secondary electrons.
Again, we simply split the output signal and loop part of it back to the accelerating
electrodes, and this is the positive charge remember. So the negative charge goes back to
feedback the input and the other loop goes to the voltage multiplier. A Cockroft-Walton
multiplier can be either positive or negative in charge—you simply reverse the
connection between the diodes and capacitors and it multiplies the positive charge.
Therefore, we could use batteries to start up the multipactor and then apply common
electronics components and devices to split the output and loop it back to the input and
bias the positive electrodes. Then the battery can be shut off, and even recharged while
the multipactor runs on self-sustaining current.
That guy who used Einstein’s name like a dirty word again wants to voice his opinion,
“Hey, genius, this stuff is a bunch of hooey! How do we know this would work?”
How do we know?
Because of TELEVISION.
These multipactor devices were invented by Philo Farnsworth when he invented
television. Just one glance at this super-egghead fellow should give you the answer. This
guy was a super-brain and he just NEEDED to have special vacuum tubes to strengthen
the broadcast signal of television from remote locations to make the picture tubes bright
enough to see—so he simply invented multipactors to multiply that weak input signal.
Check out that cranium!
If these multipactors work then why didn’t Farnsworth take over the whole world?
The reason is related to the laws of business and not the laws of physics. Philo
Farnsworth saw the value of television and his multipactors but he had an independent
streak which caused him to form his own Farnsworth Television company with which he
intended to put RCA and GE out of business. Instead they put Farnsworth out of business
by using monopoly tactics. But Philo Farnsworth applied his principles based upon
secondary electron emission to the point that he invented a nuclear fusion reactor before
he was through.
The heyday of vacuum tubes was filled with imitators of every sort. There is even an
International Patent classification which contains only “Farnsworth Tubes”.
Since Farnsworth’s day the vacuum tube was supplanted by the Japanese transistor and
then the Silicon Valley semiconductor chip. Nobody makes vacuum tubes anymore and
the vacuum tube multipactor concepts have been lost in the world of microelectronics.
But even today secondary electron emission is applied in the plasma television sets where
scores of little holes and dots are brightened by electron multiplication. Other areas such
as scintillation counters and electron detectors and night vision goggles use the process,
often in the solid-state configuration. There exists an offshoot applying vacuum tubes—
the sector called PHOTONICS which use vacuum tubes to multiply light into electronic
signals.
As stated above, there are several basic methods of achieving multiple impacts of
electrons.
The CASCADE
The BACK AND FORTH method:
and the CIRCULAR ACCELERATOR method:
These graphs and excerpts were developed over a period of time. The more ancient the
research the lower the coefficients. As newer and newer materials were invented and
tested there is a general trend toward higher and higher coefficients. I would respectfully
call your attention to the source material in the following sections for detailed analyis of
the methodology and results of individual studies and devices with various emissive
materials.
Treatises on vacuum tubes have been consulted and quoted in pertinent part. Patents are
inserted to this anthology to examine their significance at particular points in time.
Various studies on the individual materials exhibiting secondary emission.
Finally, I include several of my own designs for multipactor devices to power electrical
appliances and motors.
1. Introduction
The photomultiplier is a very versatile and without need for additional signal amplifica-
sensitive detector of radiant energy in the tion. Extremely fast time response with rise
ultraviolet, visible, and near infrared regions times as short as a fraction of a nanosecond
of the electromagnetic spectrum. A schemat- provides a measurement capability in special
ic diagram of a typical photomultiplier tube applications that is unmatched by other
is given in Fig. 1. The basic radiation sensor radiation detectors.
is the photocathode which is located inside a
vacuum envelope. Photoelectrons are emit-
ted and directed by an appropriate electric EARLY DEVELOPMENT
field to an electrode or dynode within the The development (history) of the photo-
envelope. A number of secondary electrons multiplier is rooted in early studies of secon-1
are emitted at this dynode for each imping- dary emission. In 1902, Austin and Starke
ing primary photoelectron. These secondary reported that the metal surfaces impacted by
electrons in turn are directed to a second cathode rays emitted a larger number of elec-
dynode and so on until a final gain of trons than were incident. The use of secon-
perhaps 106 is achieved. The electrons from dary emission as a means for signal
the last dynode are collected by an anode amplification was proposed as early as
which provides the signal current that is read 1919.2 In 1935, Iams and Salzberg 3 of RCA
out. reported on a single-stage photomultiplier.
The device consisted of a semicylindrical
photocathode, a secondary emitter mounted
on the axis, and a collector grid surrounding
the secondary emitter. The tube had a gain
of about eight. Because of its better frequen-
cy response the single-stage photomultiplier
was intended for replacement of the gas-
filled phototube as a sound pickup for
movies. But despite its advantages, it saw
only a brief developmental sales activity
PHOTOELECTRONS before it became obsolete.
92cs-32288
Multistage Devices
Fig. 1 - Schematic representation of a photo-
multiplier tube and its operation In 1936, Zworykin, Morton, and Malter,
all of RCA4 reported on a multistage
photomultiplier. Again, the principal con-
For a large number of applications, the templated application was sound-on-film
photomultiplier is the most practical or sen- pickup. Their tube used a combination of
sitive detector available. The basic reason electrostatic and magnetic fields to direct
for the superiority of the photomultiplier is electrons from stage to stage. A photograph
the secondary-emission amplification that of a developmental sample is given in Fig. 2.
makes it possible for the tube to approach Although the magnetic-type photomultiplier
“ideal” device performance limited only by provided high gain, it had several dif-
the statistics of photoemission. Amplifica- ficulties. The adjustment of the magnetic
tions ranging from 103 to as much as 108 field was very critical, and to change the gain
provide output signal levels that are com- by reducing the applied voltage, the
patible with auxiliary electronic equipment magnetic field also had to be adjusted.
3
Photomultiplier Handbook
Another problem was that its rather wide Snyder 8 and by Janes and Gloverg, all of
open structure resulted in high dark current RCA. The basic electron-optics of the cir-
because of feedback from ions and light cular cage was thus well determined by 1941
developed near the output end of the device. and has not changed to the present time
For these reasons, and because of the although improvements have been made in
development of electrostatically focused processing, construction, and performance
photomultipliers, commercialization did not of the 931A product.
follow. The success of the 931 type also resulted
from the development of a much improved
photocathode, Cs3Sb, reported by Gorlich 10
in 1936. The first experimental photo-
multipliers had used a Ag-O-Cs photocath-
ode having a typical peak quantum efficien-
cy of 0.4% at 800 nm. (The Ag-O-Cs layer
Fig. 2 - Magnetic-type multistage photomul-
was also used for the dynodes.) The new
tiplier reported by Zworykin, Morton, and Cs3Sb photocathode had a quantum effi-
Malter in 1936. ciency of 12% (higher today) at 400 nm. It
was used in the first 931’s, both as a
photocathode and as a secondary-emitting
material for the dynodes.
The design of multistage electrostatically
focused photomultipliers required an
analysis of the equipotential surfaces be-
tween electrodes and of the electron trajec- PHOTOEMITTER AND SECONDARY-
tories. Before the days of high-speed com- EMITTER DEVELOPMENT
puters, this problem was solved by a Photocathode Materials
mechanical analogue: a stretched rubber
membrane. By placing mechanical models of Much of the development work on
the electrodes under the membrane, the photomultiplier tubes has been concerned
height of the membrane was controlled and with their physical configuration and the
corresponded to the electrical potential of related electron optics. But a very important
the electrode. Small balls were then allowed part of the development of photomultiplier
to roll from one electrode to the next. The tubes was related to the photocathode and
trajectories of the balls were shown to cor- secondary-emission surfaces and their pro-
respond to those of the electrons in the cor- cessing. RCA was very fortunate during the
responding electrostatic fields. Working 1950’s and 60’s in having on its staff, prob-
with the rubber-dam analogue, both J.R. ably the world’s foremost photocathode ex-
Pierce5 of Bell Laboratories and J.A. pert, Dr. A.H. Sommer. His treatise on
Rajchman6 of RCA devices linear arrays of Photoemissive Materials1 1 continues to pro-
electrodes that provided good focusing prop- vide a wealth of information to all
erties. Although commerical designs did not photocathode process engineers.
result immediately from the linear dynode Sommer explored the properties of
array, The Rajchmann design with some numerous photocathode materials-par-
modifications eventually was, and still is, ticularly alkali-antimonides. Perhaps his
used in photomultipliers-particularly for most noteworthy contribution was the
high-gain wide-bandwidth requirements. multialkali photocathode (S-20 spectral
response). This photocathode, Na2KSb:Cs,
First Commercial Devices is important because of its high sensitivity in
The first commercially successful the red and near infrared; the earlier Cs3Sb
photomultiplier was the type 931. This tube photocathode spectral response barely ex-
had a compact circular array of nine tends through the visible, although it is very
dynodes using electrostatic focusing. The sensitive in the blue where most scintillators
first such arrangement was described by emit.
Zworykin and Rajchman.7 Modifications Bialkali photocathodes were also de-
were later reported by Rajchmann and veloped by Sommer and have proven to be
4
Introduction
5
Photomultiplier Handbook
tubes during this period was reported by depending upon the individual signals from
RCA and its competitors in the biannual each of the photomultipliers. Counting is
meetings of the Scintillation Counter Sym- continued until several hundred thousand
posium. These symposia were reported fully counts are obtained and the organ in ques-
in the IRE (and later the IEEE) Transactions tion is satisfactorily delineated. The location
on Nuclear Science beginning with the of each scintillation is represented by a point
meeting in Washington, January 1948. The on a cathode-ray-tube presentation.
scintillation counter became the most impor- The Computerized Axial Tomographic
tant measurement instrument in nuclear (CAT) scanner was introduced to this coun-
physics, nuclear medicine, and radioactive try in 1973. The device uses a pencil or fan-
tracer applications of a wide variety. beam of X-rays which rotates around the pa-
Headlight Dimmer tient providing X-ray transmission data
During the 1950’s, RCA collaborated with from many directions. A scintillator coupled
the General Motors Company (Guide-Lamp to a photomultiplier detects the transmitted
Division) on a successful headlight dimmer. beam-as an average photomultiplier cur-
The photoelectric headlight dimmer-first rent-and a computer stores and computes
made available only on Cadillacs and the cross-section density variation of the pa-
Oldsmobiles-basically used a tube similar tient’s torso or skull. The photomultipliers
to the 931A, but redesigned and tested to the are1/ or 3/4-inch end-on tubes which
auto manufacturer’s particular require- couple to the scintillator, commonly BGO
ments. The optical engineering problem was (bismuth germanate). Each unit is equipped
to sense the oncoming headlights or tail- with as many as 600 photomultipliers.
lights being followed without responding to PHOTOMULTIPLIERS AND SOLID-
street and house lights. Vertical and horizon- STATE DETECTORS COMPARED
tal angular sensitivity was designed to match
the spread of the high beams of the automo- In some applications either a photomulti-
bile. A red filter was installed in the optical plier or solid-state detector could be used.
path to provide a better balance between sen- The user may make his choice on the basis of
sitivity to oncoming headlights and to tail- factors such as cost, size, or previous ex-
lamps being followed. The device achieved a perience. In other applications, the choice
remarkable success, probably because of the may be dictated by fundamental properties
novelty, and thousands of photomultiplier of the photomultiplier or the solid-state
tubes were used. But today, one rarely sees a detector. A discussion follows of some of the
headlight dimmer. common applications favoring one or the
other detector with reasons for the choice. A
Medical Diagnostic Equipment summary presents the principal considera-
tions the user must apply in making a choice
In recent years two medical applications in an application for which he requires a
have used large numbers of photomultiplier photodetector. This information should be
tubes and have spurred further develop-
ments and improvements. The gamma cam- particularly useful to the designer who is not
era18 is a sophisticated version of the scin- well acquainted in this field.
tillation counter used medically for locating Photomultiplier Features
tumors or other biological abnormalities. A The photomultiplier is unique in its ability
radioactive isotope combined in a suitable to interface with a scintillation crystal and
compound is injected into the blood stream not only count the scintillations but measure
or ingested orally by the patient. The their magnitude and time their arrival. Most
radioactive material disintegrates and gam- scintillators emit in the blue and near ultra-
ma rays are ejected from preferential loca- violet. This spectral output obviously favors
tions such as tumors or specific organs. A the photomultiplier having a photocathode
large crystal intercepts the gamma rays and with high quantum efficiency in the short
scintillates. Behind the crystal are photo- wavelength range. On the other hand a sili-
multiplier tubes, perhaps 19, in hexagonal con p-i-n diode is relatively poor in this part
array. The location of the point of scintilla- of the spectrum but does best in the red and
tion origin is obtained by an algorithm near infrared. The most important factor,
6
Introduction
probably, is the gain of the photomultiplier As a result of increasing concern about en-
which permits the measurement of the very vironment, pollution monitoring is becom-
small signals from individual scintillations ing another important application for photo-
with a good signal-to-noise ratio, limited multiplier tubes. For example, in the moni-
primarily by the statistics of the number of toring of NOx the gas sample is mixed with
photoelectrons per pulse. Finally, the short O 3 in a reaction chamber. A chemilum-
rise time of the photomultiplier using fast inescence results which is measured using a
scintillators permits time-of-flight measure- near-infrared-pass filter and a photomulti-
ments to be made in nuclear physics. plier having an S-20 spectral response. Al-
though the radiation level is very low, NO
Although the CAT scanner equipment can be detected down to a level of 0.1 ppm.
also uses photomultipier tubes to detect the The advantage of the photomultiplier in this
scintillations in bismuth germanate (BGO) application is again the high gain and good
crystals, the situation is somewhat different signal-to-noise ratio (the photomultiplier is
from the scintillation counting applications cooled to 0°C to reduce dark-current noise)
discussed above. In the CAT scanner the even though the radiation spectrum is ob-
X-rays produce a broad band of pulse served near the threshold of the S-20 spectral
heights and no attempt is made to single out range.
and detect single scintillation events. The In another pollution-monitoring applica-
photomultiplier is used in an analog mode to tion, SO2 is detected down to a level of 0.002
detect the level of radiation incident on the ppm. Here, the sample containing SO2 is ir-
crystal. In the CAT scan operation the radiated with ultraviolet and the excited SO2
typical machine scans the patient in a few molecules fluoresce with blue radiation that
seconds and the level of irradiance from the is detected with a combination of a narrow-
crystal onto the photomultiplier is relatively band filter and photomultiplier. Very weak
high so that only a relatively low gain photo- signals are detected and again it is the high
multiplier is required. Furthermore, the gain, good signal-to-noise ratio and, in addi-
speed of response requirement for the tion, good blue sensitivity which makes the
photomultiplier is relatively modest-per- detection and measurement of small contam-
haps a few hundred microseconds. Still, the inations of SO2 possible.
principal advantage of using a photomulti- Spectroscopy is one of the very early ap-
plier in this application for the detection of plications for photomultipliers. The wide
the radiant signal is its good signal-to-noise range of radiation levels encountered is
ratio. This ratio is very important to the pa- readily handled by the approximately loga-
tient because a reduction in its signal-to- rithmic gain variation of the photomultiplier
noise ratio would have to be made up for with voltage. At very low signal levels, the
with an increased X-ray dose. Nevertheless, signal-to-noise capability of the photomulti-
there is interest and development activity plier is essential. Because photomultiplier
aimed at replacing the photomultiplier with spectral response (with quartz or ultraviolet-
silicon p-i-n detectors. Two factors could transmitting-glass windows) covers the range
favor the alternate use of a silicon cell: (1) a from ultraviolet to near infrared, the
better scintillator (BGO is almost an order of photomultiplier is the logical choice for spec-
magnitude less sensitive than NaI:Tl; (2) a troscopic applications, except in the infrared
faster scanning machine (a very desirable region of the spectrum.
technological advance because is would
minimize effects of body motions). Both of Photocell* Features
these factors would result in a larger Because of their small size and low cost,
photocurrent and could bring the signal level CdSe and CdS type photocells are the logical
for the silicon detector to the point where the selection for applications such as automatic
fundamental signal-to-noise ratio from the exposure control in photographic cameras or
X-ray source would not be degraded. Such various inspection and counting require-
developments may be anticipated because ments.
*“Photocell” is used here to indicate a photosensitive
the silicon detector would also have the ad- device in which the charge transport takes place through
vantage of smaller size and perhaps lower a solid as compared with “phototube” in which the
cost. charge transport is through a vacuum.
7
Photomultiplier Handbook
Many p-i-n silicon cells are used in com- diode can be of the order of 100, but the sen-
bination with lasers or LED’s (light emitting sitive area is small-about 0.5 square
diodes). Here, one of the principal advantages millimeter.
of the silicon cell is its good response in the Sensitive Area. Photomultiplier tubes are
near infrared out to 1100 nm. In combina- made in a variety of sizes so that many dif-
tion with the Nd:YAG laser emitting at 1060 ferent optical configurations can be accom-
nm, the silicon cell is used widely in laser modated. The largest photocathode area
ranging and laser tracking. A similar ap- available in commercial RCA photomulti-
plication utilizes an LED emitting near 900 plier tubes has a nominal diameter of 5 in-
nm with a silicon cell for automatic ranging ches and a minimum useful area of 97 square
for special camera equipment. Size and in- centimeters. By way of contrast, the 1/2-inch
frared sensitivity are again the important side-on photomultiplier has a projected pho-
qualifications. tocathode area of 0.14 square centimeter.
A rapidly growing application for photo- Silicon p-i-n diodes are available with sen-
cells is for fiber-optic communication sitive areas generally not larger than 1 square
systems. LED’s are coupled to the fibers and centimeter; and avalanche silicon cells, 0.005
the detector may be a p-i-n diode or, for a square centimeter. In many applications, a
better signal-to-noise ratio, a silicon ava- fairly large area is required, e.g., coupling to
lanche diode. The qualifying attributes for a cathode-ray tube or a large scintillator.
the choice of detector are size, near infrared This requirement generally indicates the use
sensitivity, adequate speed of response, and of a photomultiplier tube. Silicon cells are at
good signal-to-noise ratio. an advantage when the source is small for
Smoke detectors now use large numbers of direct coupling or for lens imaging.
LED’s and p-i-n silicon cells. Again size, Temperature. Photomultipliers are gener-
cost, and infrared sensitivity are the impor- ally not rated for operation at temperatures
tant qualifications. higher than 75° C. Exceptions are photomul-
Characteristics Comparison Summary tipliers having a Na2KSb photocathode. This
Spectral Response. Photomultipliers can bi-alkali photocathode can tolerate temper-
be obtained with good spectral sensitivity in atures up to 150° C or even higher for short
the range 200 to 900 nm. Silicon cells have cycles. In oil-well logging measurements this
rather poor blue sensitivity, but are excellent consideration is important. Photocathode
out to 1100 nm. In general, then, the photo- sensitivities and gain change very little with
multiplier is to be preferred for applications temperature, but dark current does increase
involving the shorter wavelengths, although rapidly. Dark currents at room temperature
other factors may override this considera- are of the order of 10 - l5 ampere at the pho-
tion. tocathode and double about every 10° C.
Speed of Response. If very fast response is Silicon cells are rated from - 50 to 80° C.
required, the photomultiplier is usually the Sensitivities are also relatively independent
best choice of a detector. Photomultipliers of temperature. But dark current which may
are available with rise times (10 to 90%) of 1 be 10- 7 ampere at room temperature, also
or 2 nanoseconds using a 50-ohm load. The tends to double about every 10° C.
inherent rise time of silicon cells may be in Signal-to-Noise Ratio. At very low light
the range 10 to 20 nanoseconds, depending levels, the limitation to detection and
upon the area of the cell. However, because measurement is generally the signal-to-noise
of the cell’s capacitance, the effective rise ratio. One way of describing the limit to
time is much longer depending upon the detection is to state the Equivalent Noise In-
choice of load resistance. For example, with put (ENI) or the Noise Equivalent Power
a 1-megohm load resistance, the rise time (NEP). The NEP is the power level into the
may be of the order of 20 microseconds. A device which provides a signal just equal to
fairly large load resistance must be chosen to the noise. Most often the bandwidth is
maintain good signal-to-noise characteristics specified as 1 hertz and the wavelength of the
for the silicon cell. Silicon avalanche photo- measurement is at the peak of the spectral
diodes can have rise times as short as 2 responsivity. ENI is the same type of specifi-
nanoseconds. Gain for an avalanche photo- cation except the unit instead of power may
8
Introduction
dwidth.
For a p-i-n silicon photocell, the NEP at 900 Malter, "The secondary-emission multipli -
nanometers may be of the order of 2 x er-a new electronic device,” Proc. IRE,
10- watts, or the EN1 of 1.5 x 10- l1 Vol. 24, pp. 351-375 (1936).
lumens. Both values are for a l-hertz band- 5 . J . R . P i e r c e , “Electron-multiplier
width. Thus, the photomultiplier is clearly design,” Bell Lab. Record, Vol. 16, pp.
superior in this category. Also it should be 305-309 (1938).
pointed out that the silicon diode must be 6. J.A. Rajchman, “Le courant residue1
coupled into a load resistance of about 5 dans les multiplicateurs d’electrons elec-
megohms in order to avoid noise domination trostatiques,” These L’Ecole Polytechnique
from the coupling resistor. Unfortunately, Federale (Zurich, 1938).
this large resistance then increases the effec- 7. V.K. Zworykin and J.A. Rajchman,
tive rise time of the silicon device to about “The electrostatic electron multiplier, Proc.
100 microseconds. The NEP of a silicon ava- IRE, Vol. 27, pp. 558-566 (1939).
lanche photodiode is about 10-14 watt at 8. J.A. Rajchman and R.L. Snyder, “An
900 nanometers or the ENI is 8 x 10 - l3 electrostatically focused multiplier
lumens, both for a l-Hz bandwidth. The phototube,” Electronics, Vol. 13, p. 20
lumen in these descriptions is that from a (1940).
tungsten source operating at 2856 K color 9. R.B. Janes, and A.M. Glover, “Recent
temperature. Peak emission for such a developments in phototubes,” RCA Review,
source is near 1000 nm and thus closely Vol. 6, pp. 43-54 (1941). Also, A.M. Glover,
matches the spectral peak of the silicon “A review of the development of sensitive
devices. phototubes,” Proc. IRE, Vol. 29, pp.
Gain. A photomultiplier can have a gain 413-423 (1941).
factor, by which the fundamental photo- 10. P. Gorlich, “Uber zusammengesetzte,
cathode signal is multiplied, of from 103 to durchsichtige Photokathoden,” 2. Physik,
10 8. Silicon avalanche photodiodes have a Vol. 101, p. 335 (1936).
gain of about 100. Silicon p-i-n diodes have 11. A.H. Sommer, P h o t o e m i s s i v e
no gain. The high gain of the photomulti- materials, John Wiley and Sons; 1968.
plier frequently eliminates the need of 12. R.E. Simon, Research in electron
special amplifiers, and its range of gain con- emission from semiconductors, Quarterly
trolled by the applied voltage provides flex- Report, Contract DA 36-039-AMC-02221
ibility in operation. (E) (1963).
Stability. Photomultiplier tubes are not 13. R.E. Simon and B.F. Williams,
noted for great stability although for low “Secondary-electron emission,” I E E E
anode currents and careful operation they Trans. Nucl. Sci., Vol. NS-15, pp. 166-170
are satisfactory. When the light level is (1968).
reasonably high, however, the very good 14. M.H. Sweet, “Logarithmic photomul-
stability of the silicon p-i-n cell is a con- tiplier tube photometer,” JOSA, Vol. 37, p.
siderable advantage. The silicon cell makes a 432 (1947).
particularly good reference device for this 15. H. Kallmann, Natur u Technik (July
reason. In fact, the National Bureau of Stan- 1947).
dards has been conducting special calibra- 16. J.W. Coltman and F.H. Marshall, “A
tion transfer studies using p-i-n silicon photomultiplier radiation detector,” Phys.
diodes. Rev., Vol. 72, p. 582 (1947).
17. R. Hofstadter, “Alkali halide scintilla-
REFERENCES tion counters,” Phys. Rev., Vol. 74, p. 100
1. H. Bruining, Physics and applications (1948).
of secondary electron emission, (McGraw- 18. H.O. Anger, “Scintillation camera”,
Hill Book Co., Inc.; 1954). Rev. Sci. Instr., Vol. 29, pp. 27-33 (1958).
9
2. Photomultiplier Design
10
surface s c i e n c e
ELSEVIER Applied Surface Science 111 (1997) 251-258
Abstract
Secondary-electron-emission processes under electron bombardment play an important role in the performance of a
variety of electron devices. While in some devices, the anode and the grid require materials that suppress the secondary-elec-
tron-generation process, the crossed-field amplifier (CFA) is an example where the cathode requires an efficient secondary-
electron-emission material. Secondary-electron-emission processes will be discussed by a three-step process: penetration of
the primary electrons, transmission of the secondary electrons through the material, and final escape of the secondary
electrons over the vacuum barrier. The transmission of the secondary electrons is one of the critical factors in determining
the magnitude of the secondary-electron yield. The wide band-gap in an insulator prevents low-energy secondary electrons
from losing energy through electron-electron collisions, thereby resulting in a large escape depth for the secondary electrons
and a large secondary-electron yield. In general, insulating materials have high secondary-electron yields, but a provision to
supply some level of electrical conductivity is necessary in order to replenish the electrons lost in the secondary-electron-
emission process. Our secondary-emission study of diamond demonstrates that the vacuum barrier height can have a strong
effect on the total yield. The combined effect of a large escape depth of the secondary electrons and a low vacuum-barrier
height is responsible for the extraordinarily high secondary-electron yields observed on hydrogen-terminated diamond
samples.
microwaves using a magnetically-insulated-line- dence (but not the magnitude) of the emission, ex-
oscillator (MILO) concept, and for beaming power cept in the simple case of A1, which is close to the
(wireless power transmission) using an electroni- assumed free-electron picture [9]. We will discuss
cally-steerable-phased-array-module (ESPAM) con- the secondary-electron-emission process in a mostly
cept. A good knowledge of secondary-electron-emis- qualitative manner, as done by Jenkin and Trodden
sion processes are crucial to the design of these [10], and will support the discussion with our obser-
devices. In some applications, e.g., AEGIS CFA's, vations. The discussion of the secondary-emission
only limited materials are available which have suffi- process is organized according to the distinct steps
ciently high secondary-electron yields to satisfy the used in all of the theories. The final step, which
device's needs. involves the overcome of the vacuum barrier, was
One of the major current challenges to crossed- considered to play only a minor role in the sec-
field devices (CFD's) is noise reduction. The re- ondary-electron-emission process. However, the sec-
quirement on the signal-to-noise ratio becomes more ondary-electron-emission behavior observed on dia-
stringent in radar applications, which demand high mond demonstrates the important role of the vacuum
resolution and fast response for small and close-to- barrier.
gether targets in a cluttered environment. In mi-
crowave-oven applications, a potential interference
with the neighboring band allocated to the new 2. Primary electron penetration and internal sec-
'wireless' services calls for a reduction in the side- ondary electron generation
band noise of the magnetrons. At present, CFDs are
The theories treat secondary-electron emission as
much noisier than coupled-cavity traveling-wave
occurring in three distinct steps: (l) production of
tubes, although in principle they should have compa-
internal secondary electrons by kinetic impact of the
rable noise characteristics [2,3]. Both experimental
primary electrons, (2) transport of the internal sec-
and theoretical efforts are pursuing noise reduction
ondary electrons through the sample bulk toward the
in CFDs with vigor. A thorough understanding of the
surface, and (3) escape of the electrons through the
secondary-electron-emission processes is essential to
solid-vacuum interface.
the success of these efforts. The secondary-electron-
The primary electrons are assumed to travel in a
emission characteristics of the cathodes are found to
straight-ahead path, slowing down through collisions
have a major effect on the signal-to-noise ratio [4,5].
with electrons and ions and transferring kinetic en-
In particular, numerical simulations and experimental
ergy to internally generated secondary electrons.
results have demonstrated that a very high electron
Most of the theories treat the energy loss according
emission (primary or secondary) would cause the
to the 'power law',
transition of the CFD to a low noise state [5].
Secondary-electron-emission is a complex pro- dE A
cess, and theoretical treatments are numerous. Earlier dx E" (1)
treatments have been reviewed by Dekker [6] and by where E is the energy of a primary electron at a
Hachenberg and Brauer [7]. More recent theoretical depth x, and A is an arbitrary constant. N(x), the
developments are summarized by Devooght et al. [8]. number of the secondary electrons produced in the
While the earlier models produced an overall agree- layer dx, is assumed to be equal to the energy loss in
ment with experimental observations as good as the the layer d E divided by the average excitation en-
more elaborate later models, the main problem was ergy B. Thus,
the lack of justification for the simplifying assump-
dE
tions [8]. These theories were able to predict most of N(x)dx = - ~ (2)
the important characteristics of the secondary-elec-
tron emission, such as the secondary-electron yield A straight forward derivation [ 10] leads to
as a function of primary-electron energy and the ,
energy distribution of the secondary electrons. All of N(x) = B( R - x)"/"+ ' (3)
the theories predict well only the functional depen-
A. Shih et al. / Applied Surf'ace Science I l l (1997) 251-258 253
2.00
and
E~ +1
....... ...............................................
0 = ° oo
1.60
R (4)
(n+ 1)a
1.20 4 0°
where R is the maximum penetration depth and E o : 22.5 °
is the initial energy of the primary electrons. .?/ 0°
The best fit for the value of n was found to be II 0.80 .i;
0.35, as determined by electron transmission mea-
surements in A1203 [11] as well as by fitting the 0.40
'reduced yield curves' [6] taken from many materi-
als. A quantum mechanical calculation [7] derived an
0.00 "
. . . . i . . . . i . . . . i . . . . i
approximate value of n = 0.39, which is fairly close 500 1000 1500 2000
to 0.35. The value obtained for n is valid over the Primary Electron Energy (eV)
energy range between 300 eV and 3 keV for the Fig. 2. Changes in the secondary-electron yield with incident
theory and 300 eV and 7 keV for the experiments. angle 0. Normal incidence is at 0 = 0°. The data were taken on a
Eq. (3) reveals the increasing importance of sec- clean molybdenumsample.
ondary-electron production near the end of the pri-
mary-electron path and Eq. (4) points out that the process or by a diffusion process which involves a
penetration depth of the primary electrons increases large number of scattering events. Some later models
with increasing energy. The former fact is clearly explicitly take into account the electron-cascade pro-
shown in Fig. 1, which can be understood on a cess, which is the electron multiplication that occurs
physical level by considering a simple description of during the slowing-down of the internal secondary
the primary electrons moving through the solid. At electrons. In all of the models, the escape of the
high primary energies, the high-velocity electrons internal secondary electrons is described by an expo-
have a relatively short time to interact with the nential decay law with a characteristic escape depth
lattice electrons, and the internal yield per unit length X s•
is low. As the primary electrons lose energy, the Based on the penetration-depth (R) and escape-
interaction time increases and so does the yield. The depth (X~) concepts, the shape of the secondary-elec-
combined effect is that as the primary-electron en- tron yield curve as a function of the primary energy
ergy increases, the internal secondary electrons origi- is easily explained [10]. At very low primary ener-
nate deeper beneath the surface. gies for which R << X~, the internal secondary elec-
The transport of secondary electrons through the trons escape efficiently, and due to the small primary
material is modeled by either a single-scattering energy only a few secondary electrons are created.
Since the number of internal secondary electrons
generated increases with primary energy, the ob-
served yield also rises with primary energy. At very
high primary energies for which R >> X~, the expo-
nential nature of the escape process causes the de-
Z
crease in the number of internal secondary electrons
z that escape to be more rapid than the increase in
0
I..- generation of internal secondary electrons. Conse-
0
GI
quently, the observed yield decreases with primary
0
w
energy. The yield has a maximum value at a primary
13. energy for which R ~ X~. The resulting energy de-
, , , I , , • ' • - - ' • • - ' . . . . . . . .
pendent yield curve is bell shaped, as commonly
DEPTH R observed on most materials. An example is shown in
Fig. 1. The production rate of internal secondary electrons as a Fig. 2 of yield curves taken on a molybdenum
function of distance along the primary-electron path. sample.
254 A. Shih et al. /Applied SurJace Science I 11 (1997) 251-258
A similar qualitative discussion can be made about conduction-band minimum. The electron affinity is
the variation in yield with incident angle. If the typically on the order of an electron volt for insula-
primary beam is incident at an angle 0 to the tors. Since there are few conduction electrons in
surface, the maximum penetration depth is reduced insulators, the secondary electrons lose energy
by a factor cos0 relative to that at normal incidence through the excitation of valence electrons into the
( 0 = 0), assuming a straight-ahead path for the pri- conduction band. The wide band gap prevents sec-
mary beam. Consequently, the yields are larger at ondary electrons with kinetic energy less than E~,p
more oblique angles, and the enhancement in yield is from participating in such electron-electron colli-
more apparent at the higher primary energies for sions. For these electrons, electron-phonon and elec-
which R >> X~. The family of yield curves shown in tron-impurity collisions are mainly responsible for
Fig. 2 were taken at various 0 on a clean molybde- the energy loss. Because of the absence of electron-
num sample [12]. E .... , the energy at which the electron scattering, the secondary electron loses much
maximum yield occurs, increases with 0: E,..... = less energy as it moves through material and the
490, 520, 550, 580, and 660 eV for 0 = 0, 22,5.40, escape depth becomes large. Therefore, in general,
50, and 60 °, respectively. Since E,,,~,x occurs at an the yields are high in insulators [6]. For example,
energy for which R cos0 = X~, a larger 0 results in a 6 ..... is 6.8 for NaC1 and 25 for single-crystal MgO
larger R. Since the penetration depth R and the [6].
primary energy E are related by Eq. (4), a larger 0 When the secondary-electron-yield coefficient ex-
results in a larger Era, x as well. ceeds one, the number of emitted secondary elec-
trons exceeds the number of arriving primary elec-
trons. Consequently, there is a net electron flow from
3. Transport of internal secondary electrons the emitting sample into vacuum, and some level of
electrical conductivity is necessary in the sample in
In general, a primary electron with a reasonably order to replenish the lost electrons. Otherwise, sam-
high energy generates many internal secondary elec- ple charging will decrease the secondary emission
trons. However, high secondary-electron yields are yield to 1. Different approaches have been used in
not always observed because most of the internal practice to provide electrical conductivity. In oxi-
secondary electrons lose enough energy through col- dized beryllium, only a top 10-20 A thick layer is
lisions with electrons and ions to fall below the composed of BeO, beneath which metallic Be sup-
vacuum level. The energy-loss mechanisms for inter- plies the electrical conductivity. M g O / A u cermet is
,20[
nal secondary electrons differ in metals and insula- composed of a mixture of Mg and Au micro-crystal-
tors. In metals, the secondary electrons lose energy
by interacting with conduction electrons, lattice vi-
brations, and defects. The kinetic energy of a sec-
ondary electron must be at least E F + 05 when it 10,0
reaches the surface in order to escape. E F and 05 are
the Fermi energy and the work function of the metal,
respectively, and the minimum escape energy E v + 05
is typically about 10 eV. This large minimum escape
energy and the high collision probability due to the
il 4.0 ::"
large number of conduction electrons result in the
small secondary-electron yields found with metals.
2O
The maximum yield 6r~,~ for a metal is on the order
of unity, and it varies between 0.5 (for Li) and 1.8 0.0
(for Pt) [6]. 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
In insulators, the minimum kinetic energy for a Primary Electron Energy (eV)
secondary electron to escape is the electron affinity Fig. 3. Effect of electrical conductivity on the secondary-electron
X, the difference between the vacuum level and the yield from diamond.
A. Shih et al./Applied Surface Science 111 (1997) 251-258 255
lites of about 50 ,~ diameter, with the Au particles Our study reveals that two of the key reasons for the
providing the conducting path [13]. In diamond, extremely high secondary-electron yields from H-
appropriate dopants are used to provide the neces- terminated diamond surfaces are: (1) the presence of
sary electrical conductivity. Fig. 3 compares the a wide-band gap in diamond (5.47 eV) which allows
secondary-electron-yield curves from N-doped and low-energy secondary electrons to have large escape
B-doped diamond samples. N is a deep donor in depths, and (2) a very low or even negative electron
diamond, and at room temperature N-doped diamond affinity at the surface which permits a large concen-
samples are insulators. Fig. 3 shows that the sec- tration of secondary electrons residing near the bot-
ondary-electron yields from the N-doped diamond tom of the conduction band to escape. These premises
are very low. In contrast, B is a shallow acceptor in are supported by the analysis of the secondary-elec-
diamond, and therefore B-doped diamond samples tron-yield data and the secondary-electron-energy-
are conductive. The three B-doped samples studied distribution spectra taken on diamond samples as
here have electrical resistivities between 50 f~ cm presented below.
and 170 k l ) cm, and all three as-received samples All of the diamond samples were grown by chem-
showed comparably high yields. The yield curve ical vapor deposition (CVD) on Si substrates and
taken from one of the samples is shown in Fig. 3. then lifted off in a free-standing form. All samples
were acid cleaned to remove surface impurities such
as Si and non-diamond carbon. Most of the diamond
4. Escape of secondary electrons over the vacuum samples that we studied were subjected to a 30-min
barrier hydrogenation process at 20 Tort hydrogen pressure,
600 W microwave power, and 800°C sample temper-
Most of the theories do not explicitly treat the ature. Hydrogenated diamond samples are H-
escape process at the solid-vacuum interface. A phe- terminated [ 19].
nomenological approach by Bouchard and Carette Fig. 4 shows an energy distribution curve (EDC)
[14] found that the potential barrier at a solid-vacuum of the secondary electrons emitted from a H-
interface controls the final shape of the secondary- terminated diamond sample. The measurement tech-
electron energy distribution. This model and other nique has been discussed in an earlier paper [20].
theories do not regard the vacuum-barrier height as The energy of the secondary electrons is measured
having a strong impact on the magnitude of the relative to the Fermi level E F of the sample. The
yield. For example, Jenkins and Trodden [10] argued
that "most of the secondary electrons have energies
greater than 10 eV. For this reason, we should expect ... \
that changes of the order of a volt in the work
function of the surface would have only a small
effect on the secondary emission coefficient". Fur- ~'\ / Ec + Egap
thermore, they provided experimental evidence of Na
adsorption on W, which reduced the work function
by nearly 3 eV but increased the yield by only 60%. xlO
However, the results of secondary-electron emission
studies on diamond disagree with the conventional
wisdom. We will show below that hydrogen-termina-
tion of diamond lowers the vacuum level by 1.45 eV ~ * . . . . . . .
0 5 1'0 " ' 1'5
but enhances the secondary-electron yield by more ENERGY (eV above EF)
than an order of magnitude.
Recent investigations have found very high sec- Fig. 4. Secondary-electronEDC of an as-receivedhydrogenated,
B-doped, diamond sample. The data was taken at a primary
ondary-electron yields from hydrogen-terminated di- electron energy of 1000 eV. The sharp peak is larger in spectra
amond samples [15-18]. Malta et al. [18] found a taken from samples with a saturated hydrogen coverage or in
yield as high as 86 from a (100) diamond surface. spectra taken with higher primary electron energies.
256 A. Shih et al. /Applied Surface Science 111 (1997) 251-258
secondary-yield materials, namely wide band-gap [7] O. Hachenberg and W. Brauer, in: ed. L. Marton, Advances
materials with low electron affinities. in Electronics and Electron Physics (Academic Press, New
York, 1959) p. 413.
[8] J. Devooght, A, Dubus and J.C. Dehaes, Phys. Rev. B 36
(1987) 5093.
Acknowledgements [9] A. Dubus, J. Devooght and J.C. Dehaes, Phys. Rev. B 36
The diamond samples studied were supplied by (1987) 5110.
[10] R.O. Jenkins and W.G. Trodden, Electron and Ion Emission
Drs. P. Pehrsson and J. Butler of the NRL Chemistry (Dover, New York, 1965) p. 54.
division. This work is supported in part by [11] J.R. Young, Phys. Rev 103 (1956)292.
NSWC/Crane Division and in part by the Vacuum [12] A. Shih and C. Hor, IEEE Trans. Elect. Devices 40 (1993)
Electronics Initiative. 824.
[13] V.H. Ritz, A. Shih and B. Sobocinski, Surf. Interface Anal.
18 (1992) 514.
References [14] C. Bouchard and J.D. Carette, Surf. Sci. 100 (1980) 251.
[15] G.T. Mearini, I.L. Krainsky, Y.X. Wang, J.A. Dayton, Jr., R.
[1] D. Chernin and Y.Y. Lau, ed., Proc. of the First Int. Work- Ramesham and M.F. Rose, Thin Solid Films 253 (1994) 151.
shop on Crossed-Field Devices, August 15-16, 1995, Ann [16] G.T. Mearini, I.L. Krainsky and J.A. Dayton, Jr., Surf. Int.
Arbor, Michigan. Anal. 21 (1994) 138.
[2] T.E. Ruden, G.E. Dombroski, D. Hobbs and G. Boles, Proc. [17] D.P. Malta, J.B. Posthill, T.P. Humphreys, R.E. Thomas,
of the First Int. Workshop on Crossed-Field Devices (1995) G.G. Fountain, R.A. Rudder, G.C. Hudson, M.J. Mantini and
66. R.J. Markunas, Mat. Res. Soc. Syrup. Proc. 339 (1994) 39.
[3] G. Ya. Levin, L.A. Semenov, A. Ya Usikov, Yu.A. Belov, [18] D.P. Malta, J.B. Posthill, T.P. Humphreys, M.J. Mantini and
Sov. J. Comm. Tech. Elect. 37 (1992) 128. R.J. Markunas, Mat. Res. Soc. Syrup. Proc. 416 (1996) 311.
[4] J.Z. Ye, R. MacGregor, C. Chan and T.E. Ruden, Proc. of [19] B.D.Thoms, P.E. Pehrsson and J.E. Butler, J. Appl. Phys. 75
the First Int. Workshop on Crossed-Field Devices (1995) (3) 1804 (1994).
202. [20] A. Shih, J. Yater, C. Hor and R. Abrams, IEEE Trans. Elect.
[5] H.L. McDowell, Proc. of the First Int. Workshop on Devices 41 (1994) 2448.
Crossed-Field Devices (1995) 236. [21] A. Shih, J. Yater, P. Pehrsson, J. Butler, C. Hor and R.
[6] A.J. Dekker, in: Solid State Physics, Advances in Research Abrams, Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 416 (1996) 461.
and Applications, eds. F. Seitz and D. Turnbull (Academic [22] F.J. Himpsel, J.A. Knapp, J.A. Van Vechten and D.E. East-
Press, New York, 1958) p. 251. man, Phys. Rev. B 20 (2) (1979) 624.
EUROPEAN ORGANIZATION FOR NUCLEAR RESEARCH
European Laboratory for Particle Physics
Abstract
The secondary electron emission of surfaces exposed to the impact of energetic electrons contributes
significantly to the electron cloud build-up. For the prediction of the consequences of this effect the
measurements of the secondary electron yield carried out at CERN are an important source of
information. New experimental results concerning the total secondary electron yield for very low
primary electron energy (between 5 eV and 50 eV) will be also given in the case of as received copper.
Furthermore the energy distribution of the re-emitted electrons is drastically influenced by the primary
electron energy. The ratio of the number of reflected electrons to the total number of re-emitted electrons
has been measured and its variation with the primary electron energy will be shown. As a consequence
of these new experimental data, a numerical approximation to express the secondary electron yield as a
function of the primary electron energy will be given for the low incident electron energy region
(E < 50 eV). It has been shown that the decrease of the secondary electron yield due to the electron
bombardment could reduce sufficiently the consequences electron cloud effect. To understand further
the origin of this decrease, the results of experiments showing the variation of the electron induced
desorption yield with the incident electron dose will be compared to the concomitant reduction of the
secondary electron yield.
LHC-VAC
Administrative Secretariat
LHC Division
CERN
CH - 1211 Geneva 23
Switzerland
2.5
2.3
2.1
1.9
1.7
1.5
1.3
1.1
0.9
0.7
0.5
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
Energy (eV)
Figure 1: Variation of the average secondary electron yield versus electron energy for 25 as received
copper samples
For the energy measurements, a 4 grids hemispherical energy analyser has been used. Its
energy resolution is limited to some eV and the energies given do not take into account any
correction of contact potential between the filament gun and the sample. The dose effect was
studied using various procedures. Initially (1978) the electron dose was delivered to the sample
using the measurement gun. The yield was continuously measured at the bombardment energy.
Because of the rapid destruction of the expensive gun filament, this method was abandoned and a
rustic flood gun was added to the laboratory system allowing to irradiate completely the sample
2
surface. In EPA the electron dose was accumulated by biasing the sample to a variable positive
voltage that attracted the photoelectrons created by the synchrotron light.
A change in the bias voltage modifies the mean energy of the incident electrons as well as their
amount. As the sample bias voltage changes the collection efficiency of the sample, the photon dose
needed to condition the sample are not directly comparable when the sample bias is modified. The
dose is determined by integrating the current collected on the sample. The main difference between
these two methods to accumulate the dose is that in EPA any artefact linked to the presence of a hot
filament for the production of the impinging electron has been eliminated.
23-01-01/ A.R.
1.2
31-01-01/ A.R.
23-03-01 /5.6 e-4
31-01-01/ 5.6 e-4
1.0 31-01-01/ 1.01 e-2
23-03-01 / 9.6 e-3
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Energy (eV)
Figure 2: Variation of the average secondary electron yield versus electron energy for copper samples
and energies lower than 30 eV
2 THE VARIATION OF THE SECONDARY ELECTRON YIELD OF COPPER VERSUS
THE PRIMARY ELECTRON ENERGY
Figure 1 shows the mean secondary electron yield (S.E.Y.) measured on 25 as received copper
samples cleaned following the LHC recipe. The average maximum is 2.06 (σ = 0.16) for an energy
of 271 eV (σ = 25). The bars are used to display the spread between the minimum and maximum
S.E.Y. at each energy for these 25 samples. The low energy part of the δ (E) curves was measured
recently and is displayed in Figure 2 for various electron doses (cf. next section). The two curves
labelled 23/03 AR and 31/01 AR show the SEY as a function of the energy for electron energies
between 4 eV and 30 eV. The SEY at 4 eV lies between 0.6 and 0.8. Below 10 eV the as received
curves tend to indicate a constant value of the SEY, independent of the electron energy.
3
3 THE CHANGE OF THE SECONDARY ELECTRON EMISSION WITH THE
INCIDENT ELECTRON DOSE
The variation of the SEY with the electron dose is an effect leading, when not properly taken
into account, to underestimated secondary electron yield. This brought us to modify the
experimental set up and procedure in order to decrease as much as possible the electron dose
received by the sample during the measurements4. In Chamonix X 1 it was proposed to take profit
of this effect to obtain the decrease of the copper SEY necessary to operate LHC without “electron
cloud effect”.
2.6 DELTA MAX 23-03
DELTA MAX 31-01
ELECTRON GUN measured at 500 eV
2.4
DELTA MAX EPA 99V
2.2
2.0
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0
1.E-08 1.E-07 1.E-06 1.E-05 1.E-04 1.E-03 1.E-02
Dose (C/mm2)
Figure 3: The variation of the secondary electron yield with the incident electron dose
In Figure 3, the variation of the SEY of as received copper is plotted against the incident
electron dose for various measurements made using various procedures and under various
experimental conditions:
• The curve noted electron gun was obtained in 1979 using an electron gun on a copper
sample. It gives the SEY of copper at 500 eV energy versus the electron dose. The
impinging electrons had an energy of 500 eV. The area irradiated by the beam was a circle
of approximately 2 mm diameter.
• The curve note “delta max EPA” gives the variation of the maximum SEY against the dose
of electron collected with a bias of 99 V (i.e. 99 eV impinging electron energy).
• The 2 curves noted ‘delta max 23-03” and “delta max 31-01” were obtained this year using
a flood gun irradiating the whole sample with an electron energy of 500 eV.
These curves show that an electron dose between 8x 10-4 and 2x 10-3 C/mm2 is necessary to
reach a SEY lower than 1.3. The minimum of the SEY (close to 1.1) is obtained for an electron
dose close to 10-2 C/mm2.(fully conditioned sample).
4
In Figure 2 the low energy part of the two later curves (23-03 and 31-01) are also shown. The
reproducibility is very good, the SEY are continuously decreasing below 10 eV and are close to 0.2
at an energy of 4 eV.
4 THE ENERGY DISTRIBUTION OF THE SECONDARY ELECTRONS,
EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS AND CURVES REFLECTED/TRUE SECONDARIES
VERSUS INCIDENT ELECTRON ENERGY
The preceding measurements have shown the peculiar behaviour of the SEY as the primary
electron energy decreases. These peculiarities could be related to the change in the shape of the
secondary electron energy distribution. This distribution was studied using a 4 grids hemispherical
energy analyser. The energy axis is shifted by an unknown amount (< 3eV) due to the unknown
contact potential between the filament and the sample. It must be emphasised that, because of the
large amount of incident electrons needed for this type of measurement, the data presented here are
related to a copper close to the “conditioned state”.
1.6
1.4
1.2
0.8
LAB SAMPLE 12
0.6 EPA 99 eV
LAB SAMPLE 13
0.4 EPA 800 eV
EPA 350 eV
0.2 LAB GUN 500 eV
ARGON G.D. COPPER
0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
ENERGY (eV)
Figure 4: Variation of the secondary electron yield versus the primary electron energy for 6 fully
conditioned (10-2 C/mm2) copper
In Figure 5 the energy distribution of secondary electrons emitted by a copper sample are
shown using two normalised axis: the abscissae are normalised to 1 at the incident electron energy,
the ordinates are normalised to 1000 for the maximum emitted intensity. On this graph the
increased importance of the reflected electrons at low primary electron energy is striking when the
curves measured at 10 eV and 550 eV are compared. A second fact, also reported in the literature5,
is illustrated in Figure 6 which shows a slight shift towards lower energy in the position of the
“true” secondary electron peak when the incident electron energy is raised.
5
The “true”secondary electron peak is found around an energy of 2 eV. Using the data partially
presented in Figure 5 the ratio between the number of reflected electrons and the total number of
emitted electrons has been calculated for the five energies considered (10, 30, 100, 300, 550 eV).
This ratio is given in Figure 7 as a function of the primary electron energy.
5 NUMERICAL EXPRESSIONS FOR THE RELATION BETWEEN THE SECONDARY
ELECTRON YIELD AND THE INCIDENT ELECTRON ENERGY
Usual expressions given by M. Furman6 or J.J. Scholtz7 can be used to numerically express the
variation of the true secondary electron yield δs with the primary electron energy (Ep). Both
formulae give good fits to the measured curves for a given energy range. The simple expression
given by M. Furman produces a reasonable fit in the low primary energy part (Ep< 1000 eV) which
is the most interesting for LHC. In the low energy region (<100 eV) the importance of the reflected
electrons becomes more important as it can be deduced from Figure 5. For this reason the fit
formula proposed here uses the Furman formula corrected for the contribution of reflected
electrons. The reflected electron contribution has been assessed from the previously shown
experimental data on the secondary electron energy distribution for copper. Furman’s relation for
the true secondary electron yield is:
E
s×( p )
δs = δ MAX E MAX
E s
s −1 + p
E MAX
δMAX, s and EMAX are 3 parameters used to obtain the best fit to the experimental.
1000
900
Ep= 10 eV
800
Ep=30 eV
700
Ep= 100 eV
600
Ep=300 eV
500 Ep=550 eV
400
300
200
100
0
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00
NORMALISED ENERGY
6
Ep= 10 eV
1000 Ep=30 eV
Ep= 100 eV
900 Ep=300 eV
800 Ep=550 eV
700
600
500
400
E max 550
300
Emax 10
200
100
0
0 2 4 6 8 10
ENERGY (eV)
100%
REF/TOT
FIT II
1%
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
PRIMARY ELECTRON ENERGY
Figure 7: The ratio between the reflected and the total number of re-emitted electrons in the case
of copper
7
The numerical value used to fit the experimental data presented in Figure 1 are given in
Table 1.
Table 1: Fit parameters for the true secondary yield (M.Furman formula)
To introduce the correction due to the reflected electrons two approximations could be made
depending on the accuracy needed. Of course as it appears in Figure 7, the correction for reflected
electrons is only significant at energy lower than 300 eV and amounts to more than 10% for
energies below 100 eV. A relation 7 allows to fit the experimental curve given in Figure 7:
ln( f ) = A0 + A1 × (ln(E p + E0 )) + A2 × (ln(E p + E0 ))2 + A3 × (ln(E p + E0 ))3
To obtain the best fit in the low energy part (below 300 eV), the following constants
has been used:
A0 = 20.699890, A1= -7.07605, A2= 0.483547, A3= 0, E0=56.914686
(Curve labelled FIT II low energy).
For use up to higher primary electron energy (2000 eV), the following coefficients
should be used:
A0 = 0.300207076, A1= 0.044915014, A2= -0.155498672, A3= 9.50318 x 10-4, E0=0
(Curve labelled FIT II)
A simplified exponential relation of the form:
f = R0 × exp(−E p / w)
can also be used below 100 eV using the following numerical constants:
R0= .64438713, w=43.2268304. (Curve labelled EXP FIT)
The accuracy of the various approximations can be appreciated from Figure 7.
The various formulae used to account for the reflected electron contribution at low energy
combined with Furman’s formula have been checked against the measured value of the total
secondary electron yield (δt) in the two cases of as received copper and fully conditioned copper
(dose = 10-2 C/mm2). To calculate δt, the following formula was considered:
δt = δS + δR ,
δR = f × δt ⇒ δt = δS + f × δ t
1
Hence: δt = δ s ×
(1 − f )
The results of the two fits are compared to the experimental results on the two Figures 8 (as
received case) and 9 (fully conditioned case). In both cases the agreement with the measured
secondary electron yield is good between 1000 and 100 eV incident energy. For energies greater
than 300 eV, the contribution of the reflected electrons can be neglected and M. Furman formula
used without correction. The low energy part (Ep < 100 eV) of the two graphs 8 and 9 is expanded
on the two graphs 10 and 11 to compare the results of the two fitting formulae to the experimental
results. Above 20 eV incident energy, both formulae give the same results. Below 20 eV (i.e. when
the reflected contribution accounts for more than 25% of the total number of secondary electrons)
the exponential fit gives increasingly underestimated value.
8
2.2
2.0
1.8
CU AS RECEIVED
1.6
1.4
1.2
EXPERIMENTAL DATA (AVERAGE ON 25 SAMPLES)
0.4
0.2
0.0
0 200 400 600 800 1000
ENERGY (eV)
Figure 8: The numerical expressions for the various contributions to the secondary electron yield
compared to the experimental measurements in the case of as received copper.
1.2
1.0
EXPERIMENTAL DATA
0.6 FIT FURMAN
FIT+REFLECTED
REFLECTED
0.4 EXP FIT + REFLECTED
0.2
0.0
0 200 400 600 800 1000
ENERGY (eV)
Figure 9: The numerical expressions for the various contributions to the secondary electron yield
compared to the experimental measurements in the case of fully conditioned copper
9
1.8
CU AS RECEIVED
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0
EXPERIMENTAL DATA (AVERAGE
0.8 ON 25 SAMPLES)
FIT FURMAN
0.6 REFLECTED
FIT + REFLECTED
0.4
EXP FIT + REFLECTED
0.2
0.0
0 20 40 60 80 100
ENERGY (eV)
Figure 10: The numerical expressions for the various contributions to the secondary electron yield
compared to the experimental measurements in the case of as received copper (Ep < 100 eV)
1.0
CU EXPOSED TO 0.01 C/mm2
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
EXPERIMENTAL DATA
0.4 FIT FURMAN
FIT+REFLECTED
0.3
REFLECTED
0.1
0.0
0 20 40 60 80 100
ENERGY (eV)
Figure 11: The numerical expressions for the various contributions to the secondary electron yield
compared to the experimental measurements in the case of fully conditioned copper (Ep < 100 eV)
10
6 COMPARISON WITH OTHER PUBLISHED DATA
Measurements of the secondary electron yield of as received copper have been published in
references 8,9. They are compared to the results obtained at CERN for as received copper in
Figure 12. The agreement between CERN measurement and Hopman measurements is good. The
measurements made at SLAC gives a maximum secondary electron yield, which is significantly
smaller than those obtained in the two other labs. The different measurements obtained for a
primary electron energy in the vicinity of 1000 eV are close to each other.
A dose dependence curve has also been given in reference 8. This curve is compared with a
typical curve obtained at CERN in Figure 13. As noticed in Figure 12, the initial yield is much
smaller than what is measured at CERN and the yield decrease proceeds at a slower rate. The fully
conditioned state was apparently not obtained in that reference 8.
HOPMAN,VERHOEVEN AS RECEIVED OFHC COPPER Appl.Surf.sci 150,1-
7,(1999)
B. HENRIST AS RECEIVED OFHC COPPER CERN 31/01/01
2.1
1.9
1.7
1.5
1.3
1.1
0.9
0.7
0.5
0 1000 2000 3000 4000
ENERGY (eV)
Figure 12: The variation of the secondary electron yield versus the primary electron energy as
obtained in three different laboratories
11
B. HENRIST CERN 31/01/01
2.4
R.E. KIRBY PEP II HER COPPER SLAC
PUB-8212
2.2
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1
1.E-09 1.E-07 1.E-05 1.E-03 1.E-01
DOSE (C/mm2)
Figure 13: Comparison of the dose dependence of the secondary electron yield as measured at CERN
and at SLAC
7 ESTIMATION OF THE QUANTITY OF GAS RELEASED DURING THE
CONDITIONING.
During the electron bombardment of a surface, leading to the above mentioned decrease of the
secondary electron yield, a significant decrease of the electron induced desorption yield is also
observed10,11. The desorption yields data, obtained in a separate system, on an as-received copper
sample, are presented together with the data concerning the secondary electron yield in Figure 14 as
a function of the number of electrons impinging per unit area. To allow a better comparison, both
data are normalised to 1 in the initial non-bombarded state. These data allow the calculation of the
amount of gas released during the conditioning of a copper surface by integrating the product of the
desorption yield and the electron dose.
Table 2: Total number of molecules released per unit area during processing for the main desorbed
gases
GASES H2 CH4 CO C2H6 CO2 H2O
QUANTITY (cm-2) 6x10 16 8x10 14 8x10 15 8x10 14 8x10 15 3x10 14
Figure 15 shows as a function of the total number of molecules released per unit surface area,
the secondary electron yield ratio and the desorption yield ratio for three molecular species. These
were chosen (for the sake of clarity) to represent the main desorbed gases of the two types:
hydrogen and carbon containing gases, (H2, CO and C2H6).
12
1.E+00 1
1.E-01
NORMALISED SECONDARY
ELECTRON YIELD
1.E-02 H2
CH4
CO
1.E-03 C2H6
CO2
DELTA MAX 31-01
DELTA MAX 23-03
1.E-04 0.1
1E+12 1E+14 1E+16 1E+18 1E+20
-
ELECTRON DOSE (e /cm2)
Figure 14: The variation of the normalised desorption and secondary electron yields with the electron
dose
These data show that the reduction of both the secondary electron yield and the desorption
yield are two processes evolving in parallel during the irradiation of a surface by electrons. The
upper limit of the total number (the mantissa being rounded to the next integer) of molecules
released during the conditioning of a copper surface is given in Table 2 for the main desorbed
gases. Hydrogen is the main released gas, its predominance is established during the initial part of
the conditioning when desorption yields are the highest and hydrogen the most abundant species,
carbon monoxyde and dioxyde come in second position. These results are in good agreement with
those concerning desorption yields published in the reference 11.The total number of molecules
removed from an as-received copper surface during its conditioning is smaller than 1017 molecules
per cm2 i.e. less than 100 monolayers. The number of molecules released per unit surface area
during the conditioning process is given in Figure 16 as a function of the final secondary electron
yield achieved. Although both the desorption yield and the secondary electron yield evolve in
parallel under electron bombardment, it should not be concluded that the cleaning of the surface is
the origin of the decrease of the secondary electron yield. For example a clean copper surface (e.g.
in situ glow discharge cleaned) has a secondary electron yield higher than a conditioned surface
(see Figure 4, curve labelled: “Argon G.D. Copper”).
13
1.E+00 1.0
1.E-01
CO
C2H6
1.E-03
DELTA MAX 31-01
1.E-04 0.1
x
1E+12 1E+13 1E+14 1E+15 1E+16 1E+17
TOTAL NUMBER OF DESORBED MOLECULES PER UNIT
-2
AREA (mol/cm )
Figure 15: The normalised desorption and secondary electron yields as a function of the total number
of desorbed molecules
1.E+18 H2-23/03
CO-23/03
CO2-23/03
1.E+17 CH4-23/03
C2H6-23/03
H2O-23/03
TOT-23/03
1.E+16
T0T-31/01
1.E+15
1.E+14
1.E+13
1.E+12
1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4
SECONDARY ELECTRON YIELD
Figure 16: The quantity of desorbed molecules per unit area as a function of the final secondary
electron yield
14
8 CONCLUSIONS
The conditioning of as received copper surfaces has been studied in various experimental set-
ups and coherent results have proved its efficiency to reduce the secondary electron yield. Based on
measurements of the secondary electron energy distribution, a numerical expression has been given
which allows to calculate the fraction of reflected electrons with a good agreement to the
experimental data between 4 and 500 eV. The Furman’s expression has been used and the relevant
parameters are given to calculate the true secondary electron yield as a function of the primary
electron energy. Combining both formulae permits to compute the total number of electrons emitted
when the energy of the incident electrons is given. Using data obtained for electron induced
desorption it has been shown that the quantity of molecules removed from a surface during
processing is smaller than 1017 molecules.cm-2. Using these data, it is now possible to better
estimate the amount of gas released during the beginning of the LHC operation when multipacting
can occur because of the electron cloud effect. Although the phenomenon of conditioning has been
obtained reproducibly on many samples, in different experimental set-ups, the exact mechanism
leading to this effect is not properly understood. This is of course not a comfortable situation as the
LHC operation at nominal intensity relies on this effect. Further studies are going on to try to
elucidate the main physical parameters responsible for this beneficial effect.
1
V. Baglin, B. Henrist, N. Hilleret, E. Mercier, C. Scheuerlein: Proceedings of the X workshop on LEP-SPS
performance Chamonix , 130, 2000.
2
V. Baglin, J. Bojko, O. Gröbner, B. Henrist, N. Hilleret, C. Scheuerlein, M. Taborelli: 7th Europen Accelerator
Conference, Vienna, 217-220, 2000.
3
V. Baglin, I.R. Collins, O. Gröbner, C. Grünhagel, B. Henrist, N. Hilleret, B. Jenninger: Proceedings of the
XI workshop on LEP-SPS performance Chamonix , 141, 2001.
4
G. Arnolds-Mayer, N. Hilleret: Advances in Cryogenic Engineering Materials, 28, 611-621, 1982
5
R. Bindi, H. Lanteri, P. Rostaing, J. Phys. D: Appl.Phys. 13,267, 1980.
6
M. A. Furman, CERN LHC Project Report 180, 1998.
7
J.J. Scholtz, D. Dijkkamp, R.W.A. Schmitz, Philips J. Res. 50, 375-389, 1996.
8
R. E. Kirby, F. K. King SLAC-PUB-8212, 2000.
9
H.J. Hopman, J. Verhoeven: Applied Surface Science, 150, 1-7, 1999.
10
F. le Pimpec: Thèse Université de Paris VI, 2000.
11
J. Gomez-Goni, A.G. Mathewson, J. Vac. Sci.Technol. A 15, 6, 3093-3103, 1997
15
APPLIED PHYSICS LETTERS VOLUME 81, NUMBER 6 5 AUGUST 2002
Secondary electron emission 共SEE兲 with bombardment was deposited on the vertically grown MWCNTs using elec-
of primary electrons plays an important role in vacuum de- tron beam deposition. Figure 1共a兲 shows the scanning elec-
vices. For instance, electron multiplier, microchannel plate, tron microscope 共SEM兲 image of MgO-coated MWCNTs,
and electron gun require the SEE materials with a high am- where CNTs are encapsulated by MgO only on the top area.
plification yield. In general, insulators are good candidates The inset shows a typical transmission electron microscope
for high SEE. The secondary electrons generated by the pri- 共TEM兲 image, where the thickness of MgO film at the side-
mary electrons in a magnesium oxide 共MgO兲 film move to wall is about 50–300 Å and the thickness at top of the CNT
the surface with relatively weak electron–electron scatter- tip about 500–2000 Å, although the nominal thickness of
ings due to the absence of free electrons in insulator, and MgO film from an electron-beam evaporator was 3000 Å.
finally escape from the surface if they have enough energy to This suggests that relatively small amount of MgO was de-
overcome the work function of the materials.1 Single crystal posited on CNTs compared to the thin film on a flat surface.
MgO, for instance, has a SEE yield of about 25 at best.2 On Figure 1共b兲 shows a schematic diagram of our apparatus
the other hand, the porous MgO produces high SEE yield of setup to measure the SEE. The MgO-coated CNT films were
about 1000 under the high electric field.3 However, for a bombarded by the primary electrons (I p ) which generates the
given yield, it is always desirable to look for the condition in secondary electrons (I s ) in the MgO film. The I p was mea-
which the lowest field is used. Recently a MgO film was sured by applying a positive bias of 200 V to the sample
deposited on randomly oriented carbon nanotube 共CNT兲 holder in order to avoid the leakage current to the chamber
powder, where relatively large SEE of maximum 15 000 at a wall. The I p was fixed at 233 nA during the experiment,
backbias of 1400 V was obtained.4 Yet the SEE obtained was while its kinetic energy was varied. The yield of secondary
strongly dependent on the sample positions and not repro- electron emission 共␦兲 is then defined as I s /I p ⫽(I p ⫹I t )/I p
ducible either. In this report, we introduce a systematic ap- ⫽1⫹I t /I p , where I s can be measured by the Faraday cup.5
proach to reproduce high SEE using MgO on vertically In practice, I s can be easily obtained by measuring I p and I t
grown multiwalled carbon nanotubes 共MWCNTs兲. We ob- 共the current supplied from the substrate兲, instead. The nega-
served an unusually high SEE yield of greater than 22 000 tive backbias to the sample decelerates the incident primary
共beyond the limit of a detector兲 at a backbias of 850 V, which electrons, while accelerating the secondary electrons to es-
was strongly related to the MgO film thickness. cape from the surface. In case of no primary electron, no
MWCNTs were grown by thermal chemical vapor depo- secondary electrons are generated. Note that the electric field
sition on the Ni-coated Si substrate using a C2 H2 gas at generated by the negative backbias is small such that no field
650 °C. 5 The average diameter and length of the grown emission currents are observed. The charge replenishment is
CNTs were 300 Å and 20 m, respectively. A MgO thin film achieved by the current through the sample from the I t .
Figure 2共a兲 shows the yield as a function of net primary
a兲
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed: electronic mail: electron energy (⌬E), which is defined by the energy differ-
leeyoung@yurim.skku.ac.kr ence E p -eV t , where E p and V t are primary electron energy
FIG. 1. 共a兲 The SEM image of MWCNTs covered with a MgO film. 共b兲 The
schematic diagram for SEE experimental setup.
Downloaded 30 Jul 2002 to 202.20.193.209. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright, see http://ojps.aip.org/aplo/aplcr.jsp
MEASUREMENTS AND STUDIES OF
SECONDARY ELECTRON EMISSION OF
DIAMOND AMPLIFIED PHOTOCATHODE
Qiong Wu
September, 2008
ii
__________________________
(David V. Baxter, PhD)
__________________________
(Mark H. Hess, PhD)
__________________________
(Richard J. Van Kooten, PhD)
Copyright ©2008 by
Qiong Wu
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
iv
To my parents.
v
Acknowledgement
The work covered in this thesis could not be done without the help and
Shyh-Yuan Lee for his supervision, advice, and guidance from the very early
always inspired me as a student, and I believe the benefit I received from this
will continue on. He opened my mind to this distinguished field, and led me
through the hardest time at the beginning. I am honored to become one of his
After two and half years of course study in Indiana University, I moved
looking for a PhD research topic. Dr. Ilan Ben-Zvi’s diamond secondary
emission group caught my interest. After I joined the group, all group
learning experience.
genuinely talented scientist, he would then analyze the problem along with
all my questions and bright thoughts to this project. The working experience
Triveni Rao, and John Smedley. As members in the group, they taught me so
I would also like to acknowledge the people who have contribute in this
project: Craig Rhein, Joseph Saetta, John Walsh, Harrold Dorr, and Richard
Talman.
Dr. David Baxter, Dr. Mark Hess, and Dr. Richard Van Kooten for agreeing
take time to review my thesis. They have given me many good suggestions
ABSTRACT
Qiong Wu
Amplified Photocathode
accelerators.
High purity Chemical Vapor Deposition diamond films are used as the amplifier
and are bombarded onto tens of nanometer thick metal coating and into the diamond
sample. Within 1 micron travel in the diamond, the primary electrons generate
Secondary electrons are accelerated through the diamond and will emit into vacuum
through surface with hydrogen termination. The electrons emitted should have very
low thermal emittance, for the electrons are constrained to the bottom of the
conduction band. The entire sample preparing process includes severe chemical
specific equipments, and the quality of preparation is controlled by the Atomic Force
This thesis covers all aspects of this project, and will focus on the physics of
electron transfer within and out of the diamond sample. The measurements of the gain
are taken and compared under different conditions for obtaining the highest
gain of over 200 in the diamond and over 70 for emission into the vacuum. The
diamond will also act as a vacuum barrier, protecting the photocathode from
CONTENTS
1 Introduction ................................................................................................. 1
2 DAP Design................................................................................................. 10
..................................................................................................................... 40
5.4 Energy lost in metal coating and estimation of energy needed for each e-h
pair .................................................................................................................. 63
7.2 Limitations...................................................................................................... 89
List of Tables:
Table 5.1: Energy needed for create one electron hole pair. .................................................... 66
Table 6.1: Average radii used in theoratical model calculation.Error! Bookmark not defined.
xiv
List of Figures:
Figure 2.1: DAP Design. (Photo on the left is taken by J. Grimes) ......................................... 10
Figure 2.2: Field and energy bands in the diamond with NEA surface. .................................. 14
Figure 3.1: Near-edge x-ray absorption fine structure (NEXAF) comparison of diamond
Figure 4.1: AFM scanning pictures of typical single crystal diamond sample bare and
metalized surfaces. Top two are taken by optical camera, and the structure on the
bare diamond surface is the image of the holder of the diamond. The scanning
cantilever width of the AFM is 0.04mm. The middle and bottom pictures are AFM
scanning topography and feedback circuit signal of the bare diamond surface.
Sample number HID8. Sample scanned after ultrasonic cleaning in ethyl alcohol. ...... 25
Figure 4.3: 532nm ns pulse laser ablated polycrystalline diamond under optical
microscope (left) and Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) (right). (These pictures
Figure 4.4: 266nm ns pulse laser ablated polycrystalline diamond under optical
microscope (left) and Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) (right). (These pictures
Figure 4.5: AFM image of polycrystalline diamond 266nm laser ablated area center. ........... 30
Figure 4.6: NEXAFS trace of unablated and ablated regions of diamond sample and
reference trace for amorphous carbon. (These curves are obtained by J. Smedley) ...... 31
Figure 4.7: 213nm ns pulse laser ablated polycrystalline diamond under optical
Figure 4.8: AFM image of polycrystalline diamond 213nm laser ablated area center. ........... 33
xv
Figure 4.9: Raman spectra of samples following ablation with different O2 pressures.
Figure 4.10: FTIR spectra of before and after UV exposure of ablated area. Different
Figure 4.11: Optical microscope picture of 213nm laser ablated single crystal diamond.
Figure 4.12: AFM image of single crystal diamond 213nm laser ablated area edge. .............. 38
Figure 4.13: AFM image of single crystal diamond 213nm laser ablated area center. ............ 38
Figure 5.1: EGG-3101 thermionic electron gun from Kimball Physics. ................................. 41
Figure 5.4: Simple sketch of the transmission mode measurement principle. Either side of
Figure 5.5: Primary electron signal with pulse width of 200μs. .............................................. 47
Figure 5.6: Comparison of low field (top: 0.3MV/m) and high field (bottom: 3MV/m)
Figure 5.7: Single crystal diamond window gain with primary electron energy ranges from
Figure 5.8: Secondary electron signal of 10μs pulse width with different duty cycles. No
laser beam applied. Primary electron peak current density is 0.03A/m2 and the field
Figure 5.9: Secondary electron signal of 10μs pulse width with different duty cycles. Laser
beam applied (532nm, <5mW). Primary electron peak current density is 0.03A/m2
Figure 5.10: Gain comparison of with and without laser detrapping under different current
Figure 5.11: Gain comparison of with and without laser detrapping under different primary
Figure 5.12: Gain comparison of with and without laser detrapping under various pulse
repetition rates. The pulse width for each measurement is fixed at 10μs. Primary
Figure 6.1: Simple sketch of emission mode measurement principle. Either side can be
grounded. ....................................................................................................................... 71
Figure 6.3: First pulse gain under room temperature (23°C) with different field and
effective energy for each pulse. Effective energy is the energy of the primary beam
Figure 6.4: Secondary signal with different delays for the primary electron after applying
Figure 6.7: Room temperature (23°C) measurement with laser applied (532nm laser,
<5mW). .......................................................................................................................... 84
Figure 6.8: High temperature (200°C) measurement with laser applied (532nm laser,
<5mW). .......................................................................................................................... 85
Figure 6.9: Low temperature (-140°C) measurement with laser applied (532nm laser,
<5mW). .......................................................................................................................... 86
Figure 7.1: Setup design for thermal energy measurement of diamond secondary emission.. 88
xvii
Figure 7.2: Acceleration of the secondary electrons by applying a high voltage across the
Figure 7.3: Aberration and space charge effects on beam spot size on screen. ....................... 91
Figure 7.7: The offset magnetic field to the center of the electron beam and the waist.
FWHM difference according to the offset. Thermal energy of the beam is 0.1eV. ....... 97
xviii
Introduction 1
1 INTRODUCTION
applications. Besides the contribution of electron colliders such as LEP in the precise
have made possible high brightness, constant power, and short wavelength light
sources to be possible. Synchrotron Light Sources and Free Electron Lasers (FEL)
provide the largest work platforms with high X-ray energy and brightness for biology,
chemistry, material science, medical science, and much more. Many applications
require continuous current, high intensity electron beams with narrow spatial and
temporal distributions.
rely on thermal energy overcoming the electrostatic forces restraining the charge
carriers of certain materials. The emitted current is limited by the temperature of the
cathode and the electric field. In recent years, photocathodes became widely used as
an electron source. The negatively charged electrode covered with a layer of light
sensitive material will emit electrons when struck by photons with energy above the
material‟s band gap. This type of cathode can provide high brightness electron beams
Introduction 2
and low emittance when combined with the high electric field available in an RF gun.
Metallic materials such as magnesium and copper are popular in RF guns that
operate with low average current [1, 2]. These metallic materials are easy to prepare,
robust and low in cost. The most important parameter for photocathodes is the
quantum efficiency (QE), which is the percentage of photons hitting the photoreactive
material surface that will produce an e-h (electron-hole) pair. The QE of the metallic
GaAs, can provide a much higher QE (in the order of 10%) with a much larger photon
energy range than metallic materials. But they are very prone to contamination so that
continuous emitting are available at the regime of about 100 milliamps, which is of
interest for FEL and ERL [3]. The maximum current a photocathode can deliver
depends upon the power of input laser and its QE, which is wavelength and material
dependent.
sources that promise a high current, low emittance and high stability electron beam
with a long lifetime. The DAP constitutes two main components, a traditional
beam as a laser illuminates the surface material. These primary electrons will be
accelerated to a few keV under a DC electric field applied between the photocathode
Introduction 3
and a thin metal layer coated on the amplifier window. The primary electrons will
penetrate through the metal coating into the amplifier material and produce secondary
electrons with amplification of more than 100. The secondary electrons will be
emitted into vacuum and accelerated by the RF field of the gun. Diamond is uniquely
Figure 1.1 shows the schematic drawing of the DAP system with diamond
window as the amplifier. Diamond is ideal for this application, and its advantages will
Introduction 4
The scenario inside the diamond window after primary electrons penetrate
through the metal coating is as follows: Within about 100nm travel in the diamond,
the primary electrons generate secondary electrons and holes by collisions. The
typically on the order of two orders of magnitudes larger than the number of primary
electrons. Thus each primary electron will form a plasma cloud of electrons and
holes along its range. The electron and holes will recombine within the plasma with
the presence of three-body scattering or diffuse and merge into the metal coating to
recombine within 1ns unless separated by an electric field. If the RF field of the gun is
carefully adjusted at the right phase to accelerate the electrons in the plasma cloud,
portion of the secondary electrons will be able to transfer across the diamond bulk.
The number of electrons that leave the plasma cloud is related to the RF electric field
amplitude and the energy of primary electrons (will be discussed in Chapter 5). As the
secondary electrons reach the opposite surface, they will exit into the vacuum through
the diamond surface with hydrogen termination. The electrons emitted are “cold”,
i.e. they have a very low thermal emittance, for the electrons are constrained to the
The material of the amplifier is carefully selected to gain the highest Secondary
Emission Yield (SEY). Among all the materials, diamond has many properties which
Diamond is the prototype material for the structure shown in Figure 1.2. The
equal to 3.567Å (0.3567 nm), and two atoms per unit cell at room temperature.
Diamond has a band gap of 5.47eV, which is very wide compared to other
materials. Table 1.1 shows the minimum band gap energy of several common
Introduction 6
semiconductors.
Materials with larger band gaps will have the ability of tolerant stronger electric
fields. According to Table 1.1, diamond can hold up to more than 2000MV/m electric
field before breakdown. High electric field is required for preventing recombination
and for increasing the drift velocity of the secondary electrons. As primary electrons
create e-h pair plasma along their penetration path, the higher the applied field, the
more secondary electrons can be pulled out before they diffuse into the metal coating.
Diamond is the only material that will have negative electron affinity (NEA)
with hydrogen termination on the surface, due to the large band gap. This will be
It is well known that diamond is the most rigid material. This rigidity allows it to
Introduction 7
strength. But for RF applications, the electron acceleration phase limit in the RF gun
must be considered.
Calculations have been done by others for the single-cell RF gun designed for
RHIC electron cooling. The optimized initial phase is less than 35° and the frequency
of RF cavity is ~700MHz. The RF phase for secondary electrons generated near the
backside of the diamond should be at least 5°. The time allowed for secondary
electrons to pass through the diamond is less than 30°, i.e. ~120 ps. The saturation
velocity of electron transfer in diamond bulk is ~2×105m/s [5]. Thus the thickness of
film with a diameter of the order of 1cm at this thickness the rigidity of diamond is a
great advantage.
The thermal conductivity of diamond is much higher than even copper, which is
the most widely used thermal conducting material. The diamond is subjected to
The heat produced must be quickly dissipated to ensure the temperature of the
whole system does not increase to an unsafe limit. Simulations in X. Chang‟s Ph.D.
thesis showed that the diamond secondary emission cathode can easily handle 100W
electric field of a few megavolts per meter as mentioned above. High mobility is very
important for high frequency applications. The electrons under high frequency RF
field will only have a very small period of time to transfer through the amplifier in
case to be at the right phase when emitted into the gun. Along with high rigidity, the
2 DAP DESIGN
The design of the DAP includes five main components designed to carry out the
Niobium substrate
Photocathode
Supporting window
Figure 2.1 shows the relative size and configuration of the DAP. Individual
2.1 Vacuum
Negative Electron Affinity (NEA). Cesium is very reactive and can be easily oxidized
and lose its effect. The DAP capsule will protect the photocathode surface from
A 30μm thick diamond window with 10mm diameter can hold up to 1Atm
pressure difference. The vacuum inside the DAP can be maintained even during
In addition to the diamond window rigidity, the brazing points must be vacuum
tight [9].
the vacuum is based on their thermal expansion as well as their thermal and electrical
conductivity.
as low as a few degrees Kelvin. The preparation of the DAP involves diamond
DAP Design 12
brazing, which is a high temperature process. Considering the above extreme thermal
conditions, the material that is joined with the diamond needs to have a thermal
needed to keep the whole system neutral. Thus the joined material must also be
electrical conductive.
Along the same line, the cell must be a high thermal conductive insulator to
provide a good thermal path and electric standoff. Sapphire with thermal conductivity
Diamond is a material that easily demonstrates NEA [10]. The electron affinity
(EA) of an atom or molecule is the energy required to detach an electron from a singly
charged negative ion, i.e. the energy change for the process. Most metallic atoms have
DAP Design 13
The EA of a surface is defined as the vacuum energy level Evac minus the
EA Evac Ec (2.1)
The Fermi levels of the diamond and of the termination materials (hydrogen or
alkaline elements) are aligned. Since the termination material has a relatively low
work function, the vacuum level can be lower than the bottom level of the diamond‟s
conduction band. This will allow the secondary electrons to escape into the vacuum.
As listed in Section 1.2.1, diamond has a very large band gap of 5.47eV. As
DAP Design 14
shown in Figure 2.2, the energy barrier from Fermi level to conduction band of
diamond is higher than the work function of most of the metallic elements including
hydrogen, which makes diamond very easy to form NEA. It is reported that the
electron affinity of the hydrogenated diamond surface can be as low as -3.4eV [10, 16,
17].
Figure 2.2: Field and energy bands in the diamond with NEA surface.
diamond has been observed and reported [18-20]. For the application as current
amplifier, secondary electrons need to transfer through the entire diamond bulk and
only the non-recombined electrons can be emitted from the opposite surface.
Preparation of diamond sample 15
The purpose of acid etching is to eliminate the various atoms and non-diamond
carbon layer present on the surface of the diamond sample. These elements and
structures will define the Fermi level of the area they occupied, thus will add
Procedure:
Prepare two work surfaces, one inside and another outside the fume hood. A hot
Prepare large glass containers that can be tightly closed for storing liquid waste
Position two beakers with deionized water near the hot plate in the fume hood
Place the chromic acid inside the fume hood. Chromic acid is hygroscopic, keep
All the etching must be done under the fume hood. Keep hot liquids in the fume
hood untill they are cool. After etching, make sure to dispose of the chemical
o DI water rinse
o DI water rinse
o DI water rinse
o DI water rinse
o DI water rinse
o DI water Ultrasonic
o DI water rinse
Preparation of diamond sample 17
In NEXAF, the photoelectron from core level excited by an input x-ray photon is
determine all the final states of the photoelectron that are consistent with conservation
rules. Detailed analysis of the NEXAFS data yields information about the orientation
Preparation of diamond sample 18
and the binding of the surface. The curves in Figure 3.1 have been normalized
according to the photon flux, and the spectrum can be analyzed by comparing the
peak locations to Ref [21]. Between the two normalized curves, the acid etched
sample (blue curve) shows sharper diamond peaks and weaker non diamond peaks,
which indicates the possibility for detecting a photoelectron from pure diamond bond
is larger, i.e. the acid etching has eliminated the surface remnant for a certain degree.
The graphite peak around 280eV and second resonance peaks of iron around
350eV in Figure 3.1 gets smaller or vanishes completely after acid etching. The acid
etching would partially remove the amorphous carbon and eliminates iron on the
surface.
The strong acids used in the etching will create oxygen terminations on the
diamond surface. The oxygen-carbon bond is very strong, with a bond energy
After acid etching, the sample is kept in a clean environment at 1% humidity for
identification. We keep track of the history of each sample, so the metal coating
migration into the diamond due to electron bombardment and lifetime of the sample
can be evaluated.
Preparation of diamond sample 19
The migration of metal coating layer into the diamond bulk has been observed on
samples which has been used extensively, i.e. the thin metal coating on the surface
3.2 Metallization
The signal collection highly depends on the details of the metallization of the
primary side of the diamond sample. Primary electrons must penetrate the metal
coating before entering the diamond for amplification. The metal coating will be in
contact with the niobium substrate to provide a replenishment current to the diamond.
All the electrons will lose part of their energy in the metal, and only the remnant
energy will contribute in generating secondary electrons. Thus the metal coating has
contact should be able to allow holes easily escape from the diamond, and strong
adhesion to survive the extreme thermal process. The latter requirement prevents the
usage of metals which do not interact with carbon once applied, such as gold. The
former requirement therefore demands metals with EA close to that of the diamond to
form an ohmic contact on the diamond surface. In fact, at this specific surface, the
free carrier should be holes alone, which indicates that the surface will act as a p-type
Preparation of diamond sample 20
semiconductor, so metals with high work functions form the best contacts. In the
experiments discussed in later chapters, the metal coating is a ~50nm platinum on top
of ~30nm titanium, where the titanium forms a good bond with the diamond while the
3.3 Hydrogenation
surface. Before applying hydrogen atoms, the diamond surface must be freed from
other elements by breaking their bonds at a high temperature, and usually this is done
with local temperature of 800°C or higher. After exposing the bare diamond surface,
the environment needs to be hydrogen atom rich. This can be done by flowing
hydrogen gas through a hot filament or gas cracker, or applying a hydrogen plasma
system. The hydrogenation in the experiments discussed in the following chapters was
performed with pure hydrogen flowing through a thermal gas cracker (MANTIS
3.4 Brazing
The configuration of the DAP as shown in Figure 2.1 can finished in two steps:
The contacts between diamond and niobium, niobium and sapphire are produced
by high temperature vacuum brazing with an alloy of titanium, copper, and silver
metals and ceramic/diamond. This brazing technique is carried out by J. Grimes and
Cold welding is planned to be used to join the sapphire vacuum cell and the
The best solution would be sealing the supporting window onto the sapphire in-situ at
the preparation chamber of the photocathode. Cold welding is chosen to avoid a high
The diamond thickness for amplifier application is critical, because together with
the timing of the primary pulse, it defines the phase of the secondary emission pulse.
time, since the electron velocity is much slower in the diamond than in vacuum. For
the same reason, a highly parallel geometry is required for the diamond plate. The
ideal thickness to be used in a 700MHz electron gun for launch phase of 35° would be
about 30μm. This is not achievable with mechanical polishing due to the stress
embedded onto the surface during this process. Reactive Ion Etching (RIE) is one of
the possible methods to obtain such a dimension, but this is a time consuming process
if significant thickness reduction or large aspect ratios are required. The speed of the
As an alternative method, laser ablation was introduced for shaping the Chemical
Vapor Deposition (CVD) diamonds. The advantages of this method, beyond thinning
the diamond to tens of microns with 10 times faster speed than RIE, include the laser
ablation can also engrave precise patterns onto the diamond surface or into the bulk as
desired.
Diamond laser ablation 23
durations of 10ns and 30ps were used for the ablation. The ps laser is an actively and
passively mode locked Nd:YAG oscillator followed by pulse selector and double pass
delivering 125mJ at 10Hz in a pulse duration of 60ps. The wavelength of this laser is
energy in 30 ps. Only the 266nm radiation of this laser was used to ablate the sample.
The energy on the target can be varied by changing the pump power of the amplifier.
ns pulse duration at 10Hz repetition rate. Two doubling crystals were used in series to
generate up to 200mJ of 532nm and 40mJ of 266nm radiation with pulse durations of
14ns and 10ns respectively. The energy of the laser beam on the sample was adjusted
The beam from either of these lasers is focused using a nominal 15cm lens to
result in a 150μm focal spot size on the target. The position of the sample at the focus
was identified by the size of the laser beam back reflected from the sample.
The diamonds used in experiments are all single crystal, ultra-high-purity, highly
Diamond laser ablation 24
polished and flat thin films produced by CVD. The size of the diamond samples used
in the experiments is typically 4.0mm × 4.0mm × 0.3mm, and the surface orientation
is [100]. Due to growth rate limitation, the other two orientations, [110] and [111] are
not available in ppb purity level. The impurity concentration in these diamond
samples are all within a few ppb. Both sides are polished to surface roughness (Ra)
<15nm, and the flatness is controlled to under 5 fringes @ 632.8nm over the entire
sample.
High purity and small thickness single crystal diamonds contain few electron
trapping centers. Impurity atoms, grain boundaries, and stress existing due to
imperfect lattice structure are possible potential wells for electrons. Secondary
electrons have a certain possibility being trapped by these potential wells. Electric
field shielding is produced due to these trappings, which are discussed in Ref [6].
Diamond laser ablation 25
Figure 4.1: AFM scanning pictures of typical single crystal diamond sample bare and
metalized surfaces. Top two are taken by optical camera, and the structure on the bare
diamond surface is the image of the holder of the diamond. The scanning cantilever
width of the AFM is 0.04mm. The middle and bottom pictures are AFM scanning
topography and feedback circuit signal of the bare diamond surface. Sample number
(100μm grain size) sample HIE5 (green) and detector grade single crystal HID3 (red)
(10μm grain size) sample HIO7 and HIO8 (blue and black) the silicon and nitrogen
contents are significant. The optical grade samples also show large
detector grade samples are selected. This simplifies the motion of electrons drifting
through the diamond, reduces the probability of trapping, and provides the best
Diamond laser ablation 27
on the ablated samples. The sample is then mounted onto a holder that is suspended in
a vacuum commercial 2 ¾ inch vacuum cube held at pressures < 1μtorr. The cube is
sample in a plane perpendicular to the laser beam and perform raster scanning. We
characterized all the ablated samples using optical and atomic force microscopes,
Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR) and Raman spectroscopy, Near Edge
appropriate.
Two identical electronic grade diamonds, labeled as HIE6 and HIE8, with
pulse duration was tuned to be at 10ns or 30ps for both wavelengths. The sample was
pumped down as described above to better than 1μTorr. The samples were moved in a
Diamond laser ablation 28
raster pattern in both x and y directions 10 times with a scan step of 50 µm for 70
minutes to ablate 1x1 mm2 on the sample. Since these two samples were identical, in
some cases, data from one sample before processing and from another after
The ablation with 532nm ~10ns pulsed laser was quite destructive,
non-uniformly removing large regions of the diamond surface, although some raster
Figure 4.3: 532nm ns pulse laser ablated polycrystalline diamond under optical
microscope (left) and Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) (right). (These pictures
Figure 4.4 shows the images of polycrystalline diamond after ablation with
266nm ~10ns pulse duration laser. Both images show clearer raster scan pattern as
Diamond laser ablation 29
well as some dark areas, and the surface damage caused by 266nm laser is limited to
Figure 4.4: 266nm ns pulse laser ablated polycrystalline diamond under optical
microscope (left) and Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) (right). (These pictures
Figure 4.5: AFM image of polycrystalline diamond 266nm laser ablated area center.
Diamond laser ablation 31
Figure 4.6: NEXAFS trace of unablated and ablated regions of diamond sample and
reference trace for amorphous carbon. (These curves are obtained by J. Smedley)
AFM image shows the ablated area has about 2μm roughness. The clear trace of
the raster scanning is unacceptable for thinning the diamond amplifier, where the
NEXAFS from the unablated and ablated sections of the diamond are shown in
Figure 4.6. NEXAFS is a highly sensitive surface technique that can clearly delineate
surface impurity from the bulk impurity and can identify different forms of carbon
unequivocally. A reference curve for the amorphous carbon is also shown in the same
plot. In comparison to the unablated region, the ablation process has increased the
Diamond laser ablation 32
relative strength of the peak at 285eV while reducing the strength of the peaks at
289eV and beyond 292eV. The strong similarity between the reference plot and the
NEXAFS signal from ablated section of the diamond imply that the darkened region
To form a smooth surface after the ablation, the raster scan size is decreased to
5μm to overlap the adjacent ablation traces. The laser is changed to 213nm, and the
below the band gap of the diamond where 213nm photon is corresponding to 5.8eV
energy, which is just above the band gap. Thus 213nm laser is opaque to diamond.
Figure 4.7: 213nm ns pulse laser ablated polycrystalline diamond under optical
Diamond laser ablation 33
Figure 4.8: AFM image of polycrystalline diamond 213nm laser ablated area center.
The fine lines shown in Figure 4.7 within the ablated area are grain boundaries of
the polycrystalline diamond, which is same as the well defined sharp-angled pattern
shown in Figure 4.8. The area within the sharp angle has more material left after
ablation than the rest of the area, which is differently oriented. This indicates the
The vacuum chamber was backfilled with oxygen at base pressures of 14.2Torr,
0.9Torr, 0.1Torr and <0.01Torr using a leak valve and diamond was ablated at each of
these pressures. Optical transmission measurements using 623.8nm HeNe laser and
optical constants of amorphous carbon indicate that the thickness of the non-diamond
carbon layer is ~130nm and does not depend strongly on the oxygen pressure. The
Raman spectra for the ablated surfaces are shown in Figure 4.9. As can be inferred
from the data, the presence of oxygen did not make a difference to the formation of
Figure 4.9: Raman spectra of samples following ablation with different O2 pressures.
4.3.3 UV exposure
The ablated surface of HIE8 was exposed to the radiation from a mercury arc
lamp (Jelight, GLF-12-SRC) for 6 hours at a distance of 5cm from the lamp.
Diamond laser ablation 36
Figure 4.10: FTIR spectra of before and after UV exposure of ablated area. Different
has changed from 65% before the UV radiation to 94% after the radiation. The UV
radiation in air would create a reactive ozone environment. Ozone would then form
CO2 at the presence of non-diamond carbon and left the surface cleaned.
The dark areas and uneven surface on ablated areas of polycrystalline diamond
Diamond laser ablation 37
could have been due to the grain boundaries. A single crystal was ablated with 213 nm
ps laser. This energy is above the band gap of the diamond, so the diamond is opaque
to the wavelength and all the energy will be deposited at the surface.
A single crystal diamond sample (HID13) was ablated using a laser pulse of
100µJ energy at a wavelength of 213nm and pulse duration of 30ps at a repetition rate
of 10Hz. The sample was raster scanned with 5μm step size. The optical microscope
pictures of the ablated and unablated regions are shown in Figure 4.11.
Figure 4.11: Optical microscope picture of 213nm laser ablated single crystal
Figure 4.12: AFM image of single crystal diamond 213nm laser ablated area edge.
Figure 4.13: AFM image of single crystal diamond 213nm laser ablated area center.
Diamond laser ablation 39
The roughness in Figure 4.13 is about 100nm, which is tolerable for the amplifier
application. Much less dark areas are created in this ablation process, and the raster
scanning pattern is hard to distinguish from the AFM images. From Figure 4.11, the
optical microscope image shows that there is much less surface non-diamond carbon
coverage than Figure 4.3 and Figure 4.4, and it does not show the grain boundaries as
Figure 4.7.
Laser ablation with energy above the diamond band gap is proved to be a
feasible method of thinning the diamond with submicron roughness with only a very
small amount of non-diamond carbon left on the surface. A RIE process can be added
to refine the surface of the laser ablated surface. The combination of both processes is
ideal for thinning the diamond sample to a few tens of microns with surface roughness
in nanometer scale.
Transmission mode measurement of Diamond Secondary electron yield 40
generation and transport in the diamond. The emission into the vacuum uses a
Primary electrons are generated from a thermionic electron gun source Model
option, which can provide 10μA peak current maximum and 100μm diameter spot
size minimum with optimum working distance. The gun has up to 10keV output
electron energy. The electron energies selected for experiments are limited to 8keV to
Primary electrons are focused by an Einzel lens structure panels inside the gun.
With the available electron blanking option, the primary beam from the gun can
be pulsed. For short pulse output, an electric circuit is designed to trigger the blanker
inside the gun. Using the delay function of each output of the Stanford DG535 Digital
Delay and Pulse Generator shown in Figure 5.2, two successive pulses can be sent out
with programmed timing. These two successive pulses can be delivered when needed
During the measurement, a sample holder is used for three purposes: Supporting
the diamond surface perpendicular to the primary beam; insuring electrical contact to
current; and providing an electric field to accelerate the secondary electrons and allow
metal films, identically on both sides. A stainless steel tube is pressed onto the
primary electron impacting surface (primary surface), and the inner diameter of the
tube is slightly less than the metal coating outer rim. . The tube is then connected to
electrical ground through a current measurement resistor. The voltage on the resistor
is typically 10s of millivolts and therefore the primary surface can be considered
effectively grounded. Good electrical contact is ensured between the metal coating
and the tube to provide replenishment currents. The primary side of the diamond is
grounded through the oscilloscope during all studies and the signal is measured on
On the other side of the diamond, a copper anode is in good electrical contact
with the metal coating. The anode is connected to a high voltage power supply, and it
Transmission mode measurement of Diamond Secondary electron yield 44
can be set to any voltage between 0V to 5000V. The limit of 5000V is governed by the
potential breakdown, affecting the vacuum level of the system and for safety
considerations. Electrical break down through the vacuum might happen if the voltage
Ceramic spacers and washers are used as insulators given their good
performance in ultra-high vacuum. The use of the ceramic spacers also makes the
insulation path along the insulator‟s surface very long and the insulator‟s surface is
not directly exposed to the electron beams. These are very important considerations to
A copper block of relatively large mass with a stainless steel tube connected is at
the very back of the holder. The entire stack of components is screwed down onto this
block. The long tube which extending out of the system can provide heating and
cooling for different experimental conditions. Liquid nitrogen can be fed through the
tube and bring the system down to less than -140°C. A cartridge heater is also
available to slide down the tube to bring the system up to greater than 200°C.
A leak checking is done on the whole assembly, and the vacuum can reach
VDC is the applied high voltage on the anode. Current I measures the
replenishment current as the secondary electrons transits through the diamond. The
SEY of the amplifier is calculated by comparing the ratio between the replenishment
According to the sample holder design for transmission mode measurement, high
voltage is applied to the copper anode for secondary electron acceleration and
collection. As the secondary electrons move away from the injection surface to the
opposite electrode and leave the diamond, replenishment current enters the diamond
Transmission mode measurement of Diamond Secondary electron yield 46
from the ground electrode and can be detected by the oscilloscope connected to the
holder. The signal collection circuit needs to have a fast response and good sensitivity
to small signals. The signal cable is kept short to reduce the distributed capacitance.
The electrode of the primary electron side of the holder is designed with a
tubular shape (similar to a Faraday Cup) to collect most of the secondary electrons
that are generated by the primary electrons on the metal coating surface and escape to
vacuum. It is found that more than 90% of those electrons are captured by the
electrode when the primary beam is focused in that hole. The primary electron current
is measured by focusing the beam inside the hole and applying no field on the
diamond.
With the experiment setup discussed in Section 5.1.2, pulsed secondary electron
signals are measured by oscilloscope. The signal is then compared with the primary
electron signal. The ratio between the secondary current and primary current will give
the SEY under the given applied electrical field in the diamond.
Transmission mode measurement of Diamond Secondary electron yield 47
Under a low applied field, the secondary electron drift velocity is not saturated.
The electron thermal energy at equilibrium is also smaller than that at higher applied
field and therefore under a low applied field these electrons have a larger probability
of being trapped. The trapped electrons will form an electric field, opposing the
applied field. The opposing field causes the succeeding electrons to experience a
weaker accelerating field. Therefore, fewer electrons will be able to leave the plasma
region and reach the anode, i.e. we observe a decrease of the signal or SEY. If the
pulse is adequately long, the effective field will decrease continuously in amplitude as
Transmission mode measurement of Diamond Secondary electron yield 48
more and more electrons are trapped. Eventually, the equilibrium state would be
reached when the trapped electron field fully cancels the applied field, and no more
secondary electrons will be able to leave the plasma range. Efforts to reduce trapping
diamond bulk are limited. At a high applied field situation, the field decrease due to
the trapping is small compared to the applied field. The decrease of amplitude in each
Figure 5.6: Comparison of low field (top: 0.3MV/m) and high field (bottom: 3MV/m)
transmission mode.
gain = secondary current signal amplitude / primary current signal amplitude 1 (5.1)
The sign of the additional term equal to 1 added at the end of Equation (5.1) is to
Gain vs. field inside the diamond sample can be plotted as shown in Figure 5.7,
and this plot is a good tool for explaining the performance of the diamond amplifier
[23].
Transmission mode measurement of Diamond Secondary electron yield 51
Figure 5.7: Single crystal diamond window gain with primary electron energy ranges
The plasma formed as each primary electron penetrates through the diamond
comprises electron-hole pairs. These will be separated under the applied field. With
no applied field the electrons and holes will all recombine with three-body scattering
or diffuse into the metal coating, leading to no gain. The electrons that make it
through the plasma region without recombination (or trapping) and arrive at the
opposite surface will contribute to the gain. According to each curve in Figure 5.7, the
Transmission mode measurement of Diamond Secondary electron yield 52
gain started with a small value under low electric field in diamond, which shows that
the recombination is significant. With the increase of the applied field, more electrons
can move away and the time needed for total separation decreases, thus the gain
increases. As the applied field increases, the charge carriers reach the saturation drift
velocity and the gain saturates. The gain under saturation only depends upon the
Section 5.5.
With 8keV primary electron energy, the saturated gain is nearly 250. This
indicates that the diamond amplifier has the capability of increase the input current by
two orders of magnitude. The minimum applied field needed for reaching saturated
gain is less than 0.5MV/m, which corresponding to 150V on the anode in our setup.
The signal in a pulse dropping continuously for low field is due to trapping of the
electrons, and this can be avoided by detrapping methods that will be discussed in the
next Section. With a relatively fast-response circuit, the value of the peak in the
beginning of the signal corresponds to the number of electrons that are pulled out of
the plasma. Thus the value of the signal used for calculating the gain is taken at the
Due to the trapping mechanism diamond can easily have excessive electrons held
within potential wells. These electrons will create electric field with opposite polarity
to the applied field. The trapping centers can be impurities, grain boundaries,
distortion of the crystal lattice, etc., and can be decreased by using high purity single
introduce stress or impurities into the sample, and introduce trapping centers.
given the large number of potential trapping centers. Thus, as current flows into the
diamond, the number of trapped electrons will increase with time. Figure 5.6 shows
the decrease of gain within the first pulse. Under a continuous pulse mode with high
repetition rate, the succeeding pulses will all be affected by the electrons trapped
during the preceding pulses. The electrons also have the possibility of escape from the
trapping centers due to applied electric field and thermal activity. So the escape
probability increases with increasing anode voltage and the time with current off
between pulses. If the applied field is high enough and/or time between pulses is long
enough to make the number of electrons released from the trapping centers
comparable with the number of electrons that are being trapped in one pulse, the
Transmission mode measurement of Diamond Secondary electron yield 54
signal will reach equilibrium. The equilibrium state is also dependent of the current
density of the primary beam. Higher current density will result in more electrons
Figure 5.8: Secondary electron signal of 10μs pulse width with different duty cycles.
No laser beam applied. Primary electron peak current density is 0.03A/m2 and the
a laser beam to the system during the experiment. Photons will excite the trapped
Transmission mode measurement of Diamond Secondary electron yield 55
electrons. If the applied field is set to zero, these exited electrons will move under the
field of the trapped electrons. Eventually all the trapped electrons would be
de-trapped.
Most of the trapping centers in our diamond samples are rather shallow. Photons
significant change in gain under relatively low field. A laser pointer with <5mW
power is used to provide the detrapping light, and a slot was opened on the holder
along the path of the light to allow the photons to reach and interact with the diamond.
Transmission mode measurement of Diamond Secondary electron yield 56
Figure 5.9: Secondary electron signal of 10μs pulse width with different duty cycles.
Laser beam applied (532nm, <5mW). Primary electron peak current density is
obvious that laser beam played an important role in increasing the signal by releasing
the electrons from the trapping centers. Both figures show that the smaller the duty
cycle, i.e. more time between pulses, the larger the signal. The following sections will
of trapping and the charge density within the trapping region in the diamond. Without
laser detrapping, for higher primary current density, more electrons will be trapped.
The signal observed after equilibrium is much lower than the first pulse unless the
applied field is extremely high. The time required for the system to reach equilibrium
varies with current density, but is within the range of 1 minute under all of our
experimental conditions.
The primary beam energy and spot size is fixed using the control system of the
gun. The peak of the first pulse is recorded as the total number of electrons created,
which should be the maximum gain under such applied field. The beam is pulsed at
The applied field is increased from 0MV/m to above 1.8MV/m, and signals
under the equilibrium state are recorded for gain calculation both with and without the
laser beam.
Transmission mode measurement of Diamond Secondary electron yield 58
Figure 5.10: Gain comparison of with and without laser detrapping under different
The transverse distribution of the primary beam is near uniform, and the
diameter is fixed at 3mm. So the highest current density of the 4 cases should be
5μA/(π × 2.25mm2) ≈ 0.7A/m2. The secondary electron current density is the product
of the primary current density and the gain. With the same primary electron energy,
the maximum gain under specific applied field should be the same.
Transmission mode measurement of Diamond Secondary electron yield 59
Figure 5.10 shows the significant effect of laser detrapping in all 4 different
primary currents, or current densities since the spot sizes for all case are the same. The
gain curve with laser detrapping is very close to the first pulse gain curve, which is
the maximum limit, even under a very small field and very high current density.
Compared with the maximum, the gain obtained without laser detrapping shows a
large decrease in value under low field and even under high fields when primary
current density is high. Saturation of the gain curve can be reached without laser
Primary electron energy determines the saturated gain as discussed in Section 5.2.
With the current density fixed this time, but changing the primary electron energy
from 5keV to 8keV, and the secondary electron current density changes
correspondingly. The laser still brings the equilibrium gain close to the maximum gain
To reach equilibrium state, the set up without laser detrapping requires a much
longer time for each data point. In the measurements, gain curves without laser were
only taken for 6keV and 7keV. 5keV and 8keV still show the same trend.
Transmission mode measurement of Diamond Secondary electron yield 60
Figure 5.11: Gain comparison of with and without laser detrapping under different
The maximum gain increases with the primary electron energy, and so does the
secondary electron current. As shown in Figure 5.11, without laser detrapping, the
gain requires about 1MV/m of applied field to saturate in the 6keV case and even
more in 7keV case, but with the laser, it only requires <0.5MV/m. The gain with laser
is much closer to the expected value than the gain without laser before reaching
Transmission mode measurement of Diamond Secondary electron yield 61
saturation.
If the secondary current density is the same by fixing the primary electron energy
and primary peak current density, the gain under low field will be determined by the
time lapse between pulses. For a more comprehensive study compared to Figure 5.8
and Figure 5.9, Figure 5.12 below shows the laser effect on gain under different duty
cycles.
Transmission mode measurement of Diamond Secondary electron yield 62
Figure 5.12: Gain comparison of with and without laser detrapping under various
pulse repetition rates. The pulse width for each measurement is fixed at 10μs.
Laser detrapping is essential to maintain a high gain under high repetition rates.
In the experiment for the measurement above, the pulse width is kept at 10μs
continuously. Without the laser, the decrease in signal is rather trivial for the duty
cycle of 1E-4. However, it became noticeable for duty cycle of 1E-3, and
Transmission mode measurement of Diamond Secondary electron yield 63
unacceptable for 1E-2. For a duty cycle of 1E-2, the repetition rate would be 1000Hz,
which is still very low compared with the frequency in most operating electron guns.
measurements. With the correct selection of wavelength, the trapped electrons can be
wavelength, which is corresponding to 2.34eV. This energy is less than half of the
band gap of diamond, which is ~5.7eV, and this ensures that all secondary electrons
are created by the primary electrons rather than by photons. Other wavelengths have
5.4 Energy lost in metal coating and estimation of energy needed for each e-h
pair
Primary electrons lose their partial energy in the metal coating, and the amount
lost depends on the metal variety and thickness. Only the remaining energy
According to Ref [24, 25], the energy needed to create one e-h pair is fixed. The
saturated gain should be a linear function of the primary energy. The intercept on
horizontal axis in Figure 5.13 should be the energy lost in the metal coating Elost. The
data of the maximum gain is averaged over data from 1MV/m to 2.33MV/m. For a
coating of ~50nm Pt on top of ~30nm Ti, the energy lost is Elost =3.29 ± 0.15keV.
Transmission mode measurement of Diamond Secondary electron yield 64
From the linear model approximation of the incident electron energy loss [26],
the stopping powers for electron energy of ranged from 4keV to 8keV for Pt and Ti
are:
E E
12MeV cm2 / g 20MeV cm2 / g ,
Pt xPt Ti xTi
where ρPt=21.45g/cm3 is the density of Pt and ρTi=4.506g/cm3 is the density of Ti, and
ΔxPt≈50nm and ΔxTi≈30nm are the thickness of the two layers of metal respectively.
Then the total energy loss in the metal coating calculated from this model is:
The discrepancy between the linear model and the transmission measurement result is
over 100%, which is very big. This is due to the thickness measurement of the metal
Thus:
Transmission mode measurement of Diamond Secondary electron yield 66
Table 5.1: Energy needed for create one electron hole pair.
values of 14.66eV and 17eV [24, 25]. The difference is possibly due simplification of
Diamond is an indirect band gap material, and its electron band structure has
been published in 1966 by W. Saslow et. al. as shown in Figure 5.14 [27].
Transmission mode measurement of Diamond Secondary electron yield 67
Figure 5.14 shows a calculated band structure of the diamond which agrees with
experiment. The figure covered a primitive cell of the reciprocal lattice in the
frequency domain, or Brillouin zone, and each line indicates a different energy band.
The vertical axis is the energy of the electron with 0eV as the Fermi level in diamond,
and the horizontal axis is the value of wave vector k in the reciprocal lattice. The zone
are two axes along ΓL and ΓX directions respectively. The subscript labeled the
Electrons present in the conduction band quickly settle into the energy minimum
of that band. For indirect band gap materials, electrons in this minimum cannot rejoin
the valence band by simply losing energy, or radiative recombination. They require
some source of momentum allowing them to observe both the laws of conservation of
energy and of momentum and fall into the valence band. The only way to promote
for the missing momentum vector, or a three-body collision with the impurities in the
Another possible path for the secondary electrons to recombine is to move to the
metal layer by diffusion. The secondary electrons and holes diffuse under Brownian
motion once they are created. Any electron or hole crossing the diamond-metal
interface will be recombined immediately in the metal layer and the defect rich
diamond near the metal boundary. Given that the plasma is formed tangent to the
interface and all charge particles are moving with random walks, the electrons and
holes are merged into the metal continuously through this diffusion process.
To illuminate the process, let us apply some numbers. Assume the SEY of the
primary electron is 100, and initial RMS radius of the plasma after thermal relaxation
Transmission mode measurement of Diamond Secondary electron yield 69
is 10nm. The density of the charged cloud under this assumption would be:
ne (t 0) nh (t 0) n0 2.4 1025 / m3 .
1/2
k T
D 2 B 4.11010 m 0.41nm
q N0
under room temperature, which is more than 20 times smaller than the dimension of
the cloud. Therefore the charges can be considered as plasma at the initial state.
The plasma frequencies for both electron and hole clouds are:
n0e2 n0e2
p ,e and p ,h ,
0 me 0 mh
where me and mh are effective masses of electron and hole inside the diamond. The
mobility of the two charge carriers are comparable and both are in the 10 5m/s scale
[29, 30], therefore it is reasonable to assume the effective masses are similar and both
close to the rest mass of electron. Plug in the values for the equation above, the
For applied DC (or slowly varying) field, the attenuation constant is:
c
plasma
1
540nm ,
2 p
This indicates that the applied field penetrates through the full length of the
Transmission mode measurement of Diamond Secondary electron yield 70
electron and hole clouds at the initial state without much decrease in the amplitude.
As the electric field pulls the electron cloud away from the interface to prevent
loss of the electrons, the diffusion process, on the contrary, will keep pushing
electrons into the metal to be recombined. The eventual gain measured in the
experiment is the compromise of the two motions. High electric field can accelerate
the electrons to their saturation velocity away from the incident surface within a short
period of time, so that fewer electrons are lost. Therefore, the gain is small under low
electric field, and increases rapidly with the field amplitude until the drift velocity of
the electrons can reach the saturation velocity. The gain will not change as much after
the electron drift velocity saturates within a short distance. This explains the gain
introduced a vacuum gap between the copper anode and the diamond surface, and the
Figure 6.1: Simple sketch of emission mode measurement principle. Either side can
be grounded.
Emission Mode Measurement of Diamond Secondary Electron Yield 72
With hydrogen termination, the NEA surface will allow the secondary electrons
to escape into vacuum and get collected by the anode. An amplifier circuit was
designed and added for signal collection. With this improvement, the response time
anode or cathode. In the anode connection measurements, the anode is grounded and
the metal coating on the incident side is negatively biased. The effective energy of the
where Eprimary is the primary electron energy at the exit of the gun, Umetal is the
negative bias voltage on the metal coating, and Elost is the energy lost in the metal
coating.
The grounding of the anode is designed for application of a phosphor screen and
a CCD camera. If a focusing device is applied between the anode and the phosphor
screen and the distance is carefully chosen, the thermal emittance of the diamond
amplifier can be measured by imaging the beam spot size on the CCD camera. The
the critical process of hydrogenation. For the hydrogenation process, the diamond is
heated to above 800°C to break the carbon-oxygen bond and leave free dangling
carbon bond on the surface. Hydrogen gas is broken into atoms (or “cracked”) and
impacts the diamond surface. We use a commercial thermal gas cracker (Mantis
MGC-75) to carry out this process which leads to create negative affinity surface
have residual dangling carbon bonds on the surface without any hydrogen attached.
The dangling bonds are capable of trapping the secondary electrons transferred to the
hydrogenated surface. The field applied to the diamond during experiments is about
1MV/m, and to cancel such field, the trapped electron density only needs to be
0.5C/cm2, which is about 1 trapped electron per 10,000 conventional unit cells on the
surface. This is a very small number considering the occupation of hydrogen coverage
during CVD diamond [111] surface growth can be as low as 86% [33].
With a continuous primary electron beam, sufficient time is allowed for all
possible trapping events to occur. The signal measured on the anode side comprises
the trapping and releasing of the electrons in the diamond. The signal detected is
The signal is much smaller than the transmission mode measurements, and green
laser had no effect on the signal. Since the dangling bond state energy is more than
1.3eV [34, 35], the green laser detrapping is not as effective in emission mode,
because the electrons are trapped much deeper by dangling bonds on the surface than
the trapping under the surface caused by impurities and stress in lattice. The signal
will increase with better hydrogenation, which will reduce the number of dangling
Despite the small signal in the DC beam mode, the diamond performance is
measurements, electrons in the beginning of the first pulse applied to the diamond will
experience a strong, unshielded applied field, and have much higher possibility to
emit. The gain in the beginning of the pulse is much higher than the value measured
In real applications, the applied pulse would be very short. As an example, the
703MHz. The pulse from the source must be much shorter than 1ns. Therefore the
performance of the diamond amplifier with short pulses is more important and
practical.
For short pulse measurements, the diamond was first set at neutral. Shortly after
(<3s) the electric field was applied, a train of pulses of 40μs was sent to impact the
diamond from the electron gun. With the fast response signal collection circuit, only
the SEY of the first pulse was recorded. This ensures that the front segment of the
pulse experienced the field as applied, and the change of the signal due to trapping
primary electrons and no electric field is applied. Any previously trapped charge will
cause attract opposite species to transport through the diamond and recombine. This
will „clean up‟ the diamond electrically and achieve a neutral state after a very short
time.
Emission Mode Measurement of Diamond Secondary Electron Yield 77
Figure 6.3: First pulse gain under room temperature (23°C) with different field and
effective energy for each pulse. Effective energy is the energy of the primary beam
charge-carriers inside the diamond that move according to the applied field, as in the
application of diamond detectors. There are also few trap centers in the bulk to trap
the charge carriers and therefore cause shielding to the applied field. In pulsed
measurements, the time delay of the first pulse after applying the electrical field is
Figure 6.4: Secondary signal with different delays for the primary electron after
Figure 6.4 shows the difference between two delay times, <1s and 3s. For all
four applied field strengths, the first pulses with longer delay time have smaller gain
at the beginning of the pulse and decreased under approximately the same rate with
the shorter delay time pulses. The gain at the beginning of the pulse is mainly defined
by the existing field in the diamond when the pulse is applied, and the decrease
Emission Mode Measurement of Diamond Secondary Electron Yield 79
Notice that the delay time effect is significant here on the scale of seconds,
which is very long compared to the eventual use of the diamond amplifier. Thus the
data above with long time scale is just to show the exaggerated difference, but this
As the diamond samples are pure single crystal diamonds, the trap centers‟
measurements where the signals are much higher than that in the emission mode.
There is another mechanism of trapping and possibly this is the dominant reason for
the signal‟s decrease with time, that is the effect of the dangling bonds. The dangling
bonds in emission measurements are serious obstacle for achieving a large gain.
Before the primary electron would reach the diamond, the dangling bonds of the
surface atom would capture electrons from nearby carbon atoms. This will generate a
hole in the valence band. The hole moves to the cathode surface under the influence
of the applied electric field. The time it takes the holes to traverse the thickness of the
diamond is under one nanosecond, and this will lead to charging up of the emitting
face and thus to a decrease of the field of the diamond. This will result in a gain
in materials, and this will be critical because the diamond amplifier will be operated at
In Figure 6.5, the diamond sample was heated to 250°C and kept under this
specific temperature for more than 3 hours to remove the H2O molecules attached on
the hydrogenated surface. The heating procedure leads to H2O removal from the
H-terminated surface of the CVD diamond as described in reference [37]. The NEA
Emission Mode Measurement of Diamond Secondary Electron Yield 81
surface of the diamond should be improved after the heating cycle. To ensure the
monolayer of hydrogen is not covered by atoms from the residual gas, the sample was
reheated to 200°C and kept under such temperature during the experiment.
Comparing with Figure 6.3, which shows room temperature (23°C) results, the gain at
the beginning of the pulse in the high temperature (200°C) environment is much lower.
Also in high temperature signals, the decrease of the gain is much faster than that
decrease observed at room temperature. This indicates that the trapping effect on the
temperature with lower SEY is consistent with the dangling bonds density positive
Under the same conditions, liquid nitrogen cooled system should give higher
For the gain results shown in Figure 6.6, the sample and holder are cooled by a
liquid nitrogen cooling loop, and the temperature of the whole system is calibrated to
be at -140°C. The gain in this case is higher than Figure 6.3 under high field. With
high SEY, the system can still maintain the gain for a fairly long time. This indicates
that the field does not decrease as fast as under higher temperatures, namely many
more electrons are emitted within the pulse. Hence, to obtain the best performance of
the diamond amplifier, it should be operated with the ambient temperature as low as
possible.
Emission Mode Measurement of Diamond Secondary Electron Yield 83
Thus with proper hydrogenation, the diamond amplifier will achieve reasonable
In transmission measurements, the laser helped improve the gain of the diamond.
But under emission mode, the main concern comes from the dangling bond on the
hydrogenated surface. The photon‟s energy is above the energy gap between the
dangling bond and the top of the valence band. So the laser increases the ionization
probability of the dangling bonds. The photons also will heat up the surface
temperature by photon-electron interaction, and this will also increase the dangling
Figure 6.7, Figure 6.8, and Figure 6.9 are three emission temperature
measurements with laser applied and only temperature difference. All figures are
plotted with the same scale for easier comparison. All three figures show much lower
gain and faster falling edge than the corresponding temperature with no laser applied
in Sections 6.3.1 and 6.3.2. Therefore trapping centers considered under transmission
mode are less effective to the signal in emission mode, and photons create more
dangling bond ionization. The shielding from the dangling bond ionization is more
serious under emission. This is reasonable considering the high purity and careful
Figure 6.7: Room temperature (23°C) measurement with laser applied (532nm laser,
<5mW).
Emission Mode Measurement of Diamond Secondary Electron Yield 85
Figure 6.8: High temperature (200°C) measurement with laser applied (532nm laser,
<5mW).
Emission Mode Measurement of Diamond Secondary Electron Yield 86
Figure 6.9: Low temperature (-140°C) measurement with laser applied (532nm laser,
<5mW).
Focusing on the shape and amplitude of the signal, it is noticeable that the higher
the temperature, the less the difference between with and without laser results. This
also proves the dangling bond charging density is highly dependent on the
temperature. The thermal energy brought by photons is very small due to the low
power of the laser. Hence under higher temperature, the dangling bond density is
of the thermal electron energy is a large fraction of an electron volt, depending on the
towards a temperature less than 0.1eV. This has never been measured in a
characteristic of the diamond sample, the properties of the hydrogenated surface and
the electric field in the diamond, and yet it is expected that the thermal energy is not a
strong function of the field. The measurement system should have the ability to
The design is shown in Figure 7.1. The beam coming out of the diamond NEA
surface is accelerated towards an anode. The anode has a small hole, to collimate an
Thermal emittance measurement design 88
output beam. The output beam is focused on a screen by a solenoid. The main idea of
the measurement is to compensate the strong linear defocusing effect at the anode by
applying a linear focusing lens and measure the waist spot size downstream. The
waist spot size is only a function of the thermal emittance and is less affected by the
other components. Therefore, we can compare the measurement with simulation [38].
It can also be calibrated with known thermal emittance electron source such as a
thermal cathode.
Figure 7.1: Setup design for thermal energy measurement of diamond secondary
emission.
7.1 Methods
Common to all possible focusing schemes for thermal energy measurement is the
application of a small aperture on the anode plate to limit the beam size, such that the
Thermal emittance measurement design 89
beam size after a drift distance is measurable. In addition, the field applied for
acceleration is constrained by the need to obtain a good gain in the diamond amplifier.
The schematic layout of the cathode and anode is shown in Figure 7.2.
Figure 7.2: Acceleration of the secondary electrons by applying a high voltage across
7.2 Limitations
The aperture in the anode applies a defocusing force on the electron beam, which
aperture will lead to a stronger aberration, and will cause an increase in the beam spot
Thermal emittance measurement design 90
size on the screen. Space charge is another issue in increasing the spot size. A small
aperture in the anode also leads to a lower current with smaller space charge effect,
increasing the accuracy of the measurement. On the other hand this will make the
imaging more difficult. From simulation results in Figure 7.3, we choose the upper
Figure 7.3: Aberration and space charge effects on beam spot size on screen.
Thermal emittance measurement design 92
The upper limit of the aperture and current is determined by a choice leading to a
small change in the spot size. From the simulation above, an aperture radius of 100μm
The criterion of choosing the focusing lens is the growth rate in beam waist spot
size with respect to thermal energy of the cathode. A large growth rate as a function of
temperature will minimize the system errors. Results from simulation of different
kinds of focusing lenses are shown in Figure 7.4 and Figure 7.5. All curves in both
plots are simulated with same distance from anode to lens (2cm) and from lens to
screen (25.5cm) for comparison. In both plots, the solenoid has a faster growth rate
compared to other lenses. In Figure 7.4, the growth rate of a 0.5cm aperture Einzel
lens is comparable with a solenoid, but the nonlinear effect due to small aperture is
significant, and this will result in large systematic error for spot size measurement.
The simulation also shows that the closer the lens is to the anode and the further is the
From above simulation results, it can be concluded that solenoid is the final choice
of focusing lens.
7.4 Shielding
All components in the measurement setup have low permeability. Shielding the
acceleration, which will reduce the resolution. Figure 7.6 shows the performance of a
solenoid with and without shielding, and compares with hard edge field.
Thermal emittance measurement design 95
Shielding material of 1mm thick with relative permeability μr~20,000 around the
solenoid coil will decrease the magnetic field at the anode to <1.5Gauss. Solenoid
without shielding gives the worst resolution (green), while the resolution of solenoid
with shielding of μr=20,000 (blue) is comparable with hard edge ideal case (red).
7.5 Alignment
The setup design is based on highly accurate alignment of the anode pinhole and
the solenoid center axis. It is very important to have the secondary electron beam,
Thermal emittance measurement design 96
after passing through the anode pinhole, symmetrically distributed around the
solenoid center axis in the transverse direction. This avoids distortion of the waist spot
on the screen.
During the alignment, a laser beam is passed through the system downstream of
the electron path. Along the laser path, the anode pinhole and three additional
250μm diameter pinholes are used to conduct the alignment. Two are mounted on the
center of the flanges at each end of the system. The third is located at the center of
the start point of the solenoid field. With the laser beam passing all four pinholes,
the offset of secondary electron beam away from the solenoid center axis is
Figure 7.7: The offset magnetic field to the center of the electron beam and the waist.
FWHM difference according to the offset. Thermal energy of the beam is 0.1eV.
This procedure also ensures that the solenoid axis is perpendicular to the anode
surface, and the tilt angle can be controlled to better than 5mrad.
Figure 7.7 shows the simulation of the beam waist FWHM change due to a
different offsets of the electron beam for 0.1eV thermal energy. Thus the error caused
by offset after alignment should be controlled within 15%. A quadrupole lens may be
added to the drift section for additional correction so as to lower the error even more.
Thermal emittance measurement design 98
7.6 Conclusion
With the design of the solenoid lens based measurement system shown in Figure
7.1 and the calibrated simulation plot of FWHM waist spot size vs. thermal energy, a
CCD camera with pixel size ~5μm should be able to analyze the beam waist spot size
down to 50μm diameter. Thus, we should be able to determine the thermal energy of
error.
and space charge effect is 100μm in radius and 10μA for secondary electrons
respectively.
By changing the focusing strength of lens, the waist of electron beam will be
imaged on screen at a specific location. For good resolution, lens should be as close to
the anode as possible, and the screen should be relatively far away from the lens.
Summary and conclusion 99
electron sources, with an amplifier, the electron beam available to the eventual
Diamond has a very wide band gap of 5.47eV which allows for a good negative
electron affinity with simple hydrogenation, diamond can hold more than 2000MV/m
field before breakdown. Diamond also provides the best rigidity among all materials.
These two characters offer the capability of applying high voltage across very thin
diamond film to achieve high SEY and desired emission phase. The diamond
The best mechanical polishing available can provide high purity single crystal
diamond films with no less than 100μm thickness and <15nm Ra surface roughness.
The ideal thickness for 700MHz beam is ~30μm, which requires further thinning with
RIE or laser ablation. RIE can achieve atomic layer removal precision and roughness
Summary and conclusion 100
eventually, but the time consumption for this procedure is very significant. Laser
ablation proved that with <266nm ps laser beam, the ablation process on the diamond
can easily achieve removing a few microns per hour from the surface and <100nm
and form NEA so that secondary electrons in the conduction band can escape into the
vacuum. The method is using hydrogen cracker to strike hydrogen atoms onto the
Two independent experiments were carried out to determine the transport of the
electrons within the diamond and their emission at the surface. In transmission mode
measurements, the diamond amplifier was coated with metal on both sides, so results
simply depend only on the electron transport within the diamond. The SEY for this
mode provides one secondary electron per 20eV energy, which gives the gain of more
than 200 for 4.7keV (effective energy) primary electrons under 2MV/m. Laser
detrapping can help the signal maintain the gain with 10μs pulse and duty cycle of
the actual application, the SEY is ~20 for 700eV (effective energy) primary electrons
under 1.21MV/m.
The electric field applied and the primary electron energy is limited by the
Summary and conclusion 101
experiment setup, but the results show good trend toward large gain under high field.
Thermal emittance of the diamond secondary emission is critical for the beam
application. A careful design is setup to measure with very fine precision and accuracy
of 0.01eV.
Reference 102
Reference:
*Work supported by the National High-Tech Research and Development Program of China
#
zhaijy03@mails.thu.edu.cn
which is corresponding to high escape depth of the 3002 MHz, peak output power 3.1 MW), circulators,
material. Diamond is one of the best cathode materials for directional couplers, vacuum pumps and other necessary
MEG. parts. The emission electron beam is collected by a
The excellent secondary electron emission property of faraday cup with a bias voltage of +50 V. The forward RF
CVD diamond films is due to the negative electron power from the directional coupler and the macro-pulse
affinity formed by the hydrogen or CsI termination at the current from the faraday cup are measured by a Tektronix
film surface [13]. The secondary electron emission yield 7404B oscilloscope. The repetition rate is 10 Hz. The
is also dependent on the crystal quality which is mainly pressure remained ~ 10-4 Pa during the experiment. At the
determined by the thickness of the CVD films [14]. distance of 2.5 mm, the waveforms are shown in Figure 3
The cathodes used in the MEG are polycrystalline and 4.
diamond films on Mo substrate grown by microwave
plasma assisted chemical vapour deposition (MPCVD).
The growth parameters are shown in Table 1.
Figure 2: SEM image of the CVD diamond film. Figure 4: Beam current of MEG with CsI terminated
CVD diamond cathode (bottom) and RF power delivered
to the cavity (top), both on a 1μs / div. time scale.
EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
When the RF power in the cavity (or the corresponding The macro-pulse current of the hydrogen terminated
gap voltage) grows to the susceptive region and the and CsI terminated CVD diamond cathode is 920 mA and
transient beam loading is just appropriate, the multipactor 600 mA respectively. The emission current density of the
discharge will occur [15]. The method of the high power hydrogen terminated diamond cathode is 1.2 A / cm2, and
experiment is to adjust the gap distance in order to fit the the micro-pulse current density is estimated to be 12 A /
cathode material requirement and in the same time change cm2 with the duration of 30 ps.
the power level of the RF source to initiate the The emission current decreases rapidly both for
multipactor process. hydrogen terminated and CsI terminated CVD diamond
The high power experiment system is composed of an films. This is caused by the secondary electron emission
E2V MG5349 magnetron (frequency range 2993 MHz - yield declination due to continuous high current density
electron bombardment. The emission may be restored or
enhanced if the surface is exposed to hydrogen or CsI [10] Dijk R, Vissenberg G, Zwart S. A flat thin display
environment [16-18]. This hydrogen gas feed experiment with RF electron generation. Journal of the Society
is now in progress in our lab in order to maintain the for Information Display, 2005, 13 (3): 221-225.
performance and extend the lifetime of the diamond [11] Chang X Y, Ben-Zvi I, Burrill A, et al. Study of
cathode. But the graphitization of the diamond films by secondary emission enhanced photoinjector. In:
the hydrogen ions may be a new problem [18]. Proceedings of 2005 Particle Accelerator Conference.
We are also investigating the other robust cathode IEEE, 2005. 2711-2713.
materials such as OFHC copper, Cu-Al-Mg alloy [19], [12] Zhai J Y. Initial experimental study of the
Pd-Ba alloy and MgO films [20], which may be used in multipactor electron gun. Master’s Thesis. Beijing:
MEG for the small industrial and medical linear Tsinghua University, 2006.
accelerators. [13] Yater J E, Shih A. Secondary electron emission
characteristics of single-crystal and polycrystalline
CONCLUSIONS diamond. Journal of Applied Physics, 2000, 87(11):
8103-8112.
A multipactor electron gun has been designed, built and
[14] Dvorkin V V, Dzbanovsky N N, Suetin N V, et al.
tested in the Accelerator Lab of Tsinghua University, and
Secondary electron emission from CVD diamond
a 920 mA pulse current, 5 μs pulse length electron beam
films. Diamond and Related Materials, 2003, 12:
has been obtained using the boron doped hydrogen
2208-2218.
terminated CVD diamond film cathodes. The cathode
[15] Kishek R A. Interaction of multipactor discharge and
lifetime is under further investigation.
RF structures: [PhD thesis]. Ann Arbor: University of
Michigan, 1997.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS [16] Bekker T L, Dayton J A, Gilmour A S, et al.
The authors are grateful to Prof. W. Z. Tang and his Observation of secondary electron emission from
colleagues at the University of Science and Technology diamond films. IEEE IEDM Tech. Dig, 1992, 92:
Beijing for preparing the CVD diamond films. 949-952.
[17] Mearini G T, Krainsky I L, Dayton Jr J A.
REFERENCES Investigation of diamond films for electronic devices.
Surface and Interface Analysis, 1994, 21: 138-143.
[1] Gallagher W J. The multipactor electron gun. In:
[18] Mearini G T, Krainsky I L, Wang Y X et al.
Proceeding of IEEE, 57(1), 1969. 94-95.
Fabrication of an electron multiplier utilizing
[2] Liska D J. Multipactoring electron gun for high duty
diamond films. Thin Solid Films, 1994, 253: 151-156
linacs. In: Proceedings of IEEE, 59(8), 1971. 1253-
[19] Zhai J Y, Tang C X, Zheng S X, et al. Multipactor
1254.
experiment on a Micro-Pulse Electron Gun. High
[3] Mako F M. Electron gun. European Patent
Energy Physics and Nuclear Physics, 2006, 30(2):
Application, EP 0809271 A2, 1997-11-26
147-150.
[4] Len L K, Mako F M. Self-bunching electron guns. In:
[20] Zhai J Y, Tang C X, Zheng S X. Experimental study
Proceedings of the 1999 Particle Accelerator
on the beam dynamics of Micro-Pulse Electron Gun.
Conference. IEEE, 1999. 70-74.
High Energy Physics and Nuclear Physics, 2006,
[5] Guharay S K, Len L K, Mako F M. High-current
30(Suppl. I): 99-101.
micro-pulse electron guns and accelerator
applications. In: Proceedings of the 2001 Particle
Accelerator Conference. IEEE, 2001. 2084-2086.
[6] Galdetskiy A V, Sazonov B V. Theoretical and
experimental investigation of cold emitters for
alenotron amplifiers. In: Proceedings of the 12th
International Conference on Microwave and
Telecommunication Technology (CriMiCo 2002).
IEEE, 2002: 172-173.
[7] Mako F M. Electron gun having multiple transmitting
and emitting sections. US Patent, 6633129, 2003-10-
14.
[8] Carlisle T P. X band high power multipactor receiver
protector. IEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory
and Techniques, 1978, 26(5): 345-347.
[9] Yokoo K, Ono S. High-speed ion pump with a
multipactor cathode-the multipactor ion pump.
Vacuum, 1981, 32(5): 265-268.
2251 c
0-7803-8859-3/05/$20.00
2005 IEEE
Proceedings of 2005 Particle Accelerator Conference, Knoxville, Tennessee
Figure 2: Schematic of the electron (or hole) Figure 3: SEM picture of the cross-section of the sample 1
transmission experiment. V1 and V2 are floating power diamond.
supplies ranging from -5kV to +5kV independently.
c
0-7803-8859-3/05/$20.00
2005 IEEE 2252
Proceedings of 2005 Particle Accelerator Conference, Knoxville, Tennessee
• Natural diamond 0 5 10
Gradient (MV/m)
The natural diamond was purchased from a Russian
company. It has a rectangular shape, 3x2.64mm2 and a
thickness of 160 microns. The diamond is a type 2a with a
modest nitrogen concentration of about 60 ppm (1.3x10-19 Figure 5: Electron transmission through the natural
/cm3). No other contaminant atoms were reported diamond for constant primary current of 20 nA at 80K
although we suspect there may be other contaminants too. and primary energies of 2, 3, 4 and 5 keV
The diamond was checked with a microscope and was
verified to be of good crystal quality. The diamond was Fig.5 shows the plots of electron transmission gain for
coated on both faces with aluminum 30 nm thick. constant primary current of 100nA at a diamond
Fig.4 shows four plots of electron transmission gain temperature of 80K. Even at low temperatures we still get
through the diamond for constant primary current of 20 very high gain. Similar to the room temperature case, at
nA at room temperature and four primary energies: 1, 2, 3 high current through the diamond, we observe a higher
and 4 keV. It is obvious that the maximum gain decreases gain than expected just by SEY from the primary
fast as we decreases the primary electron energy. At an electrons. We are not sure what the exact mechanism for
electron energy of 1 keV the gain disappears because the that is. Other details of the curve also will require further
low energy electrons are totally absorbed in the aluminum investigation, such as the clear bend in the current vs.
coating. One also notices that the high gain curves do not field curve.”
show the saturated gain property at high field gradient. The transmission through the natural diamond was
The slope of the curve at high field gradient increases as sensitive to the primary beam position and spot size. This
the current through the diamond increases. This may led to large variation of the electron transmission between
possibly due to ionization of impurity atoms, leading to a sets of experiments as seen in the room temperature and
larger SEY. low temperature measurements.
We also measured the hole transmission by changing
300 the polarity of the field across the diamond. No hole
transmission was measured. This is because the Nitrogen
250 impurity is a deep trap for holes while a shallow trap for
electron transmission gain
electron.
200 4k,20nA
3k,20nA CONCLUSIONS
150
2k,20nA The measurements of charge carrier transmission
100 1k,20nA through diamond films are presented. To have better
transmission properties, a single crystal pure diamond is
50 desired. Single crystal requirement seem more important.
With better quality diamond, we expect that the electron
0 transmission through diamond will be appropriate for
0 2 4 6 8 SEEP.
Gradient (MV/m)
REFERENCES
[1] J. E. Yater, A. Shih, and R. Abrams, “Electron
Figure 4: Electron transmission through the natural transport and emission properties of C(100)”,
diamond for constant primary current of 20 nA at room Physical Review B, V56, R4410.
temperature and primary energies of 1, 2, 3 and 4 keV
2253 c
0-7803-8859-3/05/$20.00
2005 IEEE
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A 610 (2009) 253–257
a r t i c l e in fo abstract
Available online 12 June 2009 Chemical vapour deposition (CVD) diamond offers great potential as a low-cost, high-yield, easily
Keywords: manufactured secondary electron emitter for electron multiplication in devices such as photomultiplier
CVD diamond tubes. Its potential for high secondary electron yield offers several significant benefits for these devices
Dynode including higher time resolution, faster signal rise time, reduced pulse height distribution, low noise,
Secondary electron emission and chemical stability.
Photomultiplier We describe an experiment to characterize the secondary emission yield of CVD diamond
Detector manufactured using different processes and process parameters and discuss the degradation of
secondary electron yield and experimental difficulties encountered due to unwanted electron beam-
induced contamination. We describe techniques utilized to overcome these difficulties, and present
measurements of secondary yield from CVD diamond dynodes in reflection mode.
We discuss the application of CVD diamond dynode technology, both in reflection and transmission
mode, to advanced high-speed imaging and photon-counting detectors and describe future plans in this
area.
& 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
0168-9002/$ - see front matter & 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.nima.2009.05.195
ARTICLE IN PRESS
254 J.S. Lapington et al. / Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A 610 (2009) 253–257
2. Experimental setup
15–75 mm, and beam energy of up to 5 keV. The beam can be degraded rapidly over time-scales of minutes as a result of
electrostatically deflected in the xy plane by 75 mm. exposure to the electron beam. Evidence in the form of visible
Secondary electrons produced by the electron beam impinging contamination, known as electron beam-induced contamination
the sample are collected by a stainless-steel cylinder, the large [8], from areas subject to long-term exposure, pointed strongly to
Faraday cup (LFC), which surrounds the arm. The LFC is coaxial the presence of organic contamination. This occurred in two
with the support arm and is mounted on an insulating support at forms, both highly structured, suggesting interaction of the beam
its closed end. The electron beam enters through a small aperture with adsorbed contaminants on the sample surface, and as diffuse
in the side of the LFC. The LFC can (a) be biased and, (b) has shadows whose geometry suggested either the presence of a
extended length to minimize the solid angle of the external large-angle component in the beam distribution or isotropic
chamber seen by emitted secondary electrons from the sample. evolution of contaminants from a remote source back along the
Both measures serve to ensure secondary electrons from the beam line. At this stage the vacuum system was cleaned and the
sample are captured by the LFC. Both the sample support arm and pump set replaced with an oil-free system comprising an Edwards
the LFC are electrically insulated allowing them to be biased and Maglev turbo and scroll pump, though the ultimate vacuum
their respective collected currents to be measured using a Keithley achieved was not appreciably lower.
6514 Electrometer and 6485 Picoammeter, both operating as Another mechanism for SEY degradation is hydrogen deso-
precision ammeters. These can be interchanged, however, only the rption from the diamond surface, which causes the disappearance
electrometer input can be biased. of NEA [9]. Since both electron beam-induced contamination and
Two independent methods can be used to calibrate the hydrogen desorption are produced by exposure to the electron
electron beam current, (i) the beam can be collected completely beam and are sensitive to total beam flux, they are difficult to
in the SFC, the sample current equalling the beam current, distinguish, but their effect can be alleviated if the total flux can
confirmed by a zero LFC current, or, (ii) the beam current can be be reduced. This approach was used to enable measurement of the
calculated from the sum of sample and LFC currents. The former nominal SEY of an initially ‘‘clean’’ material. The overall flux was
method requires the electron beam to be sufficiently well reduced by both pulsing the beam and lowering the beam current.
focussed to completely pass through the SFC aperture of LabView was used for the software platform to automate the
0.5 mm. Focussing was carried out by scanning the beam in two measurement procedure, which was used to control the electron
dimensions across the SFC aperture using the beam deflection gun HV, the xy beam deflection, the beam focus, and to initialize
capability, and imaging the aperture by means of the measured and take synchronised measurements from the Keithley am-
SEY, calculated using the sample and LFC currents. The SEY was meters, process the data, and save and display results. Several
then given by modes of operation allowed: (1) automated beam focussing, (2) xy
area beam scan and SEY image capture, (3) energy scan at a single
ILFC
SEY ¼ (1) point to produce SEY versus beam energy data, and (4) other
Isample þ ILFC
calibration procedures. The low-noise Keithley ammeters and
The focus was adjusted to achieve zero SEY over the aperture, good electrical insulation allowed electron beam currents in the
the expected result when the beam is fully collected in the SFC. 1–10 nA range to be used even when several hundred volt biases
Elsewhere, the phosphor-bronze shim from which the SFC was were applied to the LFC. The HV was typically pulsed for 0.3 s with
constructed produced an SEY of 1.0. This technique also allowed the ammeters taking measurements every 10 ms. The time profile
the beam profile to be calculated by deconvolution of the circular of measurements was used to select a window where the currents
SFC pinhole from the imaged SEY (see Fig. 3b). had reached a stable regime.
These modifications drastically reduced the rate of SEY
degradation with total beam charge. Fig. 4 shows a plot of the
3. Results variation of SEY for a single 100 mm spot illuminated by the
electron beam versus total deposited charge. The contribution of
Initially the system was pumped with a Leybold turbo pump the two SEY degradation mechanisms to this data is uncertain,
and rotary backing pump, reaching an ultimate pressure of however, we have qualitative proof that, despite the
107 mbar. Early on in the experiment it was noted that the decontaminated vacuum system and oil-free pump set, electron
measured SEY from any sample material, unless already very low, beam-induced contamination is still present. This is evidenced by
21
20.5
Secondary Electron Yield
20
19.5
19
18.5
18
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50
Extracted Charge (mC)
Fig. 4. A plot showing the degradation of SEY with increasing electron beam charge.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
256 J.S. Lapington et al. / Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A 610 (2009) 253–257
Fig. 5, which shows a photograph of the SFC after prolonged showed no trace of actual elongation of the beam distribution that
exposure to the electron beam, producing a diagonal dark stain. this deposit implies. This would be apparent as elongation of the
However, concurrent SEY imaging of the area around the SFC SFC aperture in the SEY image owing to convolution of the beam
and aperture distributions.
With the apparatus modified to reduce the SEY degradation
effects, we measured the SEY of a variety of diamond samples
from various sources, manufactured using different methods
(CVD, inkjet-printed nanoparticles), dopants and dopant concen-
trations, and differing crystallinities. Fig. 6 shows a plot of the best
results obtained for boron-doped, CVD diamond coated on silicon
and molybdenum substrates. The best SEY value so far obtained of
45 for B-doped diamond on silicon at 2.4 keV is the highest
reported for hydrogen-terminated material and a strong driver to
apply this technology to electron multiplication. However, in the
presence of degradation due to electron beam-induced
contamination, these must be regarded as preliminary.
Fig. 5. A photograph of the SFC before (left) and after (right) prolonged However, measurements of variation of SEY with angle of
illumination with the electron beam. incidence show unexpected behaviour (see Fig. 7). Typically, SEY
50
45
40
Secondary Electron Yield
35
30 Sample A
Sample B
25
20
15
10
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Electron Beam Energy (keV)
Fig. 6. Measured SEY versus beam energy data for hydrogen-terminated B-doped CVD diamond deposited on molybdenum (sample A) and silicon (sample B) substrates.
18
0 deg
15 deg
16
30 deg
45 deg
14
60 deg
Secondary Electron Yield
75 deg
12
10
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Electron Beam Energy (keV)
Fig. 7. Measured SEY versus energy for hydrogen-terminated B-doped CVD diamond deposited on molybdenum, with the electron beam at various angles of incidence.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
J.S. Lapington et al. / Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A 610 (2009) 253–257 257
is expected to increase with angle of incidence (defined as the guaranteed electron collision at every dynode, ideally suited for
angle with respect to the surface normal). This is due to the imaging applications. It is technologically more demanding;
reduced depth of penetration normal to the surface at higher challenges being mechanical support of very thin films or
angles, resulting in an increase in secondary electron escape incorporation of internal drift fields.
probability. Either, the high granularity of the surface plays a role
in reversing this trend or, as has been suggested by other authors,
the secondary electron escape mechanism from polycrystalline 5. Conclusions
diamond is different, utilizing transport along grain boundaries
[10]. We have obtained SEY results from B-doped hydrogen-
terminated CVD diamond comparable or better than reported
elsewhere. However, we are still encountering electron beam-
4. Future developments
induced contamination effects within the apparatus and are
continuing to develop counter measures to this limitation, while
We have plans to investigate the application of diamond as
in parallel, attempting to establish the relevance of SEY reduction due
secondary electron multiplication dynodes in actual detectors
to hydrogen desorption. The scale of the latter is the more serious
operating in two modes:
issue, being unavoidable in a detector context in reflection mode.
Successful demonstration of high SEY from a transmission dynode
1. Transmission: primary electrons enter through one surface of a will circumvent this problem since hydrogen desorption from the
thin film of diamond, and secondary electrons exit through the input surface should not affect the NEA of the output surface.
other. Primary track lengths at typical energies coupled with
the minority carrier diffusion length requires (a) film thick-
References
nesses o200 nm, or (b) thicker films with an internal drift field
to increase the secondary diffusion length.
[1] J.S. Lapington, S. Chakrabarti, T. Cook, J.C. Gsell, V.T. Gsell, Nucl. Instr. and
2. Reflection: diamond is deposited on an open conductive wire Meth. A A513 (2003) 159.
mesh or electroformed grid. Primary and secondary electrons [2] J.E. Yater, A. Shih, R. Abrams, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. A 16 (1998) 913.
enter and exit through the same diamond surface. Coated mesh [3] P.W. May, Phil. Trans. R. Soc. London A 358 (2000) 473.
[4] J.B. Miller, G.R. Brandes, J. Appl. Phys. 82 (1997) 4538.
dynodes (not CVD diamond) are already used in some imaging [5] Jon Howorth, Photek Ltd., private communication.
PMTs. [6] G.T. Mearini, I.L. Krainsky, J.A. Dayton Jr., Surf. Interface Anal. 21 (1994) 138.
[7] PSP Vacuum Technology, Macclesfield, UK, /www.pspvacuum.comS.
[8] A.E. Vladar, M.T. Postek, Microsc. Microanal. 11 (Suppl. 2) (2005) 764.
The transmission technique is conceptually superior, providing [9] J.B. Cui, J. Ristein, L. Ley, Phys. Rev. B59 (1999) 5847.
a linear detector design with minimum charge spread and [10] J.E. Yater, A. Shih, J.E. Butler, P.E. Pehrsson, J. Appl. Phys. 96 (2004) 446.
PHYSICS OF PLASMAS VOLUME 5, NUMBER 5 MAY 1998
field has reversed ~or is close to doing so! in order that the
secondary electrons released from the impact also be accel-
erated. This consideration leads to a condition on the transit
time of the electrons,20,21,25 namely, that the transit time
should be near an odd number, N, of 21 rf cycles for multi-
pactor to take place, where the number N is called the order
of the multipactor. This transit time condition ~or synchrony
condition! relates the rf voltage and frequency to the geom-
etry, allowing us to map the regions of external parameter
space in which multipactor is possible. Such maps are called
susceptibility curves in the literature ~e.g., Fig. 3, which will
be described in greater detail below!. Typically, the gap volt- FIG. 2. Universal curve to determine the upper limiting voltage, V gmax , for
age is plotted against the product of the frequency and gap a first-order (N51), two-surface multipactor assuming a general nonzero
monoenergetic emission energy E 0 ~in eV!. Here, f is the frequency in GHz
separation ( f D). For each order of the multipactor, a pair of
and D is the gap separation in cm.
lines defines the region in which multipactor is possible.
Given the frequency and the geometry, the curve immedi-
ately provides us with the voltage range for multipactor Reformulating the results of Gill and von Engel, we
(V gmin ,Vgmax). For zero emission velocity in a parallel plate show in Fig. 2 the correction to Eq. ~1b! introduced by the
geometry, the voltage boundaries scale as ( f D) 2 and hence nonzero initial velocity.19 Note that this is valid only for a
they appear as straight lines of slope 2 on a log–log plot.21,30 first-order (N51), two-surface multipactor. With this graph,
The voltage boundaries V gmin and V gmax can be derived it becomes a simple matter to calculate the upper bound
by a simple integration of the force law, imposing the transit V gmax in the case of a nonzero initial velocity. First, one uses
time condition x(t5N/2 f )5D. This results in an equation Eq. ~1b! to calculate V gmax0 for a zero initial velocity. Next,
relating the gap voltage amplitude to the external parameters one locates the point on the graph in Fig. 2 that corresponds
f and D, as well as the launch phase, u, and the emission to the given frequency, gap separation, and monoenergetic
energy, E 0 , of secondary electrons. The orbits are stable nonzero initial velocity, then reads off the correction factor.
only for a narrow range of launch phases, thus defining the Multiplying this correction factor by V gmax0 gives the desired
voltage boundaries. The minimum voltage, V gmin , is ob- upper bound. Note from Fig. 2 that the importance of a non-
tained at the maximum stable phase u 5 u m zero initial velocity decreases for higher ( f D) products. This
5arctan (2/N p ). The maximum voltage, V gmax , is obtained is a direct result of the higher voltages and, hence, the higher
at the maximum negative phase that allows an electron impact energies at higher ( f D) products. Figure 3 is an ex-
launched with nonzero initial velocity to reach the other ample of a susceptibility curve showing the resulting voltage
plate. A negative phase is possible if the emission velocity is boundaries for a first-order multipactor as pairs of diagonal
nonzero and the electric field changes sign before the elec- lines, one for each of a number of monoenergetic initial ve-
tron hits the plate of origin. The maximum negative phase is locities, v 0 .
that which results in the electron reversing, going back to the In addition to the boundaries on the voltage presented
plate of origin, and reversing again just before touching that above, another factor ~which has been largely ignored in the
plate. literature thus far! further constrains the existence of two-
Although such curves that include the dependence of surface multipactor. This originates from the consideration
V gmin or V gmax on the emission energy, E 0 , have been that the secondary electron yield must be greater than unity
published,21 no explicit formulas for them have thus far been
provided. For easy reference, we display, in physical units,
V gmin in Eq. ~1a!44 for general emission energy E 0 , and
V gmax in Eq. ~1b! only for the special case E 0 50 ~therefore
we call it V gmax0!:30
22480~ f D ! 2 2 ~ N p f D ! A44960E 0
V g min5 , ~1a!
A~ N p ! 2 14
22480
V g max 05 ~ f D !2, ~1b!
Np
A S DA
~for a resonantly driven, first-order discharge, the most pre-
E1 4 E1
0.15•N , f D,0.17 N1 , ~2! dominant case!.30 The formula shown in Eq. ~3! gives the
100 Np2 100 fraction of rf power consumed by the steady-state multipac-
where f is in GHz, D in cm, and E 1 in eV. These suscepti- tor as a function of external parameters. This agrees well
bility curves, derived from a dynamic theory, show the quali- with the simulation results and predicts that anywhere from
tative features of the experimentally observed data.19 1%–50% of the input rf power can be dissipated in the mul-
tipactor:
P m 2B1 AB 2 24AC m̄
B. Saturation 5 • , ~3!
Pd 2A r̄
Once the conditions for existence of multipactor are sat- where
F S D G
isfied, any seed electron can trigger the discharge. The ava-
lanche of electrons cannot go on unchecked, however, and 1 1 p 2 2
A5 ~ m̄ 2 n̄ 0 ! 2 1 2 2 ~ m̄ 1 n̄ 0 ! ,
sooner or later a saturation mechanism will set in. As shown 4 2 4 p
in Sec. II, prior researchers have proposed space charge
2
forces to be the ~only! saturation mechanism.16–18,21,27 While B5 ~ m̄ 2 2 n̄ 20 ! ,
this is a likely mechanism in some cases, the loading of rf p
structures by multipactor can play a significant role, espe-
cially in resonant structures. We have proposed a model of
the multipactor discharge that includes such interaction with
C5 F 1 p 2
G
1
2 ~ m̄ 1 n̄ 0 ! 1 ~ m̄ 2 n̄ 0 ! 2 2r̄ 2 .
2 4 4
the structure.28 In this model, which is illustrated in Fig. 4, a Here, P m is the power consumed by the steady-state multi-
single infinitesimally thin electron sheet travels in one di- pactor, P d is the drive power, m̄ 5( A2E 1 /m)/2p f D is the
mension inside a gap between two parallel plates. Through normalized impact velocity corresponding to the first cross-
Ramo’s theorem,45 the motion of the electrons induces a wall over point, n̄ 0 5 n 0 /2p f D is the normalized emission veloc-
current, I m (t), which in turn loads the rf structure, repre- ity of the secondaries ~assumed monoenergetic!, and r̄
sented in our model by a RLC circuit with a quality factor Q. 5eV g0 /m(2 p f D) 2 is the normalized steady-state gap volt-
2124 Phys. Plasmas, Vol. 5, No. 5, May 1998 Kishek et al.
from dynamic considerations, taking into account the inter- IEEE Trans. Microwave Theory Tech. MTT-42, 558 ~1994!.
action with the surrounding rf structure and the material
16
W. J. Gallagher, Proc. IEEE 94 ~Jan. 1969!.
17
W. J. Gallagher, IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. NS-26, 4280 ~1979!.
properties of the surface. Computer simulations have re- 18
F. Mako and W. Peter, IEEE Proceedings of the 1993 Particle Accelerator
vealed the time evolution of the discharge, the dependence Conference 2702 ~Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Piscat-
on materials, a new phase-focusing mechanism among mul- away, NJ, 1993!.
19
tiple electron sheets, and the relative importance of the vari- R. A. Kishek, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI,
ous saturation mechanisms. The results of this study are well 1997.
20
A. J. Hatch and H. B. Williams, J. Appl. Phys. 25, 417 ~1954!; theory later
in agreement with experimental observations. modified in A. J. Hatch and H. B. Williams, Phys. Rev. 112, 681 ~1958!.
21
J. R. M. Vaughan, IEEE Trans. ED-35, 1172 ~1988!.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 22
E. W. B. Gill and A. von Engel, Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A 192, 446
~1948!.
In the development of these theories, we have benefited 23
S. Brown, Basic Data of Plasma Physics ~American Institute of Physics,
from conversations with C. M. Armstrong, J. Benford, C. K. New York, 1959, reprinted 1994!, p. 202–221.
Birdsall, M. Brennan, K. Brown, D. Chernin, W. Getty, V. P. 24
A. L. Gilardini, J. Appl. Phys. 78, 783 ~1995!.
Gopinath, E. Haebel, J. Haimson, J. P. Holloway, S. Isa-
25
S. Riyopoulos, D. Chernin, and D. Dialetis, Phys. Plasmas 2, 3194 ~1995!.
26
S. Riyopoulos, D. Chernin, and D. Dialetis, IEEE Trans. Electron Devices
gawa, T. Lavine, A. Lombardi, F. Mako, R. Miller, R. ED-44, 489 ~1997!.
Poirier, R. Rimmer, S. Riyopoulos, J. Shiloh, J. J. Song, G. 27
S. Riyopoulos, Phys. Plasmas 4, 1448 ~1997!.
Thomas, J. P. Verboncoeur, J. Wang, and P. Wilson. 28
R. Kishek and Y. Y. Lau, Phys. Rev. Lett. 75, 1218 ~1995!.
This work was supported by the Multidisciplinary Uni-
29
R. A. Kishek and Y. Y. Lau, Phys. Plasmas 3, 1481 ~1996!.
30
R. A. Kishek, Y. Y. Lau, and D. Chernin, Phys. Plasmas 4, 863 ~1997!.
versity Research Initiative ~MURI!, managed by the Air 31
J. W. Noe, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A 328, 291 ~1993!.
Force Office of Scientific Research and subcontracted 32
D. Proch, D. Einfeld, R. Onken, and N. Steinhauser, IEEE Proceedings of
through Texas Tech University, by the Department of Navy the 1995 Particle Accelerator Conference ~Institute of Electrical and Elec-
Grant N00014-97-1-G001 issued by the Naval Research tronics Engineers, Piscataway, NJ, 1995!, p. 1776.
33
C. M. Lyneis, H. A. Schwettman, and J. P. Turneaure, Appl. Phys. Lett.
Laboratory, by the Northrop Grumman Industrial Affiliates
31, 541 ~1977!.
Program, and also by the Department of Energy. 34
C. Pasotti, P. Pittana, and M. Svandrlik, Proceedings of the IEEE 1997
Particle Accelerator Conference Vancouver, to be published ~Institute of
1 Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Piscataway, NJ!.
D. H. Preist and R. C. Talcott, IRE Trans. Electron Devices ED-8, 243
35
~1961!. Robert Alan Rimmer, Ph.D. dissertation, Lancaster University, Lancaster,
2
J. R. M. Vaughan, IEEE Trans. Electron Devices ED-8, 302 ~1961!. UK, 1988.
3
A. S. Gilmore, Microwave Tubes ~Artech House, Norwood, MA, 1986!, p. 36
V. P. Gopinath, J. P. Verboncoeur, and C. K. Birdsall, ‘‘Multipactor elec-
474. tron discharge physics using an improved secondary emission model,’’
4
S. Yamaguchi, Y. Saito, S. Anami, and S. Michizono, IEEE Trans. Nucl. submitted to Phys. Plasmas.
Sci. 39, 278 ~1992!. 37
R. Woo and A. Ishimaru, J. Appl. Phys. 38, 5240 ~1967!.
5
Y. Saito, S. Michizono, S. Anami, and S. Kobayashi, IEEE Trans. Electr. 38
R. Woo, J. Appl. Phys. 39, 1528 ~1968!.
Insul. 28, 566 ~1993!. 39
E. Somersalo, P. Yla-Oijala, and D. Proch, IEEE Proceedings of the 1995
6
J. Tuckmantel, C. Benvenuti, D. Bloess, D. Boussard, G. Geschonke, E. Particle Accelerator Conference ~Institute of Electrical and Electronics
Haebel, N. Hilleret, S. Juras, H. P. Kindermann, J. Uythoven, C. Wyss, Engineers, Piscataway, NJ, 1995!, p. 1500.
and M. Stirbet, IEEE Proceedings of the 1995 Particle Accelerator Con- 40
R. A. Kishek and Y. Y. Lau, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 193 ~1998!.
ference ~Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Piscataway, NJ, 41
L. K. Ang, Y. Y. Lau, R. A. Kishek, and R. M. Gilgenbach, ‘‘Power
1995!, p. 1642. deposited on a dielectric by multipactor,’’ to appear in IEEE Trans.
7
Linear Accelerators, edited by P. M. Lapostolle and A. L. Septier ~North Plasma Sci. ~1998!.
Holland, Amsterdam, 1970!, p. 917. 42
C. K. Birdsall and W. B. Bridges, Electron Dynamics of Diode Regions
8
K. J. Kleman, Proceedings 1993 Particle Accelerator Conference ~Insti- ~Academic, New York, 1966!; also O. Hachenberg and W. Brauer, Adv.
tute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Piscataway, NJ, 1993!, p. 924.
Electron. Electron Phys. XI, 413 ~1959!.
9
J. R. M. Vaughan, IEEE Trans. Electron Devices ED-15, 883 ~1968!.
10
43
J. R. M. Vaughan, IEEE Trans. Electron Devices ED-36, 1963 ~1989!;
M. Yoshida, S. Isagawa, Yo. Takeuchi, M. Ono, M. Sato, K. Takata, and
verified experimentally in A. Shih and C. Hor, IEEE Trans. Electron De-
H. Baba, Proceedings 6th Symposium on Accelerator Science and Tech-
vices ED-40, 824 ~1993!.
nology, Tokyo, Oct. 1987 ~Iomico, Tokyo, 1987!, pp. 126–128.
11
44
We remark that Eq. ~1a! is not exact for nonzero initial velocity, because
E. G. Schweppe, R. Bachmor, and E. Demmel, IEEE Proc. of the 1993
Particle Accelerator Conference ~Institute of Electrical and Electronic En- in such a case the maximum stable phase u m is no longer given by the
gineers, Piscataway, NJ, 1993!, p. 1178. simple expression arctan (2/N p ) derived for zero emission velocity, but is
12 nevertheless sufficiently accurate.
F. Hohn, W. Jacob, R. Beckmann, and R. Wilhelm, Phys. Plasmas 4, 940
~1997!.
45
S. Ramo, Proc. IRE 27, 584 ~1939!; also W. Shockley, J. Appl. Phys. 9,
13
P. F. Clancy, Microw. J. 77 ~March, 1978!. 635 ~1938!.
14
A. D. Woode and J. Petit, Microw. J. 142 ~January, 1992!. 46
August Valfells, R. A. Kishek, and Y. Y. Lau, Phys. Plasmas 5, 300
15
N. Rozario, H. F. Lenzing, K. F. Reardon, M. S. Zarro, and C. G. Baran, ~1998!.
Pres. PAC'09 Conf., Vancouver, BC BNL 90592-2009-CP
4-8 May (2009)
May,2009
*This manuscript has been authored by Brookhaven Science Associates, LLC under
Contract No. DC-AC02-98CHI0886 with the U.S. Department of Energy. The United
States Government retains, and the publisher, by accepting the article for publication,
acknowledges, a world-wide license to publish or reproduce the published form of this
manuscript, or allow others to do so, for the United States Government purposes.
DISCLAIMER
This work was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United
States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor
any of their employees, nor any of their contractors, subcontractors, or their employees,
makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility
for the accuracy, completeness, or any third party's use or the results of such use of any
information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would
not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial
product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does
not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the
United States Government or any agency thereof or its contractors or subcontractors.
The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect
those ofthe United States Government or any agency thereof
3D SIMULATIONS OF SECONDARY ELECTRON GENERATION AND
TRANSPORT IN A DIAMOND ELECTRON BEAM AMPLIFIER *
E(eV)
eV and lower) the secondary electron generation rates are
comparable to the electron-phonon rates. Note that mod-
10
15
r.======~----.-or------..,
« •. imp. deDII. 8e2O
eling of electron transport with energies close to the bot-
•• , imp. deDII. 1.64e20 tom of the conduction band does not include elastic scat-
10
14
:.: : : : : : ~t tering [9] from the periodic potential of the carbon ions as
_. g3Abs
_ g3Emit done for the medium energy range [6].
_. t3Ab.
- f3Emit We have implemented a general Monte Carlo algorithm
f2Ab.
t2Emit to handle all scattering processes (it also includes null col-
lisions [10] to increase the efficiency). In between scatter-
ing events, the particle-in-cell algorithms in VORPAL [4]
provide the capability to self-consistently move particles
interacting with electromagnetic fields.
1~.01 0.1
Energy (eV)
10
ELECTRON TRANSPORT SIMULATIONS
In this Section, we discuss representative results from
simulations with the implemented models on electron"
Figure 1: The top plot shows the inelastic scattering rates transport after secondary electrons and holes are generated
for generation of secondary electrons and holes (calculated using one of the models for inelastic scattering. We used
from the TPP-2 model) together with the elastic rates in the the Ashley model for the results here and primary electron
medium energy range. The bottom plot shows the rates for energy of 2.7 keY. We reported effects related to the sec-
electron-phonon (low energy inelastic) and impurity (elas- ondary electron generation with this model in a previous
tic) scattering processes. study [5] and present only new results from the transport
simulations here.
The free (conduction band) electrons in diamond also ex- The domain was split into a three-dimensional grid, typ-
perience low-energy inelastic scattering with phonons (lat- ically of 24 x 24 x 24 cells, with a cell edge size of 0.1
tice excitations) and elastic scattering from charged impuri- J.1m. For the simulations described here, a small time step
ties. Charge transport cannot be simulated accurately with- (usually 8 x 10- 18 s) was used during the creation of the
out including the electron-phonon scattering. These inelas- secondary electrons (to resolve the mean free time for these
tic processes lead to additinal relaxation of the the electron processes) which happens during the first few hundred fem-
energies to reach the drift state in an applied field. At low toseconds. Phonon scattering was not enabled during this
fields, free electrons have energies close to the bottom of time interval. At the end of this interval, the VORPAL data
the conduction band and drift with temperature effectively was dumped, the input file modified to increase the time
equal to the temperature of the diamond crystal (a highly step (for faster simulation runs while still resolving the
desirable property for generation of beams with low ther- mean free times of the low energy scattering processes),
mal emittance). and to enable scattering of the free charged carriers with
For the low-energy inelastic scattering with optical and phonons. The total propagation time of these simulations
acoustic phonons we implemented Monte Carlo algorithms was approximately 20 ps.
based on the models given by Jacoboni and Reggiani [11]. We specifically studied the dependence of the drift ve-
In diamond, these models approximate the energy bands locity obtained with the phonon scattering models on the
with a parabolic dependence on the electron wave vector applied external field magnitudes' in a range values from
and have ellipsoidal constant energy surfaces. Both in- 0.05 to 10 MV/m. This is a range of interest for use in
tervalley and intravalley electron-phonon processes are in- diamond amplified photo-cathodes. Our goal was to ver-
cluded. The rates for the emission and absorption of acous- ify that the models can describe the transport of electron
clouds with drift velocities in agreement with experimental framework for simulation of secondary electron generation
measurements for this range of applied fields. and transport in diamond. We presented results from trans-
port simulations to determine the electron drift velocity de-
pendence on the applied field. These simulations test the
implemented electron-phonon scattering models. The drift
0.8 velocity obtained from VORPAL agrees well with experi-
~ mental data and more detailed band-structure calculations
'=0. 0 .6 for the fields of interest. This gives us confidence that
~
g
• the electron-phonon models we implemented in VORPAL
.s 0.4
~
are adequate to simulate electron transport in diamond for
studying DAP properites. In future developments, we will
~ investigate how to incorporate models of electron emission
~ 0.2
from diamond surfaces with negative electron affinities and
effects related to trapping of electrons in diamond.
6 10 12
t Ips)
REFERENCES
[1] I. Ben-Zvi, X. Chang, P. D. Johnson, 1. Kewisch, and T. Rao.
Figure 2: The drift velocity evolution at two applied fields Secondary emission enhanced photoinjector. C-AD Acceler-
indicate the rate of convergence to the (time) average values ator Physics Report C-A/AP/149, BNL, 2004.
(given in the legend). [2] X. Chang, 1. Ben-Zvi, A. Burrill, S. Hulbert, P. D. Johnson,
1. Kewisch, T. Rao, 1. Smedley, Z. Segalov, and Y. Zhao.
The relaxation behavior of the drift velocity to steady Measurement of the secondary emission yield of a thin di-
state from simulations at two field values is shown Fig. 2. amond window in transmission mode. In C. Horak, editor,
The results show that it takes of the order of a few pi- 2005 Particle Accelerator Conference. IEEE, number 2251-
coseconds to reach the steady state. The relaxation time 3,2005.
decreases when increasing the applied field. [3] X. Chang, I. Ben-Zvi, A. Burrill, J. Grimes, T. Rao,
Z. Segalov, 1. Smedley, Q. WU Recent Progress on the Dia-
mond Amplified Photo-cathode Experiment In 2007 Particle
i
105
• lation code. 1. Comput. Phys., 196:448-473, 2004.
i 0
• [5] D. A. Dimitrov, R. Busby, D. L. Bruhwiler, J. R. Cary, 1. Ben-
Zvi, T. Rao, X. Chang, 1. Smedley, Q. Wu 3D Simulations of
~ Secondary Electron Generation and Transport in a Diamond
~ • Amplifier for Photocathodes In 2007 Particle Accelerator
Conference. IEEE, pp. 3555-7,2007.
• 0.1 1 10
[6] B. Ziaja, D. van der Spoel, A. Szoke, and J. Hajdu. Auger-
electron cascades in diamond and amorphous carbon. Phys.
Electric Field Magnitude (MV/m) Rev. B, 64(214104-1/8), 2001.
[7] B. Ziaja, A. Szoke, D. van der Spoel, and J. Hajdu. Space-
time evolution of electron cascades in diamond. Phys. Rev. B,
Figure 3: The obtained average electron drift velocity vs 66:024116-1/9, 2002.
applied field from VORPAL simulations of electron trans- [8] B. Ziaja, R. A. London, and 1. Hajdu. Unified model of
port in diamond agrees well with experimental data. secondary electron cascades in diamond. 1. Appl. Phys.,
97:064905-1/9, 2005.
The dependence of the average electron drift velocity [9] T. Watanabe, T. Teraji, T. Ito, Y. Kamakura, and K. Taniguchi
on the applied field magnitude obtained from the VOR- Monte Carlo simulations of electron transport properties of
PAL simulations with the models we implemented for the diamond in high electric fields using full band structure 1.
electron-phonon scattering is shown in Fig. 3. These val- Appl. Phys. 95:4866-74, 2004.
ues agree well with experimental data and the more de- [10] M. Lundstrom. Fundamentals of Carrier Transport. Cam-
tailed, band-structure Monte Carlo simulation results given bridge University Press, second edition, 2000.
by Watanabe et ale [9].
[11] C. Jacoboni and L. Reggiani The Monte Carlo method for
the solution of charge transport in semiconductors with ap-
SUMMARY plications to covalent materials Rev. Mod. Phys., 64:645-705,
1983.
We described here the overall modeling capabilities
we have implemented within the VORPAL computational
Oscillator-Generator Powered by
Secondary Electron Emission
By Bruce Darrow Gaither,
Tulsa, Oklahoma
In 1902, Austin and Starke reported that the metal surfaces impacted
by cathode rays emitted a larger number of electrons than were
incident.
Thus, classic tube designs have been given a new vitality by the
advances in materials and component parts. A higher secondary
emission coefficient results in an additional multiplication of initial
electron input, and that means that a greater portion of the multiplied
electrons can be diverted from the output of vacuum tubes and
reapplied to the input of the tube, so that outside power sources can
be turned off once the device is started.
The relationship between the travel time for the electron clouds of
secondary electrons and the frequency of the oscillation of the
cathodes is important. The electron movement and the frequency of
the alternating polarity to the cathodes needs to be in phase so that
the oscillations of the tube itself will continue. So the time of the
cycle of the electricity applied from the outside to the two cathodes
must be twice the time of flight for the cloud of electrons.
It should be noted that the electrons, once they pass all they way
through the tube and strike the other cathode, multiply and produce
another cloud of electrons which are thereupon accelerated toward
the first cathode. The cycle of endless multiplication results in a flow
toward the anode due to the increased electron density, and the
anode will tend to extract electrons in each half cycle in an amount
equal to the excess of secondary of primary electrons.
A simple battery can be used to provide the needed power for the
present invention, with a Cockroft-Walton voltage multiplier being
interposed between the battery and the tube in order to step up the
voltage to the required level.
The regime of the oscillator is to use low voltage for the cathodes and
high voltage for the positive anode.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION
After the first cloud of electrons hits the cathode then that cloud is no
longer accelerated. The multiplied cloud is another cloud and it is the
cloud which goes back in the other direction. So the original cloud of
electrons merely drifts without acceleration and they eventually orbit
toward the positive anode, 2, where they are extracted and sent to
output.
PATENT HISTORY
US 2091439 FARNSWORTH
US 2138920 HOLLMANN
US 2143378 KALLMANN
US 2168052 SNYDER
GB 451866 PERCIVAL
GB 503359 FARNSWORTH TELEVISION
Self-Charging Cellphones and PDA’s
regenerated by Secondary Electron
Emission
By Bruce Darrow Gaither,
Tulsa, Oklahoa
Thus the cell phone or PDA will not run short of charge while it is
being held by the individual, and the battery will recharge by the self-
produced current from electron multiplication.
Figure One, Photomultiplier Handbook, Burle Industries, Table 1
SECONDARY EMISSION POWER MODULE
FOR ELECTRIC VEHICLE
By Bruce Darrow Gaither
Tulsa, Oklahoma
US PATENT DOCUMENTS
ABSTRACT
The instant disclosure relates to the subject of electric cars. Usually the electric
automobile is powered by an array of 12 volt batteries, but the current invention improves
the state of the art by providing for a power system based upon secondary electron
emission similar to the photomultipliers manufactured by Hamamatsu Photonics and the
classic Multipactor tubes invented by Philo Farnsworth.
An electric motor is a device which is well known to those acquainted with the art.
Usually such motors will have requirements for electricity which can be expressed in
terms of volts and amps, and any combination of batteries, alternators or electric
generators (whether powered by gasoline or electricity) will satisfy the power
requirements of the electric motor which turns the wheels of the car.
In this instance an initial current is sent through a current multiplier which is scaled to a
degree which is designed to dovetail with the requirements of the electric motor. Thus,
the hereinafter-described invention is meant to be a general description of the invention
and it is not meant to foreclose all possible permutations or variations of the invention
which may be configured to meet the requirements of any particular electric motor, but
this disclosure is meant to include all possible variations thereof without limitation by the
illustrations or descriptions hereinafter used by the inventor.
There is presented a current multiplier which may be fabricated in the form of a vacuum
tube or a semiconductor device or a combination of the two.
The initial electric current for this device may be visible light, as in the manner of the
photocathodes of Hamamatsu, or a current from a battery or generator. The current is
conveyed through one or more cathode/anodes and is multiplied thereby until the current
meets the needs of the electric motor of the vehicle.
Thus, a small current initiates the process and a multiplication process occurs which
increases the number of electrons to the desired level, and then the mutliplied electrons
are finally subjected to transformers or voltage regulators to more closely guarantee a
constant current of the desired quantity and quality for the use of the electric motor.
It has been long known that certain substances exhibit a "secondary electron emissivity"
when they are bombarded with electrons. When these substances are exposed to a stream
of electrons then they emit electrons on their own. Some of these elements in an amount
greater than unity. Thus, when an element or alloy emits electrons in a ratio greater than
1.0 (electrons emitted/electrons inserted) it is called "greater than unity". In the days of
radio tubes a number of such substances were studied carefully and their secondary
emissivity charted. Substances such as Cesium and Magnesium were found to emit
secondary electrons in a ratio of up to 8 times the number of initial electrons by which
they were bombarded. A long list of other substances, alloys and layered combinations of
metals and other elements have been described.
Based upon this data the golden age of radio employed vacuum tubes which depended
upon the process of secondary emission. These radio tubes found a number of
applications in other fields of early electronics, including the field of television. Philo T.
Farnsworth, the inventor of television, designed a number of devices employing
secondary emission and which featured multiple impacts of electrons upon anodes within
a vacuum tube. He termed these devices "multipactors" for the multiple impacts upon the
secondary emissive materials. In one such device Farnsworth calculated that he could
produce over 4 times the initial number of electrons on each successive impact, and that
if he fabricated a vacuum tube containing multiple such impacts in succession then he
could generate 4x4x4x4...etc. Thus, the multiplicative effect of successive cathode/anode
combinations with each step being higher than unity, finally produced a huge
multiplication of the initial current.
Then Farnsworth invented a device which took part of the output of the secondary
emission cathodes and anodes and then reapplied it to the input of the device, so as to use
a regenerative feedback. This device resulted in a self-sustaining multipactor, which,
once it is started, would continue to multiply electrons without the addition of any
external power. He noted that in a cold-cathode configuration wherein light was used to
trigger a photo-emission to start this device that the input would be of a variable and not a
constant or predictable level, and that the output would vary according to the input. But if
a hot cathode or a battery-powered or Ac-powered input were used to initiate the process
that the level of input would be constant and the multiplication effect would be linear.
The design of these Farnsworth multipactor tubes is included in the Figures below and
the aforestated Farnsworth patents are incorporated herein by reference as if fully set
forth herein.
In the instant device the output desired is to be of a constant and predictable level, so
there is provided a non-photonic initial input in some configurations. In those
configurations of the current invention wherein light is to be used to stimulate photo-
emission to trigger the multiplication, then additional devices and circuits must be
employed to assure the predictable and constant linear multiplication required to power
the electric motor.
As the state of the art progressed most of the radio tubes were replaced with
semiconductor devices which performed the same function. This has likewise been the
case with secondary emission devices. The multipactor tube was microengineered and
placed on a semiconductor chip. The state of the art in photomultipliers (PMTs) has also
evolved into smaller and more efficient devices, but due to the characteristics of cesium
which deteriorates in the atmosphere, and because the atmosphere is insulative and not
conductive to electricity, the evolving devices must still be enclosed in a vacuum
envelope, whether they are in tubes or semiconductor chips.
It is for this reason that the device, though self-energized, cannot be termed a perpetua
mobilia device. The self-energization is a function of the heat generated and low work
function of the specialized materials, and is not violative of the laws of thermodynamics.
The well-recognized principle of secondary emission over unity merely provides
scintillation to the initial tube once it is already in operation.
Einstein's law is that theorem which describes the work function involved in the process
of photoemission. In the work which won Einstein the Nobel Prize
E=hv-phi
Where hv is the energy quanta of the light and phi is the amount of energy requried for
the electron to escape the surface of the metal.
Thus the energy emitted by the secondary emission substance is equal to the energy of
the light MINUS the "work function" required for the electron to escape the metal.
Therefore, it is desirable for the "work function" to be minimized in order for more
energy to be liberated by the secondary emission material.
The best coatings for the cathode/anode combinations, then, is one which has a very low
work function.
But there was devised an effect which made this work function process much more
efficient by making a NEGATIVE subtraction, which in effect ADDED to the energy
quanta of the light, as Einstein described.
In the early 1960’s, R.E. Simon while working at the RCA Laboratories developed his
revolutionary concept of Negative Electron Affinity (NEA). Electron affinity is the
energy required for an electron at the conduction-band level to escape to the vacuum
level. By suitably treating the surface of a p-type semiconductor material, the band levels
at the surface can be bent downward so that the effective electron affinity is actually
negative. Thermalized electrons in the conduction band are normally repelled by the
electron-affinity barrier; the advantage of the NEA materials is that these electrons can
now escape into the vacuum as they approach the surface. In the case of secondary
emission, secondary electrons can be created at greater depths in the material and still
escape, thus providing a much greater secondary-emission yield. In the case of
photoemission, it has been possible to achieve extended-red and infrared sensitivities
greater than those obtainable with any other known materials. The first practical
application of the NEA concept was to secondary emission. Simon and Williams An
early paper by described the theory and early experimental results of secondary emission
yields as high as 130 at 2.5 kV for GaP:Cs.
So Gallium Phosphide, treated with Cesium was the subject of this initial discovery of
Negative Electron Affinity. A number of other substances were thereafter discovered to
exhibit this negative electron affinity and therefore exhibit extremely elevated levels of
secondary emissivity multipaction.
Many of these multiplication levels, expressed in terms of "Gain" increase as the amount
of input electricity is increased. So increasing the input to the cathode/anode pairs will
further enhance the multiplication effect.
Various means then exist whereby the gain from the initial input current can be controlled.
In addition to the control of the input levels of electricity devices extrinsic to the
secondary emission devices can fine tune the current produced so that the final product is
of the levels desired to power the electric motor of the car. Such devices may include
transformers, Cockroft-Walton circuits or other ladder circuits, voltage regulators,
magnetic amplifiers or operational amplifiers might be applied in this fine-tuning process.
Sometimes the current may pick up a ripple in this multiplication process and need to be
smoothed by other devices or circuits, but these devices are all well-known to those
acquainted in the art and need not be discussed here.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION
This invention discloses a module which is designed to produce electric current sufficient
to power an electric motor for an automobile. Such a module includes a power source, an
array of tubes and/or semiconductor devices, and other extrinsic devices which do not
employ secondary emission but which serve to modulate and regulate the signal which
ultimately results from the secondary devices and which extrinsic devices are employed
to shape the current to meed the needs of the electric motor.
Although a solar cell or photocathode could be used to provide the initial jumpstart for
the device, the preferred embodiment should use a battery in the range of 12-15 volts.
This will assure a reliable and constant amount of electricity which will make it easier to
produce a linear amplification of the intial input.
The first of the array of secondary emission devices shall be of the type described by
Philo Farnsworth in his Self-Energized Alternate Current Multiplier, US Patent 2,174,487
(1937). In this disclosure Farnsworth describes that it is easier to start this device than it
is to get it to stop.
Thus, once the self-energized vacuum tube gets warmed up it will continue to multiply
electrons on its own and the power source can be turned off in order to save the batteries.
The batteries, then, can be recharged by the ultimate output of the module while the
secondary emission process of multiplication is carried on using internally-produced
power. In order to insure that the electrons will not scatter before they hit their target
electrodes, a magnetic focusing device may be provided in the space between the emitter
and the target electrode, and said magnetic device may be either a permanent magnet or
electromagnet whose purpose is to deflect and confine the beam of electrons.
Once the self-energized tube is multiplying electrons then that output us conveyed to the
input of secondary emission devices employing negative electron affinity and which
multiply electrons at a much higher rate of gain.
Using Gallium Phosphide as an example, and applying a calculation based upon a gain of
100 to 1 for each step we can easily determine that the first step would produce 100 times
as many electrons as are input from the self-energized electron multiplier. Then the
second step would be 100 times 100, or 10,000 times as many electrons. A third step
would be 100 times 10,000 or a multiplication of 1 million from the initial input of the
self-energized electron multiplier device. The graphs and formulas provided from the
Hamamatsu PMT handbook demonstrate that it is common for such devices to exhibit
gains in the range of 106 to 108.
At multiplication levels of this degree then, small variations in the signal will likewise be
multiplied and can result in undesirable effects.
Therefore it is possible that an extrinsic device or circuit be interposed between the self-
energized device tube and the negative electron affinity device in order to modulate and
regulate the output of the Farnsworth device and assure, as much as possible, that the
input of the higher multiplication device be constant and smooth. A voltage regulator or
transformer or smoothing circuit can be employed at this stage. At lower levels such an
intermediate modulation extrinsic device might not need to be employed.
The greater the number of multiple electrodes the more involved the accelerating voltage
apparatus will be. In the case of a single electrode with coating of very low work function
or of negative electron affinity the accelerating voltage field may be foregone completely.
Where the voltage is required the current from a battery may pass through a Cockroft-
Walton circuit and be tapped at the appropriate step of the ladder to supply the voltage
required to each particular electrode. Thus, a separate kind of voltage multiplier such as a
CW ladder is used to step up the voltage from a battery in order to charge the electrodes
in the electron multiplier tube. If this accelerating voltage is required in the instant
invention then the output of the electron multiplier tube can be used to recharge said
battery so that the accelerating voltage can be applied as needed indefinitely and without
the need for external power. Thus, the present invention applies the prior art involving a
self-energized multipactor tube which then provides power for a second tube, with part of
the power of the secondary tube being used to either power a battery for the accelerating
voltage CW circuit, or the initial self-energized multipactor can have part of its output
diverted to power the CW circuit, and part to recharge the battery, and the remainder to
supply the second electron multiplier tube.
The selection of materials, then, is vital to the need for accelerating voltage. If a material
is used which has a very high secondary emission gain then the device will be able to
divide the current output therefrom and apply it to the accelerating voltage requirements.
Also the desired level of multiplication is known from the specifications of the electric
motor to ultimately be powered. This means that, depending upon the materials and the
motor, the second tube in the present invention may not need to be a multistage tube, and
the problem of accelerating voltage may be eliminated or lessened to a large degree. If
there is no accelerating voltage then there is no need for a separate power source for the
Cockroft-Walton circuit which might be unnecessary.
It is clear that such levels of current can be obtained by a module containing the
described array of secondary emission devices that the requirements for a simple electric
motor might be obtained with considerable ease. The ultimate output of the secondary
emission devices then will need to be adjusted so that the voltage and amperage
requirements of the electric motor be matched as perfectly as possible. The module
described herein, then, will employ well-known devices which may step down the
voltage or step up the amperage and change the frequency of the current to meet the
needs of the motor.
Current dividers will also be employed so that the ultimate current from the secondary
emission devices be divided into separate paths in order to first power the motor, and then
to recharge the battery, and also to power the headlights, windshield wipers of the
automobile. Rectifiers may be employed to convert between AC and Dc and the current
may be shaped and scaled to suit the needs of the battery charger and the auto electric
devices respectively.
The current invention represents an improvement over the current state of the art in
electric automobiles because it will produce a small and lightweight and versatile power
supply as compared with the bulky and heavy battery arrays employed at this time. The
savings in space and weight will enable the electric car to be smaller and more spacious
to the passengers and allow more carrying space. It will also constitute an improvement
in that it will not need to be recharged every 40 miles like a single battery would, and it
will not need to be plugged into Ac current overnight to recharge like the plug-in cars
require. Instead the instant invention will be completely self-contained and self-energized,
with only an initial battery for start up being employed, and that battery being recharged
after self-energization occurs.
Such a secondary emission module will be capable of powering larger electric motors,
thus advancing the art as to trucks and cargo vehicles and other work vehicles of heavier
weights, and will constitute an improvement over the golf cart type of electric cars.
MATERIALS
Materials selected for their secondary electron emission properties may vary widely
depending upon the degree of electron multiplication needed and the cost and difficulty
in fabrication and deposition of these materials upon electrodes. In addition,
microdevices employing this principle sometimes create difficulties in the formation of
sharp points at the micro level and in the creation of vacuum spaces on the
semiconductors due to the fact that extremely high vacuum levels, beyond the normal
vacuum levels which would suffice for regular tubes. Thus, a trade-off of design
characteristics is indicated when it comes to the selection of materials for the secondary
emission of electrons.
Many materials, especially metals, exhibit secondary emission of electrons. As the graphs
indicate in the figures below, silver, magnerisum, copper, calcium, cesium, gold and
others are commonly-known elements. Next amalgams or alloys of the emissive materials
are found to multiply the initial input of electrons at elevated levels.
A silver base which is then oxidized and coated with a thin layer of cesium was the
preferred combination at one time due to the fact that it would be both photo-emissive
and cathode-emissive.
The principle of negative electron affinity and the development of new materials and
processes has expanded the range of possibilities and further elevated the gain of
secondary emission possible. Much higher levels of secondary emission have been
attained through the use of Gallium Phosphide treated with Cesium, and also with Gallim
Nitride and Cesium. Llacer & Garwin of the Stanford Linear Accelerator have predicted a
1000 fold gain for Gallium Arsenide at primary voltages of 20,000 volts. A complete
rendition of these newer materials is unnecessary here.
Recent advances have resulted in processes for the creation of thin films and coatings
involving synthetic diamonds through the chemical vapor deposition of carbon upon
substrates. Likewise research into carbon nanotubes have created another branch of
secondary emission materials. Each of these materials carries with it a separate process
for fabrication and assembly.
So there is no single material combination which is proper in this design, and this
invention is meant to include all such secondary emission materials and negative electron
affinity elements and processes for fabrication and assembly, whether stated herein or not.
But the preferred configuration is to use the tradition cesium oxide coated with cesium
for the first tube in the module due to the well-defined and predictable secondary
emission performance in this three electrode configuration, and for the negative electron
affinity materials to be used in the second tube in the module. The reasoning here is that
the first tube is to be used to create a steady and reliable power source which is
internally-generated and self-energized, and that the steady output of the first tube is then
to be applied to the second tube. Otherwise, a configuration where another power source
could apply current to a single multistage multipactor tube using negative electron
affinity materials would be likewise generative of electricity and would suit the purposes
of this invention. So, the instant invention is not meant to be limited to a two-tube design
and it may also include a single tube configuration or any other combination involving
any number of tubes in cascade design.
In the drawings:
FIGURE 9 is a flow chart which depicts the present invention. It shows that a battery
provides the initial supply, which then passes through a self-energized multipactor.
Then the power goes to a second multiplying stage by flowing through a negative
electron affinity device, which has even greater multiplicative power.
FIGURE 11 is a diagram of tube one of the secondary emission module, showing a three-
electrode configuration, and featuring one cathode and two anodes placed coaxially
thereinside the cathode. A variable capacitor and a choke coil are used to control the tube.
Figure 11 also contains a diagram of the circuit for the electric current and electrons of
the module.
CLAIMS
What I claim is:
2. A power tube module for vehicles in which one tube employs the principle of
secondary electron emission.
3. A power tube module where the first tube using secondary emission has a three
electrod configuration, with one cathode and two anodes, placed in a concentric or
coaxial arrangement.
4. A power tube module wherein the first tube is self energized by virtue of
regenerative feedback from one of the anodes and the fact that the initial start-up
current is multiplied by the principle of secondary electron admission.
5. A power tube module wherein the first tube is self-energized after start-up and the
remaining output of said first tube is then regulated and modulated to assure
constancy and quality to signal and then said remaining output is applied to the
second tube in the module.
6. A power tube module wherein the first tube is self-energized and the remaining
output thereof is applied to the second tube, which then applies the principle of
negative electron affinity to further optimize the process of secondary electron
emission so that a multi-stage multipactor or Farnsworth tube is configured to
multiply the initial input to a still greater degree.
7. A power tube module wherein the first tube powers the second tube which then
multiplies the electron input to a great degree and then the output of the second
tube is further regulated and modulated so that it will produce an electric current
which closely meets the requirements of whichever electric motor is to be used to
power the electric vehicle.
8. A power tube module wherein the electrical current to initiate the process of
secondary emission multiplication is provided by a battery, which battery can be
switched off after the initial warmup of the first tube, and which battery can be
recharged by the ultimate output of the second tube, and which power tube
module can be operated for most of the time through the electrons internally
produced and multiplied by said secondary electron emission principle.
FIGURE
1
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 3
FIGURE 4
FIGURE 5
FIGURE 6
FIGURE 7
FIGURE
8
Figure 8a
FIGURE 9
FIGURE 10
FIGURE 11
In 1902, Austin and Starke reported that the metal surfaces impacted
by cathode rays emitted a larger number of electrons than were
incident.
PATENT HISTORY
US 1948384 LAWRENCE
US 2630549 SZIKLAI
DE 687265 BRIOT
PRIOR ART