Low-damage Processing of Organic Materials with Size-controlled Gas Cluster Ion Beams

2011 ◽  
Vol 1288 ◽  
Author(s):  
Motohiro Nakagiri ◽  
Noriaki Toyoda ◽  
Isao Yamada

ABSTRACTOrganic materials have been widely used in various fields of electronic applications. However, they are difficult to process without damage by using a conventional ion beam which use energetic ions. In this study, gas cluster ion beam (GCIB), which shows low-damage process, was used for organic materials, and irradiation effect of size selected GCIB was studied with Xray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS). In the case of irradiation of 500 eV Ar ion (monomer ion) on polyimide, the intensities of both N-C=O and C-O bond decreased after irradiation. On the other hand, there was small change in the XPS spectra after 15 keV Ar-GCIB irradiation with the same ion dose. The etching rate of polyimide per one ion with 15 keV Ar-GCIB was almost 1.8×104 times higher than that with 500 eV Ar monomer ions. The damages in polyimide decreased with increasing the Ar cluster size owing to the reduction of energy per atom at acceleration voltage of 15 kV. After irradiation of size selected 5 kV Ar cluster ion, damage was almost negligible. Although, the surface became rough after irradiation of Ar-GCIB, surface roughness and the change of chemical bond were very small with N2-GCIB irradiation. Ar-GCIB irradiation on dye-sensitized solar cells (N719) showed that very low-damage process is possible with GCIB, and it indicated that GCIB is suitable for surface processing of organic materials used in electronic devices.

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Motohiro Nakagiri ◽  
Noriaki Toyoda ◽  
Isao Yamada ◽  
Jiro Matsuo ◽  
Masataka Kase ◽  
...  

2008 ◽  
Vol 47 (5) ◽  
pp. 3380-3383 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuichi Haruyama ◽  
Teruyuki Kitagawa ◽  
Kazuhiro Kanda ◽  
Shinji Matsui ◽  
Tatsuo Gejo ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Graham Purvis ◽  
Cees van der Land ◽  
Naoko Sano ◽  
Peter Cumpson ◽  
Neil Gray

<p>The procedures for detecting fossils on Mars can be derived from the methods that are already used in terrestrial paleobiology (Cady et al., 2003). Here fossils preserving regions are visually located, then inspected for morphological features that might imply fossilised biology (Cady and Noffke, 2009; Westall et al., 2015). Morphological evidence of microfossils on its own is not a completely reliable biosignature (García Ruiz et al., 2002).  However, evidence of biological activity may be implanted within the molecular and isotopic composition of organic compounds, which can serve as biosignatures (Summons et al., 2008). Thus, combining both morphological with organo-geochemical evidence could strengthen any argument that a given geological feature could be associated with biological activity. The results from the simultaneous morphological and geochemical analysis of geobiological structures on Earth could provide evidence that any comparable structures that may be observed on Mars, are potentially connected to biological activity, and therefore, may be suitable for collection for return to the Earth, for further analysis.</p><p>As a proof of concept, the distribution of the organic material that is associated with distinctive microtubules in the glassy volcaniclastic shards within tuff, that have been suggested to be putative ichnofossils (Banergee and Muehlenbachs, 2003), these were analysed by us using X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy, nanoSIMS and the Ionoptika J105 time of flight secondary ion mass spectrometer, with  an argon gas cluster ion beam. This indicated that nitrogenous organic material occurred in regions of the sample that were rich in microtubule textures and in the surrounding microfractures (Sano et al., 2016). </p><p>These results demonstrated that the J105 ToF-SIMS combined with XPS and GC/MS analysis is able to match geomorphological features with their organic and inorganic composition at the µm scale, which may be a useful approach for the identification of fossilised life on Mars.</p><p><strong>References:</strong></p><p>Banerjee et al., (2003). Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems, 4(4).</p><p>Cady et al., (2003). Astrobiology, 3(2), pp.351-368.</p><p>Cady et al., (2009). GSA Today, 19(11).</p><p>García Ruiz et al., (2002). Astrobiology, 2(3), pp.353-369.</p><p>Summons et al., (2008) Astrobiology, 90, 1151–1154.</p><p>Westall, F., et al., (2015). Astrobiology, 15(11), pp.998-1029.</p><p>Sano, N et al., (2016). J. of Vac Sci & Tech A: 34(4), p.041405</p>


2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (4) ◽  
pp. 041405 ◽  
Author(s):  
Naoko Sano ◽  
Graham W. H. Purvis ◽  
Anders J. Barlow ◽  
Geoffrey D. Abbott ◽  
Neil N. D. Gray ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document