Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T11:53:54.248Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Peaks in the background from single-crystal substrates measured with parallel beam optics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 January 2013

P. van der Sluis
Affiliation:
Philips Research Laboratories, Prof. Holstlaan 4, 5656 AA Eindhoven, The Netherlands

Abstract

An X-ray detector chain consisting of a Xe-filled proportional detector followed by a pulse height analyzer tuned to 8.1 keV may register energies between 5 and 45 keV, although with a low efficiency at the edges. For diffraction experiments on single-crystalline substrates, these diffracted intensities can be significant. In the high-energy range, regions of even higher intensity are found due to the so-called escape process. In the diffraction angle scan of an (001) oriented Si single-crystal measured with a low (fixed) incidence angle, we have identified 21 peaks, originating from three different diffraction processes: diffraction from white radiation, diffraction observed via an escape process, and crystal truncation rod scattering. These peaks interfere with diffraction studies if such a single crystal is used as a substrate for polycrystalline samples. A great reduction in the substrate background and removal of most of the substrate diffraction peaks is achieved with a graphite monochromator or with a graphite monochromator together with a β-filter.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1994

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bertin, E. P. (1970). Principles and Practices of X-Ray Spectrometric Analysis (Plenum, New York), p. 210.Google Scholar
Brouwer, G. (1988). “A novel X-ray powder diffractometer measuring preferred orientations,” in Advances in X-Ray Analysis, edited by Barrett, C.S. et al. (Plenum, New York), Vol. 31, p. 413421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flinn, P. A., and Waychunas, G. A. (1988). “A new X-ray diffractometer design for thin-film texture, strain, and phase characterization,” J. Vac. Sci. Tech. B 6, 17491755.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goehner, R. P., and Eatough, M. O. (1992). “A study of grazing incidence configurations and their effect on X-ray diffraction data,” Powder Diffr. 7, 25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harada, J. (1992). “Evaluation of the roughness of a crystal surface by X-ray scattering. I. Theoretical considerations,” Acta Cryst. A 48, 764771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Houtman, E., Ryan, T. W., David, B., and Doormann, V. (1992). “Characterization of epitaxial high Tc superconductors using a parallel beam X-ray diffractometer,” Advances in X-Ray Analysis, edited by Barrett, C. S. et al. (Plenum, New York), Vol. 35, pp. 205210.Google Scholar
Huang, T. C. (1990). “Surface and ultra-thin film characterization by grazing incidence asymmetric Bragg diffraction,” in Advances in X-Ray Analysis, edited by Barrett, C. S. et al. (Plenum, New York), Vol. 33, p. 91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klug, H. P., and Alexander, L. E. (1973). X-Ray diffraction Procedures (Wiley, New York), p. 272.Google Scholar
Ladell, J., Schreiner, W., and Greenberg, B. (1991). “The quantitative powder diffractometer QPD,” Materials Sci. Forum (EPDIC 1 Proc.), 79–82 (Trans Tech Publications, Zürich), pp. 323328.Google Scholar
Parrish, W., and Mack, M. (1967). “Seeman-Bohlin X-ray diffractometry. I. Instrumentation,” Acta Cryst. 23, 687.CrossRefGoogle Scholar