Does your SEM really tell the truth?--How would you know? Part 1

The scanning electron microscope (SEM) has gone through a tremendous evolution to become a critical tool for many and diverse scientific and industrial applications. The high resolution of the SEM is especially suited for both qualitative and quantitative applications especially for nanotechnology and nanomanufacturing. Quantitatively, measurement, or metrology is one of the main uses. It is likely that one of the first questions asked before even the first scanning electron micrograph was ever recorded was: "… how big is that?" The quality of that answer has improved a great deal over the past few years especially since today these instruments are being used as a primary measurement tool on semiconductor processing lines to monitor the manufacturing processes. The well-articulated needs of semiconductor production prompted a rapid evolution of the instrument and its capabilities. Over the past 20 years or so, instrument manufacturers, through substantial semiconductor industry investment of research and development (R&D) money, have vastly improved the performance of these instruments. All users have benefited from this investment, especially where quantitative measurements with an SEM are concerned. But, how good are these data? This article discusses some of the most important aspects and larger issues associated with imaging and measurements with the SEM that every user should know, and understand before any critical quantitative work is attempted.

The use of SIMS and SEM for the characterization of individual particles with a matrix originating from a nuclear weapon

The application of scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and secondary ion mass spectrometry (SIMS) for characterization of mixed plutonium and uranium particles from nuclear weapons material is presented. The particles originated from the so-called Thule accident in Greenland in 1968. Morphological properties have been studied by SEM and two groups were identified: a "popcorn" structure and a spongy structure. The same technique, coupled with an energy-dispersive X-ray (EDX) spectrometer, showed a heterogeneous composition of Pu and U in the surface layers of the particles. The SIMS depth profiles revealed a varying isotopic composition indicating a heterogeneous mixture of Pu and U in the original nuclear weapons material itself. The depth distributions agree with synchrotron-radiation-based mu-XRF (X-ray fluorescence microprobe) measurements on the particle (Eriksson, M., Wegryzynek, D., Simon, R., & Chinea-Cano, E., in prep.) when a SIMS relative sensitivity factor for Pu to U of 6 is assumed. Different SIMS identified isotopic ratio groups are presented, and the influence of interferences in the Pu and U mass range are estimated. The study found that the materials are a mixture of highly enriched 235U (235U:238U ratio from 0.96 to 1.4) and so-called weapons grade Pu (240Pu:239Pu ratio from 0.028 to 0.059) and confirms earlier work reported in the literature.