论文部分内容阅读
近十年来,在测定碳剥离膜的寿命上,各国做了一些工作,确认了碳剥离膜的寿命t是正比于E/(M_1Z_1~2φ)此处E是入射粒子的能量;M_1、Z_1分别是入射粒子的原子量和原子序数,φ是入射粒子流密度。有几个实验室证明了碳剥离膜的寿命亦是依赖于制膜的特殊技术的,根据他们的测量结果指出,用Ar~(++)束来轰击,在相同的轰击的物理参数下,乙烯裂解的碳膜,比电弧的碳膜寿命可长到30倍。为了能得到这种乙烯裂解的碳膜,最近我们建立了一套这种方法的做膜装置,并成功地做成了面密度均匀的、厚度可在几微克/cm~2～几十微克/cm~2之间、面积可达65×55mm~2的这种碳膜。我们曾以能量为42keV的N~+束和C~+束(我所分离器引出束)来轰击电弧蒸发的碳膜和乙烯裂解的碳膜,束流直径是4mm,束流强度是0.3μA,由于我们的入射粒子质量太轻,轰击时间又被限止,当这二种膜各经受了二个多小时的轰击后,没有看到膜破就被取下。因此,我们还期待国内外可提供有稍完善的低能重离子的加速器的条件下,再进一步做轰击寿命实验。但我们初步在某些物理性能上比较了这二种碳膜,所得的显著的差异的结果与以上所提的参考文献中的结论是一致的。
In the past ten years, countries have done some work to determine the life span of the carbon release film, confirming that the life of the carbon release film t is proportional to E / (M_1Z_1 ~ 2φ) where E is the energy of the incident particles; and M_1 and Z_1 Is the incidental particle atomic number and atomic number, φ is the incident particle flow density. Several laboratories have shown that the lifetimes of carbon release films are also dependent on the particular technology of filmmaking. According to their measurements, bombardment with Ar ~ (++) bundles, under the same physical parameters of bombardment, Ethylene cracked carbon film, carbon arc life than up to 30 times. In order to obtain this kind of ethylene cracked carbon film, we have recently established a set of film forming apparatus of this kind and succeeded in making a uniform surface density of several micrograms / cm 2 to several tens micrograms / cm ~ 2, an area of up to 65 × 55mm ~ 2 of this carbon film. We bombarded the arc-evaporated carbon film and the ethylene-cracked carbon film with N + beams and C + beams with an energy of 42 keV (the beam from our separator) with a beam diameter of 4 mm and a beam current density of 0.3 μA Since the mass of our incident particles is too low, the time of bombardment is limited. When these two membranes have been subjected to more than two hours of bombardment, they have not been seen to have been removed. Therefore, we also look forward to a further bombardment life experiment under the conditions of accelerators that can provide slightly better heavy ion at home and abroad. However, we initially compared these two carbon films for some physical properties and the results obtained for the significant differences are consistent with the conclusions in the references cited above.