| ²é¿´: 610 | »Ø¸´: 2 | ||
| ±¾Ìû²úÉú 1 ¸ö ·ÒëEPI £¬µã»÷ÕâÀï½øÐв鿴 | ||
yt.yutian.½ð³æ (СÓÐÃûÆø)
|
[ÇóÖú]
·Òë2¾ä»°
|
|
|
Another consequence of poor mask-wafer contact is sidewall roughness. Field emission scanning electron microscopy (FESEM) images of PDMS devices for a Mylar mask and a glass mask are shown in parts c and d of Figure 2, respectively. The PDMS devices made from Mylar masks result in a mean wall roughness (Lr) of about 1.5 ¨ªm whereas it is less than 0.5 ¨ªm for glass masks. The mean wall roughness spacing is measured from the SEM images as 1.5 ¨ªm. Later we show that the sidewall roughness has a dramatic effect on the dispersion and resolution of these devices. |
» ²ÂÄãϲ»¶
»úе¹¤³Ì264ѧ˶Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ3È˻ظ´
264Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ9È˻ظ´
Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ6È˻ظ´
22408 266Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ7È˻ظ´
Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ14È˻ظ´
273Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ43È˻ظ´
307Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ13È˻ظ´
327Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ7È˻ظ´
338Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ6È˻ظ´
326·Ö£¬Ò»Ö¾Ô¸»¦9£¬ÇóÉúÎïѧµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ3È˻ظ´
8814402
ÖÁ×ðľ³æ (Ö°Òµ×÷¼Ò)
- ·ÒëEPI: 509
- Ó¦Öú: 18 (СѧÉú)
- ¹ó±ö: 0.381
- ½ð±Ò: 12916.1
- É¢½ð: 47
- ºì»¨: 16
- Ìû×Ó: 4183
- ÔÚÏß: 357.8Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 1184404
- ×¢²á: 2011-01-06
- רҵ: Ò©ÎïѧÆäËû¿ÆÑ§ÎÊÌâ
¡¾´ð°¸¡¿Ó¦Öú»ØÌû
yt.yutian.(½ð±Ò+5, ·ÒëEPI+1): лл 2011-05-30 16:00:36
| Another consequence of poor mask-wafer contact is sidewall roughness.²»Á¼µÄÑÚĤ-¾§Æ¬½Ó´¥µÄÁíÒ»¸ö½á¹ûʱºòÊDzà±Ú´Ö²Ú¡£Field emission scanning electron microscopy (FESEM) images of PDMS devices for a Mylar mask and a glass mask are shown in parts c and d of Figure 2, respectively. ¾Ûõ¥ÑÚĤºÍ²£Á§ÑÚĤPDMS×°Öõij¡Ö·¢ÉäɨÃèµç¾µÍ¼Ïñ·Ö±ðÏÔʾÔÚͼ2 cºÍd¡£The PDMS devices made from Mylar masks result in a mean wall roughness (Lr) of about 1.5 ¨ªm whereas it is less than 0.5 ¨ªm for glass masks. ÔÚÓɾÛõ¥ÑÚĤ֯±¸µÄPDMS×°Öã¬Æ½¾ù±Ú´Ö²Ú¶ÈԼΪ1.5 ¨ªm £¬±È²£Á§ÑÚĤÕßС0.5 ¨ªm ¡£The mean wall roughness spacing is measured from the SEM images as 1.5 ¨ªm. ´ÓɨÃèµç¾µÍ¼ÏñÉϲâµÃµÄƽ¾ù´Ö²Ú¶È¼ä¸ô Ϊ1.5 ¨ªm ¡£Later we show that the sidewall roughness has a dramatic effect on the dispersion and resolution of these devices.ºóÃæÎÒÃÇÏÔʾ²à±Ú´Ö²Ú¶È¶ÔÕâЩÉ豸µÄɫɢºÍ·Ö±æÂʾßÓÐÖØÒªÓ°Ïì¡£ |
2Â¥2011-05-30 09:20:45
8814402
ÖÁ×ðľ³æ (Ö°Òµ×÷¼Ò)
- ·ÒëEPI: 509
- Ó¦Öú: 18 (СѧÉú)
- ¹ó±ö: 0.381
- ½ð±Ò: 12916.1
- É¢½ð: 47
- ºì»¨: 16
- Ìû×Ó: 4183
- ÔÚÏß: 357.8Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 1184404
- ×¢²á: 2011-01-06
- רҵ: Ò©ÎïѧÆäËû¿ÆÑ§ÎÊÌâ
¡¾´ð°¸¡¿Ó¦Öú»ØÌû
| Another consequence of poor mask-wafer contact is sidewall roughness.²»Á¼µÄÑÚĤ-¾§Æ¬½Ó´¥µÄÁíÒ»¸ö½á¹ûʱºòÊDzà±Ú´Ö²Ú¡£Field emission scanning electron microscopy (FESEM) images of PDMS devices for a Mylar mask and a glass mask are shown in parts c and d of Figure 2, respectively. ¾Ûõ¥ÑÚĤºÍ²£Á§ÑÚĤPDMS×°Öõij¡Ö·¢ÉäɨÃèµç¾µÍ¼Ïñ·Ö±ðÏÔʾÔÚͼ2 cºÍd¡£The PDMS devices made from Mylar masks result in a mean wall roughness (Lr) of about 1.5 ¨ªm whereas it is less than 0.5 ¨ªm for glass masks. ÔÚÓɾÛõ¥ÑÚĤ֯±¸µÄPDMS×°Öã¬Æ½¾ù±Ú´Ö²Ú¶ÈԼΪ1.5 ¨ªm £¬±È²£Á§ÑÚĤÕßС0.5 ¨ªm ¡£The mean wall roughness spacing is measured from the SEM images as 1.5 ¨ªm. ´ÓɨÃèµç¾µÍ¼ÏñÉϲâµÃµÄƽ¾ù´Ö²Ú¶È¼ä¸ô Ϊ1.5 ¨ªm ¡£Later we show that the sidewall roughness has a dramatic effect on the dispersion and resolution of these devices.ºóÃæÎÒÃÇÏÔʾ²à±Ú´Ö²Ú¶È¶ÔÕâЩÉ豸µÄɫɢºÍ·Ö±æÂʾßÓÐÖØÒªÓ°Ïì¡£ |
3Â¥2011-05-30 09:21:42














»Ø¸´´ËÂ¥