1887
banner image
No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
Formation, trapping, and ejection of radiolytic from ion-irradiated water ice studied by sputter depth profiling
Rent:
Rent this article for
USD
10.1063/1.3091998
/content/aip/journal/jcp/130/13/10.1063/1.3091998
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aip/journal/jcp/130/13/10.1063/1.3091998

Figures

Image of FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.

(a) The sputtering yield during irradiation of several ice films at by plotted vs monolayers sputtered. The films were first irradiated with at to a fluence of , then cooled to and capped with fresh ice overlayers of the indicated thickness in ML. Also shown is the yield without prior irradiation at (lower curve). (b) The fractional concentration vs depth calculated from (a) using Eqs. (2) and (3) (see text).

Image of FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.

(a) The sputtering yield during irradiation of an ice film at by plotted vs sputtered depth. The film was first irradiated with at to a fluence of , then cooled to and capped with a 216 ML overlayer. (b) Experiment of (a) without an overlayer.

Image of FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.

The fractional concentration vs depth in fresh ices irradiated with at with fluence as a parameter: , , , , and , from lowest to highest concentration. Note that the buildup is not linear with fluence.

Image of FIG. 4.
FIG. 4.

The column density (▲), subsurface peak concentration (◼), and twice the surface concentration (○) vs fluence during irradiation of a fresh ice at , as determined from the data of Fig. 3. The line shows the fluence dependence of the sputtering yield for comparison.

Image of FIG. 5.
FIG. 5.

The fractional concentration vs depth (in ML) after , irradiation of fresh ices with the temperature as a parameter. Bottom panel: ; top panel: . The dashed line is the depth distribution of energy deposited by the projectiles Ref. 47, which is shown for comparison.

Image of FIG. 6.
FIG. 6.

(a) The sputtering yield vs fluence during irradiation of fresh ices with temperature as a parameter: 80, 100, 110, 120, 130, 140, and , from bottom to top, at zero fluence. (b) The initial and saturation yields from (a), and the saturation yield from Fig. 7, vs temperature.

Image of FIG. 7.
FIG. 7.

The sputtering yield vs fluence during irradiation of fresh ices with temperature as a parameter. The inset shows the yield at 140 and at low fluence .

Image of FIG. 8.
FIG. 8.

A comparison of the temperature dependence of and production by ion irradiation. The saturation column densities after irradiation calculated from the integration of the depth profiles of Fig. 5 (filled circles) and from Eq. (4) (filled triangles) are also shown, together with the saturation desorption yield (stars). The saturation values of the column densities produced by (open triangles), (open circles), and (inverted triangle) irradiation are reproduced from Ref. 42.

Tables

Generic image for table
Table I.

Experiments performed.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/aip/journal/jcp/130/13/10.1063/1.3091998
2009-04-02
2014-04-20
Loading

Full text loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
Scitation: Formation, trapping, and ejection of radiolytic O2 from ion-irradiated water ice studied by sputter depth profiling
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aip/journal/jcp/130/13/10.1063/1.3091998
10.1063/1.3091998
SEARCH_EXPAND_ITEM