In at least one aspect, the present invention is related to electron emission devices that can be fabricated on a single chip.
Photon assisted electron emission from solids have been investigated extensively since early 1960. Specially with the advances of Q-switched and Ti-Sapphire ultrafast laser sources, the vast majority of researches devoted to demonstrating sharp electron beam via exploring the electron emission from various metallic surface or sharp tip emitter exposed to high power picosecond laser radiation. Ultrafast electron source is essential for many applications such as free electron laser source, vacuum electronic high-power THz generation and ultrafast electron microscopy. Up to date, intensity dependence of the photon assisted electron emission as well as energy distribution and emittance of the emitted electrons were at the top interests of the published papers. Despite all developments achieved in more than 50 years after the initial results on photon assisted electron emission, this phenomenon suffers from low quantum efficiency as the biggest challenge for being used in wide range of the abovementioned applications. The recent value of the reported QE for Cu used as photocathode in RF photo-gun is around 1e−5 and it hardly exceeds slightly over 1e−4 only under deep UV (at 250-300 nm) illumination.
Realization of on-chip, low-power, high-speed, spatially addressable electron emission arrays would be potentially transformative for a variety of civilian and military applications, including but not limited to, electron microscopy, electron beam lithography, space propulsion, high power microwave (HPM) devices, free electron lasers, displays, and ultrafast electron diffraction. While electrically-gated field emission devices have been heavily explored in the past, the large capacitances due to the close proximity of a control gate often limits the maximum modulation frequency of these devices. Optical modulation of emission offers the highest modulation speeds as well as a variety of emission mechanisms such as single photon photoemission, multiphoton emission, and thermionic emission. However, in general, optical approaches rely on free-space coupling of an optical beam onto electron emitters, a process that is highly inefficient, particularly when utilizing nanostructured tips. Furthermore, free-space coupling to nanostructures places stringent requirements on incident laser alignment, and is not practical if nanoscale alignment between incident photons and arrays of millions of emission tips is required.
Accordingly, there is a need for improved methods for generating electron emission currents.
In at least one aspect, a photonic electron emission device includes an emitter, a photonic energy conduit evanescently coupled to the emitter, and an anode. The emitter includes a component selected from the group consisting of a metal, a semimetal, a semiconductor having a bandgap that is less than about 3.5 eV. The anode is positively biased with respect to the emitter, the anode directing electrons emitted from the emitter.
In another aspect, microscale optical cavities coupled to thermionic emitters that enable a class of efficient and ultrafast optically-modulated, on-chip, thermionic electron emitters are provided. This class of devices is referred to as Optical Cavity Thermionic Emitters (OCTET). The devices include a microfabricated optical cavity, such as Fabry-Perot or ring resonator, and a heterostructured thermionic emitter with a small bandgap or metallic thermionic emitter (e.g. LaB6) deposited on a wider bandgap electrical and thermal conductor (e.g. doped Si). By tuning the resonant wavelength of the optical cavity, one can ensure photons are efficiently and selectively absorbed by the small bandgap/metallic emitter, enabling design of GHz-THz regime on-chip electron emission sources. The disclosure discloses elucidating the properties of single cavity-single emitter OCTETs, but may be applied to more complex cavity-tip structures. First, the disclosure discloses design rules based on the cavity optical properties and emitter optical and thermal properties. Next, detailed device simulations are carried out using optical and thermal 3-D numerical simulations that accurately account for both geometry as well as temperature and wavelength dependent materials properties. The disclosure illustrates that devices with highly-efficient photon to thermal conversion efficiencies >60% can be achieved despite small emitter active absorption volumes <0.01 μm3 and moderate Q optical cavities. Critically, OCTETs may be designed with ultra-fast sub-ns thermal response time, and sub 10 ps current response times, or efficient steady state excitation—with <5.4 μW of power required to achieve nA level current emission per tip. Due to the recent advances in integrated photonics and electronics, the structures explored here may be fabricated using standard microfabrication techniques.
In still another aspect, optical cavities are provided as a means to enable nanoscale control over the spatial interaction between the photon electric field and nanostructured electron emission tips.
5: (A) Free Space Illuminated Emission Device, (B) Integrated waveguide assisted Emission Device.
Reference will now be made in detail to presently preferred compositions, embodiments and methods of the present invention which constitute the best modes of practicing the invention presently known to the inventors. The Figures are not necessarily to scale. However, it is to be understood that the disclosed embodiments are merely exemplary of the invention that may be embodied in various and alternative forms. Therefore, specific details disclosed herein are not to be interpreted as limiting, but merely as a representative basis for any aspect of the invention and/or as a representative basis for teaching one skilled in the art to variously employ the present invention.
Except in the examples, or where otherwise expressly indicated, all numerical quantities in this description indicating amounts of material or conditions of reaction and/or use are to be understood as modified by the word “about” in describing the broadest scope of the invention. Practice within the numerical limits stated is generally preferred. Also, unless expressly stated to the contrary: the first definition of an acronym or other abbreviation applies to all subsequent uses herein of the same abbreviation and applies mutatis mutandis to normal grammatical variations of the initially defined abbreviation; and, unless expressly stated to the contrary, measurement of a property is determined by the same technique as previously or later referenced for the same property.
It is also to be understood that this invention is not limited to the specific embodiments and methods described below, as specific components and/or conditions may, of course, vary. Furthermore, the terminology used herein is used only for the purpose of describing particular embodiments of the present invention and is not intended to be limiting in any way.
It must also be noted that, as used in the specification and the appended claims, the singular form “a,” “an,” and “the” comprise plural referents unless the context clearly indicates otherwise. For example, reference to a component in the singular is intended to comprise a plurality of components.
Throughout this application, where publications are referenced, the disclosures of these publications in their entireties are hereby incorporated by reference into this application to more fully describe the state of the art to which this invention pertains.
Abbreviations:
“OCTET” means Optical Cavity Thermionic Emitter.
“SEM” means scanning electron microscopy.
“SOI” means silicon-on-insulator.
“TE” means transverse electric.
“TM” means transverse magnetic.
Definitions
“Work function” means the minimum quantity of energy required to remove an electron to infinity from a surface of a solid. In the context of the present invention, this solid can be a metal, semimetal, or a semiconductor.
“Emission active material” means any material that can liberate electrons into a vacuum or gas upon thermal excitation, photon excitation, or a combination thereof.
With reference to
Although the present embodiment is not limited by any particular dimensions of the photonic energy conduit, typically the length l1 of conduit 14 is from about 100 nm to 30 microns, width w1 is from about 50 nm to 15 microns, and height h1 from about 1 nm to 10 microns. Moreover, photonic energy conduit can be a waveguide, resonator, optical cavity, or a combination thereof. Specific examples of resonators include Fabry-Perot resonator and ring resonators.
Photonic energy conduit 14 include an evanescent field-supporting surface (e.g., surface 18 and/or 20) over which an evanescent field develops and/or can be maintained. The surface can be a surface of a waveguide, optical cavity, or a resonator. The formation of the electron emission current can be by photoemission, photo-assisted field emission, thermionic emission, or a combination thereof. Photoemission will dominate when the photon energies from photon energy source is greater than the work function for the emitter. Photo-assisted field emission will occur and dominate when the photon energy is less than but within about 20 percent of the work function of emitter 12. Thermionic emission will dominate when the photon energy is less than about 20 percent of the work function of emitter 12. Examples of the emission active material lanthanum hexaboride (LaB6), cerium hexaboride (CeB6), graphene, gallium arsenide, gallium nitride, tungsten, and combinations thereof. The dominant electron emission mechanism depends of the specific work function of the specific emission active material and the photon energy (Eph). Table 1 provides several useful combinations of these properties.
The transfer of energy (e.g., electromagnetic radiation) from photonic energy conduit 14 to emitter 12 can depend on the mode for the electromagnetic radiation within the photonic energy conduit. For a waveguide or resonator, the modes can be expressed as TMnm or TEnm, wherein n, m are independently 0, 1, 2, 3, 4 . . . 10. Higher modes can transfer energy over smaller spatial dimensions than lower modes.
As depicted in
With reference to
With reference to
With reference to
Advantageously, the photonic electron emission devices set forth herein can be used in a number of application. For example, the electron emission devices can be used in electron microscopes (i.e. scanning electron microscopes and transmission electron microscopes.) The electron emission devices can replace the thermionic or field emission gun to provide an electron beam with lower energy dispersion, enabling higher resolution. The photonic electron emission devices can also be used in vacuum electron devices (e.g. travelling wave tubes, gyrotrons etc.) Advantageously, the photonic electron emission devices can produce chopped electron beams at the frequency of amplification. In other application, the photonic electron emission devices can be used in electron beam lithography. In this application, the photonic electron emission devices can be a single chip that produces multiple beams to enable large area writing). In still other application, the photonic electron emission devices can be used in free electron lasers where the photonic electron emission devices can produce very low transverse energy dispersion beams beyond the capacity of current systems.
The following examples illustrate the various embodiments of the present invention. Those skilled in the art will recognize many variations that are within the spirit of the present invention and scope of the claims.
I. OCTET Analytical Models for the Optical, Thermal, and Current Characteristics.
To determine the steady state and time dependent optical response of the OCTETs here, certain device parameters must be known: Rb, the cavity mirror reflectivity; As, the single pass absorption of cavity photons into the emitter; and αL, the intrinsic and scattering loss in the cavity. For simplicity, one can assume that the αL losses are negligible. The total fraction of photons injected into the cavity absorbed by the emitter, AT, and the lifetime of cavity photons, τP. can be defined. Assuming the cavity has two identical Bragg mirrors, the following expression for AT can be written:
As shown in equation (1), the total absorbed power is the ratio of the single pass photon absorption in the emitter to the total photon loss per single trip. Thus, total absorption can be optimized by either maximizing mirror reflectivity (Rb→1), or maximizing the single pass absorption of the emitter (As→1).
Using optical cavity lasing condition and considering rate of change in photon number inside cavity, Eq. (2) can be derived for the structure that shows the relationship between the cavity photon lifetime and the device parameters Equation 2 shows the relationship between the cavity photon lifetime and the device parameters, ignoring αL:
where vg is the group velocity of the mode and L is the cavity length. The photon lifetime can then be plotted as a function of AS for different Rb values, as shown in
To determine the thermal and current response, the Richardson-Dushman equation is used in conjunction with a lumped thermal circuit model for both steady-state and cooling transient responses. To convert the absorbed photon flux to a thermal flux, it is assumed that electrons are in equilibrium with the lattice, which is reasonable for steady state behavior, as well as the transient behavior explored here due to the fast carrier relaxation time, which are typically on the subpicosecond timescale, as compared to the thermal relaxation time here, which are greater than 10 ps. The thermal and current responses are determined by the thermal mass, thermal conductivity, and work function of the emitters. The steady state model of the system can be written by assuming the dominant source of heat loss from the LaB6 emitter is conduction through the Si fin. The steady-state DT of the LaB6 emitter ca be written as:
where PAbs is the optical power absorbed by the LaB6, k is the thermal conductivity of the Si fin, A is the area of the fin in the plane of the substrate, and L is the length of the fin from the LaB6 to the substrate. The cooling transient response of the emitter can be written as
T(t)=(Tm−Tb)e−t/τ
where Tm is the initial maximum temperature of the emitter, Tb is the bulk temperature, and τTh=mCp/kemAem, where m is the mass, Cp is the heat capacity, and kemAem is the thermal conductance of the emitter. This can be rewritten as τTh=ρemCpdem/kemAem, where ρem is density of the emitter material, and dem is the emitter thickness, illustrating the critical role of emitter thickness in modulation speed of the device. The current density can then be estimated using the Richardson-Dushman equation
with Ab=29 A/cm2K2, A is Richardson constant, b is material factor for LaB6, and φ0=2.7 eV for LaB6. In the simulation section, the current density is used on all the emitting surface to calculate the total emitted current from the emitter. In
While the simple analytical approach set forth above offers much insight into the general design constraints, a detailed numerical simulation is necessary to quantify the performance of the proposed devices. Here, a 3D FDTD Maxwell equation solver was used to find the optical. absorption spectrum in the emitter as a function of both position and time. The optical absorption results from the FDTD solver are then used as inputs for a 3D thermal transport simulation, enabling us to ascertain (1) the steady state relationship between optical power injected into the cavity and emitter temperature, and (2) the transient thermal (cooling) response of the emitter. The simulation structure, as shown in
To determine the sensitivity of the performance to physical device parameters, OCTETs is simulated while varying emitter thickness, T, emitter-cavity distance, d, emitter length, L, and Bragg mirror reflectivity, Rb. Each of the emitter parameters explored essentially changes the single pass absorption of the emitter, AS. First, the effect of increasing emitter thickness was explored as illustrated in
After obtaining the optical behavior, the effect of the emitter design on the thermal response was simulated via 3D thermal simulations using COMSOL. The heat input to the emitter was extracted from the optical simulation and imported into the thermal simulation, details of the absorption profiles are shown in
Next, the transient thermal response of these devices was studied. In the proposed device, 3 μm cavity and 1 μm LaB6 emitter 50 nm from the cavity, the transient absorption results show that optical absorption from a single pulse occurs in about 1 ps, allowing us to assume that the electrons and phonons are at the same temperature. After heating, the emitter cools due to the Si substrate, which is assumed to be a heat sink at 300 K.
Summary and Conclusions
In conclusion, a device platform that enables efficient and ultrafast optical modulation of thermionic emitters by coupling an on-chip heterostructured thermionic emitter with an optical cavity is explored. First, the critical device parameters are identified and used to develop simple equations that elucidated the steady-state and transient properties of these devices. Next, device performance was carefully evaluated through full 3D optical and thermal simulations using accurate geometries and materials parameters. The full simulation results also enabled validation of the simple analytical relations describing device performance. Importantly, it was found that through proper device design, steady-state tip heating of >1700K could be achieved with less than ˜10 μW of injected optical power or ˜5.9 nW/K, which could potentially be reduced through further optimization. By changing the properties of the emitter, ultrafast thermionic current responses <10 ps and thermal transient responses <1 ns are shown to be possible with this platform. While only thermionic emission was explored here, the general approach of coupling optical cavities to electron emission micro-/nanostructures is a potentially rich field, enabling engineering of photoemission, multiphoton and multicolor emission processes, as well as mixed mode electron emission processes. Additionally, by designing the emission structures to support surface plasmon or surface plasmon polariton modes, these approaches could enable efficient generation and emission of nonequilibrium electrons. Finally, by enabling simple on-chip integration, the approach outlined here opens up the space for ultrafast, optically modulated electron beams in microscale devices.
II. Integrated Optical Waveguide Assisted Electron Emission from Graphene Emitter
Device Fabrication:
Schematic of the proposed integrated waveguide assisted electron emission device is shown in
Graphene Absorption Measurement & Simulation:
The graphene layer absorbs photons from optical waveguide. The optical absorption was characterized via measuring the output from waveguide before and after transferring 4 mm graphene layer above waveguide.
Experimental Set Up and Results:
The fiber coupled laser source transport the optical power in to vacuum chamber using optical feedthrough for multimode fiber with 400 μm diameter for wavelength range of 190 nm to 1100 nm with minimum optical loss at 850 nm. As such, the power after optical feedthrough was measured to know the exact power illuminated at the input of the optical waveguide. The power at the end of optical waveguide after coupling was also characterized. From these measurements, it was observed that input power of 250 mW at waveguide input (end of fiber) ends up to 80 μW of optical power at the end of optical waveguide. This optical loss is partially due to the surface roughness at the wall of the waveguides, however the major source of optical loss is geometrical mismatch between the large fiber (diameter of 200 μm) and smaller optical waveguide (height of 5 μm).
The field emission characteristics for emission device were measured at room temperature under a vacuum of 10-7 Torr. Photo-current detection was carried out using a Keysight B2985A electrometer connected via triaxial cable directly to our cathode for low noise measurement. First, the I-E curves for dark and laser assisted emission from a graphene layer on heavily doped silicon substrate were characterized. This graphene sheet was illuminated from side (free space illuminated device). It was observed that up to 1 pA of photon assisted current using this conventional free space illumination method. Then, the I-E curve for dark and photon assisted emission from graphene layer on optical waveguide referred to as “waveguide assisted electron emission device” was measured. For this device, up to 40 pA of current using laser was measured. Note the input power for the three curves of free space illuminated device and integrated device is the same. However, it was shown that the waveguide output power for integrated device as a measure of required power if emitter layer absorbs photons evanescently from waveguide. In addition, it should be noted that photon assisted electron emission can be detected at relatively small E-field. For integrated devices, electron emission close to 17 pA at 0.2 V/μm was detected.
The transient response under different optical power was also measured. Here, like previous plot, it is noted that the coupled power for integrated device. For free space illumination, photon assisted current signal at 250 mW is shown for two different E-field. Even at higher E-field photon assisted current doesn't exceed 2 pA for free space illuminated device. For integrated emission device, a larger current was observed as the input optical power increased. Note, this measurement performed at relatively small E-field, only 0.3 V/μm. The current versus laser power for integrated device was also measured. Photo-current curve can be fitted with polynomial 2nd order that indicates two photons contribution in the process. This matches with theoretical expectation given graphene work function of 4.5 eV and a laser source photon energy of 2.78 eV. As such two-photons contribution is necessary for photo emission over the barrier.
While exemplary embodiments are described above, it is not intended that these embodiments describe all possible forms of the invention. Rather, the words used in the specification are words of description rather than limitation, and it is understood that various changes may be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention. Additionally, the features of various implementing embodiments may be combined to form further embodiments of the invention.
Each of the following references is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety:
Goldstein, J.; Newbury, D. E.; Echlin, P.; Joy, D. C.; Romig Jr, A. D.; Lyman, C. E.; Fiori, C.; Lifshin, E., Springer Science & Business Media: 2012.
Reimer, L., Springer: Vol. 36, 2013.
Vieu, C.; Carcenac, F.; Pepin, A.; Chen, Y.; Mejias, M.; Lebib, A.; Manin-Ferlazzo, L.; Couraud, L.; Launois, H., Applied Surface Science, 164 (1), 111-117, 2000.
Goebel, D. M.; Katz, I., John Wiley & Sons: Vol. 1, 2008.
Benford, J.; Swegle, J. A.; Schamiloglu, E., High power microwaves. CRC Press: 2007.
Gold, S. H.; Nusinovich, G. S., Review of Scientific instruments 1997, 68 (11), 3945-3974.
Barker, R. J.; Luhmann, N. C.; Booske, J. H.; Nusinovich, G. S., by Robert J. Barker (Editor), Neville C. Luhmann (Editor), John H. Booske (Editor), Gregory S. Nusinovich, pp. 872. ISBN 0-471-68372-8. Wiley-VCH, April 2005. 2005, 1.
Brau, C. A., Free-electron lasers. 1990.
Wang, Q.; Setlur, A.; Lauerhaas, J.; Dai, J.; Seelig, E.; Chang, R., Applied Physics Letters, 72 (22), 2912, 1998.
Kartikeyan, M. V.; Borie, E.; Thumm, M., Springer Science & Business Media: 2013.
C. J. Glassbrenner and Glen A. Slack, Physical Review, Vol 134, No 4A, 1964.
Haitao Wang.; Yibin Xu.; Masato Shimono.; Yoshihisa Tanaka and Masayoshi Yamazaki, The Japan Institute of Metals and Materials, Vol. 48, No. 9, pp. 2349-2352, 2007.
Mahmoud Bakr, R. Kinjo, Y. W. Choi, M. Omer, K. Yoshida, S. Ueda, M. Takasaki, K. Ishida, N. Kimura, H. Zen, T. Sonobe, T. Kii, K. Masuda and H. Ohgaki, Korean Physical Society, Vol. 59, No. 5, pp. 3273-3279, November 2011.
Ling Liu and Xi Chen, Applied Physics, vol. 107, 2010.
R. E. Honig and J. R. Woolston, Appl. Phys. Letters 2, 138(1963).
D. Lichtman and J. F. Ready, Phys. Rev. Letters 10, 342(1963).
C. M. Verber and A. H. Adelman, Appl. Phys. Letters 2, 220 (1963).
F. Giori, L. A. McKenzie, and E. J. McKinney, Appl. Phys. Letters 3, 25 (1963).
J. F. Ready, Phys. Rev. 137, A620 (1965); J. Appl. Phys. 36, 462 (1965).
W. L. Knecht, Appl. Phys. Letters 6, 99 (1965).
H. Sonnenberg, H. Heffner, and W. Spicer, Appl. Phys. Letters 5, 95 (1964).
M. C. Teich, J. M. Schroeer, and G. J. Wolga, Phys. Rev. Letters 13, 611 (1964).
E. M. Logothetis and P. L. Hartman, Phys. Rev. Letters Vol 187, 2 (1969).
J. H. Bechtel, t W. Lee Smith, ˜and N. Bloembergen, Phys. Rev B VOL 15, 10 (1977).
Peter Hommelhoff et al, PRL 96, 077401 (2006).
Brau, C. A., Free-electron lasers. JSTOR: 1990; Vol. 22.
Booske, John H., et al. “Vacuum electronic high-power terahertz sources.” IEEE Transactions on Terahertz Science and Technology 1.1 (2011): 54-75.
Wayne E. King et al, Journal of Applied Physics 97, 111101 (2005).
F. Le Pimpeca et al, Appl. Phys. A 112, 647 (2013).
W. E. Spicer, Phys. Rev. 112, 114 (1958).
Huan Li et al, Appl. Phys. Lett. 101, 111110 (2012).
S. J. Koester and M. Li, “Waveguide-Coupled Graphene Optoelectronics,” IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quantum Electron. 20(1), 6000211 (2014). 14
F. Rezaeifar and R. Kapadia, J. Vac. Sci. Technol., B 34, 041228 (2016).
This application claims the benefit of U.S. provisional application Ser. No. 62/486,581 filed Apr. 18, 2017, the disclosure of which is hereby incorporated in its entirety by reference herein.
The invention was made with Government support under Contract No. FA9550-16-1-0306 awarded by the Air Force Office of Scientific Research. The Government has certain rights to the invention.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
20080001139 | Augusto | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20160001398 | Kancharla | Jan 2016 | A1 |
20180131311 | Karalis | May 2018 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20180301324 A1 | Oct 2018 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
62486581 | Apr 2017 | US |