EDS與EELS的競爭與比較

 C-3-7 EDS與EELS的競爭與比較

由於幾何位置的關係，傳統的TEM/EDS系統中，從試片發出的特性X-光，其中只有4%被EDS偵測器接收。也就是說EDS的偵測效率很差；另外EDS能量解析度約為130電子伏特(eV)。相對地，EELS的偵測效率可以高達90%以上，而且在使用場效電子鎗穿透式電鏡的條件下，能量解析度優於1.0電子伏特(eV)。因此在1980年代中期，EELS由SEELS演進到PEELS後，許多TEM使用者預測EDS在TEM應用領域將會逐漸被EELS取代[1]。三十幾年過去，EDS不但沒有被EELS取代，反而隨著超薄窗型和無窗型的偵測器問世，逐漸蠶食EELS分析碳、氮、氧的領域。當然，EELS能譜儀最大製作公司- Gatan也不會坐視TEM成份分析的生意大餅被吞食，近幾年開發出新型的EELS能譜儀，大幅提升在重元素的偵測能力，也就是能量損失大於1000電子伏特能區的收集能力。

Due to the geometric relationship of signals and the detector, only about 4% of characteristic X-rays emitted from the specimen can enter the traditional EDS detector. It means that the collection efficiency of the EDS detector is quite low. Besides, the energy resolution of EDS is about 130 eV. On the contrary, the collection efficiency of EELS can be over 90%, and its energy resolution can be better than 1.0 eV when a FEG TEM is used. Thus, in the mid 1980s, many TEM users predicted that EDS was going to be phased out of the TEM applications [1]. However, more than 30 years passed, EDS is not replaced by EELS in the TEM market, but blooms more and more. Currently, most of TEM users have used STEM/EDS of ultra-thin-window type detectors or windowless type detectors to map C, N, O contained phases widely. Gatan, the main manufacture of EELS spectrometers, of course, is not able to stand for the loss in the market of TEM composition analysis. The developed new generation EELS spectrometers which are more efficiently in collecting electrons suffering large energy loss, more than 1000 eV, by striking atoms of heavy elements.

圖C3-15比較三組同一個MOS結構的氮和氧的成份映像圖。(a)使用單一超薄窗EDS偵測器STEM/EDS系統，訊號收集時間90分鐘；(b)使用四無窗EDS偵測器STEM/EDS系統，訊號收集時間30分鐘；(c)使用TEM/GIF系統，攝像時間約3分鐘。明顯地，從訊號收集時間和訊號強度來說，EELS對輕元素的成份映像能力還是遠優於EDS。但是EDS的價格優勢遠大於EELS，加上EELS的操作程序遠比EDS複雜。因此，目前台灣裝設在TEM上的EDS的數目遠大於EELS。

Three sets of N and O elemental maps are shown in Figure C3-15, (a)an STEM/EDS system with mono ultra-thin-window EDS detector, collection time is 90 minutes, (b)an STEM/EDS system with four windowless EDS detectors, collection time is 30 minutes, (c) a TEM/GIF system, total imaging time is about 3 minutes. Obviously, EELS is better than EDS when collection time and the intensity of signal are considered only. However, the price of EDS is much lower than that of EELS, and the operation of EELS is much complicate compared with EDS. Therefore, the number of TEM equipped with EDS overwhelms that of TEM equipped with EELS. 

圖C3-15 MOS的EDS和EELS氮和氧成分映像圖。(a)單一超薄窗EDS偵測器 STEM/EDS系統；(b) 四無窗EDS偵測器 STEM/EDS系統；(c)TEM/GIF系統。訊號收集時間分別為90分鐘，60分鐘，3分鐘。

參考文獻

1] E. Van Cappellen, “Energy Dispersive X-ray Microanalysis in Scanning and Conventional Transmission Electron Microscopy”, in the book “X-ray Spectrometry: Recent Technological Advances”, edited by Kouichi Ysuji, Jasna Injuk, and René Van Grieken, published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. (2004).