| Literature DB >> 35808069 |
Andris Berzins1, Hugo Grube1, Einars Sprugis2, Guntars Vaivars2, Ilja Fescenko1.
Abstract
The implantation of diamonds with helium ions has become a common method to create hundreds-nanometers-thick near-surface layers of NV centers for high-sensitivity sensing and imaging applications; however, optimal implantation dose and annealing temperature are still a matter of discussion. In this study, we irradiated HPHT diamonds with an initial nitrogen concentration of 100 ppm using different implantation doses of helium ions to create 200-nm thick NV layers. We compare a previously considered optimal implantation dose of ∼1012 He+/cm2 to double and triple doses by measuring fluorescence intensity, contrast, and linewidth of magnetic resonances, as well as longitudinal and transversal relaxation times T1 and T2. From these direct measurements, we also estimate concentrations of P1 and NV centers. In addition, we compare the three diamond samples that underwent three consequent annealing steps to quantify the impact of processing at 1100 °C, which follows initial annealing at 800 °C. By tripling the implantation dose, we have increased the magnetic sensitivity of our sensors by 28±5%. By projecting our results to higher implantation doses, we demonstrate that it is possible to achieve a further improvement of up to 70%. At the same time, additional annealing steps at 1100 °C improve the sensitivity only by 6.6 ± 2.7%.Entities:
Keywords: He ion implantation; dense NV layers; diamond annealing; nitrogen-vacancy centers
Year: 2022 PMID: 35808069 PMCID: PMC9268007 DOI: 10.3390/nano12132234
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nanomaterials (Basel) ISSN: 2079-4991 Impact factor: 5.719
Figure 1Fabrication of samples: (a) SRIM vacancy-depth profile for fabrication of 200-nm-thick NV layer close to the diamond surface. (b) Time–temperature graphs for the three annealing steps.
He ion implantation doses and energies used for fabrication of samples F1, F2, and F3.
| Energy, keV | Normalized Dose | Dose ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| F1 | F2 | F3 | ||
| 33 | 1.0 | 4.0 | 8.0 | 12.0 |
| 15 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 4.0 | 6.0 |
| 5 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 4.0 | 6.0 |
| Total: | 8 | 16 | 24 | |
Figure 2Schematic of the experimental apparatus. AOM: acousto-optic modulator; I and Q: phase shift control; PC: the personal computer.
Figure 3ODMR measurements: (a) Off-resonance fluorescence intensity for three subsequent annealing steps versus cumulative implantation dose. (b) Contrasts of the ODMR signals at spin transition versus the cumulative implantation dose. The contrasts are shown for dBm of MW power (see the inset). (c) The FWHM of the ODMR signals at spin transition versus the cumulative implantation dose. The FWHMs linewidths are shown for dBm of MW power (see the inset). (d) Calculated from the FWHM inhomogeneously broadened transverse relaxation versus the cumulative implantation dose. A complete breakdown of implantation doses can be found in Table 1. The error bars represent the standard error (SE) of the data. All ODMR data except the fluorescence intensity show no significant correlation with the annealing temperature or duration; therefore, the contrasts, FWHMs, and after averaging over all three annealing steps are shown for simplicity.
Figure 4Relaxation measurements:(a) Relaxation rate 1/ for three subsequent annealing steps versus cumulative implantation dose. The inset shows the same plot in units. (b) Relaxation rate 1/ for three subsequent annealing steps versus cumulative implantation dose. The inset shows the same plot in units. Estimates of concentrations:(c) Concentration of P1 centers estimated from . (d) Concentration of NV centers estimated from . (e) Concentration of NV estimated from . Symbol denotes small concentrations of other N-containing defects. (f) NV concentration estimated from . All estimates are shown versus cumulative implantation dose for three subsequent annealing steps. The solid lines are shown to guide the eye.
Figure 5Projected values: (a) Linear extrapolations of P1 and NV concentrations to higher implantation doses. The optimal dose is expected at He/cm where the P1 concentration is equal to the NV concentration. (b) The linear extrapolation to higher implantation doses of relative improvement of sensitivity (minimum detectable magnetic field , see Equation (1)).