Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-qxdb6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T05:47:47.357Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Strained Layer Epitaxy on Rough Si Surfaces

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 February 2011

T.D. Lowes  and
M. Zinke-Allmang
T.D. Lowes
Affiliation:
The University of Western Ontario, Department of Physics, London, ON, Canada N6A 3K7
M. Zinke-Allmang
Affiliation:
The University of Western Ontario, Department of Physics, London, ON, Canada N6A 3K7
Get access

Abstract

Lattice mismatch associated with heteroepitaxy imposes a significant limitation on the epitaxial compatibility between overlayer and substrate. In lattice mismatched systems the misfit may be accommodated to some extent by strain. However, in order to maintain misfit strain and avoid dislocation generation the epitaxial layer must not exceed a critical thickness. Some success has been reported in avoiding damaged epitaxial layers with thicknesses greater than the critical thickness by overgrowing on patterned or rough surfaces. For the case of Si, surface roughening by energetic Ar+ bombardment as a pre-growth roughening treatment is discussed and assessed. Evolution of surface features as a function of initial substrate treatment, ion accelerating potential, and the duration of bombardment are presented. Stability of the surface features generated by bombardment for typical overgrowth conditions was tested to assess feasibility of this technique for Si heteroepitaxy.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 379: Symposium C – Strained Layer Epitaxy–Materials, Processing, and Devise Applications , 1995 , 15
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Schlachetzki, A. and Wehmann, H.-H., Diff. and Defect Data B, Sol. State Phenom. 19–20 (1991) 551.Google Scholar
2. Matthews, J.W. and Blakesly, A.E., J. Cryst. Growth 27 (1974) 118; D.C. Houghton, D.D. Perovic, J.-M. Baribeau and G.C. Weatherly, J. Appl. Phys. 67 (1990) 1850.Google Scholar
3. Fitzgerald, E.A., Xie, Y.-H., Monroe, D., Silverman, P.J., Kuo, J.M., Kortan, A.R., Thiel, F.A. and Weir, B.E., J. Vac. Sci. Tech. B10 (1992) 1807; E.A. Fitzgerald, G.P. Watson, R.E. Proano, D.G. Ast, P.D. Kirchner, G.D. Pettit and J.M. Woodall, J. Appl. Phys. 65 (1989) 2220.Google Scholar
4. Luryi, S. and Suhir, E., Appl. Phys. Lett. 49 (1986) 140.Google Scholar
5. Stewart, A.D.G. and Thompson, M.W., J. Mat. Sci. 4 (1969) 56.Google Scholar
6. Tsong, I.S.T. and Barber, D.J., J. Mat. Sci. 7 (1972) 687.Google Scholar
7. Lowes, T.D., Carlow, G.R., and Zinke-Allmang, M., to be published.Google Scholar