Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-rkxrd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-22T05:33:47.609Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Co-Implantation and the Role of Implant Damage in the Thermal Stability of Implanted Helium in Indium Phosphide

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 March 2011

Todd W. Simpson  and
Ian V. Mitchell
Todd W. Simpson
Affiliation:
Department of Physics & Astronomy, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, N6A3K7, Canada
Ian V. Mitchell
Affiliation:
Department of Physics & Astronomy, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, N6A3K7, Canada
Get access

Abstract

The thermal stability of 3He implanted into single crystal indium phosphide has been studied. Helium diffuses in the 200°C-300°C temperature range unless stabilized by bubbles which trap helium up to the 400°C-500°C temperature range. The efficiency of bubble formation, as measured by the fraction of implanted helium retained to 400°C is increased by: 1) increasing the helium fluence, 2) increasing the temperature ramp rate, 3) co-implantation with a second ion species, or 4) implanting at elevated temperature. The mechanism by which these processes enhance bubble formation can be understood in terms of a model where the nucleation of bubbles occurs at elevated temperature in the presence of both lattice defects and helium atoms.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 647: Symposium O – Ion Beam Synthesis & Processing of Advanced Materials , 2000 , O6.4
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2001

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

1. Bruel, M., Electron. Lett. 31, 1201 (1995).Google Scholar
2. Simpson, T.W., Mitchell, I.V., Este, G.O. and Shepherd, F.R., Nucl. Instr. Meth. B 148, 381 (1999).Google Scholar
3. Simpson, T.W., Mitchell, I.V., unpublished.Google Scholar
4. Biersack, J. P. and Haggmark, L. G., Nucl. Instrum. Methods 174, 257 (1980).Google Scholar
5. Moller, W. and Besenbacher, F., Nucl. Instr. Meth 168, 111 (1980).Google Scholar
6. Simpson, T.W., Mitchell, I.V., Appl. Phys. Lett. 78, 207 (2001).Google Scholar
7. Agarwal, A., Haynes, T.E., Venezia, V.C., Holland, O.W. and Eaglesham, D.J., Appl. Phys. Lett. 72, 1086 (1998).Google Scholar
8. Weldon, M.K., Collot, M., Chabel, Y.J., Venezia, V.C., Agarwal, A., Haynes, T.E., Eaglesham, D.J., Christman, S.B. and Chaban, E.E., Appl. Phys. Lett. 73, 3721 (1998).Google Scholar