Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-pjpqr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-24T02:15:24.650Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Differences of Damage Production in GaAs and InP after MeV and Low Energy Ion Implantation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 February 2011

E. Wendler ,
T. Bachmann  and
W. Wesch
E. Wendler
Affiliation:
Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena, Institut für Festkörperphysik, Helmholtzweg 3, 0 - 6900 Jena, Germany
T. Bachmann
Affiliation:
Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena, Institut für Festkörperphysik, Helmholtzweg 3, 0 - 6900 Jena, Germany
W. Wesch
Affiliation:
Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena, Institut für Festkörperphysik, Helmholtzweg 3, 0 - 6900 Jena, Germany
Get access

Abstract

Ion implantation induced damage production in GaAs and InP is investigated using Rutherford backscattering spectrometry in combination with channeling techniques and near-edge optical measurements. 200 keV and 1.6 MeV Ar+ ions are implanted at room temperature in GaAs and InP with ion doses varying between 2 × 1012 cm−2 and 3 × 1015 cm−2. Our results show that InP behaves similar for the two implantation energies and no influence of energy loss in electronic processes is found. In GaAs in the region of maximum nuclear energy deposition almost no difference in the damage production occurs for the two implantation energies. But for 1.6 MeV Ar+ implantation within the first 500 nm the defect concentration is very low in comparison to the nuclear energy deposition, which may be the consequence of ionizationinduced defect annealing and/or of the fact that in this depth region the amount of nuclear energy deposition is less than a critical value being necessary for the production of heavily damaged and amorphous zones.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 300: Symposium D1 – III-V Electronic and Photonic Device Fabrication and Performance , 1993 , 331
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1993

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] Thompson, P.E., Nucl. Instr. and Meth. B 59/60, 592 (1991).Google Scholar
[2] Biersack, J.P. and Ziegler, J.F., in: The Stopping and Ranges of Ions in Matter, 1 (Pergamon Press 1985).Google Scholar
[3] Bogh, E., Can. J. Phys. 46, 653 (1968).Google Scholar
[4] Gärtner, K., Hehl, K., and Schlotzhauer, G.. Nucl. Instr. and Meth. B 4, 55 (1984).Google Scholar
[5] Wie, C.W., Tombrello, T.A.. and Vreeland, T. Jr., Phys. Rev. B 33, 40833 (1986).Google Scholar
[6] Wesch, W. and Wendler, E., Proc. IBMM'92, Heidelberg (Germany), Nucl. Instr. and Meth. B (in press).Google Scholar
[7] Trudeau, Y.B., Kajruys, G.E., Gagnon, G., and Brebner, J.L., Nucl. Instr. and Meth. B 59/60, 609 (1991).Google Scholar
[8] Wendler, E., Wesch, W., and Götz, G., Nucl. Instr. and Meth B 63, 47 (1992).Google Scholar
[9] Wesch, W., Wendler, E., and Götz, G., Nucl. Instr. and Meth. B 22, 523 (1987).Google Scholar