Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-30T16:31:37.031Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

“On the Growth - and Annealing - Temperature Dependence of the Electrical Properties of Ga0.51In0.49P/GaAs Heterostructures Grown by Mombe”

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 February 2011

E. C. Paloura
Affiliation:
Aristotle Univ. of Thessaloniki, Physics Dept, 54006 Thessaloniki, Greece.
A. Ginoudi
Affiliation:
b) Foundation of Research and Technology, IESL, 711 10 Heraklion, Crete.
N. Frangis
Affiliation:
b) Foundation of Research and Technology, IESL, 711 10 Heraklion, Crete.
A. Christou
Affiliation:
b) Foundation of Research and Technology, IESL, 711 10 Heraklion, Crete.
Get access

Abstract

We study the effect of growth temperature (TG) and post-growth rapid thermal annealing (RTA) on the electrical properties of Schottky diodes fabricated on undoped, lattice-matched Ga0.51In0.49P/GaAs heterostructures. The samples were grown by metalorganic molecular beam epitaxy (MOMBE) in the temperature range 480 – 560°C. Ga0.51In0.49P grown in this temperature range undergoes spinodal decomposition, as shown by cross-section TEM analysis. The dislocation-free epilayers grown at TG≤520°C are characterized by a deep electron trap with an activation energy of 800meV while growth at higher temperatures renders trap-free films. Furthermore, the Schottky barrier ideality factor (n) depends strongly on TG and takes the best value of 1.4 for TG=540°C, while the barrier height remains nearly constant at about 0.75eV. Finally, upon capped rapid thermal annealing the value of n improves while the trap concentration decreases significantly. Based on the presented experimental evidence we can propose that MOMBE growth at 540°C renders films with improved electrical properties.

Type
Research Article
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

1. Asahi, H., Kawamura, Y., and Nagai, H., J. Appl. Phys. 54, 6958 (1983).Google Scholar
2. Olson, J.M., Ahrenkiel, R. K., Dunlavy, D. J., Keyes, B., and Kibber, A. E., Appl. Phys. Lett. 55, 1208 (1989).Google Scholar
3. Ishikawa, M., Ohba, Y., Sugawara, H., Yamamoto, M., and Nakanisi, T., Appl. Phys. Lett. 48, 207 (1986).Google Scholar
4. Garcia, J. C., Maurel, P., Bove, P., and Hirtz, J. P., J. Appl. Phys. 69, 3297 (1991).Google Scholar
5. Rhoderick, E. H., “Metal-Semiconductor Contacts”, Clarendon Press, Oxford 1980.Google Scholar
6. Paloura, E. C., Ginoudi, A., Frangis, N., Kiriakidis, G., Scholz, F., Moser, M. and Christou, A., App. Phys. Lett. 60 (22), 2749, (1992).Google Scholar
7. Stoemenos, J., private communication.Google Scholar
8. Frangis, N., Ginoudi, A., Paloura, E. C., Proc. 6th International Conference on Intergranular and Interface Boundaries in Materials, June 1992, Thessaloniki Greece (in press).Google Scholar