Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-nmvwc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-26T14:18:14.225Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The influence of total pressure in the reactor and carrier gas on the chemical vapor deposition of Al from tri-isobutyl aluminum

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2011

Takakazu Suzuki
Takakazu Suzuki
Affiliation:
National Institute for Materials and Chemical Research, Tsukuba 305, Japan
Get access

Abstract

The influence of total pressure in the chamber and carrier gases on the chemical vapor deposition of aluminum using tri-isobutyl aluminum was studied. The superior penetrability of chemical vapor deposition is expected to make it effective for aluminum deposition onto complex-shaped materials such as turbo-charger rotors, fibrous preform, and multifilament. It may also be a suitable method for the development of fiber-reinforced composite materials. The apparatus was composed of a raw material gas supply system, a three-zone electric furnace, a reaction chamber, an auto pressure controller, and an exhaust system. Aluminum was deposited onto a graphite fiber in the quartz reactor. The results show that, in the diffusion rate-determining stage of aluminum thermal decomposition, the rate of deposition for aluminum shows a marked increase as the pressure increases; in contrast, in the reaction rate-determining stage, this tendency is limited. This can be explained by the fact that, as the total pressure decreases, the gas diffusion coefficient becomes larger, and there is an increase in the uniformity of film formation. On the other hand, as the carrier gas flow rate increases, the amount of raw material supplied increases; consequently, a higher rate of deposition is obtained. Moreover, in the diffusion rate-determining stage, there is a tendency for an increase in flow rate to elevate the probability of arrival of the raw material, and, in combination with high temperatures, for nucleus generation to be accelerated and the average diameter of aluminum granules to become smaller. In the reaction rate-determining stage, there appears to be hardly any dependency of granule diameter on the flow rate. When Ar or He is used as the carrier gas, under the same conditions argon, rather than helium, is seen to increase the rate of deposition.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Materials Research , Volume 12 , Issue 7 , July 1997 , pp. 1866 - 1871
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1997

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.Pierson, H. O., Thin Solid Films 45, 257 (1977).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Malazgirt, A. and Evans, J. W., Metall. Trans. 11B, 225 (1980); Ph.D Thesis, University of California, Berkeley, CA (1980).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Cooke, M. J., Heinecke, R. A., Stern, R. C., and Maes, J. W. C., Solid State Technol., Dec., 62 (1982).Google Scholar
4.Levy, R. A., Green, M. L., and Gallagher, P. K., in Proc. 9th Int. Conf. on CVD, edited by Robinson, McD., van den Brekel, C. H. J., Cullen, G. W., Blocher, J. M., Jr., and Rai-Choudhury, P. (Electrochemical Society, Penington, NJ, 1984), pp. 258–274.Google Scholar
5. F. Schmaderer, G. Wahl, M. Dietrich, and C-H. Dustmann, ibid., pp. 663–672.Google Scholar
6.Vandenbulcke, L., Thin Solid Films 102, 149 (1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Suzuki, T. and Umehara, H., J. Metal Finishing Society of Japan 35, 600 (1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Suzuki, T. and Umehara, H., J. Jpn. Inst. Metals 51, 577 (1987).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Suzuki, T. and Umehara, H., Proc. Int. Conf. on Chemical Vapor Deposition (1987), pp. 1050–1059.Google Scholar
10.Kumazawa, M., Umehara, H., and Suzuki, T., J. Jpn. Inst. Metals 53, 237 (1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Suzuki, T., Umehara, H., and Hino, H., J. Mater. Res. 9, 1984 (1994).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12.Smith, W. L. and Wartik, T., J. Inorg. Nucl. Chem. 29, 629 (1967).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13.Bent, B. E., Nuzzo, R. G., and Dubois, L. H., J. Am. Chem. Soc. 111, 1634 (1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.Ghandhi, S. K. and Field, R. J., J. Cryst. Growth 69, 619 (1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15.Hitchman, M. L. and Jensen, K. F., Chemical Vapor Deposition (Academic Press, London, 1993), pp. 31–150.Google Scholar
16.Bromley, L. A. and Wilke, C. R., Industrial and Engineering Chemistry 43, 1641 (1951).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17.Stringfellow, G. B., Organometallic Vapor-phase Epitaxy, Theory and Practice (Academic Press Inc., New York, 1989), p. 10.Google Scholar