Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-skm99 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T02:45:38.162Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Comparison of Aluminum Nitride Nanowire Growth with and without Catalysts via Chemical Vapor Deposition

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 June 2011

Kasif Teker
Affiliation:
Department of Physics and Engineering, Frostburg State University, 101 Braddock Road, Frostburg, MD 21532, U.S.A.
Joseph A. Oxenham
Affiliation:
Department of Physics and Engineering, Frostburg State University, 101 Braddock Road, Frostburg, MD 21532, U.S.A.
Get access

Abstract

This paper presents a systematic investigation of AlN nanowire synthesis by chemical vapor deposition using Al and NH3 on SiO2/Si substrate and direct nitridation of mixture of Al-Al2O3 by NH3. A wide variety of catalyst materials, in both discrete nanoparticle and thin film forms, have been used (Co, Au, Ni, and Fe). The growth runs have been carried out at temperatures between 800 and 1100oC mainly under H2 as carrier gas. It was found that the most efficient catalyst in terms of nanowire formation yield was 20-nm Ni film. The AlN nanowire diameters are about 20-30 nm, about the same thickness as the Ni-film. Further studies of direct nitridation of mixture of Al-Al2O3 by NH3 have resulted in high density one-dimensional nanostructure networks at 1100oC. It was observed that catalyst-free nanostructures resulted from the direct nitridation were significantly longer than that with catalysts. The analysis of the grown nanowires has been carried out by scanning electron microscopy, transmission electron microscopy, atomic force microscopy, and x-ray diffraction.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2011

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. Nakamura, S., Science 281, 956 (1998).Google Scholar
2. Yang, S.G., Pakhomov, S., Hung, T., and Wong, C.Y., Appl. Phys. Lett. 81, 2418 (2003).Google Scholar
3. Wu, S. Y., Liu, H.X., Gu, L., Singh, R.K., Budd, L., Van Schifgaarde, M., McCartney, M.R., Smith, D.J., and Newman, N., Appl. Phys. Lett. 82, 3047 (2003).Google Scholar
4. Cimalla, V., Foerster, Ch., Cengher, D., Tonisch, K., and Ambacher, O., Phys. Stat. Sol (b) 243, 1476 (2006).Google Scholar
5. Tondare, V.N., Ballasubramanian, C., Shende, S.V., Joag, D.S., Godbole, V.P., Bhoraskar, S.V., and Bhadbhade, M., Appl. Phys. Lett. 80, 4813 (2002).Google Scholar
6. Haber, J.A., Gibbons, O.C., and Buhro, W.E., Chem. Mater. 10, 4062 (1998).Google Scholar
7. Zhang, Y.J., Liu, J., He, R.R., Zhang, Q., Zhang, X.Z., and Zhu, J., Chem. Mater. 13, 3899 (2001).Google Scholar
8. Suehiro, T., Tatami, J., Meguro, T., Komeya, K., and Matsuo, S., J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 75, 910 (2002).Google Scholar
9. Wu, H.M., Liang, J.Y., Lin, K.L., and Chou, C.C., Ferroelectrics 383, 73 (2009).Google Scholar
10. Wu, Q., Hu, Z., Wang, X.Z., Chen, Y., and Lu, Y. N., J. Phys. Chem. B 107, 9726 (2003).Google Scholar
11. Tang, Y.B., Cong, H.T., Wang, Z.M., and Cheng, H.M., Chem. Phys. Lett. 416, 171 (2005).Google Scholar
12. Liu, C., Hu, Z., Wu, Q., Wang, X.Z., Chen, Y., Sang, H., Zhu, J.M., Deng, S.Z., and Xu, N.S., J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 127, 1318 (2005).Google Scholar
13. Zhao, Q., Zhang, H.Z., Xu, X.Y., Wang, Z., Xu, J., Yu, D.P., Li, G.H., and Su, F.H., Appl. Phys. Lett. 86, 193101 (2005).Google Scholar
14. Shi, S.C., Chen, C.F., Chattopadhyay, S., Lan, Z.H., Chen, K.H., and Chen, L.C., Adv. Funct. Mater. 15, 781 (2005).Google Scholar
15. Liu, F., Su, Z.J., Mo, F.Y., Li, L., Chen, Z.S., Liu, Q.R., Chen, J., Deng, S.Z., and Xu, N.S., Nanoscale 3, 610 (2011).Google Scholar
16. Wang, X., Song, J., Zhang, F., He, C., Hu, Z., and Wang, Z., Adv. Mater. 22, 1 (2010).Google Scholar