Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-jbqgn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-02T13:08:49.616Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Effect of Oxidizer on Chemical Vapor Deposited Hafnium Oxide-Based Nanostructures and the Engineering of their Interfaces with Si(100)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 February 2011

Manish K. Singh
Affiliation:
msingh9@uic.edu, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chemical Engineering, 810 S Clinton St, Chicago, IL, 60607, United States
Rajesh Katamreddy
Affiliation:
rkatam1@uic.edu, University of Illinois at Chicago, Department of Chemical Engineering, 810 S Clinton St, Chicago, IL, 60607, United States
Christos G. Takoudis
Affiliation:
takoudis@uic.edu, University of Illinois at Chicago, Department of Bioengineering, 851 S Morgan St, Chicago, IL, 60607, United States
Get access

Abstract

Thin films of hafnium oxide were deposited on silicon substrates using tetrakis-diethylamino hafnium as precursor. Two different oxidizers: (a) ozone/oxygen mixture, and (b) dry oxygen were used for comparative study of the effect of different oxidizers on the deposited films. The deposition using dry oxygen was carried out in a cold-wall rapid thermal processing metalorganic chemical vapor deposition (MOCVD) reactor, whereas ozone/oxygen mixture was used in a cold-wall atomic layer deposition (ALD) reactor. Annealing studies were carried out at 600 and 800°C in high-purity argon at atmospheric pressure. X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) analyses of as-deposited and annealed films were performed to study the HfO2/Si interface. The films deposited using these two different oxidizers appeared to be of comparable quality. Silicon oxide formation at the interface occurred after annealing at 600°C and it increased upon further annealing at 800 °C.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2007

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. Wilk, G. D., Wallace, R. M. and Anthony, J. M., J. Appl. Phys. 89 (10), 5243 (2001).Google Scholar
2. Kukli, K., Ritala, M., Sundqvist, J., Aarik, J., Lu, J., Sajavaara, T., Leskela, M. and Hrsta, A., J. Appl. Phys. 92, 5698 (2002).Google Scholar
3. Kukli, K., Ritala, M., Sajavaara, T., Keinonen, J. and M. Leskelä, Chem. Vap. Deposition 8 (5), 199 (2002).Google Scholar
4. Williams, P. A., Roberts, J. L., Jones, A. C., Chalker, P. R., Bickley, J. F., Steiner, A., Davies, H. O. and Leedham, T. J., J. Mater. Chem., 12 165 (2002).Google Scholar
5. Deshpande, A., Inman, R., Jursich, G. and Takoudis, C. G., J. Vac. Sci. Technol. A 22, 2035 (2004).Google Scholar
6. Cui, Z., Madsen, J. M. and Takoudis, C. G., Meas. Sci. Technol. 15, 2099 (2004).Google Scholar
7. Inman, R. and Jursich, G., Future Fab Intl. 21, 117 (2007).Google Scholar
8. Deshpande, A., Inman, R., Jursich, G. and Takoudis, C. G., J. Appl. Phys. 99 (9), 094102 (2006).Google Scholar
9. Renault, O., Samour, D., Damlencourt, J.-F., Blin, D., Martin, F., Marthon, S., T., N., and Besson, P., Appl. Phys. Lett. 81 (19) 3627 (2002).Google Scholar