Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-pjpqr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-07T18:36:33.339Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Quantitative Experimental Determination of The Effect of Dislocation - Dislocation Interactions on Strain Relaxation in Lattice Mismatched Heterostructures

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 February 2011

E. A. Stach ,
R. Hull ,
R. M. Tromp ,
F. M. ROSS ,
M. C. Reuter  and
J. C. Bean
E. A. Stach
Affiliation:
National Center for Electron Microscopy, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley, CA 94720, EAStach@LBL.gov
R. Hull
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Engineering
R. M. Tromp
Affiliation:
IBM Research Division, Thomas J. Watson Research Center, P.O. Box 218, Yorktown Heights, New York 10598.
F. M. ROSS
Affiliation:
IBM Research Division, Thomas J. Watson Research Center, P.O. Box 218, Yorktown Heights, New York 10598.
M. C. Reuter
Affiliation:
IBM Research Division, Thomas J. Watson Research Center, P.O. Box 218, Yorktown Heights, New York 10598.
J. C. Bean
Affiliation:
Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22903.
Get access

Abstract

We present real time observations of the interaction of dislocations in heteroepitaxial strained layers using a specially modified ultrahigh vacuum transmission electron microscope equipped with in-situ deposition capabilities. These observations have led to delineation of the regime of epilayer thickness and composition where dislocation interactions result in blocking of the propagating threading segment. It is found that both the blocking probability as well as the magnitude of the dislocation interaction force are strongly dependent on the Burgers vectors of the dislocations involved, with the greatest effects observed when the Burgers vectors of the two dislocations are parallel with respect to each other. Frame-by-frame analysis of the motion of the dislocation threading segment during interaction is used to extract the magnitude of the interaction stresses as a function of both the level of heteroepitaxial strain and the dislocation geometry. Finally, by continuing growth following observations of blocking during annealing, we find that blocked dislocations are likely to remain in that configuration until substantial additional heteroepitaxial stresses are incorporated into the layer. These results have direct relevance to the successful integration of strained layer heterostructures into electronic device applications. This is because blocked threading segments result in the introduction of undesired band gap states, enhance impurity diffusion, modify surface morphology and act to limit the dislocation density reductions achievable in graded buffer structures.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 535: Symposium D/I – III-V and IV-IV Materials & Processing Challenges for Highly… , 1998 , 15
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1999

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 For a recent review, see Hull, R. and Stach, E.A., “Strain accommodation and relief in SiGe / Si heteroepitaxy” in Heteroepitaxy, Thin Film Systems, edited by Liu, A.W. and Santo, M.B. (World Scientific Publishing Co., Inc., Rivers Edge, NJ 1999).Google Scholar

2 Hull, R. and Bean, J.C., Appl. Phys. Lett. 54, 925 (1989); R. Hull, J.C. Bean and C. Buescher, J. Appl. Phys. 66 5837 (1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

3 Freund, L.B., J. Appl. Phys. 68, 2073 (1990); J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 38, 657, (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

4 Gosling, T.J., Jain, S.C. and Harker, A.H., phys. stat. sol(a) 146, 713 (1994).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

5 Schwarz, K.W. and Tersoff, J., Appl. Phys. Lett. 69, 1220 (1996); K.W. Schwarz, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 4785 (1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

6 Dodson, B.W. and Tsao, J.Y., Appl. Phys. Lett. 51, 1325 (1987).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

7 Hirth, J.P. and Lothe, J., Theory of Dislocations, 2nd ed. (John Wiley, New York, 1982).Google Scholar

8 For further details of the sample preparation and experimental calibrations we have performed to permit quantitative determination of dislocation motion, please see Stach, E.A., Hull, R., Tromp, R.M., Reuter, M.C., Copel, M., LeGoues, F.K. and Bean, J.C., J. Appl. Phys. 83, 1931, (1998).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

9 Hull, R., Bean, J.C., Eaglesham, D.J., Bonar, J.M. and Buescher, C., Thin Solid Films, 183, 117 (1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

10 Hull, R., Bean, J.C., Bahnck, D., Peticolas, L.J., Short, K.T. and Unterwald, F.C., J. Appl. Phys. 70, 2052 (1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

11 Matthews, J.W. and Blakeslee, A.E., J. Cryst. Growth 27, 118 (1974); 29, 373 (1975); 32, 265 (1976).Google Scholar

12 Abrahams, M.S., Weisberg, L.R., Buiocchi, C.J., and Blanc, J., J. Mat. Sci. 4, 223 (1969).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

13 Vdovin, V.I., Matveeva, L.A., Semenova, G.N., Skorohod, M.Ya., Tkhorik, Yu. A., and Khazan, L.S., phys. stat. sol.(a) 92, 379 (1985).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

14 For further details of the analysis of Burgers vectors using (g · b)s techniques in (001) oriented heterostructures see Stach, E.A., Hull, R., Tromp, R.M., Ross, F.M., Reuter, M.C. and Bean, J.C, submitted to Phil. Mag. A.Google Scholar

15 Stach, E.A., Hull, R., Tromp, R.M., Reuter, M.C., Copel, M., LeGoues, F.K. and Bean, J.C., J. Appl. Phys. 83, 1931, (1998).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

16 Hull, R. and Bean, J.C., phys. stat. sol. a 138, 533 (1993).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

17 Hsu, J. W. P., Fitzgerald, E. A., Xie, Y. H., Silverman, P. J., and Cardillo, M. J., Appl. Phys. Lett. 61, 1293, 1992; J. W. P. Hsu, E. A. Fitzgerald, Y. H. Xie and P. J. Silverman, Appl. Phys. Lett. 65, 344, 1994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

18 Samavedam, S.B. and Fitzgerald, E.A., J. Appl. Phys. 81, 3108 (1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar