Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T15:54:45.322Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Adhesion mechanisms of copper films deposited onto laser-irradiated alumina

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2011

Jae-Won Park ,
Anthony J. Pedraza ,
Douglas H. Lowndes  and
William R. Allen
Jae-Won Park
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Engineering, The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee 37996-2200
Anthony J. Pedraza
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Engineering, The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee 37996-2200
Douglas H. Lowndes
Affiliation:
Solid State Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, P. O. Box 2008, Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37831–6056
William R. Allen
Affiliation:
Lockheed-Martin Energy Systems, Inc., Post Office Box 2009, Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37831–8084
Get access

Abstract

Strong adhesion between a deposited copper film and an alumina substrate takes place when the substrate is laser-irradiated prior to deposition. A post-deposition annealing is required to achieve the strong bonding. In this work, the interfacial region between the copper film and the alumina substrate was analyzed using Auger Electron Spectroscopy (AES). It was found that a transitional region is always present in couples that have a high adhesion strength, while little or no transitional region was found in weakly bonded couples. The transitional region depends on the laser irradiation atmosphere. In the case of laser irradiation in air, oxygen excess was found on the surface of the alumina substrate, and in the copper/alumina couple the transitional region consists of a copper oxide and a Cu–Al double oxide. When the laser irradiation was performed in a reducing atmosphere (Ar–4% H2), substoichiometric alumina and metallic aluminum were found on the surface of the substrate and also a reaction between copper and the substoichiometric aluminum oxide was detected in the subsurface. Although the substoichiometric alumina is formed on the surface irradiated in Ar–4% H2, a stable Al2O3 thin layer is formed on the outmost surface because the irradiated substrate is exposed to the atmosphere before deposition. This reoxidized layer remains whole at the interface of the couple upon low temperature (at least up to 300 °C) annealing, while it is ruptured upon higher temperature annealing (500 °C in this work). In the latter case, the copper film can contact and react with the substoichiometric alumina formed in the subsurface of the substrate irradiated in the Ar–4% H2 atmosphere. It is concluded that the Cu–Al–O interfacial compound formed in the transitional region causes the strong adhesion between the copper film and the alumina substrate.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Materials Research , Volume 12 , Issue 11 , November 1997 , pp. 3174 - 3181
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.Pedraza, A. J., DeSilva, M. J., Kumar, R. A., and Lowndes, D. H., J. Appl. Phys. 77 (10), 5176–5179 (1995).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.DeSilva, M. J., Ph.D. Thesis, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN (1994).Google Scholar
3.Kim, K. S., Baitinger, W. E., Amy, J. W., and Winograd, N., J. Electron Spectrosc. Rel. Phenom. 5, 351–367 (1974).Google Scholar
4.Chen, C. H. and McCann, M. P., Opt. Commun. 60, 296 (1986).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Lowndes, D. H., DeSilva, M., Godbole, M. J., Pedraza, A. J., and Geohegan, D. B., MRS Proceedings, Vol. 285 (1992), p. 191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Schildbach, M. A. and Hamza, A. V., Phys. Rev. B 45, 6197 (1992).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Pedraza, A. J., Park, J. W., Meyer, H. M., and Braski, D. N., J. Mater. Res. 9, 2251 (1994).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Siqi Cao, Pedraza, A. J., and Allard, L. F., J. Mater. Res. 12, 1747 (1997).Google Scholar
9.Jae-Won, Park, Anthony, J. Pedraza, and William, R. Allen, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. A 14 (2), 286–292(1996).Google Scholar
10.Park, J. W., Pedraza, A. J., and Allen, W. R., Appl. Surf. Sci. 103, 39 (1996).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Tobin, J. P., Hirschwald, W., and Cunningham, J., Appl. Surf. 16, 441 (1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12.Wagner, C. D., Gale, L. H., and Raymond, R. H., Anal. Chem. 51, 466 (1979).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13.O'Brien, T. E. and Chaklader, A. C. D., J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 58, 329 (1974).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.Nicholas, M. G., Mater. Sci. Forum 29, 127 (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15.Gadalla, A. M. M. and White, J., Trans. Brit. Ceram. Soc. 63, 39 (1964).Google Scholar
16.Baglin, J. E. E., Schrott, A. G., Thompson, R. D., Tu, K. N., and Segmüller, A., Nucl. Instrum. Methods in Phys. Res. B19/20, 782–786 (1987).CrossRefGoogle Scholar