Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T20:18:15.880Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Local Cross-sectional Profiling of Multilayer Thin Films with an Atomic Force Microscope for Layer Thickness Determination

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2011

J. R. LaGraff
Affiliation:
Superconducting Electronics Organization, TRW Space and Defense, One Space Park Drive, Redondo Beach, California 90278
J. M. Murduck
Affiliation:
Superconducting Electronics Organization, TRW Space and Defense, One Space Park Drive, Redondo Beach, California 90278
Get access

Abstract

A new essentially nondestructive cross-sectional method is described for measuring the individual thicknesses of multilayer YBa2Cu3O7 (YBCO) and SrTiO3 (STO) thin films using off-axis ion milling and the atomic force microscope (AFM). Since the ion-milling is done during routine patterning of a thin-film device and the AFM requires only a small area for imaging, no additional sample preparation is required. This is a significant improvement over traditional cross-sectional techniques which often require lengthy and destructive sample preparation. Also, there is no a priori reason that this technique would not be amenable to other multilayer thin-film systems.

Type
Articles
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

1. For example, Saloma, C., Matsuoka, K., and Kawata, S., Rev. Sci. Instrum. 67, 2072 (1996); A. Wasserman, D. J. Roth, R. Beserman, A. Hoffman, and K. Dettmer, Appl. Phys. Lett. 68, 3407 (1996).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. For example, Chap. 17 of Electron Microscopy of Thin Crystals, edited by Hirsch, P., Howie, A., Nicholson, R., Pashley, D. W., and Whelan, M. J. (R. E. Krieger Publishing Co., Inc., Malabar, FL, 1977).Google Scholar
3. For example, Gao, J. and Wong, W. H., Physica C 251, 330 (1995); P. C. McIntyre, M. J. Cima, and A. Roshko, J. Cryst. Growth 149, 64 (1995); D. W. Moon and K. J. Kim, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. A 14, 2744 (1996).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Bardwell, J. A., Allegreto, E. M., Mason, B., Erickson, L. E., and Champion, H. G., Appl. Phys. Lett. 68, 2840 (1996).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Yoon, J. and Ivey, D. G., J. Mater. Sci. Lett. 15, 551 (1996).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Switzer, J. A., Hung, C. J., Breyfogle, B. E., Shumsky, M. G., Leeuwen, R. V., and Golden, T. G., Science 264, 1573 (1994).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Denk, W. and Pohl, D. W., Appl. Phys. Lett. 59, 2171 (1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Howard, A. J., Baca, A. G., and Shul, R. J., Appl. Phys. Lett. 68, 3353 (1996).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. For example, Pettiette-Hall, C. L., Luine, J. A., Murduck, J., Burch, J. F., Hu, R., Sergant, M., and John, D. St., IEEE Trans. On Appl. Supercond. 5, 2087 (1995).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Different etching rates of different materials as a function of ionmilling angle can lead to different angles for each material along the etched edge.Google Scholar
11. The cross-sectional analysis feature of the AFM was also used to confirm the calculated thicknesses; however, it is difficult to distinguish the layer boundaries in this analysis mode.Google Scholar
12. After stripping the photoresist and cleaning with an O2 plasma, the edge was noticeably rougher, thus making the layers more difficult to resolve.Google Scholar
13.LaGraff, J. R., unpublished results.Google Scholar
14. No extra intralayer boundary in STO1 was observed by the TEM.Google Scholar
15. The STM, SEM, and TEM operate best with conductive or semiconductive samples which dissipate the electrons used in imaging. The AFM is a contact probe and only needs to be in physical contact with the surface to obtain an image, regardless of the electrical properties of the materials.Google Scholar