Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T17:43:56.764Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Influence of Fabrication Governed Surface Conditions on the Mechanical Strength of Thin Film Materials

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 March 2011

Ioannis Chasiotis  and
Wolfgang G. Knauss
Ioannis Chasiotis
Affiliation:
Graduate Aeronautical Laboratories California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91125, U.S.A.
Wolfgang G. Knauss
Affiliation:
Graduate Aeronautical Laboratories California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91125, U.S.A.
Get access

Abstract

The mechanical strength of thin polysilicon films has been examined in connection with exposure to Hydrofluoric Acid (HF). It is found that surface roughness as characterized by groove formation at grain boundaries depends on the HF release time. Surface undulations and crevasses related to grain structure result in reduced fracture strength and induced errors into the effective elastic modulus measurements - especially when the latter is determined from flexure configurations. Extensive exposure to HF results in material degradation, as evidenced by a transition from a transgranular to an intergranular failure manner and a corresponding drastic drop of the film strength with attendant increase of porosity.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 657: Symposia EE – Materials Science of Microelectromechanical Systems (MEMS) Devices III , 2000 , EE2.2
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2001

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. Chasiotis, I., and Knauss, W.G., Proc. of the SPIE 3512, Santa Clara, CA, 1998, pp. 66–75.Google Scholar
2. Chasiotis, I., and Knauss, W.G., Proc. of the SPIE 4175, Santa Clara, CA, 2000, pp. 96–103.Google Scholar
3. Sharpe, W. N. Jr., Brown, S., Johnson, G. C., and Knauss, W. G., Mater. Res. Soc. Proc. 518, San Francisco, CA, 1998, pp. 57–65.Google Scholar
4. Walker, J. A., Gabriel, K. J., and Mehregany, M., J. of Electr. Mat. 20 (9), 665–670, (1991).Google Scholar
5. Hu, S. M. and Kerr, D. R., J. Electrochem. Soc. 114, 414, (1967).Google Scholar
6. Liou, L., Spitzer, W. G. and Prussin, S., J. Electrochem. Soc. 131, 672, (1984).Google Scholar
7. Chan, E. K., Garikipati, K. and Dutton, R. W., IEEE Des. and Test 16 (4), 58–65, (1999).Google Scholar