Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T15:26:57.184Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Substrate Surface Treatments and “Controlled Contamination” in GaN / Sapphire MOCVD

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 February 2011

Yuval Golan
Affiliation:
Materials Department, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106 [email protected]; [email protected]
Paul Fini
Affiliation:
Materials Department, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106
Steven P. Denbaars
Affiliation:
Materials Department, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106
James S. Speck
Affiliation:
Materials Department, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106 [email protected]; [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

We have used atomic force microscopy (AFM) to study the effect of common substrate surface treatments for the metal-organic chemical vapor deposition (MOCVD) of GaN on sapphire. It appears that contaminants play a major role in the surface chemistry and strongly influence the morphology of the treated surfaces. In order to investigate the role of these contaminants, we have introduced the concept of “controlled contamination” (CC), namely, exposure of the sapphire surfaces to controlled amounts of potential contaminants in-situ and investigation of the resulting sapphire morphology. The results showed that sapphire, considered to be a very stable oxide surface, is clearly reactive in the GaN MOCVD chemical environment at the high temperatures (HT) employed, allowing us to use CC for obtaining sapphire substrates with controlled roughness. Nevertheless, epitaxial growth using the two-step GaN MOCVD process appears to be very robust and practically insensitive to the (submicronscale) substrate morphology.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1998

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. Ponce, F. A., Bour, D. P., Gotz, W., Johnson, N. M., Helava, H. I., Grzegory, I., Jun, J. and Porowski, S., Appl. Phys. Lett. 68 p. 917 (1996).Google Scholar
2. Vaudo, R. P., Phanse, V. M., Wu, X. H., Golan, Y. and Speck, J. S., 2nd Intl. Conf. on Nitride Semiconductors (Tokushima, Japan, 1997).Google Scholar
3. Gotz, W., Romano, L. T., Krusor, B. S., Johnson, N. M. and Molnar, R. J., Appl. Phys..Lett. 69 p. 242 (1996).Google Scholar
4. Amano, H., Sawaki, N., Akasaki, I. and Toyoda, Y., Appl. Phys. Lett. 48 p. 353 (1986).Google Scholar
5. Wu, X. H., Fini, P., Keller, S., Tarsa, E. J., Heying, B., Mishra, U. K., DenBaars, S. P. and Speck, J. S., Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 35 p. L1648 (1997).Google Scholar
6. Mitha, S., Clark-Phelps, R., Erickson, J. W. and Gao, Y., Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. (San Francisco, CA 1997), in press.Google Scholar
7. Popovici, G., Kim, W., Botchkarev, A., Tang, H., Solomon, J. and Morkoc, H., Mat. Res.Soc. Symp. Proc. (San Francisco, CA 1997), in press.Google Scholar
8. Marasina, L. A., Malinovsky, V. V., Pichugin, I. G. and Prentky, P., Crystal Res. and Technol. 17 p. 365 (1982).Google Scholar
9. It is often seen that samples cleaved from the same wafer show different spacing of the miscut steps. This presumably indicates slight variations in the surface curvature atvarious points in the wafer.Google Scholar
10. Dryburgh, P. M., J. Crystal Growth 94 p. 23 (1989).Google Scholar
11. Brewer, L. and Searcy, A. W., J. Am. Chem. Soc. 73 p. 5308(1951).Google Scholar
12. Wu, X. H., Brown, L. M., Kapolnek, D., Keller, S., Keller, B., DenBaars, S. P. and S.Speck, J., J. Appl. Phys. 80 p. 3228 (1996).Google Scholar
13. Heying, B., Wu, X. H., Keller, S., Kapolnek, D., Keller, B. P., DenBaars, S. P. and Speck, J. S., Appl. Phys. Lett. 68 p. 643 (1996).Google Scholar