Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T09:34:28.978Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Determination of Bulk Mismatch Values in Heterostructures” by TEM/CBED

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 February 2011

A. Armigliato ,
R. Balboni  and
S. Frabboni
A. Armigliato
Affiliation:
CNR-Istituto LAMEL, Via P.Gobetti, 101 40129 Bologna, Italy
R. Balboni
Affiliation:
CNR-Istituto LAMEL, Via P.Gobetti, 101 40129 Bologna, Italy
S. Frabboni
Affiliation:
INFM and Dipartimento di Fisica, Università di Modena, Via Campi 213A, 41100 Modena, Italy
Get access

Abstract

Using isotropic elasticity theory it is possible to determine the bulk mismatch in thinned, cross-sectioned heterostructures, where a relaxation occurs along the thinning direction. This is accomplished by measuring, in the central disk of a single Convergent Beam Electron Diffraction (CBED) pattern, the position of the High Order Laue Zone lines, which are sensitive to lattice parameters along different crystallographic directions. The results obtained in both uniform and graded Sil-xGex/Si heterostructures are in good agreement with bulk values deduced from independent techniques.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 405: Symposium K – Surface/Interface and Stress Effects in Electronic Materials Nanostructures , 1995 , 467
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1996

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. Crabbé, E. F., Meyerson, B. S., Stork, M. C. and Harame, D. L., in Proceedings of International Electron Device Meeting (IEDM) (The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Piscataway, NJ, 1993) pp. 83–86.Google Scholar
2. Steeds, J. W., in Introduction to analytical electron microscopy, edited by Hren, J. J., Goldstein, J. P. and Joy, D. C. (Plenum, New York, 1979) pp. 387–422.Google Scholar
3. Maher, D. M., Fraser, H. L., Humphreys, C. J., Knoell, R. V and Bean, J. C., Appl. Phys. Lett. 50, 574 (1987).Google Scholar
4. Armigliato, A., Balboni, R., Frabboni, S., Malvezzi, F. and Vanhellemont, J., Mat. Sci. Technol. 11, 400 (1995).Google Scholar
5. Treacy, M. M. J. and Gibson, J. M., J. Vac. Sci.Technol. B4, 1458 (1986).Google Scholar
6. Perovic, D. D. and Wheatherly, G. C. and Houghton, D. C., Phil. Mag. A64, 1 (1991).Google Scholar
7. Duan, X. F., Appl. Phys. Lett. 66, 2247 (1995).Google Scholar
8. Jones, P. M., Rackham, G. M., and Steeds, J. W., Proc. Roy. Soc. A354, 197 (1977).Google Scholar
9. Bithell, E. G. and Stobbs, W. M., J. of Microscopy 153, 39 (1989).Google Scholar
10. Lin, Y. P., Bird, D. M., and Vincent, R., Ultramicroscopy 27, 233 (1989).Google Scholar
11. Stadelmann, P., Ultramicroscopy 21, 131 (1987).Google Scholar
12. Zuo, J. M., Ultramicroscopy 41, 211 (1992).Google Scholar