Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T02:18:31.046Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Device-Degradation in III-V Semiconductor Lasers and Led's—Influence of Defects on the Degradation—

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 February 2011

O. Ueda*
Affiliation:
Fujitsu Laboratories Ltd., 10–1 Morinosato-Wakamiya, Atsugi 243–01, Japan
Get access

Abstract

Material issues in III-V alloy semiconductors and our current understanding of degradation in III-V semiconductor lasers and LED's are systematically reviewed.

Generation of defects and thermal instability are among these issues for these systems. Defects introduced during crystal growth are classified into two types: interface defects and bulk defects. Defects belonging to the former type are stacking faults, V-shaped dislocations, dislocation clusters, microtwins, inclusions, and misfit dislocations, and the latter group includes precipitates and dislocation loops. Defects in the substrate can also be propagated into the epi-layer. Structural imperfections due to thermal instability are also found. They ame quasi-periodic modulated structures due to spinodal decomposition of the crystal either at the liquid/solid interface or growth surface, and atomic ordering which also occurs on the growth surface through migration and reconstruction of the deposited atoms.

Three major degradation modes, rapid degradation, gradual degradation, and catastrophic failure, are discussed. For rapid degradation, recombination-enhanced dislocation climb and glide are responsible for degradation. Differences in the ease with which these phenomena occur in different hetero-structures are presented. Based on the results, dominant parameters involved in the phenomena are discussed. Gradual degradation takes place presumably due to recombination enhanced point defect reaction in GaAlAs/GaAs-based optical devices. This mode is also enhanced by the internal stress due to lattice mismatch. However, we do not observe this mode in InGaAsP/InP-based optical devices. Catastrophic failure is found to be due to catastrophic optical damage at a mirror or at a defect in GaAlAs/GaAs DH lasers, but not in InGaAsP/InP DH lasers. In each degradation mode, the role of defects in the degradation and methods of elimination of degradation are discussed.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1990

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. Hayashi, I., Panish, M. B., Foy, P. W., and Sumski, S., 17,109 (1970).Google Scholar
2. Ueda, O., Fujii, T., and Nakata, Y., Proc. Int. Cof. Sci. and Tech of Defect Control in Semiconductors, Yokohama, Japan, 1989 (Elsevier Sci. Pub.).Google Scholar
3. Ueda, O., Wakao, K., Yamaguchi, A., Isozumi, S., and Komiya, S., J. Appl. Phys. 57, 1523 (1985).10.1063/1.334466Google Scholar
4. Ueda, O., Wakao, K., Komiya, S., Yamaguchi, A., Isozumi, S., and Umebu, I., J. Appl. Phys. 58, 3996 (1985).10.1063/1.335576Google Scholar
5. Maree, P. M. J., Barbour, J. C., van der Veen, J. F., Kavanagh, K. L., Bulle-Lieuwma, C. W. T., Viegers, M. P. A., J. Appl. Phys. 62, 4413 (1987).10.1063/1.339078Google Scholar
6. Takasugi, H., Kawabe, M., and Bando, Y., Japan. J. Appl. Phys. 26, L584 (1987).10.1143/JJAP.26.L584Google Scholar
7. Ueda, O., Nakai, K., Yamakoshi, S., and Umebu, I., Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 138, 509 (1989)10.1557/PROC-138-509Google Scholar
8. Ueda, O., Umebu, I., and Kotani, T., J. Crystal Growth 62, 329 (1983).10.1016/0022-0248(83)90311-1Google Scholar
9. Kotani, T., Ueda, O., Akita, K., Nishitani, Y., Kusunoki, T., and Ryuuzan, O., J. Crystal Growth 38, 85 (1977).10.1016/0022-0248(77)90377-3Google Scholar
10. Ueda, O., Isozumi, S., and Komiya, S., Japan. J. Appl. Phys. 23, L394 (1984).10.1143/JJAP.23.L394Google Scholar
11. Cahn, J. W., Acta Met. 9, 795 (1961).10.1016/0001-6160(61)90182-1Google Scholar
12. Ueda, O., Komiya, S., and Isozumi, S., Japan. J. Appl. Phys. 23, L241 (1984).10.1143/JJAP.23.L241Google Scholar
13. See for example, Kuan, T. S., Kuech, T. F., Wang, W. I., and Wilkie, E. L., Phys. Rev. Lett. 54, 208 (1985); H. Nakayama and H. Fujita, Inst. Phys. Conf. Ser. 79, 289 (1986); O. Ueda, M. Takikawa, J. Komeno, and I. Umebu, Japan. J. Appl. Phys. 26, L1824 (1987).10.1103/PhysRevLett.54.201Google Scholar
14. Ueda, O., J. Electrochem. Soc. 135, 11C (1988).10.1149/1.2095535Google Scholar
15. Petroff, P. M. and Kimerling, L. C., J. Appl. Phys. 29. 461 (1976).Google Scholar
16. O'Hara, S., Hutschinson, P. W., and Dobson, P. S., Appl. Phys. Lett. 30, 368 (1977).10.1063/1.89432Google Scholar