Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T02:47:11.658Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ex Situ and in Situ Methods for Oxide and Carbon Removal from AlN and GaN Surfaces

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 February 2011

Sean W. King ,
Laura L. Smith ,
John P. Barnak ,
Ja-Hum Ku ,
Jim A. Christman ,
Mark C. Benjamin ,
Michael D. Bremser ,
Robert J. Nemanich  and
Robert F. Davis
Sean W. King
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Engineering
Laura L. Smith
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Engineering
John P. Barnak
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Engineering
Ja-Hum Ku
Affiliation:
Department of Physics North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695.
Jim A. Christman
Affiliation:
Department of Physics North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695.
Mark C. Benjamin
Affiliation:
Department of Physics North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695.
Michael D. Bremser
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Engineering
Robert J. Nemanich
Affiliation:
Department of Physics North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695.
Robert F. Davis
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Engineering
Get access

Abstract

Exposure to numerous acids and bases and UV/O3 oxidation were used to determine the best ex situ cleaning techniques for the (0001) surfaces of AIN and GaN. HF and HCI were the most effective in removing the oxide from AIN and GaN, respectively. However, AES and XPS revealed the surfaces to be terminated with F and CI which inhibited re-oxidation prior to loading into vacuum. TPD showed mat temperatures of 650 and 850°C are necessary to thermally desorb the CI and F, respectively. UV/O3 oxidation in air was not effective in removing hydrocarbons from either surface but was effective for oxide growth. In situ remote hydrogen plasma exposure at 450°C removed halogens and hydrocarbons remaining after ex situ cleaning of both AIN and GaN surfaces; however, oxide free surfaces could not be achieved. Thermal desorption of hydrocarbons from GaN in UHV was achieved at 650°C. Complete thermal desorption of the surface oxide in UHV was only achieved at temperatures > 800°C where some GaN decomposition occurred. Annealing GaN in NH3 at 700°C reduced the surface oxide without loss of surface stoichiometry.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 395: Symposium AAA – Gallium Nitride and Related Materials: The First International Symp , 1995 , 739
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

REFERENCES

1 Kern, W., J. Electrochem. Soc, 137 1887 (1990).Google Scholar
2 Srinivasan, G.R. and Meyerson, B.S., J. Electrochem. Soc, 134 1518 (1987).Google Scholar
3 Meyerson, B., Ganin, E., Smith, D., and Nguyen, T., J. Electrochem. Soc, 133 1232 (1986).Google Scholar
4 McFee, J.H., Swartz, R.G., Archer, V.D., Finegan, S.N., and Feldman, L.C., J. Electrochem. Soc, 130 3083 (1989).Google Scholar
5 Ren, F., Emerson, A.B., Pearton, S.J., Fullowan, T.R., and Brown, J.M., Appl. Phys.Lett., 58 1030 (1991).Google Scholar
6 Kodama, M., Electronics Letters, 30 (1) 89 (1994).Google Scholar
7 Zangwill, A., Physics at Surfaces. (Cambridge Univ. Press, New York, 1988) pp. 221–231.Google Scholar
8 Rhoderick, E.H., and Williams, R.H., Metal-Semiconductor Contacts. 2nd ed. (Oxford University Press, New York, 1988), pp. 5–17.Google Scholar
9 Yon, E., Ko, W.H., and Kuper, A.B., IEEE Trans. Electron Devices, 13 276 (1966).Google Scholar
10 van der Weide, J. and Nemanich, R.J., Appl. Phys. Lett. 62 1878 (1993).Google Scholar
11 Weeks, T.W. Jr., Bremser, M.D., Ailey, K.S., Carlson, E., Perry, W.G., and Davis, R.F., Appl. Phys. Lett. 67 401 (1995).Google Scholar
12 King, S.W., Nemanich, R.J., and Davis, R.F., to be published.Google Scholar
13 McClintock, J.A., Wilson, R.A., Byer, N.E., J. Vac. Sci. Technol., 20 241 (1982).Google Scholar
14 Madden, H.H. and Goodman, D.W., Surface Science, 150 39 (1985).Google Scholar
15 Barnak, J.P., King, S.W., Montgomery, J.S., Ku, Ja-Hum, and Nemanich, R.J. in Ultraclean Semiconductor Processing Technology and Surface Chemical Cleaning and Passivation, Liehr, M., Heyns, M., Hirose, M., and Parks, H. eds. , (Mater. Res. Soc. Proc. 386, Pittsburgh, PA, 1995) pp. 357–362.Google Scholar
16 Cheng, C.C., Lucas, S.R., Gutleben, H., Choyke, W.J., and Yates, J.T. Jr., J. Am. Chem. Soc, 114 1249 (1992).Google Scholar
17 Smith, L.L., King, S.W., Nemanich, R.J., and Davis, R.F., submitted????????????.Google Scholar
18 Lide, D.R., CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 71st ed, (CRC Press, New York 1991) p. 4–41,9-87.Google Scholar
19 Nefedov, V.I., Buslaev, Y.A., Kokunov, Y.V., Zh. Neorg. Khim., 19 1166 (1974)Google Scholar
20 Yates, Dr. J.T. Jr., University of Pittsburgh (private communication).Google Scholar
21 Melendez, J.L. and Helms, C.R., J. Electrochem. Soc, 141 1973 (1994).Google Scholar