Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T02:11:17.529Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Interfacial Effects on the Premature Failure of Polycrystalline Silicon Structural Films

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2011

C.L. Muhlstein ,
E.A. Stach  and
R.O. Ritchie
C.L. Muhlstein
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Engineering, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802
E.A. Stach
Affiliation:
National Center for Electron Microscopy, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA 94720
R.O. Ritchie
Affiliation:
Materials Sciences Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, and Department of Materials, Science and Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720
Get access

Abstract

Although bulk silicon is not known to be susceptible to cyclic fatigue, micron-scale structures made from mono and polycrystalline silicon films are vulnerable to degradation by fatigue in ambient air environments. Such silicon thin films are used in small-scale structural applications, including microelectromechanical systems (MEMS), and display “metal-like” stress-life (S/N) fatigue behavior in room temperature air environments. Previously, the authors have observed fatigue lives in excess of 1011 cycles at high frequency (∼40 kHz), fully-reversed stress amplitudes as low as half the fracture strength using a surface micromachined, resonant-loaded, fatigue characterization structures. Stress-life fatigue, transmission electron microscopy, infrared microscopy, and numerical models were used to establish that the mechanism of the fatigue failure of thin-film silicon involves the sequential oxidation and environmentally-assisted crack growth solely within the native silica layer, a process that we term “reaction-layer fatigue”. Only thin films are susceptible to such a failure mechanism because the critical crack size for catastrophic failure of the entire silicon structure can be exceeded by a crack solely within the native oxide layer. The importance of the interfacial geometry on the mechanics of the reaction-layer fatigue mechanism is described.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 741: Symposium J – Nano- and Microelectromechanical Systems (NEMS and MEMS) and Molecular Machines , 2002 , J3.5
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2003

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. Kahn, H., Tayebi, N., Ballarini, R., Mullen, R.L. and Heuer, A.H., Sens. Actuators A, A82, 274–80 (2000).Google Scholar
2. Chen, T.J. and Knapp, W.J., J. Am. Ceram. Soc., 63, 225–26 (1980).Google Scholar
3. Lawn, B.R., Marshall, D.B. and Chantikul, P., J. Mater. Sci., 16, 1769–75 (1981).Google Scholar
4. Wong, B. and Holbrook, R.J., J. Electrochem. Soc., 134, 2254–56 (1987).Google Scholar
5. Connally, J.A. and Brown, S.B., Science, 256, 1537–39 (1992).Google Scholar
6. Brown, S.B., Van Arsdell, W. and Muhlstein, C.L., in Proceedings of International Solid State Sensors and Actuators Conference (Transducers '97), edited by Senturia, S., IEEE, 1997, pp. 591–93.Google Scholar
7. Muhlstein, C. and Brown, S., in Proceedings of the NSF/AFOSR/ASME Workshop on Tribology Issues and Opportunities in MEMS, edited by Bhushan, B., Kluwer Academic, 1997, pp. 80.Google Scholar
8. Muhlstein, C.L., Brown, S.B. and Ritchie, R.O., J. Microelectromech. Sys., 10, 593–600 (2001).Google Scholar
9. Muhlstein, C.L., Brown, S.B. and Ritchie, R.O., Sens. Actuators A, 94, 177–88 (2001).Google Scholar
10. Kahn, H., Ballarini, R., Mullen, R.L. and Heuer, A.H., Proc. Roy. Soc. A, 455, 3807–23 (1999).Google Scholar
11. Van Arsdell, W.W. and Brown, S.B., J. Microelectromech. Sys., 8, 319–27 (1999).Google Scholar
12. Kapels, H., Aigner, R. and Binder, J., in Proceedings of the 29th European Solid-State Device Research Conference, edited, IEEE, 1999, pp. 1522–28.Google Scholar
13. Komai, K., Minoshima, K. and Inoue, S., Micros. Tech., 5, 30–37 (1998).Google Scholar
14. Allameh, S.M., Gally, B., Brown, S. and Soboyejo, W.O., in Materials Science of Microelectromechanical System (MEMS) Devices III, edited by Kahn, H., de Boer, M., Judy, M., and Spearing, S.M., MRS, 2000, pp. EE2.3.1–EE2.3.6.Google Scholar
15. Muhlstein, C.L., Stach, E.A. and Ritchie, R.O., Acta Mater., 50, 3579–3595 (2002).Google Scholar
16. Bagdahn, J. and Sharpe, W.N.J., in MEMS 2002, edited, IEEE, 2002, pp. 447–450.Google Scholar
17. Allameh, S.M., Gally, B., Brown, S. and Soboyejo, W.O., in Mechanical Properties of Structural Films, STP 1412 Muhlstein, C., and Brown, S., eds. (American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA, 2001), Vol. 1413, pp. 3–16.Google Scholar
18. Beuth, J.L. Jr,, International Journal of Solids and Structures, 29, 1657–75 (1992).Google Scholar
19. Muhlstein, C.L. and Ritchie, R.O., Int. J. Fract., in press (2002).Google Scholar
20. Pugh, E.N., Corrosion, 41, 517–26 (1985).Google Scholar
21. Newman, R.C., Shahrabi, T. and Sieradzki, K., Scripta Metallurgica, 23, 71–4 (1989).Google Scholar
22. Ford, F.P. and Silverman, M., “Mechanistic aspects of environment-controlled crack propagation in steel/aqueous environment systems.” HTGE-451–8–12 (General Electric Company, 1979).Google Scholar