Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T09:47:48.672Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Low-Defect-Density Ge on Si for Large-Lattice-Mismatched Semiconductor Integration and Strain-Engineered Devices

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 February 2011

D.P. Malta
Affiliation:
Research Triangle Institute, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709–2194
J.B. Posthill
Affiliation:
Research Triangle Institute, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709–2194
P.M. Enquist
Affiliation:
Research Triangle Institute, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709–2194
R.J. Markunas
Affiliation:
Research Triangle Institute, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709–2194
T.P. Humphreys
Affiliation:
Dept. of Physics, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695–8202
N.R. Parikh
Affiliation:
Dept. of Physics & Astronomy, Univ. of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599–3255
Get access

Abstract

Heteroepitaxial Ge layers were grown on vicinal Si(100) by molecular beam epitaxy (MBE) at substrate temperatures of 500°C and 900°C. The layers grown at 500°C were topographically smooth with planar interfaces and a typically high threading dislocation density at the surface (> 108cm−2). Layers grown at 900°C (nucleation at 500°C) showed smooth topography, an interface highly facetted on (111) planes and a dense network of dislocations that is well confined to the interfacial region. Etch pit density measurements indicated that defect densities at the surface were as low as 1 × 105cm−2. Biaxial tensile strains of 1.2 × l0−3 and 2.5 × l0−3 were measured by Raman spectroscopy for the 500°C and 900°C layers, respectively. RBS/channeling spectra supported crosssection TEM results indicating interfacial defect confinement in the layers grown at 900°C. A model describing thermal radiation absorption suggests that interfacial Ge melting occurred during the high temperature growths.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1992

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. Rles, P.A., Y.-C. Yeh, M., Ho, F.H., Chu, C.-L. and Cheng, C., IEEE Electron Device Lett., l1, 140 (1990).Google Scholar
2. Timmons, M.L., Venkatasubramanian, R., Sharps, P., and Colpitts, T., unpublished results obtained at RTI.Google Scholar
3. Haase, M.A., Qiu, J., DePuydt, J.M., and Cheng, H., Appl. Phys. Lett., 59, 1272 (1991); and H. Jeon, J. Ding, W. Patterson, A.V. Nurmikko, W. Xie, D.C. Grillo, M. Kobayashi, and R.L. Gunshor, Appl. Phys. Lett., 59, 3619 (1991).Google Scholar
4. Fountain, G.G., Hattangady, S.V., Alley, R.G., Mantini, M.J., Markunas, R.J., and Leupp, D.G., Proceedings of the 1991 International Semiconductor Device Research Symposium, Charlottesville, VA, 139 (4-6 Dec. 1991).Google Scholar
5. Murakami, E., Nakagawa, K., Nishida, A. and Miyao, M., IEEE Electron Dev. Lett., 12, 71 (1991).Google Scholar
6. Malta, D.P., Posthill, J.B., Markunas, R.J., and Humphreys, T.P., Appl. Phys. Lett., 60, 844 (1992).Google Scholar
7.This same phenomenon could potentially be observed in other thin film heterostructure systems when backside optical heating is employed and the grown layer has a bandgap less than the substrate.Google Scholar
8. Binary Alloy Phase Diagrams, Massalski, T.B., Ed. (American Society for Metals, Metals Park, OH) 2, 1249 (1986).Google Scholar
9. Celler, G.K., Robinson, McD., Trimble, L.E., and Lischner, D.J., Appl. Phys. Lett., 43, 868 (1983).Google Scholar