Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T17:43:54.652Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Misfit Strain Relief Beyond the Critical Thickness Using Curvature Measurements and in Situ Characterization of the Magneto-Optic Kerr Effect

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 February 2011

H. E. Inglefield
Affiliation:
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA
G. Bochi
Affiliation:
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA
C. A. Ballentine
Affiliation:
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA
R. C. O’Handley
Affiliation:
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA
C. V. Thompson
Affiliation:
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA
Get access

Abstract

Epitaxial misfit has been characterized in Ni/Cu/Si (100) as a function of Ni film thickness using wafer curvature measurements. This strain can be related to measurements of magnetic anisotropy made in the deposition system using the magneto-optic Kerr effect. Films were deposited using molecular beam epitaxy (MBE) with varying Ni epilayer thickness between 10 and 1000Å. The change in wafer curvature due to misfit strain was measured using optical interferometry and the strain was calculated using Stoney’s equation. Transmission electron microscopy was used to characterize misfit dislocations at the Ni/Cu interface. It has been determined that misfit strain can have a very strong effect on magnetic anisotropy, particularly in the regime between the critical thickness and complete misfit accommodation, where strain has been found to decrease significantly as a function of film thickness. A critical strain has been determined at which a transition in the direction of magnetization easy axis from perpendicular to the film to in the film plane occurs. This discovery allows the use of Kerr effect measurements to characterize misfit strain in situ.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1995

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. Matthews, J. W. and Blakeslee, A. E., J. Cryst. Growth 27, 118 (1974).Google Scholar
2. Payne, A. P., Nix, W. D., Lairson, B. M., and Clemens, B. M., Phys. Rev. B. 47, 13730 (1993).Google Scholar
3. Tsao, J. Y., Materials Fundamentals of Molecular Beam Epitaxy (Academic Press, Inc., 1993), p. 167.Google Scholar
4. Bochi, G., Ballentine, C., Inglefield, H., Bogomolov, S., Thompson, C. V., and O’Handley, R. C., Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 313, 309 (1993).Google Scholar
5. Stoney, G. G., Proc. Roy. Soc. London A82, 172 (1909).Google Scholar
6. Dankov, and Churaev, , C. R. Acad. Sci. U. R. S. S. 73, 1221 (1950).Google Scholar
7. Edington, J. W., Interpretation of Transmission Electron Micrographs (N.V. Philips’ Gloeilampenfabrieken, Eindhoven, 1975), p. 822.Google Scholar
8. Nabarro, F. R. N., Theory of Crystal Dislocations (Dover Publications, Inc., New York, 1967), p. 7576.Google Scholar
9. Volkert, C. A., Fitzgerald, E. A., Hull, R., Xie, Y. H., Mii, Y. J., J. Elec. Mater. 20, 833 (1991).Google Scholar
10. Parafittand, L. and Inglefield, H. E. (unpublished work).Google Scholar
11. Chikazumi, S., Physics of Magnetism (Robert E. Krieger Publishing Company, Malabar, Florida, 1964).Google Scholar
12. Bochi, G., Ballentine, C. A., Inglefield, H. E., Thompson, C. V., and O’Handley, R. C., to be published.Google Scholar