Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T15:34:38.005Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Use of Novel Organometallic Sources in Metal Organic Chemical Vapor Deposition (MOCVD)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 February 2011

R. M. Biefeld
R. M. Biefeld*
Affiliation:
Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM 87185
Get access

Abstract

In metal organic chemical vapor deposition (MOCVD), the most commonly used sources are the trimethyls of Al, Ga, In, and Sb, and PH3 and ASH3. New organometallic sources are being developed as the understanding of the deposition process improvesand allows for the determination of the effects of source type and growth condition on the properties of the grown films. These new sources are safer and allow for the growth of higher purity materials using more favorable growth conditions. InSb and AlSb prepared using these trimethyl-sources are not of high enough quality to be used in many current device applications. Alternate organometallic Sb sources are being investigated to improve the materials characteristics of InSb grown by MOCVD.InSb grown using trimethylindium (TMIn) and trimethylantimony (TMSb) or triethylantimony (TESb) yielded similar quality materials under similar growth conditions. InSb grown using triethylindium (TEIn) and TESb under similar growth conditions yielded very poor quality n-type material. Three new organometallic Sb sources, triisopropylantimony (TIPSb), tris(dimethylamino)antimony (TDMASb), and tertiarybutyldimethylantimony (TBDMSb) are being investigated. The growth of InSb using TIPSb, TDMASb, or TBDMSb and TMIn was investigated over a temperature range of 350 to 475 °C. InSb grown from TDMASb had similar properties to InSb grown from TMIn and TMSbwhen using a similar temperature and V/III ratio range. The growth rates of InSb using TMIn and either TIPSb or TBDMSb at temperatures <= 425 °C were proportional to both the TMIn flow rate and the temperature. The surface morphology of InSb grown using eitherTIPSb or TBDMSb was very rough for growth temperatures <=425 °C. This may be due to the complex decomposition mechanisms involved and the presence of methyl groups on the surface. The InSb with the highest mobility was grown at 400 °C and a V/III ratioof 3 using TIPSb. It was n-type with a carrier concentration of 2.5 × 1015 cm−3 and a mobility of 78,160 cm2/Vs at 77 K. Both n- and p-type InSb were grown using TBDMSb with mobilities up to 67,530 and 7773 cm2/Vs, respectively at 77 K. The mobility for InSb using either TIPSb or TBDMSb was optimized by going to lower temperatures, pressures and V/III ratios. The opposite was truefor surface morphology which improved with higher temperature, pressure, and V/III ratio. The growth of high mobility InSb with smooth surfaces at T<=425 °C was not achieved with TIPSb or TBDMSb and TMIn under the conditions investigated in this work.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 282: Symposium E – Chemical Perspectives of Microelectronic Materials III , 1992 , 11
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1993

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. Stringfellow, G. B., J. Electronic Mater. 17, 327 (1988).Google Scholar
2. Hobson, W. S., Harris, T. D., Abernathy, C. R., and Pearton, S. J., 58, 77 (1991)Google Scholar
3. Zilko, J. L., Davisson, P. S., Luther, L., and Trapp, K. D. C., (to be published J. Crystal Growth).Google Scholar
4. Stauf, G. T., Gaskill, D. K., and Bottka, N., and Gedridge, R. W., Jr, Appl. Phys. Lett. 58, 1311 (1991).Google Scholar
5. Chen, C. H., Fang, Z. M., Stringfellow, G. B., and Gedridge, R. W. Jr, Appl. Phys. Lett. 58, 2532(1991).Google Scholar
6. Ma, K. Y., Fang, Z. M., Cohen, R. M., and Stringfellow, G. B., J. Electron. Mater. 21, 143 (1991).Google Scholar
7. Kurtz, S. R., Dawson, L. R., Biefeld, R. M., Fritz, I. J., and Zipperian, T. E., IEEE Elec. Dev. Letters 10, 150 (1990).Google Scholar
8. Biefeld, R. M., Cunningham, B. T., Kurtz, S. R., and Wendt, J. R., Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 216, 175 (1991).Google Scholar
9. Gaskill, D. K., Stauf, G. T., and Bottka, N., Appl. Phys. Lett. 58, 1905 (1991).Google Scholar
10. Jindal, B. K., Sivaramakrishnan, V., Hall, J. T., and Bahraman, A., Proc. IRIS Spec. Group Infrared Materials, p. 271–285, 1989.Google Scholar
11. Lum, R. M., Klingert, J. K., and Lamont, M. G., J. Cryst. Growth, 89, 137 (1988).Google Scholar
12. Biefeld, R. M., Kurtz, S. R., and Fritz, I. J., J. Electron. Mater. 18, 775 (1989).Google Scholar
13. Galuska, A. A., Gruelich, F. A., and Biefeld, R. M. (unpublished results).Google Scholar
14. Haacke, G., Watkins, S. P., and Burkhard, H., Appl. Phys. Lett. 56, 478 (1990).Google Scholar
15. Sugiura, O., Kameda, H., Shiina, K., and Matsumura, M., J. Electron. Mater. 17, 11 (1988).Google Scholar
16. Biefeld, R. M., Wendt, J. R., and Kurtz, S. R., J. Crystal Growth, 107, 836 (1991).Google Scholar
17. Gedridge, R. W. Jr, Organometallics, 11, 967 (1992).Google Scholar
18. Morton International, Advanced Materials, Danvers, MA.Google Scholar
19. Cao, D. S., Chen, C. H., Hill, C. W., Li, S. H., Stringfellow, G. B., Gordon, D. C., Brown, D. W., and Vaartstra, B. A., J. Electron. Mater. 21, 583 (1992).Google Scholar
20. Biefeld, R. M., J. Crystal Growth, 75 255 (1986).Google Scholar
21. Wiley, J. D. in Semiconductors and Semimetals, edited by Willardson, R. K. and Beer, A. C., (Academic Press, New York, NY, 1975), Vol. 10, p. 166.Google Scholar
22. Strauss, A. J., J. Appl. Phys. 30 559 (1959).Google Scholar
23. Box, G. E. P., Hunter, W. G., and Hunter, J. S., “Statistics for Experimenters: An Introduction to Design, Data Analysis, and Model Building” (John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, 1978).Google Scholar
24. Gedridge, R. W. Jr, (private communication).Google Scholar