Comparison of GeSn alloy films prepared by ion implantation and remote plasma-enhanced chemical vapor deposition methods

Thin films of germanium-tin (GeSn) alloy with Sn content well above its equilibrium solubility limit in Ge are produced using both remote plasma-enhanced chemical vapor deposition (RPECVD) directly on silicon substrates and ion implantation of Sn into Ge. For RPECVD, the growth temperature of 302 °C...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of vacuum science and technology. B, Nanotechnology & microelectronics Nanotechnology & microelectronics, 2024-07, Vol.42 (4)
Main Authors: Huang, X., Lim, S. Q., Ratcliff, T., Smillie, L. A., Grzybowski, G. J., Claflin, B. B., Warrender, J. M., Williams, J. S.
Format: Article
Language:
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Thin films of germanium-tin (GeSn) alloy with Sn content well above its equilibrium solubility limit in Ge are produced using both remote plasma-enhanced chemical vapor deposition (RPECVD) directly on silicon substrates and ion implantation of Sn into Ge. For RPECVD, the growth temperature of 302 °C resulted in fully relaxed GeSn alloys with high defect density, principally threading dislocations related to the large lattice mismatch between Si and GeSn. For the implantation case, pulsed laser melting was used to melt and crystallize the GeSn layer on a time scale of a few tens of nanoseconds. The resulting GeSn layers were also relaxed and defective, presumably again as a result of lattice mismatch with the underlying Ge lattice. However, the nature of the defects was quite different to the RPECVD method, whereby the line defects were not threading dislocations but stackinglike defects, which developed into arrays of these defects in the high Sn content region close to the surface. For the purpose of comparing RPECVD and ion-implantation methods, alloy films of similar thickness (400–450 nm) and Sn content (4.5–6.5 at. %) were examined. Film parameters (thickness, Sn content, Sn solubility, and segregation), as well as film quality and defect structures, were examined for both fabrication methods using several analytical techniques. This comparison provided us with a better physical understanding of our GeSn films and will help inform future growth/fabrication strategies targeted at minimizing defects formed in the GeSn films for the realization of optoelectronic devices.
ISSN:2166-2746
2166-2754
DOI:10.1116/6.0003668