Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-wg55d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-11T01:37:03.287Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Dependence of Microcrystalline Silicon Growth on Ion Flux at the Substrate Surface in a Saddle Field PECVD

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 February 2011

Erik Johnson
Affiliation:
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Toronto Toronto, ON M5S 3G4, Canada
Nazir P. Kherani
Affiliation:
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Toronto Toronto, ON M5S 3G4, Canada
Stefan Zukotynski
Affiliation:
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Toronto Toronto, ON M5S 3G4, Canada
Get access

Abstract

The Saddle-Field Glow Discharge PECVD system emulates RF-like excitation using a semi-transparent anode and a DC power supply. It has been used to deposit high quality amorphous and microcrystalline hydrogenated silicon thin films in the past. The growth of microcrystalline material is particularly sensitive to the conditions under which it is produced. Significant levels of microcrystallinity are only produced under conditions of higher pressure and electrical isolation of the substrate surface from the grounded substrate holder. We present results of a study on the relationship between substrate electrical potential and microcrystalline growth, as quantified by Raman scattering spectroscopy, at growth pressures near the minimum required for microcrystalline growth.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2005

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 Jana, Madhusudan, Das, Debajyoti, and Barua, A. K., J. Appl. Phys., 91, 5442–8. (2002)10.1063/1.1454201Google Scholar
2 Layadi, N., Cabarrocas, P. Roca i, Drevillon, B., and Solomon, I., Phys. Rev. B 52, 5136, (1995).10.1103/PhysRevB.52.5136Google Scholar
3 Han, Danxing, Lorentzen, J. D., Weinberg-Wolf, J., McNeil, L. E., and Wang, Qi, J. Appl. Phys., 94, 2930, 2003.10.1063/1.1598298Google Scholar
4 Allen, T., Milostnaya, I., Yeghikyan, D., Leong, K., Gaspari, F., Kherani, N., Kosteski, T., and Zukotynski, S., in Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc., edited by Abelson, J. et al. (2003), 762, p. A6.10.10.1557/PROC-762-A6.10Google Scholar
5 Milostnaya, I., Allen, T., Gaspari, F., Kherani, N., Yeghikyan, D., Roes, W., Kosteski, T., and Zukotynski, S., in Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc., edited by Abelson, J. et al (2003), 762, p. A6.15.10.1557/PROC-762-A6.15Google Scholar
6 Veprek, S., Sarott, F. A., Iqbal, Z., Phys. Rev. B 36, 3344 (1987)10.1103/PhysRevB.36.3344Google Scholar
7 Tsu, D. V., Chao, B. S., Oshvinsky, S. R., Jones, S.J., Yang, J., Guha, S., Phys Rev. B 3 125338 (2001).10.1103/PhysRevB.63.125338Google Scholar
8 Kalache, B., Kosarev, A. I., Vanderhaghen, R., Cabarrocas, P. Roca i, J. Non Crys. Sol.,299-302, 63 (2002).10.1016/S0022-3093(01)00995-4Google Scholar