Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T04:36:02.660Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Highly resistive sputtered ZnO films implanted with copper

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2011

M. K. Puchert ,
A. Hartmann ,
R. N. Lamb  and
J. W. Martin
M. K. Puchert
Affiliation:
Surface Science and Technology, School of Chemistry, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales 2052, Australia
A. Hartmann
Affiliation:
Surface Science and Technology, School of Chemistry, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales 2052, Australia
R. N. Lamb*
Affiliation:
Surface Science and Technology, School of Chemistry, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales 2052, Australia
J. W. Martin
Affiliation:
School of Physics, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales 2052, Australia
*
a) Author to whom all correspondence should be addressed.
Get access

Abstract

Polycrystalline (0001)-oriented thin films of ZnO (thickness 120 nm) were deposited by rf magnetron sputtering and post-deposition annealed at 500 °C in oxygen (1 atm). The films were subsequently implanted with copper at doses over the range 1016 to 1017 ions/cm2. X-ray diffraction (XRD) indicates the compressive intrinsic film stress is largely relieved by the preimplantation anneal, and does not change when implanted or when further annealed after implantation, suggesting that the dominant cause of intrinsic stress is the atomic packing density rather than the crystallographic defect density. Resistivity measurements indicate that annealing of pure ZnO films causes the perpendicular resistivity to increase from 1.3 × 105 Ω · cm to 5 × 1010 Ω · cm. Copper implantation results in a lower resistivity of the order of 107 Ω · cm, but subsequent annealing actually increases resistivity beyond that of annealed nonimplanted ZnO to 3 × 1012 Ω · cm. It is proposed that copper increases the resistivity of those annealed films by trapping free electrons with the Cu 3d hole state occurring in CuO (formed predominantly during annealing). In order to check this, the oxidation state of the implanted copper was studied before and after annealing by x-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) and extended x-ray absorption fine structure (EXAFS). Three oxidation states of copper (Cu0, Cu1+, Cu2+) are detected in the implanted films, and postimplantation annealing results in oxidation of copper to the Cu2+ state, confirming that the presence of CuO in ZnO is associated with increased resistivity.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Materials Research , Volume 11 , Issue 10 , October 1996 , pp. 2463 - 2469
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1996

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. Blom, F. R., Yntema, D. J., van de Pol, F. C. M., Elwenspoek, M., Fluitman, J. H. J., and Popma, Th. JA., Sensors and Actuators A21–A23, 226 (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. van de Pol, F. C. M., Ceram. Bull. 69, 1959 (1990).Google Scholar
3. Lampe, U. and Muller, J., Sensors and Actuators 18, 269 (1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Persegol, D., Pic, E., and Plantier, J., J. Appl. Phys. 62, 2563 (1987).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Heffner, B. L. and Kino, G. S., Op. Lett. 12, 208 (1987).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Godil, A. A., Patterson, D. B., Heffner, B. L., Kino, G. S., and Khuri-Yakob, B. T., Lightwave, J. Technol. 6, 1586 (1988).Google Scholar
7. Koch, M., Timbrell, P. Y., and Lamb, R. N., Semiconductor Sci. Technol. 10, 1523 (1995).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Shiosaki, T. and Kawabata, A., Appl. Phys. Lett. 25, 10 (1974).Google Scholar
9. Srivastava, J. K., Agarwal, Lily, and Bhattacharyya, A. B., J. Elec-trochem. Soc. 136, 3414 (1989).Google Scholar
10. Labeau, M., Rey, P., Deschanvres, J.L., Joubert, J.C., and Delabouglise, G., Thin Solid Films 213, 94 (1992).Google Scholar
11. Chernets, A. N., Thin Solid Films 18, 247 (1973).Google Scholar
12. Puchert, M. K., Timbrell, P. Y., and Lamb, R. N., J. Vac. Sci. Technol. A, in press (1996).Google Scholar
13. Brown, I. G., Galvin, J.E., Gavin, B. F., and MacGill, R. A., Rev. Sci. Instr. 57, 1069 (1986).Google Scholar
14. Azaroff, Leonid V., Elements of X-ray Crystallography (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1968), pp. 551–552.Google Scholar
15. Nelson, J. B. and Riley, D. P., Phys. Soc. 57, 160 (1944).Google Scholar
16. Sathe, A. D. and Kim, E. S., The 7th International Conference on Solid-State Sensors and Actuators (1993).Google Scholar
17. Numerical Data and Functional Relationships in Science and Technology, edited by Hellwege, K. H. and Hellwege, A. M. (Springer, Berlin, 1964), group III, Vol. 2, p. 58.Google Scholar
18. Foran, G. J., Cookson, D. J., and Garrett, R. F., in Synchrotron Radiation Facilities in Asia, edited by Ohta, T., Suga, S., and Kikuta, S. (Ionics Publishing, Tokyo, 1994), pp. 119–124.Google Scholar
19. Kaltofen, R. and Weise, G., J. Nucl. Mater. 200, 375 (1993).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20. Ghijsen, J., Tjeng, L. H., van Elp, J., Eskes, H., Westerink, J., and Sawatzky, G. A., Phys. Rev. B 38, 11322 (1988).Google Scholar
21. van der Laan, G., Westra, C., Haas, C., and Sawatzky, G. A., Phys. Rev. B 23, 4369 (1981).Google Scholar
22. Stern, E. A., Sayers, D. E., and Lytle, F.W., Phys. Rev. B 11, 4836 (1975).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23. Teo, B. K., in EXAFS Spectroscopy, edited by Teo, B. K. and Joy, D. C. (Plenum Press, New York, London, 1981).CrossRefGoogle Scholar