Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T23:36:37.276Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Tilts in Thin Strained Layers.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 February 2011

Richard Beanland
Richard Beanland*
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Engineering, The University of Liverpool, P.O. Box 147, Liverpool L69, 3BX, England.
Get access

Abstract

There is considerable interest at present in the mechanisms of tilting of epitaxial films, such that low index planes in layer and substrate have slightly different orientations. There are two primary causes of this effect: a) coherency strains and b) the action of misfit dislocations. It is important to distinguish between the two effects, particularly in the case of strained layers used for band-gap engineering. Using a recent formulation of the Frank-Bilby equation for the dislocation content of interfaces, it is shown how planes may be rotated in coherent layers due to both the Poisson effect and anisotropic misfit. An advantage of the Frank-Bilby equation is that it allows consideration of semicoherent layers. It is shown that a side effect of misfit dislocation introduction can be to introduce a further rotation of the epitaxial layer. Both these effects have been measured experimentally. The amount and the sense of rotation is compared to theory.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 238: Symposium Cb – Structure and Properties of Interfaces in Materials , 1991 , 17
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1992

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

Beanland, R., Ph.D. thesis, Liverpool University (1991).Google Scholar
Bringans, R.D., Biegelsen, D.K., Ponce, F.A., Swartz, L.E. and Tramontana, J.C., Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 198, 195, (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Du, R-R. and Flynn, C.P., J. Phys. Cond. Matter. 2, 1335, (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, J.C.A., Du, R-R. and Flynn, C.P., Phys. Rev. Lett. 66, 341, (1991).Google Scholar
Flynn, C.P., MRS Bulletin (June), p.341, (1991).Google Scholar
Igarishi, O., J. Appl. Phys. 42, 4035, (1971).Google Scholar
Jesser, W.A., Phys. Stat. Sol.(a) 20, 63,.(1973).Google Scholar
Nagai, H., J. Appl. Phys. 45, 3789, (1974).Google Scholar
Olsen, G.H. and Smith, R.T., Phys. Stat. Sol.(a), 21, 739, (1975).Google Scholar
Varrio, J., Salokatve, A., Asonen, H., Hovinen, M., Pessa, M., Ishida, K. and Kitajima, H., Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 116, 91, (1988).Google Scholar
Schowalter, L.J., Mat. Res. Soc Symp. Proc. Vol. 116, 3, (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stolz, W., Guimares, F.E.G. and Ploog, K., J. Appl. Phys. 63, 492, (1988).Google Scholar