MENU
  • Scitation Home
SUBMIT YOUR ARTICLE
Prev Next
Published Online: 28 June 2011
Accepted: May 2011

Study of the piezoresistivity of doped nanocrystalline silicon thin films

Journal of Applied Physics 109, 123717 (2011); https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3599881
P. Alpuim1, a), J. Gaspar2, P. Gieschke2, C. Ehling3, J. Kistner3, N. J. Gonçalves1, M. I. Vasilevskiy1, and O. Paul2
more...View Affiliations
Abstract
The piezoresistive response of n- and p-type hydrogenated nanocrystalline silicon thin films, deposited by hot-wire (HW) and plasma-enhanced chemical vapor deposition (PECVD) on thermally oxidized silicon wafers, has been studied using four-point bending tests. The piezoresistive gauge factor (GF) was measured on patterned thin-film micro-resistors rotated by an angle θ with respect to the principal strain axis. Both longitudinal (GFL) and transverse (GFT) GFs, corresponding to θ = 0° and 90°, respectively, are negative for n-type and positive for p-type films. For other values of θ (30°, 45°, 120°, and 135°) GFs have the same signal as GFL and GFT and their value is proportional to the normal strain associated with planes rotated by θ relative to the principal strain axis. It is concluded that the films are isotropic in the growth plane since the GF values follow a Mohr’s circle with the principal axes coinciding with those of the strain tensor. The strongest p-type pirezoresistive response (GFL = 41.0, GFT = 2.84) was found in a film deposited by PECVD at a substrate temperature of 250 °C and working pressure of 0.250 Torr, with dark conductivity 1.6 Ω−1cm−1. The strongest n-type response (GFL =− 28.1, GFT =− 5.60) was found in a film deposited by PECVD at 150 °C and working pressure of 3 Torr, with dark conductivity 9.7 Ω−1cm−1. A model for the piezoresistivity of nc-Si is proposed, based on a mean-field approximation for the conductivity of an ensemble of randomly oriented crystallites and neglecting grain boundary effects. The model is able to reproduce the measured GFL values for both n- and p-type films. It fails, however, to explain the transversal GFT data. Both experimental and theoretical data show that nanocrystalline silicon can have an isotropic piezoresistive effect of the order of 40% of the maximum response of crystalline silicon.

REFERENCES

  1. 1. P. Alpuim, V. Chu, and J. P. Conde, J. Appl. Phys. 86, 3812 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.371292 , Google ScholarScitation, ISI, CAS
  2. 2. G. N. Parsons, C.-S. Yang, T. M. Klein, and L. Smith, Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 507, 19 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1557/PROC-507-19 , , Google ScholarCrossref
  3. 3. V. Terrazzoni-Daudrix, F.-J. Haug, T. Söderström, C. Ballif, D. Fischer, W. Soppe, J. Bertomeu, M. Fahland, H. Schlemm, M. Grimm, M. Topic, and M. Wutz, Proceedings of the 24th European Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conference, Hamburg, Germany, 21–25 September 2009. , Google Scholar
  4. 4. M. B. Schubert, Thin Solid Films 337, 240 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0040-6090(98)01435-7 , Google ScholarCrossref, CAS
  5. 5. G. Parascandolo, G. Bugnon, A. Feltrin, and C. Ballif, Prog. Photovoltaics 18, 257 (2010). , Google ScholarCAS
  6. 6. S. Bae and S. J. Fonash, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. A 17, 1987 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1116/1.581715 , , Google ScholarCrossref, CAS
  7. 7. P. Roca i Cabarrocas, Y. Djeridane, T. Nguyen-Tran, E. V. Johnson, A. Abramov, and Q. Zhang, Plasma Phys. Controlled Fusion 50, 124037 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1088/0741-3335/50/12/124037 , , Google ScholarCrossref
  8. 8. J. Meier, R. Fluckiger, H. Keppner, and A. Shah, Appl. Phys. Lett. 65, 860 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.112183 , , Google ScholarScitation, CAS
  9. 9. N. Kosku and S. Miyazaki, Thin Solid Films 511–512, 265 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsf.2005.12.105 , , Google ScholarCrossref, CAS
  10. 10. H. Jia, J. K. Saha, and H. Shirai, Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 45, 666 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1143/JJAP.45.666 , , Google ScholarCrossref, CAS
  11. 11. H. Matsumura, Y. Tashiro, K. Sasaki, and S. Furukawa, Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 33, L1209 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1143/JJAP.33.L1209 , , Google ScholarCrossref, CAS
  12. 12. S. A. Filonovich, P. Alpuim, L. Rebouta, J.-E. Bourée, and Y. M. Soro, J. Non-Cryst. Solids 354, 2376 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2007.09.030 , , Google ScholarCrossref, CAS
  13. 13. W. G. Pfann and R. N. Thurston, J. Appl. Phys. 32, 2008 (1961). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1728280 , , Google ScholarScitation
  14. 14. O. N. Tufte, P.W. Chapman, and D. Long, J. Appl. Phys. 33, 3322 (1962). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1931164 , , Google ScholarScitation
  15. 15. C. S. Smith, Phys. Rev. 94, 62 (1954). , Google Scholar
  16. 16. S. Nishida, M. Konagai, and K. Takahashi, Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 25, 17 (1986). https://doi.org/10.1143/JJAP.25.17 , Google ScholarCrossref, CAS
  17. 17. W. Germer, Sens. Actuators 7, 135 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1016/0250-6874(85)85014-9 , , Google ScholarCrossref, CAS
  18. 18. M. Utsunomiya and A. Yoshida, Appl. Surf. Sci. 33–34, 1222 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-4332(88)90438-2 , , Google ScholarCrossref
  19. 19. P. Alpuim, V. Chu, and J.P. Conde, IEEE Sens. J. 2, 336 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1109/JSEN.2002.804037 , , Google ScholarCrossref, CAS
  20. 20. V. Lumelsky, M. Shur, and Sigurd Wagner, IEEE Sens. J. 1, 41 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1109/JSEN.2001.923586 , , Google ScholarCrossref, CAS
  21. 21. See, for example, M. Elwenspoek and R. Wiegerink, Mechanical Microsensors (Springer, New York, 2001), p. 87 or , , Google Scholar
    S. Middelhoek and S. A. Audet, Silicon Sensors (Delft Univ. Press, Delft, The Netherlands, 1994), pp. 95–193. Google ScholarCrossref
  22. 22. O. Paul, J. Gaspar, and P. Ruther, IEEE Trans. Electr. Electron. Eng. 2, 199 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1002/tee.v2:3 , , Google ScholarCrossref, CAS
  23. 23. J. Gaspar, V. Chu, and J. P. Conde, IEEE J. Microelectromech. Syst. 14, 1082 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1109/JMEMS.2005.851808 , , Google ScholarCrossref, CAS
  24. 24. J. Gaspar, H. Li, P. P. Freitas, V. Chu, and J. P. Conde, IEEE J. Microelectromech. Syst. 12, 550 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1109/JMEMS.2003.817890 , , Google ScholarCrossref, CAS
  25. 25. H. Li, J. Gaspar, P. P. Freitas, V. Chu, and J. P. Conde, IEEE Trans. Magn. 38, 3371 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1109/TMAG.2002.802399 , , Google ScholarCrossref, CAS
  26. 26. M. Eickhoff and M. Stutzmann, J. Appl. Phys. 96, 2878 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1775043 , , Google ScholarScitation, CAS
  27. 27. F. I. Baratta, Commun. Am. Ceram. Soc. 64(5), C–86 (1981). , Google ScholarCrossref
  28. 28. E. Lund and T. G. Finstada, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 75, 4960 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1808917 , , Google ScholarScitation, ISI, CAS
  29. 29. S. P. Timoshenko and J. N. Goodier, Theory of Elasticity (McGraw-Hill, Singapore, 1970), pp. 19–22. , Google Scholar
  30. 30. G. L. Bir and G. E. Pikus, Symmetry and Strain-Induced Effects in Semiconductors (Wiley, New York, 1974), Chapter VI. Google Scholar
  31. 31. C. Herring and E. Vogt, Phys. Rev. 101, 944 (1956). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.101.944 , Google ScholarCrossref, CAS
  32. 32. See, for example, G. A. Korn and T. M. Korn, Mathematical Handbook for Scientists and Engineers (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1968), p. 450. , Google Scholar
  33. 33. A. Blacha, H. Presting, and M. Cardona, Phys. Status Solidi B 126, 11 (1984). https://doi.org/10.1002/pssb.v126:1 , Google ScholarCrossref, CAS
  34. © 2011 American Institute of Physics.

Article Metrics

Views
78
Citations
Crossref 10
Web of Science
ISI 8

Altmetric

Please Note: The number of views represents the full text views from December 2016 to date. Article views prior to December 2016 are not included.