2013
DOI: 10.1088/0022-3727/46/18/185301
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Converse longitudinal piezoelectric response of a ferroelectric thick film elastically coupled with a supporting substrate or underlayer

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

2
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The piezoelectric properties of Pb(Zr x Ti 1−x )O 3 film have been widely and systematically studied in the literatures [6,[19][20][21]. However, detailed investigations about lead-free ferroelectric films like BaTiO 3 (BTO) film heterostructure are very few.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The piezoelectric properties of Pb(Zr x Ti 1−x )O 3 film have been widely and systematically studied in the literatures [6,[19][20][21]. However, detailed investigations about lead-free ferroelectric films like BaTiO 3 (BTO) film heterostructure are very few.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, a larger d 33 modulus in the CBNO film grown on Si can be attributed to a stronger (200)/(020) film texture and a softer substrate. [23,24]. While the dominant (200)/(020) grains can yield a larger longitudinal piezoelectric response at a given electric field [1], a softer substrate has a smaller clamping effect and a larger "Poisson strain" contribution [23] to the piezoelectric deformation of the film, and, therefore, effectively enhances its d 33 piezoelectric modulus.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As mentioned earlier, the analysis relies on the assumption that the thin piezoactive film is unclamped, and that the fractional change in capacitance (≈ Δ c π / c π 0 ) is due to the change in physical dimensions of the device ( R 0 & h 0 ) and is independent of the dielectric constant ( κ normalr ), as suggested by Equation (). [ 26,39 ] The in‐plane dimensions of the actual device are much larger than the total stack thickness ( R 0 h 0 ), which avoids edge effects [ 5,40 ] visible in simulations on small scale ( Figure b inset). Further, in the case of submicrometer dimensions, the thin film is always clamped to the substrate via van der Waals forces [ 41 ] ; thus, the assumption σ = 0 is invalid.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%