Engineering Pseudosubstrates with Porous Silicon Technology

Blanchard, N. P.; Boucherif, Abderraouf; Régreny, P.; Danescu, Alexandre; Magoariec, Hélène; Penuelas, Jose; Lysenko, V.; Bluet, Jean‐Marie; Marty, Olivier; Guillot, G.; Grenet, Geneviève

doi:10.1007/978-3-642-15868-1_3

Cited by 7 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…6b ). Similar results were already observed in a previous study 50 . In these experimental conditions, the results are assigned only to the prestrain while the softness of HTPSi has been shown to have no effect (as already discussed in the previous parts).…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 93%

New strategies for producing defect free SiGe strained nanolayers

David

Aqua

Liu

et al. 2018

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Strain engineering is seen as a cost-effective way to improve the properties of electronic devices. However, this technique is limited by the development of the Asarro Tiller Grinfeld growth instability and nucleation of dislocations. Two strain engineering processes have been developed, fabrication of stretchable nanomembranes by deposition of SiGe on a sacrificial compliant substrate and use of lateral stressors to strain SiGe on Silicon On Insulator. Here, we investigate the influence of substrate softness and pre-strain on growth instability and nucleation of dislocations. We show that while a soft pseudo-substrate could significantly enhance the growth rate of the instability in specific conditions, no effet is seen for SiGe heteroepitaxy, because of the normalized thickness of the layers. Such results were obtained for substrates up to 10 times softer than bulk silicon. The theoretical predictions are supported by experimental results obtained first on moderately soft Silicon On Insulator and second on highly soft porous silicon. On the contrary, the use of a tensily pre-strained substrate is far more efficient to inhibit both the development of the instability and the nucleation of misfit dislocations. Such inhibitions are nicely observed during the heteroepitaxy of SiGe on pre-strained porous silicon.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 93%

New strategies for producing defect free SiGe strained nanolayers

David

Aqua

Liu

et al. 2018

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The AFM or TEM images of the morphology of the different SiGe epilayers are superimposed in Figure . The porosity was measured to be ϕ = 50% so that s = (1 – ϕ) 2 = 0.25, while ν = 0.279. The prestrain was measured to be η = 0.62%.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Because of small experimental differences and of a negligible influence on the following results, we neglect the differences in Poisson’s ratio ν for the three materials. In contrast, we account for the difference in Young’s modulus, which proves to have a significant impact. , While the SiGe and Si Young’s modulus are similar (equal to Y ), the CS stiffness is Y CS = sY , with 0 ≤ s ≤ 1 for a relatively soft CS. We also account for a possible prestrain of the CS measured in experiments prior to the deposition of the film .…”

Section: Theoretical Sectionmentioning

confidence: 99%