Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

MT41016

Prof S. B. Sant Department of Metallurgical & Materials Engineering IIT Kharagpur

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations

Two cubic crystals with lattice constants a1 = 1 units and a2 = 1.05 units (i.e. a misfit of 5%) form a phase boundary interface.

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations

Two cubic crystals with lattice constants a1 = 1 units and a2 = 1.05 units (i.e. a misfit of 5%) form a phase boundary interface.

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations
Misfit dislocations compensate for differences in the lattice constants by concentrating the misfit in one-dimensional regions - the dislocation lines.

Between the dislocation lines the interface is coherent; a phase boundary with misfit dislocations is called semi-coherent. Misfit dislocations - in contrast to general grain boundary dislocations must have an edge component that accounts for the lattice constant mismatch

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations
Phase boundaries

Phase boundary dislocations -misfit dislocations are only a subset), "simple" misfit dislocations are the dominant defects in technologically important man-made phase boundaries. Misfit dislocations are not restricted to boundaries between two chemically different types of materials. Silicon heavily doped with, e.g., Boron, has a slightly changed lattice constant and thus formally can be seen as a different phase. The rather ill defined interface between a heavily doped region and an undoped region thus may and does have misfit dislocations, an example is given in the illustration.

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations in the Interface between Heavily and Normally Doped Silicon The TEM micrograph shows a loose network of dislocations between "regular" & Heavily B-doped Si. The expected square network has not yet fully developed. Many dislocations are "on their way" from the surface to their proper place in the interface.

Misfit Dislocations

The geometry is also not too well defined, because there is no abrupt change of lattice constants as in the case of phase boundaries between chemically different phases. The lattice constant changes continuously following the B-concentration which obeys some diffusion profile.

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations
The mere existence of misfit dislocations coupled with their usually detrimental influence on electronic properties is the reason why many "obvious" devices do not exist at all (e.g. optoelectronic GaAs structures integrated on a Si chip), and others have problems. The aging of Laser diodes, e.g., may be coupled to the behavior of misfit dislocations in the many phase boundaries of the device. Optoelectronics in general practically always involves having phase boundaries, e.g. devices like Lasers, LEDs, as well as all multi quantum well structures. A very careful consideration of misfit and misfit dislocations is always needed and some special process steps are often necessary to avoid these defects.

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations
Optoelectronics

Optoelectronics includes all semiconductor devices which emit light through recombination of electrons and holes. Prime materials are GaAs, GaAlAs, GaP, InSb and generally all III - V semiconductors, but also GaN or SiC. In making optoelectronic devices, defect engineering is needed. Diffusion plays a major role; the precise atomic mechanisms are not too well understood at present. Defects in interfaces (= phase boundaries between different optoelectronic materials) play a major role; they essentially limit or prohibit applications in many cases. In contrast to Si microelectronics, defects may also play a role in the finished device while it is in operation. Dislocations, not wholly unavoidable in most III - V materials, may start to climb and degrade the function. Early Lasers diodes, e.g., stopped working after few hours of operation because defects evolved that served as recombination centers impeding radiant recombination.

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations
This is shown in the schematic three-dimensional view of an edge dislocations in a cubic primitive lattice. This beautiful picture (from Read?) shows the inserted half-plane very clearly; it serves as the quintessential illustration of what an edge dislocation looks like.

Look at the picture and try to grasp the concept. But don't forget

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations

1. There is no such crystal in nature: All real lattices are more complicated. 2. The exact structure of the dislocation will be more complicated. Edge dislocations are just an extreme form of the possible dislocation structures, and in most real crystals would be split into "partial" dislocations and look much more complicated.

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations
We therefore must introduce a more general and necessarily more abstract definition of what constitutes a dislocation. Before we do that, however, we will continue to look at some properties of (edge) dislocations in the simplified atomistic view, so we can appreciate some elementary properties.

First, we look at a simplified but principally correct rendering of the connection between dislocation movement and plastic deformation - the elementary process of metal working which contains all the ingredients for a complete solution of all the riddles and magic of the smiths art.

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations

Generation of an edge Dislocation by a shear stress

Movement of the dislocation through the crystal

Shift of the upper half of the crystal after the dislocation emerged

Dislocations move in response to an external stress .

As soon as a critical shear stress is reached, the dislocation starts moving and deformation is no longer elastic but plastic, because the dislocation will not move back when the stress is removed.

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations
The dislocation line moves on its glide plane and produces, upon leaving the crystal (and thus disappearing), an elementary step on the crystal surface. Note that after the dislocation disappeared, the crystal is completely stress-free. For macroscopic deformation in three dimensions, many dislocations have to move through the crystal. The elementary process shown above thus has to be repeated literally billions of times on many (at least 5) different planes of the lattice. Plastic deformation proceeds - atomic step by atomic step - by the generation and movement of dislocations Without dislocations, there can be no elastic stresses whatsoever in a single crystal!
"Discovery" of dislocations as source of plastic deformation = answer to one of the biggest and oldest scientific puzzles in 1934 (Taylor, Orowan and Polyani). No Noble prize!

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

We already know enough by now, to deduce some elementary properties of dislocations which must be generally valid. 1. A dislocation is one-dimensional defect because the lattice is only disturbed along the dislocation line (apart from small elastic deformations which we do not count as defects farther away from the core). The dislocation line thus can be described at any point by a line vector t(x,y,z). 2. In the dislocation core the bonds between atoms are not in an equilibrium configuration, i.e. at their minimum enthalpy value; they are heavily distorted. The dislocation thus must possess energy (per unit of length) and entropy. 3. Dislocations move under the influence of external forces which cause internal stress in a crystal. The area swept by the movement defines a plane, the glide plane, which always (by definition) contains the dislocation line vector. 4. The movement of a dislocation moves the whole crystal on one side of the glide plane relative to the other side. (Edge) dislocations could (in principle) be generated by the agglomeration of point defects: self-interstitial on the extra half-plane, or vacancies on the missing half-plane. The Burgers vector is perpendicular to the dislocation line direction.

Misfit Dislocations

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Now we add a new property. The fundamental quantity defining an arbitrary dislocation is its Burgers vector b. Its atomistic definition follows from a Burgers circuit around the dislocation in the real crystal, which is illustrated below

Misfit Dislocations

Left picture: Make a closed circuit that encloses the dislocation from lattice point to lattice point (later from atom to atom). You obtain a closed chain of the base vectors which define the lattice.

Right picture: Make exactly the same chain of base vectors in a perfect reference lattice. It will not close.

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations

The special vector needed for closing the circuit in the reference crystal is by definition the Burgers vector b. But beware! As always with conventions, you may pick the sign of the Burgers vector at will. In the version given here (which is the usual definition), the closed circuit is around the dislocation, the Burgers vector then appears in the reference crystal. You could, of course, use a closed circuit in the reference crystal and define the Burgers vector around the dislocation. You also have to define if you go clock-wise or counter clock-wise around your circle. You will always get the same vector, but the sign will be different! And the sign is very important for calculations! So whatever you do, stay consistent!. In the picture above we went clock-wise In both cases.

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations
Now we go on and learn a new thing: There is a second basic type of dislocation, called screw dislocation. Its atomistic representation is somewhat more difficult to draw - but a Burgers circuit is still possible:

You notice that here we chose to go clock-wise - for no particularly good reason.
The Burgers vector is parallel to the dislocation line direction.

If you imagine a walk along the non-closed Burgers circuit, which you keep continuing round and round, it becomes obvious how a screw dislocation got its name.

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations
Dislocations are characterized by Their Burgers vector b = Vector describing the step obtained after a dislocation passed through the crystal. Vector obtained by a Burgers circuit around a dislocation. All definitions of b give identical results for a given dislocations; but watch out for sign conventions! By definition, b is always a translation vector T of the lattice. For energetic reasons b is usually the shortest translation vector of the lattice; e.g. b = a/2 <110> for the fcc lattice. Their line vector t(x,y,z) describing the direction of the dislocation line in the lattice. t(x,y,z) is an arbitrary (unit) vector in principle but often a prominent lattice direction in reality. While the dislocation can be curved in any way, it tends to be straight (= shortest possible distance) for energetic reasons.

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations
The glide plane by necessity must contain t(x,y,z) and b and is thus defined by the two vectors . The angle between t(x,y,z) and b determines the character or kind of dislocation: Note that any plane containing t is a glide plane for a screw dislocation. = 90: Edge dislocation. = 0: Screw dislocation. = 60: "Sixty degree" dislocation. = arbitrary : "Mixed" dislocation. Dislocations have a large line energy Edis per length and therefore are never thermal equilibrium defects

5eV E >> /b/ dis

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations
Misfit dislocations compensate for differences in the lattice constants by concentrating the misfit in one-dimensional regions - the dislocation lines.

Between the dislocation lines the interface is coherent; a phase boundary with misfit dislocations is called semi-coherent. Misfit dislocations - in contrast to general grain boundary dislocations must have an edge component that accounts for the lattice constant mismatch

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations
However, not every ( = 1) phase boundary with some misfit between the partners contains misfit dislocations - provided one of the phases consists of a thin layer on top of the other phase. Only if the thickness of the thin-layer phase exceeds a critical value, misfit dislocations will be observed. It is easy to understand why this is so: For thin layers, it may be energetically more favorable to deform the layer elastically, so that a perfect match to the substrate layer is achieved. No Misfit Dislocations The total elastic energy contained in the "strained layer" scales with the thickness of the layer and the expenditure in elastic energy below a critical thickness for an epitaxial layer may be smaller than the energy needed to introduce misfit dislocations.

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Strained-Layers

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations
Energy of Misfit Dislocations and Critical Thickness The critical thickness for the introduction of misfit dislocations can be obtained by equating the energy contained in a misfit dislocation network with the elastic energy contained in a strained layer of thickness h. Since the elastic energy increases directly with h, whereas the energy contained in the dislocation network increases only very weakly with h, the thickness for which both energies are equal is the critical thickness hc. layers prefer elastic distortion. This computation was first done by Frank and van der Merwe in 1963 The resulting Frank and van der Merwe formula became quite famous.

Thicker layers are energetically better off with a dislocation network, thinner

Somewhat later in 1974 Matthews and Blakeslee reconsidered the situation and looked at the forces needed to move a few pre-existing dislocations into the interface in order to form the misfit dislocation network.

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations
They obtain the same formula for the critical thickness as van der Merwe (i.e. the equilibrium situation), but their treatment also allows to consider the kinetics of the process to some extent (i.e. how the network is formed) and is therefore widely used. We are looking at the situation retrospectively by studying an article of the possibly most famous TEM and defect expert, Peter Hirsch from Oxford University, or, to be precise, Sir Peter as he must be called after his nobilitation by Elizabeth II, Queen of England. This is to show that honor-wise - a defect expert can go just as far as a rock Star (several of whom have been knighted by the Queen). Money-wise, however, it is a completely different matter. We use parts of his article printed in the Proceedings of the 2nd International Conf on Polycrystalline Semiconductors (Schwbisch Hall, Germany, 1990, p. 470).

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Nucleation and Propagation of Misfit Dislocations in Strained Epitaxial Layer Systems P.B. Hirsch (Sir Peter) Department of Materials, University of Oxford Introduction In 1949 Frank and van der Merwe discussed theoretically the stresses and the energies at the interface of an epitaxial layer grown on a matrix with a slightly different lattice parameter. Their one-dimensional model was extended to two dimensions by Jesser et al. These studies show that if the lattice mismatch is small, and/or the thickness of the overlayer is not large, the growth of the epilayer is pseudomorphic (commensurate) with the matrix, with the atomic planes on the two sides of the interface being in perfect register with each other. The mismatch is accommodated by an elastic strain in the epilayer giving a biaxial stress of

Misfit Dislocations

(1 + ) = 2. . f . (1 )

[1]

where is the shear modulus, Elastic isotropy is assumed.

is the Poisson's ratio and f the misfit parameter.

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations
The misfit parameter is given by f = (ae -am)/am, where ae , am are the lattice parameters of the unconstrained epilayer and matrix in the plane parallel to the Interface. For the case of GexSi1-x alloys Vegard's law is approximately obeyed i.e. aGeSi = aSi + (aGe - aSi).x, where the a's are the lattice parameters. This means that for GexSi1-x epilayers on an Si(001) surface, f is a linear function of x; since the lattice parameter of Ge (0.5657nm) is greater than that of Si (0.5431nm), f increases with x (f(x) =0.042x), and the epilayer is in compression. Beyond a critical strain and/or thickness it becomes energetically favourable for the misfit to be accommodated by a network of interface dislocations.

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations
In view of the importance of strained epilayers or superlattices for device applications and the development of methods of growing them, much research has been devoted in recent years to the conditions which control the relaxation of elastic strain by the introduction of misfit dislocations, and to the mechanisms by which they are formed. This paper presents a brief review of this field of research; it does not pretend to be exhaustive.
Energetic Considerations

The energy of the system involving a strained epilayer and an array of misfit dislocations is generally discussed for the case of the layer and matrix material being cubic, and the interface parallel to a cube plane.

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations
The energy per unit area of a square grid of edge dislocations, with Burgers vector b, with dislocation spacing p is given approximately by

eh b 2 2. ln 4 (1 ) p r0

[2]

where h is the film thickness, r0 the core radius, and where the factor 2 arises because of the presence of two orthogonal sets of edge dislocations. The elastic strain remaining is given by:

b =f p

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations
The total energy per unit area E is then given by

where the first term is the elastic strain energy. For a given thickness the minimum energy occurs for a value 0 given by:

(1 + ) 2 h + b( f ) ln eh E = 2 (1 ) 2 (1 ) r0
eh b 0 = ln 8h(1 + ) r0

[3]

[4]

If 0 > f, then the layer is ideally commensurate with the substrate, and the elastic strain is equal to f. If 0 < f then some misfit will be relaxed by dislocations, the spacing being given by (5) with 0 = f - b/p. The critical film thickness, hc , at which it becomes energetically favourable for the first dislocation to be introduced is obtained with 0 = f, i.e.

ehc b hc = ln 8f (1 + ) r0

[5]

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations

ehc b ln hc = 8f (1 + ) r0
Two points should be made about this relation.

[5]

First, hc depends on the core radius r0 ( b), and the uncertain value of this parameter introduces some uncertainty into this relation, particularly for small h/r0. Secondly, hc depends on the assumed dislocation arrangement; for example the misfit might be relieved by dislocations with different b; eqn. (2) shows that the dislocation strain field energy is smaller for edge dislocations of smaller energy, even though for the same relief of strain (f - ), the spacing p will be smaller.

eh b 2 2. ln 4 (1 ) p r0

[2]

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations

Thus it is necessary to take care in making comparisons between theory and experiment. In practice, however, it is generally found that the observed values of hc are larger than those predicted over most of the range of misfits (see for example People and Bean [6] for Ge-Si layers on (100) Si). The reasons for this discrepancy are partly due to insensitivity of the experimental techniques used, and partly kinetic in origin. In order to introduce dislocations, there have to be mechanisms for doing so, and for most practical cases, except these with very large misfits, the strain relief is limited by kinetic considerations.

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations - Critical Thickness

a) Interstitial impurity atom, b) Edge dislocation, c) Self interstitial atom, d) Vacancy, e) Precipitate of impurity atoms, f) Vacancy type dislocation loop, g) Interstitial type dislocation loop, h) Substitutional impurity atom

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

As you saw, great minds sometimes make great steps and are not immune to small errors! If you didn't see that, consider: (1 + ) How exactly do you get eq. 1? = 2. . f .

Misfit Dislocations

Why is the strain for minimum energy calculated in eq. 3 equal

E = 2

(1 )

to the unrelaxed elastic strain at the point of the introduction of dislocations?

What is h, the thickness of the layer, doing in an equation for the

(1 + ) 2 h + b( f ) ln eh (1 ) 2 (1 ) r0

critical thickness hc (eq. 5)? After all, the critical thickness can not possibly depend on the thickness itself.

Well, if you want to know, turn to the annotated version of Sir Peters paper.

ehc b ln hc = 8f (1 + ) r0

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations
The annotated version Comments on light blue background

1. Introduction In 1949 Frank and van der Merwe discussed theoretically the stresses and the energies at the interface of an epitaxial layer grown on a matrix with a slightly different lattice parameter. Their one-dimensional model was extended to two dimensions by Jesser et al. These studies show that if the lattice mismatch is small, and/or the thickness of the overlayer is not large, the growth of the epilayer is pseudomorphic commensurate) with the matrix, with the atomic planes on the two sides of the interface being in perfect register with each other. The mismatch is accommodated by an elastic strain in the epilayer giving a biaxial stress of:

2 f .(1 + ) = 1

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations

2 f .(1 + ) = 1
where is the shear modulus, is the Poisson's ratio and f the misfit parameter. Elastic isotropy is assumed. The misfit parameter is given by f = (ae -am)/am, where ae , am are the lattice parameters of the unconstrained epilayer and matrix in the plane parallel to the interface. How did he get this formula? Well, this is easy, but deriving the starting formula also illustrates a certain problem one might encounter from looking at simple pictures all the time. Let's see:

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

fits the matrix perfectly, you have the following situation:

If you strain the lattice of the epitaxial layer in one dimension, so that it

Misfit Dislocations

The strain needed for perfect fit is = (ae am)/ae; but since ae and am are nearly equal, dividing by ae (as is correct) or by am (as Sir Peter does) makes no difference. So we can equate with f = (ae am)/am, the misfit parameter according to Sir Peter.

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

nearly equal, dividing by ae (as is correct) or by am (as Sir Peter does) makes no difference. So we can equate with f = (ae am)/am, the misfit parameter according to Sir Peter.

Misfit = (a a The strain needed for perfect fit is Dislocations)/ae; but since ae and am are e m

Strain and stress are usually related by:

= E. with E = modulus of elasticity (Youngs modulus). But since E can be expressed in terms of the shear modulus and Poissons ratio by E=2(1+), we can write = 2(1+). = 2(1+). f Apart from the factor (1 ), this is Sir Peters starting formula. Where does the (1 ) term come from?
Let's look at the problem carefully. We actually have a two-dimensional problem and must consider biaxial stress. Our simple figure was one-dimensional - and that is where we might have missed something. Did we miss something? Well, yes - we did.

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations
In the picture above, we have applied a suitable stress to strain the blue lattice to the desired value in the x-direction. If we now apply the same stress in the y-direction perpendicular to the first one, we will have to use a larger strain because the y-dimension of the crystal layer will now be smaller as expressed by Poissons modulus. This is illustrated below.

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations
After we pulled the blue crystal sheet to the desired dimension by a strain 1, its lateral dimension in y direction decreased by 2q as shown. We now must apply a strain of 2 = 1 (1 ) to make the match in y-direction. That's it. For reasons of symmetry, this must be the strain corrected for biaxial stress in both directions, i.e. we have

1 = 1,2 (1 )

This is the expression used by Sir Peter.

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations
After we pulled the blue crystal sheet to the desired dimension by a strain 1, its lateral dimension in y direction decreased by 2q as shown. We now must apply a strain of 2 = 1 (1 ) to make the match in y-direction. That's it. For reasons of symmetry, this must be the strain corrected for biaxial stress in both directions, i.e. we have This is the expression used by Sir Peter. Of course, we made a little mistake. The deformation in y-direction will lead to a shrinkage in x -direction which me must compensate, which in turn will lead to a shrinkage in y-direction, which will lead to a shrinkage - and so on ad infinitum. But all this does is to add higher order terms in which we commonly neglect in linear elasticity theory.

1 = 1,2 (1 )

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations
For the case of GexSi1-x alloys, Vegard's law is approximately obeyed, i.e. aGeSi = aSi+(aGe - aSi)x, where the a's are the lattice parameters. This means that for GexSi1-x epilayers on an Si(001) surface, f is a linear function of x; since the lattice parameter of Ge (0.5657nm) is greater than that of Si (0.5431nm), f increases with x (f(x) =0.042x), and the epilayer is in compression. Beyond a critical strain and/or thickness it becomes energetically favourable for the misfit to be accommodated by a network of interface dislocations. In view of the importance of strained epilayers or superlattices for device applications and the development of methods of growing them, much research has been devoted in recent years to the conditions which control the relaxation of elastic strain by the introduction of misfit dislocations, and to the mechanisms by which they are formed.

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations
Energetic Considerations The energy of the system involving a strained epilayer and an array of misfit dislocations is generally discussed for the case of the layer and matrix material being cubic, and the interface parallel to a cube plane. The energy per unit area of a square grid of edge dislocations, Burgers vector b, with dislocation spacing p is given approximately by

eh b 2 2. ln 4 (1 ) p r0
where h is the film thickness, r0 the core radius, and where the factor 2 arises because of the presence of two orthogonal sets of edge dislocations. First, there is a slight correction in eqn (2): The "x" after the "2" as shown in the original has been replaced by a dot - because the "", written as "x" as a sign for multiplication is no longer allowed; it has been used up as denoting the amount of Ge in the alloy GexSi 1 x.

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations

Now the formula contains an unexplained "e". Since we know that the energy of a dislocation contains the term ln(R/r0) with R being some outer radius, it is clear that R cannot be larger than h, the thickness of the layer. But by simply equating R with h, we make some numerical mistake which we might correct by introducing a unspecified (but probably not very large) correction factor e?

That was the first thought. Well - wrong! Sir Peter simply takes one of the
many formulas for the total energy of a dislocation that float around, it is the same formula as shown before (for the purpose of recalling it here), and e is e indeed - the base for natural logarithms.

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations We then have the correct formula except for the 2/p.
But this is easy and pointed out (albeit somewhat obliquely) by Sir Peter:

The general formula for the dislocation energy gives the energy per unit length

of the dislocation. If we want the energy per unit area, we have to multiply by the length of the dislocations in a unit area and then divide by the unit area. If we take the unit area to be p2, the areas of one cell of the (square) dislocation network, it contains dislocations with the length 2p we have the factor 2/p.

The elastic strain remaining is given by

= f b/p.

This is something easy to figure out for yourself. Just take into account that every dislocation with a Burgers vector b relaxes the total deformation by one b (provided it is fully contained in the plane of the boundary).

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations

Full relaxation thus would occur if a misfit dislocation network with a spacing The essential trick is to generate a variable e which is the residual strain
contained in a partially relaxed epitaxial layer. So some of the strain and its energy is gone, but at a cost: Dislocations, carrying their own energy penalty, are introduced.

p = b/f = b/(ae am)/am is introduced which partially relaxes the epitaxial layer.

Since is a variable, it can now be used to optimize the system as we will see.
The total energy per unit area E is then given by

(1 + ) 2 b( f ) eh E = 2 ln h+ (1 ) 2 (1 ) r0
where the first term is the elastic strain energy.

(3)

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations
Here Sir Peters gets a bit tricky once more. The elastic energy Eelast of a uniaxially elastically deformed material is simple ./2. For biaxial strain it is twice that, and that gives the first term. The second term is the energy of the dislocation network; it is almost the formula from above. However, p has been replaced using the relation

= f b/p, or p = b/ (f ).

The next part is straight forward. The total energy per unit area is a function

of , the strain still present in the epitaxial layer even after some dislocations have been introduced. So we can find the minimum energy of the system with respect to by calculating dE/d = 0. The calculation is straight forward: For a given thickness the minimum energy occurs for a value 0 given by

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

For a given thickness the minimum energy occurs for a value 0 given by
If 0 = f, then the layer is ideally commensurate with the substrate, and the elastic strain is equal to f. If 0 < f, then some misfit will be relaxed by dislocations, the spacing being given by (5) with 0 = f b/p. The critical film thickness, hc , at which it becomes energetically favourable for the first dislocation to be introduced is obtained with 0 = f, i.e.

Misfit Dislocations

eh b 0 = ln 8h(1 + ) r0

(4)

ehc b hc = ln 8f (1 + ) r0
Got it? Well, lets look at the argumentation in detail?

(5)

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations

If the remaining strain 0 = f, then it is the strain of the unrelaxed layer and

the formula defining yields b/p = 0 which, since b has a defined value, can only mean p is infinite - in other words there is no dislocation network.

If 0 > f, the layer is not ideally commensurate with the substrate as stated in
the original, but a dislocation network must be present (b/p < 0 is required) which increases the strain - the sign of b is the wrong way around. This is of course a totally unphysical high energy situation, and we can safely exclude 0 > f, from the possible range of e values.

If 0 < f, again a dislocation network must be present, but this time with the
right sign of b - it decreases the total elastic strain.

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations
Now, 0, the optimal residual strain is a function of the layer thickness h. It decreases with increasing h and this means that dislocations must be introduced at some critical thickness hc.

If the thickness is below hc we have no dislocations and = f obtains. If the thickness is above hc, we have dislocations and = f obtains.
This leaves us with 0 = f at the point of critical thickness. All we have to do now is to express the equation above for h; it will then give hc by substituting f for 0. Sir Peter now writes

ehc b hc = ln 8f (1 + ) r0

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations
Two points should be made about this relation: First, the above version of equation (5) corrects the little mistake of the original - forgetting the index "c" at the h in the argument of the logarithm, and Second; this equation is now a transcendent equation for hc; we cannot write it down in closed form.

hc depends on the core radius r0 ( b), and the uncertain value of this

parameter introduces some uncertainty into this relation, particularly for small h/r0.

hc depends on the assumed dislocation arrangement; for example the misfit might be relieved by dislocations with different b; eqn. (2) shows that the
dislocation strain field energy is smaller for edge dislocations of smaller energy, even though for the same relief of strain (f ), the spacing p will be smaller.

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations
Thus it is necessary to take care in making comparisons between theory and experiment. In practice, however, it is generally found that the observed values of hc are larger than those predicted over most of the range of misfits (see for example People and Bean [6] for Ge-Si layers on (100) Si). The reasons for this discrepancy are partly due to insensitivity of the experimental techniques used, and partly kinetic in origin. In order to introduce dislocations, there have to be mechanisms for doing so, and for most practical cases, except these with very large misfits, the strain relief is limited by kinetic considerations. Now, what order of magnitude do we get for hc, forgetting about the small detail of unclear core radii and so on?

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations
Well, if we rewrite the above equation, with 8(1 and ln hc/r0 = y, we have

+ ) 30,

hc b/f (ln y)/30

How large is ln y? If we take r0 to be about 0.3 nm, and hc to be anywhere between 10 nm and 1000 nm, we have a range of values from ln(10/0.3) = 3.51 to ln(1000/0.3) = 8.11. In other words, it doesn't matter much for orders of magnitude. Lets take an intermediate value of 5 and we get hc Now here is a simple formula! But how good is it?

b/6 f.

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations
Well, we live in the age of easy accessible PCs with tremendous computing power, so solving the transcendental equation from above is actually no problem at all. The best approximation is actually obtained for ln y = 3.03 leading to

b hc 9.9 f
So if your misfit is 1% (f = 0.01), your critical thickness will be roughly around 10 b. Burger vectors usually are b = a/2<110> or b = a/22 which is around 0.3 nm. This gives hc 3 nm - which is not all that much! Fortunately, as Sir Peter points out in the remainder of the article, the critical thicknesses observed are usually considerably larger than the calculated ones.

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations
Still, Sir Peter got it right in principle, and his derivation of the critical thickness is short and most elegant. The final formula for the critical thickness hc is

ehc b hc = ln 8f (1 + ) r0

With b = Burgers vector of the misfit dislocations (actually only their edge component in the plane of the interface), f = misfit parameter, i.e a/a, e = 2.7183... = base of natural logarithms, and r0 = core radius of the dislocations. This transcendental equation may be roughly approximated by

b hc 9 .9 f

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations
Lets see what the calculations tell us for real phase boundaries (for a b value of 0.376 nm (which applies to Si)). We note that misfit dislocations are only to be expected if the layer thickness h exceeds the critical value hc.

For a misfit of 1% the critical thickness is about 4 nm - not much at all!

Semi-conducting & Magnetic Materials

Misfit Dislocations
Experiments confirm the theory. Very thin epitaxial layers do not show dislocations in the interface, but with increasing thickness misfit dislocations will appear.

Considering that misfit dislocations are usually unwanted but that they must
appear with increasing layer thickness - however not out of thin air we ask an important question:

Exactly how are misfit dislocations produced and incorporated into the Suffice it to say that while this question has not been fully answered,

interface if the critical thickness is reached. More to the point: How can I prevent this nucleation and migration process?

there are many ways and tricks to keep misfit dislocations from appearing at the earliest possible moment.