High-resolution microscopy methods for surface morphology semiconductors investigation

Many techniques for high-resolution surface analysis of semiconductors are known, such as optical-, X-ray-, transmission electron microscopy etc. However, atomic-force microscopy and scanning electron microscopy are generally used. In this article, basic principles of scanning electron and atomic-force microscopy are considered. This article shows advantages and disadvantages of each technique. These techniques can be used for quality assessment of semiconductors wafers and structures at different stages of production such as incoming inspection, interoperation inspection and functional control. For AFM study we used “tapping mode” which is well suited for epitaxial structures. SEM images were obtained in secondary electrons imaging mode. These two techniques were compared with respect to the following factors: surface morphology, working environment and the determination of composition. Specific defects for each semiconductor structure and substrates for epitaxy were studied in detail. One of the main advantages of AFM is 3D imaging of the surface together with a “true” vertical resolution less than 0.1 nm. On the contrary, lateral resolution in SEM is better. AFM works under atmospheric environmental conditions that exclude sample preparation. SEM requires vacuum conditions, but at the same time, this “disadvantage” helps to realize its excellent analytical potential. The applicability of these methods for surface morphology investigations of semiconductors such as Ge, MCT, InSb, AlGaN, InGaAs is shown. These materials are commonly used for IR imaging systems in military and civil applications, and their quality is very important. In summary, we conclude that both techniques complement each other. In a modern laboratory it is better to use these techniques side-by-side to achieve satisfactory results.

AFM, SEM, surface morphology, composition, CHT, InSb, AlGaN, InGaAs.

1. Филачев А.М., Таубкин И.И., Тришенков М.А.. Твердотельная фотоэлектроника. Фоторезисторы и фотоприёмные устройства. М: Физматкнига, 2012. 367 c.

2. Watt I.M. The Principles and Practice of Electron Microscopy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985. 303 p.

3. Гоулдстейн Дж., Ньюбери Д., Эчлин П., Джой Д., Фиори Ч., Лифшин Ф. Растровая электронная микроскопия и рентгеновский микроанализ: в 2-х кн. Пер. с англ. М.: Мир, 1984. 303 с.

4. Барышников Ф.М., Зайцев А.А., Концевой Ю.А. // Электронная техника. Серия 2. Полупроводниковые приборы. 2010. Т. 225. С. 8-12 .

5. Binnig G., Quate C.F., Gerber Ch. // Physical Review Letters. 1986. V. 56. I. 9. Р. 1-2 .

6. Миронов В.Л. Основы сканирующей зондовой микроскопии. Н.Новгород: Техносфера, 2004. 144 c.

7. Russell P., Batchelor D., Thornton J. // Microscopy and Analysis. 2000. V. 49. Р. 1-9.

8. Sun W., Fan H., Peng Z., Zhang L., Zhang X., Zhang L., Lu Z., Si J., Emelyanov E., Putyato M., Semyagin B., Pchelyakov O., Preobrazhenskii V. // Infrared Physics & Technology. 2014. V. 62. P. 143-146.

9. Сизов А.Л., Бурлаков И.Д., Яковлева Н.И., Коротаев Е.Д., Мирофянченко А.Е. // Вестник МИТХТ. 2013. Т. 8. № 5. С. 94-98

10. Пермикина Е.В., Кашуба А.С., Арбенина В.В. // Неорг. материалы. 2012. Т. 48. № 7. C. 765-770.

11. Пермикина Е.В., Кашуба А.С., Ляликов А.В., Коротаев Е.Д., Бурлаков И.Д. // Прикладная физика. 2012. № 5. С. 81-90.

12. Васильев А.Г., Колковский Ю.В., Концевой Ю.А. Приборы и устройства на широкозонных полупроводниках. М.: Техносфера, 2011. 416 c.

13. Neves B.R.A., Salmon M.E., Russell P.E., Troughton E.B. // Microscopy and Microanalysis, 1999. V. 49. P. 413-419.

14. Lemoine P., Lamberton R.W., Ogwu A.A. // J. App. Phys. 1999. V. 86. P. 6564-6570.

15. Власов А.И., Елсуков К.А., Косолапов И.А. Электронная микроскопия: учеб. пособие. М.: Издво МГТУ им. Н.Э. Баумана, 2011. 168 с.

16. Мошников В.А., Спивак Ю.М., Алексеев П.А., Пермяков Н.В. Атомно-силовая микросокопия для исследования наноструктурированных материалов и приборных структур: учеб. пособие. СПб: Издво СПбГЭТУ «ЛЭТИ», 2014. 144 с.