Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Ga2O3 nanopillars
Cite as: Appl. Phys. Lett. 114, 193101 (2019); https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5096596
Submitted: 19 March 2019 . Accepted: 01 May 2019 . Published Online: 17 May 2019
Alessandro Grillo , Julien Barrat , Zbigniew Galazka , Maurizio Passacantando , Filippo Giubileo
, Laura Iemmo , Giuseppe Luongo , Francesca Urban , Catherine Dubourdieu, and Antonio Di
Bartolomeo
Light confinement and high current density in UVB laser diode structure using Al composition-
graded p-AlGaN cladding layer
Applied Physics Letters 114, 191103 (2019); https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5095149
© 2019 Author(s).
Applied Physics Letters ARTICLE scitation.org/journal/apl
Alessandro Grillo,1 Julien Barrat,2 Zbigniew Galazka,3 Maurizio Passacantando,4 Filippo Giubileo,5
1,5 1,5 1,5 2,6,a)
Laura Iemmo, Giuseppe Luongo, Francesca Urban, Catherine Dubourdieu,
and Antonio Di Bartolomeo1,5,7,a)
AFFILIATIONS
1
Physics Department “E. R. Caianiello,” University of Salerno, via Giovanni Paolo II n. 132, Fisciano 84084, Italy
2
Helmholtz-Zentrum Berlin fu € r Materialien und Energie GmbH, Hahn-Meitner-Platz 1, D-14109 Berlin, Germany
3
€ r Kristallzu
Leibniz-Institut fu € chtung (IKZ), Max-Born-Strasse 2, 12489 Berlin, Germany
4
Department of Physical and Chemical Science, University of L’Aquila and CNR-SPIN L’Aquila, via Vetoio, Coppito, L’Aquila 67100,
Italy
5
CNR-SPIN Salerno, via Giovanni Paolo II n. 132, Fisciano 84084, Italy
6
€ t Berlin, Institut fu
Freie Universita € r Chemie und Biochemie, Physical Chemistry, Takustrasse 3, 14195 Berlin, Germany
7
Interdepartmental Centre NanoMates, University of Salerno, via Giovanni Paolo II n. 132, Fisciano 84084, Italy
a)
Electronic addresses: catherine.dubourdieu@helmholtz-berlin.de and adibartolomeo@unisa.it
ABSTRACT
Field emission from gallium oxide (b-Ga2O3) nanopillars, etched by Neþ ion milling on b-polymorph (100) single crystals, is reported. A sta-
ble field emission current, with a record density over 100 A/cm2 and a turn on field of 30 V/lm, is achieved. We expect that the high field
enhancement factor of about 200 at a cathode-anode distance of 1 lm can be further increased by optimizing the shape of the nanopillar
apex. This work demonstrates that the material properties combined with an appropriate nano-patterning can make b-Ga2O3 competitive or
better than other well-established field emitters.
Published under license by AIP Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5096596
Gallium oxide (Ga2O3) is considered a promising candidate for or nanopillars renders b-Ga2O3 a good candidate for field emission
high power electronics application owing to its excellent physical and applications.7–12 Huang et al. reported field emission from quasi-
chemical properties.1 Among the five polymorphs, b-Ga2O3 is the aligned Ga2O3 nanowires fabricated using a brass wire mesh as the
thermodynamically stable phase at room temperature and atmo- substrate and estimated a field enhancement factor of about 880 at a
spheric pressure.2 It has a wide bandgap of about 4.8 eV (Ref. 3) and a cathode-anode distance of about 100 lm.13 Lopez et al. investigated
very high breakdown electric field4 (Ebr 8 MV cm1), three times the field emission properties of Ga2O3 nanowires with Sn-dopant
larger than that of SiC and GaN, which enables handling huge switch- enhanced electrical conductivity.14 They reported a field enhancement
ing voltages. Moreover, its Baliga figure of merit (BFOM ¼ erlEg, factor of 3287 measured at a cathode-anode distance of 400 lm.
where er is the relative dielectric constant, l is the electron mobility, Finally, Tien et al. investigated field emission from Ga2O3 nanobelts
and Eg is the bandgap of the semiconductor), a parameter used to synthesized in different oxygen ambient and achieved a field enhance-
assess the suitability of a semiconductor for power device applications, ment factor as high as 2242 for the 1% oxygen level.15
is several times larger than that of SiC and GaN.5 Hence, b-Ga2O3 So far, all field emission studies have been dealing with meshes
based power devices offer a significant reduction in the current loss.6 or arrays of Ga2O3 nanostructures, where the field emission proper-
Despite the recent interest in this material, few research groups ties are averaged over a large number of emitters. In this paper, we
have explored opportunities for different applications, such as field report the patterning of a b-Ga2O3 single crystal into individual
emission. nanopillars, purposely designed for the investigation of the field
Due to the high mechanical strength, chemical stability, heat dis- emission current. Different from other groups, we investigate the
sipation, and charge transport capability, the patterning of nanowires field emission from a single b-Ga2O3 nanopillar. We show that the
Appl. Phys. Lett. 114, 193101 (2019); doi: 10.1063/1.5096596 114, 193101-1
Published under license by AIP Publishing
Applied Physics Letters ARTICLE scitation.org/journal/apl
b-Ga2O3 nano-patterning, combined with the intrinsic properties square with a central pillar of 500 nm diameter, (ii) rough polishing
of the material, enables a class of performant and competitive field of the central pillar, reduced to a diameter of 150 nm, and (iii) fine
emitters with a low turn-on field and a very high current density polishing of the central pillar to obtain the sharpest and finest pillar
and field enhancement factor. possible. This process results in spatially separated individual pillars
The sample used is a (100) b-Ga2O3 single crystal, which was pro- with a height of 400 nm and a diameter of 70 nm [Fig. 1(c)]. Some
duced using the Czochralski method.16–18 The unit cell of b-gallium squares were intentionally etched without the central pillar.
oxide as well as the crystal orientation of the samples is presented in All electrical measurements were performed with the sample
Fig. 1(a). The size of the samples is 10 10 mm2. The electron concen- kept inside a Zeiss LEO 1530 SEM chamber in high vacuum (pressure
tration is 5.9 1016 cm3, and the mobility is 62 cm2 V1 s1 (the < 106 mbar) and at room temperature. A W-tip, mounted on a
resistivity is 1.8 X cm1). Prior to the patterning process, the sample piezoelectric-driven arm, installed inside the SEM chamber, and the
was cleaned in a sequence of 1-min ultrasonic baths with ethanol, SEM sample holder were electrically connected to a semiconductor
acetone, and distilled water, at a temperature of 22 C. Finally, an argon parameter analyzer (Keithley 4200-SCS) and used as the anode and
plasma was applied on it for about 5 min at a pressure of 0.3 mbar and the cathode for the two-terminal device characterization. The W-tip
a power of 40 W. The cleanliness of a sample is a critical factor in the positioning was controlled with a resolution better than 5 nm in all
process of nanofabrication. directions. Figure 2(a) shows a diagram of the measurement setup.
A Carl Zeiss Orion NanoFab microscope was used for the fabri- The W-tip (anode), guided by the SEM arm, is gently approached to
cation and imaging of the nanopillars. The corresponding experimen- the surface of the sample until it establishes an intimate electrical con-
tal setup is shown in Fig. 1(b). The imaging of the nanopillars is tact with it [Fig. 2(b)]. An ohmic contact (cathode) on the back-side of
realized through the collection of the sputtered secondary electrons the sample is created with silver paste covering a large scratched area
with an Everhart-Thornley detector. The use of a helium source results of the b-Ga2O3 sample.
in images with a great contrast and a large depth of field, because of The I-V characteristics between top and bottom contacts are
the small De Broglie wavelength of the ions [the probe size is typically shown in Fig. 2(c). The curve exhibits a pronounced rectifying behav-
0.5 nm (Ref. 19)]. However, this imaging technique is also destruc- ior with a rectification ratio, defined as the current ratio at 65 V,
tive since the target atoms are also sputtered by the ions.20 For milling greater than 106, pointing to the formation of Schottky barriers.22
purposes, the use of helium ions is not appropriate because of surface The forward current at positive bias confirms the n-type behavior
blistering.21 It is possible to switch to neon ions in the Orion setup, for of the b-Ga2O3 sample, which can facilitate the extraction of a field
which there is no noticeable blistering effect. The Neþ beam was used emission current. To check that the Ag-contact on the bottom of the
all throughout this work for the fabrication of nanostructures, while device is nonrectifying, we created a similar contact of silver paste on
the Heþ beam is used for convenient in-situ imaging. The Neþ beam the top of the sample and performed I-V measurements between these
was regulated at an energy of 30 keV for producing an isolated pillar. two contacts. The results are shown in Fig. 2(d), from which a sym-
To increase the control on the single pillar diameter, the nanofabrica- metrical although nonlinear characteristic is noted as a confirmation
tion process was divided into three steps: (i) milling of a 2 2 lm2 of the nonrectifying nature of the Ag-paste contacts.
FIG. 2. (a) Diagram of the measurement setup: a tungsten tip, placed on the top
surface of the sample, and a large silver paste bottom contact are electrically con-
FIG. 1. (a) Monoclinic unit cell of b-Ga2O3 with the lattice parameters: a ¼ 12.214 nected to a source measurement unit (SMU Keithley 4200 SCS). (b) SEM image of
Å, b ¼ 3.0371 Å, c ¼ 5.7981 Å, and ß ¼ 103.8 .3 A projection of the cell in the the tungsten tip used as a contact for the electrical measurements. (c) Two-probe
(100) plane is shown below the unit cell. (b) Experimental setup of the Carl Zeiss I-V characteristics between the W-tip and the back Ag-paste contact used as the
Orion NanoFab helium ion microscope. The inset shows an in-situ image of the tri- anode and the cathode of a two-terminal device. (d) I-V characteristic between two
mer. (c) SEM image of three nanopillars with a height of 400 nm and a diameter silver paste contacts placed on the top and on the bottom of the device, respec-
of 70 nm. tively (the inset shows the current on a linear scale).
Appl. Phys. Lett. 114, 193101 (2019); doi: 10.1063/1.5096596 114, 193101-2
Published under license by AIP Publishing
Applied Physics Letters ARTICLE scitation.org/journal/apl
Appl. Phys. Lett. 114, 193101 (2019); doi: 10.1063/1.5096596 114, 193101-3
Published under license by AIP Publishing
Applied Physics Letters ARTICLE scitation.org/journal/apl
REFERENCES
1
J. Millan, P. Godignon, X. Perpi~ na, A. Perez-Tomas, and J. Rebollo, IEEE
Trans. Power Electron. 29, 2155 (2014).
2
R. Roy, V. G. Hill, and E. F. Osborn, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 74, 719 (1952).
3
S. I. Stepanov, V. I. Nikolaev, V. E. Bougrov, and A. E. Romanov, Rev. Adv.
Mater. Sci. 44, 63 (2016).
4
A. J. Green, K. Chabak, E. R. Heller, R. C. Fitch, M. Baldini, A. Fiedler, K.
Irmscher, G. Wagner, Z. Galazka, S. E. Tetlak, A. Crespo, K. Leedy, and G. H.
Jessen, IEEE Electron Device Lett. 37, 902 (2016).
5
M. Higashiwaki, A. Kuramata, H. Murakami, and Y. Kumagai, J. Phys. D:
Appl. Phys. 50, 333002 (2017).
6
FIG. 5. (a) Field enhancement factor b vs cathode-anode distance for the single M. Higashiwaki, K. Sasaki, A. Kuramata, T. Masui, and S. Yamakoshi, Appl.
nanopillar and for the box edge emitter. (b) Field emission current vs time. The inset Phys. Lett. 100, 013504 (2012).
7
shows the histogram of the current with the mean and standard deviation. F. Giubileo, A. D. Bartolomeo, A. Scarfato, L. Iemmo, F. Bobba, M.
Passacantando, S. Santucci, and A. M. Cucolo, Carbon 47, 1074 (2009).
8
F. Urban, M. Passacantando, F. Giubileo, L. Iemmo, and A. Di Bartolomeo,
linear b-distance behavior of Fig. 5(a) to distances comparable with
Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) 8, 151 (2018).
the ones of 100–400 lm (Refs. 13–15) reported in previous studies 9
A. D. Bartolomeo, M. Passacantando, G. Niu, V. Schlykow, G. Lupina, F.
that have used differently shaped Ga2O3. This is a reasonable assump- Giubileo, and T. Schroeder, Nanotechnology 27, 485707 (2016).
10
tion, based on the experimental observation that the field enhance- L. Iemmo, A. D. Bartolomeo, F. Giubileo, G. Luongo, M. Passacantando, G.
ment factor increases with the distance.31,32,38 The resulting b > 4000 Niu, F. Hatami, O. Skibitzki, and T. Schroeder, Nanotechnology 28, 495705
at a distance of 100 lm suggests that the nanopillars here presented (2017).
11
A. Di Bartolomeo, F. Urban, M. Passacantando, N. McEvoy, L. Peters, L. Iemmo,
are not only better than other, differently shaped, Ga2O3 field emit-
G. Luongo, F. Romeo, and F. Giubileo, Nanoscale 11(4), 1538–1548 (2019).
ters13–15 but also competitive with emitters known for their high field 12
F. Giubileo, L. Iemmo, M. Passacantando, F. Urban, G. Luongo, L. Sun, G.
enhancement factor and low turn on field like carbon nanotubes.39,40 Amato, E. Enrico, and A. Di Bartolomeo, J. Phys. Chem. C 123, 1454 (2019).
13
The current stability is another important parameter that a Y. Huang, Z. Wang, Q. Wang, C. Gu, C. Tang, Y. Bando, and D. Golberg,
good field emitter must possess. We checked the field emission sta- J. Phys. Chem. C 113, 1980 (2009).
14
bility of the b-Ga2O3 nanopillar under the applied bias of 40 V with I. Lopez, E. Nogales, P. Hidalgo, B. Mendez, and J. Piqueras, Phys. Status Solidi
A 209, 113 (2012).
the W-tip at 400 nm. Figure 5(b) plots the current for a time of 15
L.-C. Tien, C.-C. Tseng, and C.-H. Ho, J. Electron. Mater. 41, 3056 (2012).
25 min and shows fluctuations within 10% of the average value, 16
Z. Galazka, R. Uecker, K. Irmscher, M. Albrecht, D. Klimm, M. Pietsch, M.
which is a satisfactory result, especially if we take into account the Br€utzam, R. Bertram, S. Ganschow, and R. Fornari, Cryst. Res. Technol. 45,
difficulty to control the W-tip/nanopillar distance over time. As is 1229 (2010).
17
well known, the emission current instability is mainly caused by the Z. Galazka, K. Irmscher, R. Uecker, R. Bertram, M. Pietsch, A. Kwasniewski, M.
Naumann, T. Schulz, R. Schewski, D. Klimm, and M. Bickermann, J. Cryst.
local heating effect in metal oxide semiconductor emitters.41 Then,
Growth 404, 184 (2014).
the observed good stability indicates an efficient heat dissipation of 18
Z. Galazka, R. Uecker, D. Klimm, K. Irmscher, M. Naumann, M. Pietsch, A.
the fabricated nanopillar, despite the low thermal conductivity of Kwasniewski, R. Bertram, S. Ganschow, and M. Bickermann, ECS J. Solid State
b-Ga2O3 ( 21 W m1 K1).42 Sci. Technol. 6, Q3007 (2017).
19
We fabricated nanopillars with a height of 400 nm and a diame- G. Hlawacek, V. Veligura, R. van Gastel, and B. Poelsema, J. Vac. Sci. Technol.
ter of 70 nm from b-Ga2O3 single crystals using Neþ ion milling. The 20
B 32, 020801 (2014).
R. Livengood, S. Tan, Y. Greenzweig, J. Notte, and S. McVey, J. Vac. Technol.
field emission properties of such nanopillars were experimentally
B 27, 3244 (2009).
investigated using a tip-shaped anode with fine movement control. A 21
S. E. Donnelly, Radiat. Eff. 90, 1 (1985).
stable field emission current, with a high current density over 100 A/ 22
A. Di Bartolomeo, A. Grillo, F. Urban, L. Iemmo, F. Giubileo, G. Luongo, G.
cm2, well described by the standard Fowler-Nordheim theory, was Amato, L. Croin, L. Sun, S.-J. Liang, and L. K. Ang, Adv. Funct. Mater. 28,
extracted with a turn on field of 30 V=lm. The field enhancement fac- 1800657 (2018).
23
tor was found to be a linear function of the distance and achieves the I. Berishev, A. Bensaoula, I. Rusakova, A. Karabutov, M. Ugarov, and V. P.
Ageev, Appl. Phys. Lett. 73, 1808 (1998).
remarkable value of about 200 at 1 lm distance. The turn-on field and 24
R. D. Underwood, D. Kapolnek, B. P. Keller, S. Keller, S. P. Denbaars, and U.
the b factor could be further improved by sharpening the nanopillar K. Mishra, Solid-State Electron. 41, 243 (1997).
25
tip. This work shows that b-Ga2O3 nanopillars are suitable candidates T. Kozawa, M. Suzuki, Y. Taga, Y. Gotoh, and J. Ishikawa, in 10th
for field emission applications and, if appropriately patterned, can International Conference on Vacuum Microelectronics (1997), pp. 750–753.
26
compete with well-established emitters such as carbon nanotubes. Y.-K. Tseng, C.-J. Huang, H.-M. Cheng, I.-N. Lin, K.-S. Liu, and I.-C. Chen,
Adv. Funct. Mater. 13, 811 (2003).
27
J. Zhou, N.-S. Xu, S.-Z. Deng, J. Chen, J.-C. She, and Z.-L. Wang, Adv. Mater.
Z.G., C.D., and J.B. performed this work in the framework of 15, 1835 (2003).
GraFOx, partially funded by the Leibniz Association and by the 28
X. Calder on-Colon, H. Geng, B. Gao, L. An, G. Cao, and O. Zhou,
German Science Foundation (Grant Nos. DFG-FI932/10-1 and Nanotechnology 20, 325707 (2009).
29
DFGFI932/11-1). The fabrication of the nanopillars was performed Q. Zhang, X. Wang, P. Meng, H. Yue, R. Zheng, X. Wu, and G. Cheng, Appl.
Phys. Lett. 112, 013101 (2018).
at the Zeiss labs@location of the Helmholtz Zentrum Berlin. A.D.B., 30
W. Zhu, C. Bower, O. Zhou, G. Kochanski, and S. Jin, Appl. Phys. Lett. 75, 873
A.G., and L.I. acknowledge the financial support of Project PICO & (1999).
PRO, No. ARS S01_01061, and PON MIUR “Ricerca e Innovazione” 31
J.-M. Bonard, K. A. Dean, B. F. Coll, and C. Klinke, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 197602
2014–2020. (2002).
Appl. Phys. Lett. 114, 193101 (2019); doi: 10.1063/1.5096596 114, 193101-4
Published under license by AIP Publishing
Applied Physics Letters ARTICLE scitation.org/journal/apl
32 37
M. Passacantando, F. Bussolotti, S. Santucci, A. D. Bartolomeo, F. Giubileo, L. F. Giubileo, A. Di Bartolomeo, L. Iemmo, G. Luongo, M. Passacantando, E.
Iemmo, and A. M. Cucolo, Nanotechnology 19, 395701 (2008). Koivusalo, T. V. Hakkarainen, and M. Guina, Nanomaterials (Basel,
33
V. Semet, V. T. Binh, P. Vincent, D. Guillot, K. B. K. Teo, M. Chhowalla, G. A. Switzerland) 7, 275 (2017).
38
J. Amaratunga, W. I. Milne, P. Legagneux, and D. Pribat, Appl. Phys. Lett. 81, J.-M. Bonard, M. Croci, I. Arfaoui, O. Noury, D. Sarangi, and A. Ch^atelain,
343 (2002). Diamond Relat. Mater. 11, 763 (2002).
34 39
R. H. Fowler and L. Nordheim, Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A 119, 173 J.-M. Bonard, J.-P. Salvetat, T. St€ ockli, W. A. de Heer, L. Forr o, and A.
(1928). Ch^atelain, Appl. Phys. Lett. 73, 918 (1998).
35 40
S. J. Pearton, J. Yang, P. H. Cary, F. Ren, J. Kim, M. J. Tadjer, and M. A. L. Nilsson, O. Groening, C. Emmenegger, O. Kuettel, E. Schaller, L. Schlapbach,
Mastro, Appl. Phys. Rev. 5, 011301 (2018). H. Kind, J.-M. Bonard, and K. Kern, Appl. Phys. Lett. 76, 2071 (2000).
36 41
A. D. Bartolomeo, A. Scarfato, F. Giubileo, F. Bobba, M. Biasiucci, A. P. Feng, X. Q. Fu, S. Q. Li, Y. G. Wang, and T. H. Wang, Nanotechnology 18,
M. Cucolo, S. Santucci, and M. Passacantando, Carbon 45, 2957 165704 (2007).
42
(2007). M. D. Santia, N. Tandon, and J. D. Albrecht, Appl. Phys. Lett. 107, 041907 (2015).
Appl. Phys. Lett. 114, 193101 (2019); doi: 10.1063/1.5096596 114, 193101-5
Published under license by AIP Publishing