artigo crescimento filmes
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/6/2019 artigo crescimento filmes
1/33
Annu. Rev. Mater. Sci. 2000. 30:15990Copyright c by Annual Reviews. All rights reserved
STRUCTURE EVOLUTION DURING PROCESSINGOF POLYCRYSTALLINE FILMS
C. V. ThompsonDepartment of Materials Science and Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139; e-mail: [email protected]
Key Words thin films, grain growth, texture processing
s Abstract Polycrystalline films have wide variety of applications in which theirgrain structures affect their performance and reliability. Thin film growth techniquesand growth conditions affect grain shapes, the distribution of grain sizes, and the dis-tribution of the crystallographic orientations of grains. Variations in these structuralproperties are affected by the conditions under which grain nucleation, growth, coars-ening, coalescence, and thickening occur. General trends in structural evolution inpolycystalline films, as a function of processing conditions and materials class, arediscussed in terms of these fundamental kinetic processes.
INTRODUCTION
The microstructural characteristics of polycrystalline films control their proper-
ties, performance, and reliability in applications in a wide variety of electronic,
magnetic, photonic, chemical, and micromechanical devices and systems. Poly-
crystalline metallic films are used to interconnect devices in integrated circuits
(61, 92), as magnetic storage media, as elements in magnetic devices, as cat-alytic elements, as thermal sensing elements (80), and as protective and decorative
coatings (79). Polycrystalline semiconductor films are also used as conducting
elements in circuits and devices (35), as well as as optical interconnects (15), and
as active device elements in thin film transistors, solar cells, and detectors (35,
79, 80). Piezoelectric ceramic films are used in surface acoustic wave transducers
(80); ferroelectric ceramic films are being investigated foruse in nonvolatile memo-
ries [MRS Bulletin June 1966], and ceramic films are being investigated for use
as high-dielectric constant interlevel insulators for integrated circuits. Ceramic
high Tc films are also often polycrystalline, although preferably not composed ofrandomly oriented crystals (12). Polycrystalline materials from all classes of mate-
byU
niversidadedeSaoPaulo(USP)
on06/09/11.Forpersonaluseonly.
-
8/6/2019 artigo crescimento filmes
2/33
160 THOMPSON
(a)
coalescence
(b)
thickening
lowTdep
highTdep
anneal
Type 1e.g. Ta, W, Cr, Fe, Si ...
(c)
Type 2e.g. Ag, Al, Au, Cu
(d)
nucleationand
growth
Figure 1 Overview of grain structure evolution during deposition of polycrystalline thin
films.
In all these applications the properties of polycrystalline films must be repro-ducibly controlled in order to control their performance and reliability. This, in
turn, requires the control of their microstructure, through manipulation of the
atomic scale processes that define their structures. Although often complex and
materials-specific phenomena affect the structures of polycrystalline films, there
are also known trends of behavior for materials in general, and for specific materi-
als classes, and these trends can be understood in terms of the fundamental kinetic
processes through which the structures must evolve. It is the purpose of this brief
review to outline the current understanding of these materials and process-generic
trends in structure development and evolution during processing of polycrystallinethin films.
byU
niversidadedeSaoPaulo(USP)
on06/09/11.Forpersonaluseonly.
-
8/6/2019 artigo crescimento filmes
3/33
POLYCRYSTALLINE FILMS 161
(a) (b)
Figure 2 Nucleation,
growth, and coalescence to
form a continuous thin film.
on a substrate surface. This process is discussed in terms of condensation of asolid film from a vapor phase, the most common case, but similar phenomena occur
during film formation by electrodeposition or other methods involving growth from
liquid solutions, as well as for films grown from their melts. The evolution outlined
in Figure 1 also applies to for film formation through reactions at interfaces with
external vapor, liquid, and solid phases (6) and for crystallization of amorphous
films (99). Once formed, nuclei grow into the external phase, as well as laterally in
directions lying in the plane of the interface. Lateral growth leads to impingement
and coalescence of crystals, resulting in the formation of grain boundaries and
defining at least the initial grain-structure characteristics of the newly formed film.This nucleation, growth, impingement, and coalescence process is schematically
illustrated in cross-sectional sketches in Figure 1a and b and Figure 2.
Nucleation (discussed in more detail below) in most thin film formation pro-
cesses is copious, thus nuclei spacings and therefore the grain size at impingement
are of order 10 nm or less. In the absence of coarsening phenomena, the thickness
of the film at coalescence is also of order 10 nm or less. For most applications,
further thickening of the film is required. Grain structure evolution during thick-
ening occurs in two fundamentally different ways, as schematically illustrated in
Figure 1c, d. If the grain boundaries formed through island impingement are im-mobile, the grain structure resulting from the nucleation, growth, and coalescence
byU
niversidadedeSaoPaulo(USP)
on06/09/11.Forpersonaluseonly.
-
8/6/2019 artigo crescimento filmes
4/33
162 THOMPSON
to as the in-plane grain size) becomes small compared with the average grain size
as measured in the direction normal to the plane of the interface (henceforth re-
ferred to as the through-thickness grain size). Often though, as the grains at the
base of the film grow into the parent phase, competitive growth processes lead toan increasing in-plane grain size at the top surface of the thickening film.
If grain boundaries are mobile, the grain structure of a film evolves during the
coalescence process and continues to evolve during film thickening. This often
results in a more equiaxed structure in which the in-plane grain size tends to be
approximately the same as and scale with the film thickness, resulting in structures
in which most grain boundaries traverse the thickness of the film, as schematically
illustrated in Figure 1d, so that the average in-plane grain size is uniform through
the thickness of the film.
Microstructural characteristics of importance include grain shapes, grain sizes,the distribution of grain sizes and the distribution of grain orientations. The in-
plane grain size di can be defined as (4A/ )1/2, where A is the area of the grain
in the plane of the interface (or a plane parallel to it). It is often useful to consider
the degree to which the grains are equiaxed, one measure of which is the grain
aspect ratio ai = dp/di, where dp is the through-thickness grain size. The aspect
ratio can vary from approximately 1, as in Figure 1d, to much larger values that
increase with increasing film thickness, as illustrated in Figure 1c. In general, it is
important to not only know and control the average in-plane grain size and aspect
ratio, but to also know and control the distribution of grain sizes and shapes. Thesecan vary widely with processing conditions. For example, the distributions of in-
plane grain sizes can range from narrow monomodal distributions to multimodal
distributions in which subpopulations can have average sizes that differ by orders
of magnitude (26, 62).
Knowledge and control of the distribution of grain orientations is also im-
portant in most applications of polycrystalline thin films. Whereas, by defini-
tion, the grains or crystals from which a polycrystalline film is formed do not all
have the same crystallographic orientations, rarely do they have fully randomly
distributed crystallographic orientations. Very often polycrystalline films havewhat is referred to as a crystallographic texture, in that the crystals from which
they are composed tend to have specific crystallographic directions normal to the
plane of the film. For example, it is common, although not required (see below),
for films of fcc metals to have crystallographic orientations with (111) planes
parallel to the plane of the film. In this case the films are said to have a (111)
texture. Whereas polycrystalline films often have a sharp texture, meaning that
the vast majority of grains have surface normals within a small deviation of a spe-
cific crystallographic direction, the grains often have random in-plane orientations
relative to rotations about axes normal to the plane of the film. The distribution ofgrain orientations is affected by all the processes that affect grain size and is also
byU
niversidadedeSaoPaulo(USP)
on06/09/11.Forpersonaluseonly.
-
8/6/2019 artigo crescimento filmes
5/33
POLYCRYSTALLINE FILMS 163
In the sections that follow, the nucleation, growth, coalescence, thickening and
grain growth processes are discussed in more detail in order to illustrate some of
the ways in which processing techniques and conditions affect the evolution of
grain sizes, shapes and orientations.
NUCLEATION, GROWTH, ANDCOALESCENCE
The following discussion focuses on film formation via condensation from a vapor
phase. However, as noted above, it should be borne in mind that analogous phe-
nomenology and analyses apply to film formation from other media.
Consider, for simplicity, nuclei which grow as islands that maintain the con-
stant shape of a spherical cap, as shown in Figure 3. This shape would result if theenergy of the free surface of the film, f, is isotropic, and if the particle maintains
its equilibrium shape. The equilibrium shape would be characterized by an angle
of contact between the free surface of the particle and the substrate surface , given
by the force balance f cos( ) + i = s, where i is the energy per unit area of
the island-substrate interface, and s is the energy per unit area of the substrate
surface. As deposition is carried out, atoms arrive at the substrate surface with a
flux R, which is the number of atoms arriving per unit area of the substrate surface
per unit time. It is assumed, again for simplicity, that the depositing atoms are
arriving at normal incidence to the substrate surface. Arriving adatoms adsorb on
f
r
i
s
(a)
rs
Figure 3 (a) An island with isotropic surface
energy s and film/substrate interface energy
i, on a substrate with energy s has an equi-
librium contact angle , and a circular area of
contact with radius rs. (b) A growing island
will incorporate atoms deposited directly and
by addition of adatoms, which are deposited
within a distance on the substrate surface.
byU
niversidadedeSaoPaulo(USP)
on06/09/11.Forpersonaluseonly.
-
8/6/2019 artigo crescimento filmes
6/33
164 THOMPSON
the substrate surface and remain adsorbed for a mean residence time , which is a
function of the desorption rate (which is in turn a function of the binding energy).
Nucleation occurs when stable clusters of adatoms form and continue to grow
rather than dissolving back to smaller clusters and single adatoms. The nucleationrate can be analyzed using classical methods based on the capillarity approxima-
tion or, more appropriately in the current context, based on an atomistic analysis
(45, 56). Both approaches have been treated in exhaustive detail in the literature,
with an apparent consensus that the nucleation rate as indicated by atomistic anal-
yses, is given by
I = I0Rn exp
Gn
kT
, 1.
where I0 is a temperature and deposition-flux-independent constant, k isBoltzmans constant, and T is the temperature of the substrate. Gn is the en-
ergy of formation of a cluster of size n, where n is the critical cluster size.
For physical vapor deposition processes, n has a low integer value, often only 1
(so that the minimum stable cluster size is 2). Because the degree of supersatura-
tion decreases with increasing T, as T increases, n increases (e.g. from 1 to 2 to 3)
and Gn increases, so that the temperature dependence of the nucleation rate
becomes incrementally stronger with increasing T. It is generally found that the
nucleation rate decreases with increasing temperature (56).
When critical cluster sizes are sufficiently large that the crystallography ofthe nucleating phase is defined, specific nuclei crystallographic orientations will
minimize surface and interface energies (60), with nucleation rates higher for
nuclei with energy minimizing orientations. In this case, nucleation is orientation
selective, and the nucleation process can play an important role in determining the
distribution of orientations in the resulting film. When critical cluster sizes are
as small as they usually are in vapor deposition processes, the nucleation process
can still be orientation selective in that dimers and trimers etc will have specific
low-energy configurations relative to the configurations of the substrate atoms;
however, these energy-minimizing orientations may not be those that minimizethe macroscopic surface and interface energies so these initial orientations may
not persist during subsequent structure evolution.
As nuclei grow into islands of the sort illustrated in Figure 3, islands of a given
volume will have total energies that vary with their crystallographic orientations
relative to the plane of the interface and relative to the atomic level structure and
symmetry of the substrate surface. Iff is not isotropic, the energy-minimizing
island orientation will be a function of the anisotropy of f as well as of the
magnitude off, in addition to depending on the magnitude and anisotropy ofi (81,
100, 106). During island growth and competitive coarsening processes, growthof islands with specific surface and interface energy-minimizing crystallographic
byU
niversidadedeSaoPaulo(USP)
on06/09/11.Forpersonaluseonly.
-
8/6/2019 artigo crescimento filmes
7/33
POLYCRYSTALLINE FILMS 165
surface from which adatoms are more likely to be added to the growing island
than to desorb or become part of another island or critical cluster. The width of
this zone, , is a function of and of the difussivity for adatoms, both of which
have an Arhenius dependence on temperature [i.e. proportional to a Boltzman termof the form exp(E/kT)]. Whether increases or decreases with T depends on
the relative magnitudes of the energy of desorption and the activation energy for
surface diffusion. If the absolute value of the latter is lower, decreases with
increasing T, as has often been inferred from experimental observations (45).
Considering the radius rs of the circle of intersection of an island and the
substrate, as illustrated in Figure 3, the rate of in-plane growth of a particle has the
form
G =
drs
dt = G0
1+
rs, 2.
where G0 is proportional to R and independent of T, but depends on and on the
atomic volume of the particle (88).
If it is assumed that grain boundaries formed when islands impinge are immo-
bile, the grain size at impingement can be determined as a function of, I, and G,
and therefore as a function of R and . When (G0/I)1/3 , a Johnson-Mehl grain
structure results (18), for which the average in-plane grain diameter is
di = 1.203G
0I1/3
,
G0
I1/3
. 3.
When (G0/I)1/3 , a grain structure for which
di = 1.351 .
G0
I
1/34.
results. This structure, which we refer to as the -dominated structure, can be
described by a Vornoi construction for points defined by the centers of disks of
radius , which have been randomly place on a plane, with maximum final density(18). The distributions of grain sizes for Johnson-Mehl and-dominated structures
have been determined through simulations. The distribution of grain sizes in the
-dominated structure is found to be much narrower than that of the Johnson-Mehl
structure, resulting in a greater initial stability against the grain coarsening which
occurs when grain boundaries become mobile.
The grain size at impingement can be approximated for all , G0, and I by (88)
di 1.351 + 1.203G0
I 1/3
. 5.
When, as is generally the case, I and decrease with increasing temperature, the
byU
niversidadedeSaoPaulo(USP)
on06/09/11.Forpersonaluseonly.
-
8/6/2019 artigo crescimento filmes
8/33
166 THOMPSON
deposition flux R. It should be noted that the film thickness at which coalescence
occurs should, under conditions discussed above, scale with di, so that the film
thickness at coalescence should also increase with increasing T and remain un-
changed or decrease with increasing R. When islands grow with more complexgeometries, the specific results given above will be modified, but it is expected
that the trends for the dependence of the grain size at impingement, di, on R and
T will be preserved.
Nucleation experiments often show that a saturation in the number of nuclei
per unit area Nmax is reached when the zones of width completely cover the
substrate surface. Nmax is expected to scale with the inverse of the square root
of di. Measurements ofNmax suggest that even for high mobility materials (such as
fcc metals) deposited at relatively high temperatures (several hundred degrees C),
the grain size at impingement is, or would be inferred to be, of order 10 nm orless (45). Low-mobility materials, such as semiconductors or refractory metals, or
materials deposited at still lower temperatures, are expected to have still smaller
grain sizes impingement.
COARSENING
In the preceding discussion it has been implicitly assumed that the exchange of
atoms between islands does not significantly impact the overall structure evolutionprocess. However, the average island size within a system of isolated islands can, in
principle, increase through a coarsening process, even if deposition is interrupted.
This can occur through detachment of atoms from islands and diffusion of atoms
on the substrate surface to attach to other islands, resulting in the shrinkage and
even disappearance of some islands and the growth of other islands, so that the
average island size increases (10, 85, 111). Such a coarsening processes would be
driven by differences in the average energy per atom for islands of different sizes.
For islands with the same surface and interface energies, the energy per atom will
scale with the island surface to volume ratio, so that the atoms in small islands willhave high energies relative to those in larger islands. In the more general case, the
free energy per atom in an island will be a function of the island size and of the
total surface and interface energies of the island.
Because the surface and interface energies are a function of the crystallographic
orientation of the lattice of the island relative to the orientations of the substrate
lattice and the interface plane, the energy differences driving coarsening processes
include contributions that depend on the crystallographic orientation of an island
as well as on its size relative to that of its neighbors. Pre-coalescence island coars-
ening should therefore lead to an evolution in the distributions of island orientationsand well as islands sizes, favoring islands with orientations with minimum surface
byU
niversidadedeSaoPaulo(USP)
on06/09/11.Forpersonaluseonly.
-
8/6/2019 artigo crescimento filmes
9/33
POLYCRYSTALLINE FILMS 167
once islands impinge, island coarsening can occur through exchange of atoms via
grain boundary motion or via diffusion of atoms on the surfaces of the islands.
Observations of coarsening during and after coalescence are more common (64).
COALESCENCE
Consider two islands of the same size that have grown just to the point of contact,
as schematically illustrated in Figure 4. Once the islands make contact, there
is an energetic driving force for formation of a grain boundary that eliminates
the energies of the free surfaces of the two contacting islands, 2f, in exchange
for the lower energy of the newly formed grain boundary gb. This can happen
without diffusive processes, through elastic distortion of the islands as they arebrought together through grain boundary formation which initiates at the base of
the islands where they first make contact. If there is no sliding at the island/substrate
interfaces, the resulting strain in the islands can be substantial. Nix & Clemens (58)
have recently shown that the energy per volume released by boundary formation
increases with decreasing island size and, for island sizes of order 10 nm, can be
sufficiently high to drive development of stresses in the islands on the order of
GPas. This provides a possible explanation for the high tensile stresses that often
develop during deposition under conditions for which, and of materials for which,
surface diffusivities are expected to be low (1, 31, 32). Low diffusivities lead tosmall grain sizes at coalescence and to little stress relief via diffusive processes
during the coalescence process.
Figure 4 Coarsening resulting from the coa-
lescence of two islands.
byU
niversidadedeSaoPaulo(USP)
on06/09/11.Forpersonaluseonly.
-
8/6/2019 artigo crescimento filmes
10/33
168 THOMPSON
If surface self-diffusivities and grain boundary self-diffusivities are such that
pairs of contacting islands can adopt fixed volume equilibrium shapes, the island
pairs will evolve as shown schematically in Figure 4af. Islands first form a grain
boundary either through elastic straining or through diffusion of material to theboundary. In the former case, the centers of mass of the islands will move toward
each other. If the energy per atom is exactly the same for the two islands, the islands
will be in an unstable equilibrium, and coarsening will not occur until a fluctuation
leads to an energy difference between the islands. When energy differences exist
due to a size difference and/or differences in surface or interface energies, one
island will grow and the other island will shrink, as shown in Figure 4cf. As this
coarsening occurs, there are equilibrium shapes for the island pairs for any given
relative volume and surface and grain boundary energies. However, coarsening
continuously leads to lower energy configurations. Coarsening requires diffusiveprocesses in the grain boundary including grain boundary motion. As a result of
this coarsening process small islands can shrink and eventually disappear, and the
centers of mass of the remaining islands can move from their original positions.
This coarsening process therefore results in an evolution in the grain size distribu-
tion, and, because it is also orientation selective, might also lead to an evolution
in the grain orientation distribution.
If coarsening occurs during island coalescence, the fraction of the substrate
surface covered by islands and by their surrounding nucleation exclusion zones
can decrease. This can lead to a situation in which relatively late in the process ofcovering the substrate surface, for example after Nmax has been reached, new areas
are exposed in which nucleation can again occur. This phenomenon is known as
secondary nucleation and has been observed during deposition in metallic systems
(64). Therefore, while coarsening during coalescence can lead to a decrease in the
final grain size due to decreases in the number of nuclei that survive the coalescence
process, secondary nucleation, can, in principle, lead to an increase in the number
of surviving nuclei, at least partially compensating for the loss of nuclei.
The rate of coarsening during coalescence depends on the surface and grain
boundary diffusivities and also on the initial distribution of island sizes. In thesequence shown in Figure 4, the coarsening is relatively slow at first, but then
speeds up as the size difference (and therefore the driving force) becomes larger.
Islands that first make contact when their sizes are substantially different coarsen
quickly. Coarsening during coalescence leads to the rapid elimination of small
islands, and might therefore be expected to lead to structures with more uniform
grain sizes, such as the -dominated structures discussed above.
It should be noted that elastic distortion to create a grain boundary is rapid
compared with the diffusive processes required for the islands to adopt their fixed
volume equilibrium shapes. However, if diffusion is relatively fast, the islandpairs will adopt fixed volume equilibrium shapes, and the coalescence strain will
byU
niversidadedeSaoPaulo(USP)
on06/09/11.Forpersonaluseonly.
-
8/6/2019 artigo crescimento filmes
11/33
POLYCRYSTALLINE FILMS 169
complete stress relief requires dislocation generation and motion (23, 57) or sliding
at the film/substrate interface (95). If the deposition rate is high and the island
growth process is fast relative to the rate of surface self-diffusion, coalescence
stresses will not be relieved.Whether coarsening during coalescence results in the elimination of a signifi-
cant number of islands depends on the overall growth rate of all the islands, which
is a function of the deposition rate R. If R is high, only the smaller islands will
be eliminated. In this context, R must be high relative to the surface and grain
boundary self-diffusivities. These self-diffusivities increase with the substrate tem-
perature as exp(-Q/kT), so that coarsening during coalescence leads to an increase
in the grain size with increasing substrate temperature (assuming that secondary
nucleation does not compensate for the coarsening effects). The dependencies of
the grain size on R and T is therefore similar to that expected without coarsening.The grain structure characteristics resulting from coarsening processes occurring
during coalescence and their dependence on the relative magnitudes of the relevant
kinetic and energetic parameters are not quantitatively well understood. However,
coarsening processes that continue after coalescence, grain growth processes, have
been studied extensively and quantitatively modeled.
GRAIN GROWTH
Consider a fully coalesced polycrystalline film with an equiaxed grain structure,
such as the one shown in Figure 5. Grain coarsening can occur through motion of
grain boundaries resulting in the shrinkage and elimination of small grains which,
in turn, results in an increase in the average size of the remaining grains. This is a
well known phenomenon called grain growth. Grain growth has been the subject
of several reviews (4, 33, 77), and grain growth in polycrystalline thin films has
been the subject of a review in this series (86). Only the key characteristics of
grain growth in films are reviewed here, with a focus on improved understandings
since the earlier article in this series.Grain growth in pure defect-free bulk materials is driven by the reduction in
the total grain boundary area and in the corresponding reduction in the total grain
boundary energy that accompanies the area decrease. At a more microscopic scale
this is accomplished when individual boundaries move toward their centers of
curvature in order to reduce boundary curvature and therefore boundary energy.
When grain boundary energy reduction alone drives grain growth, it is expected
that (4)
dr
dt
mgb
r= mgb, 6.
byU
niversidadedeSaoPaulo(USP)
on06/09/11.Forpersonaluseonly.
-
8/6/2019 artigo crescimento filmes
12/33
170 THOMPSON
(a)
(b)
Figure 5 Grain growth in a continuous film with an in-plane grain size, which is constant
through the film thickness, and with an average in-plane grain size similar to the film
thickness.
m = m0 exp(Qgb/kT), where m0 is a temperature-independent constant, and Qgbis the activation energy for the rate-limiting atomic process involved in boundary
motion. From Equation 6 it is expected that the average grain radius will increase
with t1/2. It is also expected that the shape of the grain size distribution will be
time-invariant, indicating self-similar growth in that the function describing the
distribution of normalized grain sizes (the grain sizes divided by the median grainsize) is time independent. Grain growth with these characteristics is called normal
byU
niversidadedeSaoPaulo(USP)
on06/09/11.Forpersonaluseonly.
-
8/6/2019 artigo crescimento filmes
13/33
POLYCRYSTALLINE FILMS 171
The number of sides of a grain changes through switching events is of two ba-
sic types (71, 77). The first type occurs when two new grain boundary triple
junctions combine to eliminate a grain boundary, forming an unstable quadru-
ple point that immediately decomposes into two triple junctions connected by anew grain edge. The second kind of switching event occurs when triple junctions
are eliminated through disappearance of grains. Approximate analytic models for
two-dimensional grain growth, which combine analyses of grain growth within
topological classes (number-of-sides classes) as well as analyses of the rates of
topological transitions, have been shown to be successful in modeling the time
evolution of the statistical geometric and topological characteristics of soap froths
evolving between glass plates, when the bubble size is roughly equal to or larger
than the plate spacing (24, 77). Froth evolution is thought to be similar to idealized
normal grain growth.Several techniques have been developed for computer simulation of grain
growth, including Monte Carlo Potts models (76), front-tracking models (19),
and so-called vertex models (21, 39). In front-tracking models, points on grain
boundaries are moved a distance and direction consistent with
= mgb, 7.
in time steps, where the boundary velocity and the curvature are vector quan-
tities. Force balances are maintained at the grain boundary triple junctions in each
time step. Using this approach, as well as the other modeling approaches, behaviorconsistent with the expectations for two-dimensional normal grain growth can be
demonstrated, i.e. average geometric dimensions of the grain structure scale with
t1/2, and the normalized grain size distributions and number-of-sides distributions
are time invariant (14, 77). It has been shown that the time-invariant or steady-state
grain size distribution is well fit by a Weibull distribution function (14).
A film with the structure shown in Figure 5a can, in principle, undergo a
grain growth process that is two dimensional in character, e.g. the directions of
boundary motion will generally lie in the plane of the film, and boundary motion
will largely occur to reduce the in-plane curvatures of the boundaries. However,true two-dimensional normal grain growth rarely if ever occurs in thin films. Grain
structures of films that are known to have undergone grain growth do not have grain
size distributions that are well fit by Weibull distribution functions (or similar
distribution functions such as the Gamma distribution), but are instead well fit
by lognormal grain size distribution functions (62, 97, 98, 109). Also it is often
found that these grain structures are resistant to further evolution through grain
growth when the average in-plane grain size is about three times the film thickness
(7, 20, 54, 62). This is known as the specimen thickness effect (7). The Weibull
and lognormal distributions can be readily distinguished. When grain growth doeslead to grain sizes significantly larger than the film thickness, it usually involves the
byU
niversidadedeSaoPaulo(USP)
on06/09/11.Forpersonaluseonly.
-
8/6/2019 artigo crescimento filmes
14/33
172 THOMPSON
These departures from ideal two-dimensional behavior arise for a number of
reasons. First, consider a film with the as-deposited structure shown in Figure 1c.
Heating of such a film will increase the boundary mobility and eventually lead to
observable grain growth, which will ultimately lead to structures such as the onesschematically illustrated in Figure 1d and Figure 5. However, because the initial
structure has a grain size that is not uniform through the film thickness, there will
be an important three-dimensional component to the grain growth until the vast
majority of boundaries traverse the thickness of the film. Also, as highly non-
equiaxed columnar grains disappear, they are likely to do so by first collapsing to a
triple junction line in the interior of the film, which connects two three-dimensional
grains (96). The three-dimensional grains will rapidly shrink through motion of
boundaries in directions out of the plane of the film. The higher the average aspect
ratio of the grains, the more important this three-dimensional component will bein governing the overall structure evolution.
It is therefore only after structures of the type shown in Figures 1dand Figure 5
develop that the conditions for two-dimensional normal grain growth might, in
principle, be approximated. However, at this point the top and bottom surfaces
of the films begin to play important roles affecting further evolution. First, it is
important to recognize that a balance of the surface energies of neighboring grains
with the energy of the boundary between the grains leads to the formation of
grooves where boundaries intersect the surfaces of the film. Groove formation has
been treated by a number of authors (54, 78). Mullins (54) discusses the effectsthat groove formation have on grain growth in metallic sheets. Grooving and grain
growth are competing kinetic processes. To a first approximation, grooves will not
form on rapidly moving boundaries. However, as grain growth proceeds and the
velocity of a boundary decreases, grooves eventually form and suppress or stop
further boundary motion. Mullins showed that this effect can lead to the speci-
men thickness effect. This has also been demonstrated using a two-dimensional
simulation which assumes that boundary velocities drop discontinuously to zero
when the boundary curvature (and therefore the boundary velocity) falls below
a critical value (20). Frost et al also show that under these conditions not onlydoes grain growth stagnate when the average in-plane grain size is about three
times the film thickness, but also that the grain size distributions of the resulting
stagnant structures are well fit by a lognormal distribution function, as is observed
experimentally. It should be noted, however, that solute drag (29) can also lead
to transient regimes in which the grain size distribution is well fit by a lognormal
function.
The energies of the top surface of the film and the film substrate interface also
affect grain growth in films in other ways. Once structures of the type shown
in Figure 1d and Figure 5 develop, a significant fraction of the total energy of agrain is associated with the energies of the free surface and the interface. The
byU
niversidadedeSaoPaulo(USP)
on06/09/11.Forpersonaluseonly.
-
8/6/2019 artigo crescimento filmes
15/33
POLYCRYSTALLINE FILMS 173
s
i
2rs
2r
h
Figure 6 The energetics of grain structure evolution in thin films on substrates are affected
by the surface energy s, the interface energy i, and the strain energy density, all of which
vary with the crystallographic orientation of a grain.
not necessarily the same orientations, one energy will dominate so that there will
be grain orientations that minimize the sum of the surface and interface energy.
Therefore the growth of grains with these orientations is favored (see Figure 6).
This has several important consequences. First, there is a subpopulation of grains
for which growth is favored so that steady-state normal grain growth can not occur
until or unless only the favored grains are left. Second, since grains in the favored
subpopulation have restricted crystallographic orientations, grain growth in films
necessarily leads to an evolution in the distribution of grain sizes toward a uniform
or restricted texture unless the texture of the film is already uniform.
Two-dimensional front-tracking simulations can be modified to account for
surface and interface energy minimization by modifying Equation 7 to be
= mgb + s/i, 8.where
s/i =(s +i)
gbh, 9.
and where s and i are the differences of the surface and interface energies,
respectively, of the grains meeting at the boundary, and h is the film thickness.
s/i then becomes a measure for the out-of plane curvature of the boundary, and
the effect of surface and interface energy differences become more important in
thinner films.It is thought that surface energy minimization during grain growth is responsible
byU
niversidadedeSaoPaulo(USP)
on06/09/11.Forpersonaluseonly.
-
8/6/2019 artigo crescimento filmes
16/33
174 THOMPSON
minimization does not favor growth of grains with specific in-plane orientations.
However, for polycrystalline films on single-crystal substrates, i depends on the
in-plane orientation of the grain, and grain growth is expected for films composed
of grains with three-dimensionally constrained or epitaxial orientations, as hasbeen observed in metallic films on various single crystals, including single-crystal
metallic films (91), and ceramic films (52).
Another important aspect of the energetics of grain growth in thin films is
that they are often under high intrinsic or extrinsic stresses. High intrinsic tensile
stresses can arise during coalescence, as described above, and in sputter-deposited
films, high intrinsic compressive stresses are sometimes observed, presumably
the result of shot peening effects (60). In addition, when films are heated or
cooled on substrates, differential thermal expansion can lead to significant ten-
sile or compressive extrinsic strains. In continuous films, these strains are largelybiaxial, thus the associated strain energy density in different grains is given by
E = 2Mhkl, 10.
and depends on the magnitude of the strain and the effective biaxial modulus
Mhkl. Mhkl depends on the crystallographic direction (hkl), which is normal to
the plane of the film and therefore normal to the plane of the strain (57, 89, 90).
The biaxial modulus for grains with arbitrary (hkl) texture can be calculated using
equations given by Murikami & Chaudhari (55). For fcc metals the effective
biaxial modulus is found to have a minimum value for grains with (100) texture
and a maximum value for grains with (111) texture.
It can be seen, then, that in biaxially strained films, grains with different orien-
tations have different strain energy densities and that these energy differences can
contribute to the driving force for grain growth, favoring grains with strain energy
density minimizing orientations (16, 68, 87, 110). This effect has been accounted
for in simulations (9) by modification of Equation 8 to become
= mgb + s/i + , 11.where is an upper bound for the effects of differences in strain energy density
and is given by 2 M/gb, where M is the difference in the biaxial moduli of
the two grains meeting at the boundary under consideration.
The effects of strain energy minimization are qualitatively similar to those of
surface and interface energy minimization in that normal grain growth can not
occur until the subpopulation of grains favored by strain energy minimization
has consumed all grains with other orientations. Strain energy minimization also
drives the evolution of the distribution of grain orientations, favoring strain energy-
minimizing textures. It is important to note, however, that the contribution ofstrain energy differences to the energetics of grain growth does not scale with film
byU
niversidadedeSaoPaulo(USP)
on06/09/11.Forpersonaluseonly.
-
8/6/2019 artigo crescimento filmes
17/33
POLYCRYSTALLINE FILMS 175
surface and interface energies generally appear to be minimized for grains with
(111) texture, whereas strain energies are minimized for grains with (100) texture
(16, 89, 90, 102). Other materials have energy minimizing textures. For example,
it has been suggested that for TiN, (100) texture minimizes the surface energy,whereas (111) is known to minimize the strain energy (59, 65).
It has been observed in a number films of mechanically anisotropic fcc metals
that annealing-induced grain growth can promote the development or enhancement
of pre-existing (111) texture or strengthening instead of an initially weak (100)
texture, depending the film thickness and the temperature at which the film was
deposited. This can be understood in terms of energy minimization by recognizing
that surface and interface energy minimization and strain energy minimization
compete in defining the texture that is, on average, favored during grain growth.
The average driving force for grain boundary motion arising from surface andinterface energy minimization is
Es/i =(s +i)
h, 12.
where s is the difference in the average surface energy of the film and the
minimum surface energy, and i is similarly defined for the interface. The
average driving force arising from strain energy minimization is
E = 2M, 13.
where, M is the difference in the average biaxial modulus of the film and the
minimum modulus. A transition in dominant texture will occur when Es/i = E,
with surface and interface energy minimization dominating when Es/i > E, i.e. in
films with low h and , and strain energy minimization dominating when Es/i
-
8/6/2019 artigo crescimento filmes
18/33
176 THOMPSON
surfaceenergy
minimizatione.g. (111)
strainenergy
minimizatione.g. (100)
film thickness
Figure 7 A texture map
showing the expected texture
favored by grain growth as
a function of the elastically
accommodated strain and the
film thickness.
defects is partially recovered through grain growth and also contributes to texture
evolution (69).
When there is a subpopulation of grains whose growth is favored, e.g. by surfaceand interface energy or strain energy minimization, abnormal growth grain growth
results because the normalized grain size distribution and the grain orientation
distribution evolve during grain growth. If there is a favored subpopulation and
grain boundary grooves have formed favored grains may preferentially avoid stag-
nation (54). This can lead to strikingly bimodal grain size distributions as favored
grains grow by consuming grains with otherwise stagnant boundaries. This mode
of grain growth in thin films is commonly observed (62, 86, 93, 109) and has been
referred to as secondary grain growth. Secondary grain growth can also result from
precipitate-induced stagnation coupled with growth of preferred subpopulations(22, 48, 104). In secondary grain growth, the final grain size of the film depends
on how many grains are able to grow. This, in turn, depends on the degree of the
selectivity and on how many grains in the initial grain structure have the favored
orientation (84). A small initial grain size in initially randomly oriented films fa-
vors a smaller grain size resulting from the impingement of secondary grains. As
secondary grains impinge and completely consume the smaller stagnant grains, the
resulting grain structure is likely to be stagnant and characterized by a monomodal
distribution of sizes. In at least one case this has been characterized, and the dis-
tribution of grain sizes appears to be well fit by a lognornmal function (41). Thein-plane grain size resulting from secondary grain growth can be many times the
byU
niversidadedeSaoPaulo(USP)
on06/09/11.Forpersonaluseonly.
-
8/6/2019 artigo crescimento filmes
19/33
POLYCRYSTALLINE FILMS 177
defect energy, such as the energy from dislocations, as well as the energy of grain
boundaries. Strain energy and surface and interface energy minimization can also
contribute to the driving force for recrystallization, thus recrystallization can also
lead to texture evolution, bimodal grain size distributions, and final in-plane grainsizes many times the film thickness. Recrystallization and secondary grain growth
are not readily distinguishable.
GRAINGROWTHDURING FILM COALESCENCE
AND THICKENING
It has been shown that grain growth during the late stages of coalescence can
lead to the (111) texture observed in as-deposited Au (34, 64, 107), Ag (34), Cu(34) and Al (67) films, even when they are deposited at room temperature. In the
case of Au, room temperature is only about 20% of the absolute melting tempera-
ture. Continued grain growth during film thickening, schematically illustrated in
Figure 1bd, is expected in these metals and has been directly demonstrated in
experiments on Al (47). This behavior is also suggested by the stress evolution
characteristic of this mode of structure evolution observed during deposition of Ag,
Au, and Cu at room temperature (1) and Fe and Cr at elevated temperatures (1, 2).
If grain growth proceeds during thickening, but is subject to grooving-induced
stagnation, it is expected that the average in-plane grain size in the as-depositedfilms should scale with the film thickness, as has been observed for Al films (47).
In this case the as-deposited grain size distribution should be lognormal, as has
also been observed in Al (47, 97). The texture and the lognormal grain size dis-
tribution observed in as-deposited Al films is probably the result of grain growth
processes occurring during film coalescence and thickening. These microstruc-
tural characteristics observed in other as-deposited metallic films may have similar
origins. In general, the mode of structure evolution illustrated in Figure 1bd,
which we refer to as type 2 evolution, is expected in materials with high atomic
mobilities (and therefore high grain boundary mobilities) at low temperatures andin other materials at higher temperatures at which their atomic mobilities are
high.
It should be noted that impurities in films can lead to grain boundary drag and
even grain growth stagnation (17, 49). For this reason, improved vacuums with
lower pressures of background gases can lead to larger as-deposited grain sizes
in films that undergo grain growth during coalescence if solute drag effects are
reduced or absent. This is probably the reason that films of Al, Au, Ag, and Cu
tend to have larger as-deposited grain sizes when they are deposited under UHV
conditions (34, 67). Gettering of sputtering gases also leads to larger grain sizesin sputter-deposited Al films. On the other hand, introduction of impurities dur-
byU
niversidadedeSaoPaulo(USP)
on06/09/11.Forpersonaluseonly.
-
8/6/2019 artigo crescimento filmes
20/33
178 THOMPSON
Impurity-induced suppression of grain growth during deposition can lead to an
increase in the grain boundary energy per volume, which can drive secondary
grain growth and recrystallization. Processes such as electrodeposition, which of-
ten lead to significant impurity incorporation, can therefore result in as-depositedfilms with very fine grain sizes in materials that would have larger grain sizes
if deposited via cleaner vapor deposition techniques. These films would be more
prone to undergo recrystallization, as in room-temperature so-called self annealing
of electroplated Cu films (28, 46).
COMPETITIVE GRAIN GROWTH PROCESSES AT THE
SURFACESOFGROWING FILMS
Once a continuous film has formed through nucleation, growth, and coalescence
processes, thickening is normally expected to occur via epitaxial growth on pre-
existing grains, even at quite low temperatures. Exceptions are possible if the
surface composition of the growing grains changes sufficiently to require renu-
cleation. For example, even during growth of nominally pure films, if impurities
absorb and accumulate on the surface of the growing grains, due for example to re-
jection from the growing crystals, the surface will periodically become sufficiently
coated with impurities to require nucleation of new grains of the pure material.
Under clean and well-controlled growth conditions, thickening is expectedto proceed as schematically illustrated in Figure 1c, d. As discussed above, in
cases in which grain boundaries are mobile during deposition, type 2 thickening
(Figure 1bd) occurs and the grain size of the film increases as the film thick-
ens. Adatoms join the grain on which they are deposited but may become incor-
porated in neighboring grains through motion of boundaries in the bulk or volume
of the film. The grain aspect ratios in the as-deposited films have an average value
of order 1 if grain growth proceeds to stagnation as the film thickens.
When the grain boundaries in the bulk of a film are immobile, type 1 thickening
(Figure 1bc) occurs and results in films with high-aspect-ratio columnar grains.Even in this case the grain size and texture at the top of the film can still evolve
through competitive grain growth processes restricted to the surface of the growing
film. At very low temperatures at which surface self-diffusivities for adatoms
are very low, surface topography present at coalescence can become accentuated
during thickening as atoms arrive and remain at their arrival site. It has been
shown that roughness on the surface of even thickening amorphous films can
become accentuated under conditions of severely limited adatom mobility, and this
stabilized roughness can result in a columnar growth mode and columnar structures
(5). This phenomenon is known as kinetic roughening (36, 51). When adatomsarrive at normal incidence to the films surface, perturbations are stabilized and
byU
niversidadedeSaoPaulo(USP)
on06/09/11.Forpersonaluseonly.
-
8/6/2019 artigo crescimento filmes
21/33
POLYCRYSTALLINE FILMS 179
minimum-sized perturbations that are stabilized increases. If adatoms arrive with a
range of angles off the normal to the film surface, as they do in sputter deposition,
shadowing can also occur (5, 38, 42). Perturbations that reach farther into the
vapor phase than others tend to collect more of the atoms arriving at angles otherthan normal incidence. Shadowing can lead to competitive growth of columns
with structures similar to those shown in Figure 1c but with the grain boundaries
replaced by walls of low density or voided material. It should also be noted that
surface corrugation to relieve strain can lead to growth of columnar structures,
even in the absence of polygranular or even crystalline structure (3, 27, 73, 75).
Ballistic aggregation models in which atoms are added to growing film surfaces,
and hence subject to severe limitations on their repositioning based on constrained
arrival directions, show features on an atomic scale similar to those expected by
analytic treatments of kinetic roughening (30).Although kinetic roughening and shadowing effects may contribute to the for-
mation of structures of the type shown in Figure 1c for polycrystalline films, given
that the columns in polycrystalline films are defined by grain boundaries, it is rea-
sonable to believe that some form of competition for incorporation of adatoms in
different grains is primarily responsible for the evolution of these structures. Also,
the spatial scales associated with kinetic roughening and shadowing effects are
generally smaller than those of the grain structures of polycrystalline films. This
has recently been nicely demonstrated in experiments on TiN grown on Al films
(13). In this case the Al films had grain sizes on the order of one micrometer andTiN grains grew epitaxially on the Al grains so that the TiN film had a grain size
of the same order as that of the Al film, even under growth conditions in which
the grain size of TiN grown on an amorphous SiO2 layer would have been much
smaller. However, a small-scale columnar structure as highlighted by microvoids
at column walls was observed within the TiN grains, demonstrating the effects
of kinetic roughening and shadowing on this smaller size scale. In this case the
columnar structure resulting from kinetic roughening and shadowing was smaller
than, and independent of, the size scale of the columnar grain structure associated
with the films polycrystallinity.The competitive polycrystalline growth illustrated in Figure 1c can be best un-
derstood by considering the action of adatoms with finite mobility, which, upon
arriving in the vicinity of a grain boundaries diffuse to attach to grains and thus
minimize the boundary curvature. Thus the competition among grains at the sur-
face of the film can be viewed as a two-dimensional grain growth process in
which the boundaries are mobile only at the surface of the film, and the mobil-
ity of the boundaries is related to the adatom diffusivities as well as to the time
during which adatoms can move before being buried by newly arriving adatoms.
This diffusion time is related to the deposition rate. If this simple picture applies,then simulations of two-dimensional grain growth run to different times would
byU
niversidadedeSaoPaulo(USP)
on06/09/11.Forpersonaluseonly.
-
8/6/2019 artigo crescimento filmes
22/33
180 THOMPSON
t1/2 (74), and the grain size distribution should be well fit by a Weibull distribution
function (14). If surface energy minimization contributes to the driving force for
grain boundary motion at the surface of the film, the crystallographic texture of
the grains at the surface of the film will evolve as grains with high energy sur-faces are eliminated or occluded during thickening (43, 44). The texture evolution
and grain size evolution could then also be understood using two-dimensional
simulations (74). Similarly, if strains and strain energies are high, strain energy
minimization might also significantly contribute to the evolution of the surface
grain structure, driving the development of strain energy minimizing textures dur-
ing film thickening (59, 65, 88).
For films whose stress state is affected most strongly by the tensile stress that
develops during coalescence, the magnitude of the strain, and therefore of dif-
ferences in strain energy densities, will depend on the island size at coalescencewhich, under the conditions discussed above, increases with increasing deposi-
tion temperature and decreases with increasing deposition rate. In this case strain
energy minimizing textures might be expected in films deposited at lower tem-
peratures and higher rates, whereas surface energy minimizing textures might be
expected otherwise (88). This argument is qualitatively consistent with observa-
tions of texture as a function of deposition rate and temperature in a variety of
evaporated metallic films (25).
As mentioned earlier, sputtered films can be deposited with high compressive
stresses when the energies of arriving atoms and other bombarding species aresufficiently high to cause shot peening effects. Minimization of compressive strains
may also drive the evolution of strain-minimizing textures. This hasbeen suggested
as the origin of (111) textures in TiN films deposited under conditions leading to
high stresses, as opposed to the development of (100) texture, which is speculated
to minimize the surface energy of TiN (59, 65).
In addition to strain and surface energy minimization, growth velocity anisotro-
pies can also lead to competition of grains at the surface of the thickening film
and a through-thickness evolution of the in-plane grain size and the average crys-
tallographic texture of the grains at the surface. This is most simply illustrated inFigure 8, as originally described by van der Drift (101). Consider two-dimensional
crystals that grow with a square facetted morphology bound by faces with Miller
indices of type (01), which are assumed to grow only in the (01) directions so
that the square morphologies are retained. In this cases the maximum rate of ex-
tension or growth of the crystals is in the (11) directions. Even if these crystals
nucleate on a line (the analog of a surface for three-dimensional crystals) with
random orientations, thickening will result in the eventual occlusion of crystals
with textures near (01) by crystals with textures near (11). This happens because
the crystals with (11) texture are oriented to have fast growth directions lying notonly normal to the plane of the film but also in the plane of the film. This results
byU
niversidadedeSaoPaulo(USP)
on06/09/11.Forpersonaluseonly.
-
8/6/2019 artigo crescimento filmes
23/33
POLYCRYSTALLINE FILMS 181
Figure 8 van der Drift construction illustrating through-thickness grain-size and grain-
orientationevolution resulting fromgrowth velocity anisotropy during film thickening(101).
Thijssen (83) has termed this type of model a 1+1D model to capture thefact that the competition is occurring only in directions parallel to the line that
represents the surface as the film thickens in another dimension. Thijssen shows
that such a model also results in an average in-plane grain size at the surface of the
film (average grain width along a line parallel to the surface line), which scales with
h1/2. Thijssen later reported a model for 2+1D growth (82) in which competition
occurs on a two-dimensional surface of a growing film and argued that in this case
the average in-plane grain size at the surface of the film scales at h5/2. Paritosh et al
(63) have also treated the 1+1D case, again confirming that the average surface
grain size scales with h1/2, but also quantitatively analyzing the evolution of thedistribution of grain sizes and orientations. Models of this type have been invoked
to explain grain size and texture evolution in diamond films (105).
It should be noted that a number of experiment report grains with specific
in-plane orientations that are favored during thickening, which result in three-
dimensionally constrained surface textures and in-plane orientations (50, 72, 108).
A number of models for this behavior have been proposed (11, 37, 66).
For through-thickness in-plane grain size and surface texture evolution caused
by growth velocity anisotropy or driven by surface or strain energy minimization,
the rate of grain size evolution will diminish once grains with the favored texturehave occluded all other grains and the surface texture becomes uniform. This can
byU
niversidadedeSaoPaulo(USP)
on06/09/11.Forpersonaluseonly.
-
8/6/2019 artigo crescimento filmes
24/33
182 THOMPSON
Figure 9 If surface grain growth during film thickening is driven by growth velocity,
surface energy, or strain energy anisotropy, when all unfavored grains are occluded, furtherevolution may lead to grains with parallel boundaries, uniform through-thickness sizes, and
uniform or restricted textures. (This could lead to zone 2 structures in the Movchan &
Demchishin scheme.)
e.g. when adatom mobilities are high, the competitive growth phase may transpire
in the very early stages of film growth, so that the columnar parallel-boundary
structure dominates the character of the film, especially in thick films.
ZONEMODELS REVISITED
In all the structure-governing phenomena described above, temperature is the crit-
ical effect in controlling the relative importance of various thermally activated
processes. Adatom diffusion on the substrate surface, the rate of adatom desorp-
tion, and the rate of nucleation control the grain size at impingement and are all
exponentially dependent on temperature. Pre-coalescence coarsening is controlled
by adatom diffusion on the substrate surface, and coarsening during and after co-alescence is controlled by self-diffusion on the island or film surfaces and by self-
diffusion along and across grain boundaries. Coarsening confined to the surface of
the growing film is also governed by the rates of surface self-diffusion of adatoms.
When adatom mobilities are low, grain boundary mobilities are also low, and
initial grain sizes are small and tend to change only through coarsening at the
surface of the growing film. Bulk, grain boundary and surface self-diffusivities
for a material at given temperature, tend to be lower the higher the melting tem-
perature of that material. This leads to the tendency to observe similar structural
evolution for materials within the same materials class at similar homologous tem-peratures, Th, where the homologous temperature is defined as the temperature in
byU
niversidadedeSaoPaulo(USP)
on06/09/11.Forpersonaluseonly.
-
8/6/2019 artigo crescimento filmes
25/33
POLYCRYSTALLINE FILMS 183
structures are expected when the deposition temperature is below a homologous
temperature of about 0.5, and the effects of bulk grain boundary motion are not
expected unless deposition temperatures above homologous temperatures of 0.5 K
are used. Thornton (94) noted that in sputter deposition, effective adatom mobili-ties are affected by the energy with which the atoms arrive at the film surface. The
energy is affected by the number of collisions the arriving atom has with sputter-
ing gas atoms, which scales with the pressure of the sputtering gas. This leads to
an increase in the homologous temperatures associated with structural transitions
with decreasing sputtering gas pressure for sputtered films. Thornton illustrated
this by adding another dimension and axis to Movchan & Demchishins diagram,
along which the sputtering gas pressure was tracked.
The zone diagrams of Movchan & Demchishin and Thornton are useful tools
for semi-quantitatively capturing and illustrating the expectations for structuralevolution as a function of the process parameters, deposition temperature, and
pressure. However, it is important to note that the such diagrams are developed for a
specific material or class of materials (typically refractory bcc metals) and are based
on assumptions about the deposition technique (typically sputter deposition) and
specific processing conditions, such as deposition rates and background impurity
gas pressures, both of which affect the purity of the deposited films. As has been
nicely illustrated by Brown & Ashby (8), while materials within the same class
tend to have similar diffusivities at similar homologous temperatures, diffusivities
for materials from different materials classes can have widely varying diffusivities,even at the same homologous temperature. As a class, materials with diamond
cubic structures such as Si, Ge, and C in the diamond form have among the
lowest diffusivities at a given homologous temperature of any materials class. The
diffusivities of diamond cubic materials are particularly low in comparison with
bcc materials, for which zone models are usually discussed (94) and are even lower
still than those of fcc materials. Adatom mobilities for Si are so low that deposited
films are amorphous up to homologous temperatures of 0.5 K. Grain boundary
mobilities of undoped diamond cubic materials are also anomalously low, thus bulk
grain boundary motion does not affect the as-deposited grain structures of thesematerials unless deposition temperatures are above homologous temperatures of
about 0.9 K (86). These observations are illustrated in a Movchan & Demchishin-
type zone map for diamond cubic materials (Figure 11b).
As discussed above, bulk grain boundary motion during coalescence and thick-
ening of films of Ag, Cu, Al, and Au clearly plays an important role in defining
the grain sizes, grain shapes, and grain orientations in films deposited even at
homologous temperatures as low as 0.2 K. Clearly the zone diagram for these
materials should be more like the ones schematically illustrated in Figure 11a,
than the one shown in Figure 10. Part of the reason for this is the higher atomicmobilities characteristic of fcc materials compared with bcc materials. However,
byU
niversidadedeSaoPaulo(USP)
on06/09/11.Forpersonaluseonly.
-
8/6/2019 artigo crescimento filmes
26/33
184 THOMPSON
0.3 0.5
SUBSTRATETEMPERATURE (T/Tm)
ZONE 1 ZONE 2 ZONE 3
Figure 10 Movchan & Demchishin zone model (94).
minimized. The mole fraction of impurities in a film is expected to scale with the
background partial pressure of impurities so that films deposited under ultra-high-
vacuum conditions should have higher purities than films deposited with higher
background pressures. It is well known that very minor levels of impurities can
suppress grain boundary motion due to grain boundary drag effects (49). Impurity
absorption probably also affects adatom mobilities. It is usually expected thatthe homologous temperatures associated with the transitions in structural zones
will increase with decreasing film purity. It should be noted, however, that in
Si electron doping with electron donors leads to enhanced atomic and boundary
(a)
0.5 Tm 0.9 Tm
0.2 0.3 Tm
Figure 11 (a) Movchan
& Demchishin-type map
for Si, (b) Movchan &
Demchishin-type map for
fcc metals deposited under
ultra-high vacuum condi-
tions.
byU
niversidadedeSaoPaulo(USP)
on06/09/11.Forpersonaluseonly.
-
8/6/2019 artigo crescimento filmes
27/33
POLYCRYSTALLINE FILMS 185
mobilities impurities (40, 103), so that in this special case, and perhaps in others,
impurity additions might lower the homologous temperatures for zone transitions.
In general, it is important to recognize that film purity, whether impurities are
intentionally added or not, can significantly affect the homologous temperaturesassociated with transitions in growth modes in a particular materials class, and so
can affect the transitions shown in Figures 10 and 11a, b.
SUMMARY
Table 1 summarizes the kinetic factors and process parameters that affect the
evolution of the structure of polycrystalline films. The relative rates of island
nucleation and growth govern the grain size at impingement (see also Figure 1).The nucleation rate depends on the substrate temperature and the deposition rate,
and the rate of island growth also depends on the deposition rate as well as the
rate of adatom diffusion on the substrate surface and the adatom desorption rate,
both of which are strongly temperature dependent. The grain size at impingement
increases with increasing substrate temperature and is unaffected or decreases with
increasing deposition rate.
Competitive coarsening processes occurring before, during, and after coales-
cence can also affect the grain size of films. Pre-coalescence competitive coars-
ening can occur by diffusion of adatoms on the substrate surface, but evidence for
TABLE 1 Factors affecting structure evolution in polycrystalline films
Kinetic factors affecting structure evolution
Adatom diffusivities on the substrate surface
Adatom self-diffusivities on island surfaces
Self-diffusivities in grain boundaries
Grain boundary mobilities
Adatom cluster nucleation rates
Adatom desorption rates
Process parameters
Deposition rate (affects adatom arrival rate, affects adatom diffusion time before
cluster nucleation or desorption, affects film purity)
Substrate temperature (affects all kinetic processes, increasing rates with increasing
temperature
Background pressure (affects film and surface purity)
In sputter deposition: sputtering gas pressure and substrate bias (affect the angular
distribution and energies of arriving adatoms)
Factors affecting zone models
Materials class
byU
niversidadedeSaoPaulo(USP)
on06/09/11.Forpersonaluseonly.
-
8/6/2019 artigo crescimento filmes
28/33
186 THOMPSON
strong affects of such coarsening is not known. Coarsening has been observed
as islands coalesce, at which point islands can exchange material via atomic self-
diffusion on the island surfaces and by diffusion along and across grain boundaries.
Coarsening processes are faster at higher temperatures. Coarsening through grainboundary motion (grain growth) can occur during or after film coalescence, during
film thickening (type 2 thickening), or as a result of post-deposition annealing. The
rate of grain growth is higher at higher temperatures. The rates of grain growth
and other coarsening processes are generally (though not always) reduced by the
presence of impurities from either solute or precipitate drag. Precipitates can sup-
press normal grain growth and lead to abnormal grain growth in which the final
grain size of a film can be many times larger than the film thickness.
When bulk grain boundaries are immobile during film growth, both the grain
size at impingement and the corresponding grain size distribution are preservedat the base of a film, and in the absence of impurity effects, films thicken through
epitaxial growth on the as-impinged grains at the base of the film. This type 1
thickening mode results in films with high-aspect-ratio columnar grains. Even
without bulk grain boundary motion, the grain size at the surface of the grow-
ing film can increase due to competition among the growing grains at the surface
of the film. This competition can be driven by grain boundary curvature reduc-
tion and by surface energy and/or strain energy minimization. Through-thickness
grain size evolution may also result from growth velocity anisotropies. The amount
of through-thickness grain structure evolution that occurs depends on the intrin-sic anisotropies of the growing materials and on the adatom surface diffusivities
and the deposition rate. High-growth temperatures promote this competition, as
do conditions leading to shadowing effects. When anisotropies are responsible
for through-thickness grain growth, through-thickness evolution stops when only
those grains with favored orientations remain.
The texture of as-deposited polycrystalline films is also affected by the pro-
cesses that control grain size and shape evolution as (schematically illustrated and
summarized in Figure 12). The texture of as-coalesced films can be affected by the
nucleation and pre-coalescence growth process, because the energetics of theseprocesses are affected by surface and interface energy anisotropies. These ener-
getic anisotropies as well as mechanical anistropies can also cause texture evolution
to result from coarsening processes occurring before, during and after coarsening.
Surface, interface, and strain energy minimization can drive grain growth, lead-
ing, in principle, to different textures. These energies as well as growth velocity
anisotropies can also drive texture evolution during type 1 thickening. The differ-
ent modes of structure evolution can be schematically summarized as a function
of substrate temperature and other process parameters in zone-model maps. How-
ever, such maps apply only for a specific material or a class of materials, depositedusing specific techniques under specific conditions. The homologous temperatures
byU
niversidadedeSaoPaulo(USP)
on06/09/11.Forpersonaluseonly.
-
8/6/2019 artigo crescimento filmes
29/33
POLYCRYSTALLINE FILMS 187
atomic mobility materials (such as fcc metals). The transition temperatures are also
strongly dependent on factors such as the background pressure during deposition
that affect film purity.
Many factors affect the structures of polycrystalline films, and polycrystallinefilms can have widely varying grain shapes and distributions of grain sizes and ori-
entations. The relationships between materials selection, processing techniques,
and processing conditions, and the structural characteristics of the resulting films
are qualitatively understood, and, increasingly, semi-quantitatively understood.
These understandings can provide the bases for materials selection, process se-
lection, and process design to tailor microstructures for optimized performance of
polycrystalline films in their wide range of specific engineering applications.
nucleation
pre-coalescencecoarsening
coarseningduring coalescence
coarseningafter coalescence
(grain growth)
coarsening
duringthickening
byU
niversidadedeSaoPaulo(USP)
on06/09/11.Forpersonaluseonly.
-
8/6/2019 artigo crescimento filmes
30/33
188 THOMPSON
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors research on this topic has been primarily supported by the National
Science Foundation. During preparation of the bulk of this paper, the author was
a visitor at the Max-Planck Institute fur Metallforschung where he was supportedthrough an Alexander von Humboldt research prize for senior U.S. scientists. The
author also thanks Steven Seel for a critical review of the manuscript.
Visit the Annual Reviews home page at www.AnnualReviews.org
LITERATURE CITED
1. Abermann R. 1990. Vacuum 41:1279
2. Abermann R. 1992. MRS Soc. Symp. Proc.239:25
3. Assaro RJ, Tiller WA. 1972. Met. Trans.
3:1788
4. Atkinson HV. 1988. Acta Metall. 36:
469
5. Bales GS, Zangwill AJ. 1991. Vac. Sci.
Technol. A9:145
6. Barmak K, Rickman JM, Michaelson C.
1997. J. Electron. Mater. 26:1009
7. Beck PA, Holtzworth ML, Sperry PR.
1949. Trans. Am. Inst. Min. (Metall.) Eng.
180:163
8. Brown AM, Ashby MF. 1980.Acta Metall.
28:1085
9. Carel R, Thompson CV, Frost HJ. 1996.
Acta Metall. Mater. 44:2479
10. Chakraverty BK. 1967. J. Phys. Chem.
Solids 28:2401
11. Dong L, Srolovitz DJ. 1998. J. Appl. Phys.84:5261
12. Dimos D, Chaudhari P, Mannhart J,
LeGoues FK. 1988. Phys. Rev. Lett. 61:219
13. Eaglesham DJ, Bower JE, Marcus MA,
Gross M, Merchant S. 1997. Appl. Phys.
Lett. 71:219
14. Fayad W, Thompson CV, Frost HJ. 1999.
Scr. Mater. 40:1199
15. Fitzgerald EA, Kimerling LC. 1998. MRS
Bull. 23:3916. Floro JA, Thompson CV, Carel R, Bris-
PD 1994 J M R 9 241
18. Frost HJ, Thompson CV. 1987. Acta Met-
all. 35:52919. Frost HJ, Thompson CV, Howe CL, Whang
J. 1988. Scr. Metall. 22:65
20. Frost HJ, Thompson CV, Walton DT. 1990.
Acta Metall. Mater. 38:1455
21. Fullman RL. 1952. In Metal Interfaces,
p. 179. Cleveland, OH: Am. Soc. Metals
22. Gangulee A, dHeurle F. 1972. Thin Solid
Films 12:399
23. Gao H, Zhang L, Nix WD, Thompson CV,
Arzt E. 1999. Acta Mater. 47:2865
24. Glazier JA, Weaire D. 1992. J. Phys.: Con-
dens. Matt. 4:1867
25. Grantscharova E. 1993. Thin Solid Films
224:28
26. Greiser J, Muller D, Mullner P, Thompson
CV, Arzt E. 1999. Scr. Mater. 41:709
27. Grinfeld MA. 1987. Sov. Phys. Dokl.
31:1831
28. Harper JME, Cabral C Jr, Andricacos PC,Gignac L, Noyan IC, et al. 1999. J. Appl.
Phys. 86:2516
29. Hayashi Y, Frost HJ, Thompson CV, Wal-
ton DT. 1994. MRS Symp. Proc. 317:
431
30. Henderson D, Brodsky MH, Chaudhari P.
1974. Appl. Phys. Lett. 25:641
31. Hoffman RW. 1976. Thin Solid Films
34:185
32. Hoffman RW. 1981. Surf. Interface Anal.3:62
33 H h FJ H th l M 1998 R
byU
niversidadedeSaoPaulo(USP)
on06/09/11.Forpersonaluseonly.
-
8/6/2019 artigo crescimento filmes
31/33
POLYCRYSTALLINE FILMS 189
34. Kakati KK, Wilman H. 1973. J. Phys. D:
Appl. Phys. 6:1307
35. Kamins T. 1998. Polycrystalline Silicon for
Integrated Circuits and Displays. Boston:
Kluger. 2nd ed.
36. Karder M, Parisi G, Zhang YC. 1986. Phys.
Rev. Lett. 56:889
37. Karpenko OP, Bilello JC, Yalisove SM.
1997. J. Appl. Phys. 82:1397
38. Karunasiri RPU, Bruinsma R, Rudnick J.
1989. Phys. Rev. Lett. 62:788
39. Kawasaki K, Enomoto Y. 1988. Physica
150A:462
40. Kim H-J, Thompson CV. 1986.Appl. Phys.Lett. 48:399
41. Kim H-J, Thompson CV. 1990. J. Appl.
Phys. 67:757
42. Krug J. 1997. Adv. Phys. 46:139
43. Kynut G, Quaeyhaegens C, DHaen J, Stals
LM. 1995. Thin Solid Films 258:159
44. Kynut G, Quaeyhaegens C, DHaen J, Stals
LM. 1996. Phys. Status Solidi B159:179
45. Lewis B, Anderson JC. 1978. Nucleation
and Growth of Thin Films. New York:Academic
46. Lingk C, Gross ME. 1998. J. Appl. Phys.
84:5547
47. Lita AE, Sanchez JE. 1999. J. Appl. Phys.
85:876
48. Longworth H, Thompson CV. 1991. J.
Appl. Phys. 69:3929
49. Lucke K, Stuwe HP. 1963. InRecovery and
Recrystallization, ed. L Himmel, p. 171.
New York: Interscience50. Malhotra AK, Yalisove SM, Bilello JC.
1997. Thin Solid Films 286:196
51. Mazor A, Srolovitz DJ, Hagan PS, Bukiet
BG. 1988. Phys. Rev. Lett. 60:424
52. Miller KT, Chan C-J, Cain MG, Lange FF.
1993. J. Mater. Res. 8:169
53. Movchan BA, Demchishin AV. 1969. Fiz.
Met. 28:83
54. Mullins WW. 1958. Acta Metall. 6:414
55. Murikami M, Chaudhari P. 1977. Thin
Solid Films 46:109
Glang, Chpt. 8. New York: McGraw-Hill
57. Nix WD, 1989. Met. Trans. 20A:2217
58. Nix WD, Clemens BM. 1999. J. Mater.
Res. 14:3467
59. Oh UC, Je JH. 1993.J. Appl. Phys. 74:1692
60. Ohring M. 1992. The Materials Science of
Thin Films. New York: Academic
61. Ohring M. 1998. Reliability Failure of
Electronic Materials and Devices. New
York: Academic
62. Palmer JE, Thompson CV, Smith HI. 1987.
J. Appl. Phys. 62:2492
63. Paritosh, Srolovitz DJ, Battaile CC, Li X,
Butler JE. 1999. Acta Mater. 47:226964. Pashley DW, Stowell MJ, Jacobs MH, Law
JT. 1964. Philos. Mag. 10:127
65. Pelleg J, Zevin LZ, Lungo S, Croitoru N.
1991. Thin Solid Films 197:117
66. Ressler KG, Sonnenberg N, Cima MJ.
1997. J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 80:2637
67. Roberts S, Dobson PJ. 1986. Thin Solid
Films 135:137
68. Sanchez JE, Arzt E. 1992. Scr. Met. Mater.
27:28569. Seel SC, Carel R, Thompson CV. 1996.
MRS Symp. Proc. 403:63
70. Shen Y, Wong BY, Laughlin DE. 1994. J.
Appl. Phys. 76:8174
71. Smith CS. 1952. InMetal Interfaces, p. 65.
Cleveland, OH: Am. Soc. Metals
72. Sonnenberg N, Longo AS, Cima MJ,
Chang BP, Ressler KG, et al. 1993.J. Appl.
Phys. 74:1027
73. Spencer BJ, Voorhees PW, Davies SH.1993. J. Appl. Phys. 73:4955
74. Srolovitz DJ. 1986. J. Vac. Sci. Technol.
A4:2925
75. Srolovitz DJ. 1989. Acta Metall. 37:621
76. Srolovitz DJ, Anderson MP, Sahni PS,
Grest GS. 1984. Acta Metall. 32:793
77. Stavans J. 1993. Rep. Prog. Phys. 56:733
78. Suo Z. 1997. Adv. Appl. Mech. 33:193
79. Sze SM, ed. 1985. Semiconductor Devices
Physics and Technology. New York: Wiley
& Sons
byU
niversidadedeSaoPaulo(USP)
on06/09/11.Forpersonaluseonly.
-
8/6/2019 artigo crescimento filmes
32/33
190 THOMPSON
81. Taylor JE, Cahn JW. 1988. J. Electron.
Mater. 17:443
82. Thijssen JM. 1995. Phys. Rev. B51:
1985
83. Thijssen JM. Knops HJF, Dammers AJ.
1992. Phys. Rev. B45:8650.
84. Thompson CV. 1985. J. Appl. Phys.
58:763.
85. Thompson CV. 1988.Acta Metall. 36:2929
86. Thompson CV. 1990. Annu. Rev. Mater.
Sci. 20:245
87. Thompson CV. 1993. Scr. Met. Mater.
28:167
88. Thompson CV. 1999. J. Mater Res.14:3164
89. Thompson CV, Carel R. 1995. Mater. Sci.
Eng. B 32:211
90. Thompson CV, Carel R. 1996. J. Mech.
Phys. Solids 44:657
91. Thompson CV, Floro J, Smith HI. 1990. J.
Appl. Phys. 67:4099
92. Thompson CV, Lloyd JR. 1993. MRS Bull.
17:19
93. Thompson CV, Smith HI. 1984. Appl.Phys. Lett. 44:603
94. Thornton JA. 1977. Annu. Rev. Mater. Sci.
7:239
95. Thouless MD. 1995.Annu. Rev. Mater. Sci.
25:69
96. Townsend SJ, Nichols CS. 1994. MRS
Symp. Proc. 343:43
97. Tracy BW, Davies PW, Fanger D, Gartman
P. 1988. In Microstructural Science for
Thin Film Metallizations in Electronics
Applications, ed. J Sanchez, DA Smith, N
DeLanerolle TMS
98. Tracy DP, Knorr DB, Rodbell KP. 1994.
J. Appl. Phys. 76:2671
99. Tu KN, Smith DA, Weiss BZ. 1987. Phys.
Rev. B36:8948
100. Uwaha M. 1987. Jpn. J. Appl. Phys.
26:1592
101. van der Drift A. 1967. Philips Res. Rep.
22:267
102. Vinci RP, Zielinski EM, Bravman JC.
1995. Thin Solid Films 262:142
103. Wada Y, Nishimatsu S. 1978. J. Elec-
trochem. Soc. 125:1499104. Weiss D, Mullner P, Thompson CV, Arzt
E. 1998. Grain Growth in Polycrystalline
Materials III Proc. 3rd Intl. Conf. Grain
Growth, ed. H Weiland, BL Adams, AD
Rollet, p. 537. Warrendale, PA: Min. Met.
Mater. Soc.
105. Wild C, Herres N, Koidl P. 1990. J. Appl.
Phys. 68:973
106. Winterbottom WL. 1967. Acta Metall.
15:303107. Wong CC, Smith HI, Thompson CV.
1986. Appl. Phys. Lett. 48:335
108. Yu LS, Harper JME, Cuomo JJ, Smith
DA. 1986. J. Vac. Sci. Technol. 4:443
109. Zielinski EM, Vinci RP, Bravman JC.
1994. J. Appl. Phys. 76:15
110. Zielinski EM, Vinci RP, Bravman JC.
1995. Appl. Phys. Lett. 67:1078
111. Zinke-Allmang M. 1999. Thin Solid
Films 346:1byU
niversidadedeSaoPaulo(USP)
on06/09/11.Forpersonaluseonly.
-
8/6/2019 artigo crescimento filmes
33/33
Annual Review of Materials Science
Volume 30, 2000
CONTENTS
The Theory of Real Materials,Marvin L. Cohen 1
Tribochemical Polishing, Viktor A. Muratov, Traugott E. Fischer 27
High-Tc Superconductivity in Electron-Doped Layered Nitrides, ShojiYamanaka
53
Holographic Polymer-Dispersed Liquid Crystals (H-PDLCs), T. J.
Bunning, L. V. Natarajan, V. P. Tondiglia, R. L. Sutherland83
Optical Generation and Characterization of Acoustic Waves in Thin
Films: Fundamentals and Applications,John A. Rogers, Alex A. Maznev,
Matthew J. Banet, Keith A. Nelson
117
Structure Evolution During Processing of Polycrystalline Films, C. V.
Thompson159
Mechanical Behavior of Metallic Foams,L. J. Gibson 191
Copper Metallization for High-Performance Silicon Technology,R.
Rosenberg, D. C. Edelstein, C.-K. Hu, K. P. Rodbell229
The Properties of Ferroelectric Films at Small Dimensions, T. M. Shaw,
S. Trolier-McKinstry, P. C. McIntyre 263
IC-Compatible Polysilicon Surface Micromachining,J. J. Sniegowski, M.
P. de Boer299
SiGe Technology: Heteroepitaxy and High-Speed Microelectronics, P. M.
Mooney, J. O. Chu335
Ultrathin Diffusion Barriers/Liners for Gigascale Copper Metallization,
A. E. Kaloyeros, E. Eisenbraun363
Magnetocaloric Materials, K. A. Gschneidner Jr., V. K. Pecharsky 387
Advances in In Situ Ultra-High Vacuum Electron Microscopy: Growth of
SiGe on Si,Ruud M. Tromp, Frances M. Ross431
Layered Magnetic Manganites, T. Kimura, Y. Tokura 451
The Electronic Structure of Semiconductor Nanocrystals, Al. L. Efros, M.
Rosen 475Mechanisms for Enhanced Formation of the C45 Phase of Titanium
Silicide Ultra-Large-Scale Integration Contacts,J. M. E. Harper, C.
Cabral Jr.,, C. Lavoie
523
Synthesis and Characterization of Monodisperse Nanocrystals and Close-
Packed Nanocrystal Assemblies, C. B. Murray, C. R. Kagan, M. G.
Bawendi
545
Extremely High Density Longitudinal Magnetic Recording Media,Dieter
Weller, Mary F. Doerner611
Low Dielectric Constant Materials for ULSI Interconnects,Michael
Morgen, E. Todd Ryan, Jie-Hua Zhao, Chuan Hu, Taiheui Cho, Paul S.
Ho
645
Device Innovation and Material Challenges at the Limits of CMOSTechnology, P. M. Solomon
681