Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T01:18:47.807Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Phase stability of epitaxial KTaxNb1−xO3 thin films deposited by metalorganic chemical vapor deposition

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2011

B. M. Nichols ,
B. H. Hoerman ,
J-H. Hwang ,
T. O. Mason  and
B. W. Wessels
B. M. Nichols
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Engineering and Materials Research Center, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois 60208
B. H. Hoerman
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Engineering and Materials Research Center, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois 60208
J-H. Hwang
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Engineering and Materials Research Center, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois 60208
T. O. Mason
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Engineering and Materials Research Center, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois 60208
B. W. Wessels
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Engineering and Materials Research Center, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois 60208
Get access

Abstract

The phase stability of epitaxial KTaxNb1−xO3 (0 ≤ x ≤ 1) thin films, with compositions over the entire solid solution range, was investigated. KTaxNb1−xO3 thin films were deposited on (100) MgAl2O4 substrates by metalorganic chemical vapor deposition. Films with compositions x ≤ 0.30 were orthorhombic, as determined by x-ray diffraction. Dielectric measurements at room temperature indicated the presence of morphotropic phase boundaries at x = 0.30 and at x = 0.74. Temperature-dependent measurements of the dielectric constant for KNbO3 from 80 to 800 K indicated three structural phase transitions at 710, 520, and 240 K. For intermediate compositions, a decrease in the Curie and tetragonal–orthorhombic transition temperatures was observed with increasing Ta atomic percent, similar to the bulk phase equilibrium. In contrast to bulk materials, an increase in the orthorhombic–rhombohedral transition temperature with increasing x was observed for the films, resulting in the stabilization of a rhombohedral phase at room temperature for compositions 0.45 ≤ x ≤ 0.73. Differences between the phase stability for the thin films and bulk were attributed to lattice misfit strain.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Materials Research , Volume 18 , Issue 1 , January 2003 , pp. 106 - 110
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2003

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1.Gill, D.M., Conrad, C.W., Ford, G., Wessels, B.W., and Ho, S.T., Appl. Phys. Lett. 71, 1783 (1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Jones, D.E. and Naylor, D.L., in Proceedings of InterPACK ’97, edited by Suhir, E., Shiratori, M., Lee, Y.C., and Subbarayan, G. (ASME, Kohala Coast, HI, 1997), Vol. 1, p. 773.Google Scholar
3.Brueck, S.R.J. and Myers, R.A., in Epitaxial Oxide Thin Films and Heterostructures, edited by Fork, D.K., Phillips, J.M., Ramesh, R., and Wolf, R.M. (Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 341, Pittsburgh, PA, 1994), p. 243.Google Scholar
4.Pliska, T., Fluck, D., Gunter, P., Gini, E., Melchior, H., Beckers, L., and Bichal, C., Appl. Phys. Lett. 72, 2364 (1998).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Nui, F., Hoerman, B.H., and Wessels, B.W., J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B 18, 2146 (2000).Google Scholar
6.Holman, R.L., Johnson, L.M.A., and Skinner, D.P., Opt. Eng. 26, 134 (1986).Google Scholar
7.Raalte, J.A. v., J. Opt. Soc. Am. 57, 671 (1967).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Christen, H-M., Norton, D.P., Gea, L.A., and Boatner, L.A., Thin Solid Films 312, 156 (1998).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Suzuki, K., Sakamoto, W., Yogo, T., and Hirano, S., Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. Part 1-Reg. Pap. Short Notes Rev. Pap. 38, 5953 (1999).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10.Chattopadhyay, S., Nichols, B.M., Hwang, J-H., Mason, T.O., Wessels, B.W., J. Mater. Res. 17, 275 (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Hoerman, B.H., Ford, G.M., Kaufmann, L.D., and Wessels, B.W., Appl. Phys. Lett. 73, 2248 (1998).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12.Farnell, G.W., Cermak, I.A., Silvester, P., and Wong, S.K., IEEE Trans. Sonics Ultrason. SU–17, 188 (1970).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13.Triebwasser, S., Phys. Rev. 114, 63 (1959).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.Siegwarth, J.D. and Holste, J.C., J. Appl. Phys. 47, 4791 (1976).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15.Hulm, J.K., Matthias, B.T., and Long, E.A., Phys. Rev. 79, 885 (1950).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16.Fontana, M.D., Metrat, G., Servoin, J.L., and Gervais, F., J. Phys. C. 16, 483 (1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17.Cross, L.E., Ferroelectrics. 151, 305 (1994).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18.Sommer, D., Friese, D., Kleeman, W., and Rytz, D., Ferroelectrics 124, 231 (1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19.Suzuki, K., Sakamoto, W., Yogo, T., and Hirano, S., J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 82, 1463 (1999).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20.Kleeman, W., Schafer, F.J., and Rytz, D., Phys. Rev. Lett. 54, 2038 (1985).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21.Pattnaik, R. and Toulouse, J., Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 4677 (1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22.Hochli, U.T., Weibel, H.E., and Boatner, L.A., Phys. Rev. Lett. 39, 1158 (1977).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23.Speck, J.S. and Pompe, W., J. Appl. Phys. 76, 466 (1994).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24.Speck, J.S., Seifert, A., Pompe, W., and Ramesh, R., J. Appl. Phys. 76, 477 (1994).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
25.Pertsev, N.A. and Koukhar, V.G., Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 3722 (2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar