The relationship between lattice matching and crosshatch in liquid phase epitaxy HgCdTe on CdZnTe substrates

X-ray topography provides a very sensitive map of lattice mismatch between a HgCdTe LPE epitaxial layer and its (111) CdZnTe substrate. A well-defined Crosshatch pattern in the three «110» directions indicates a positive room-temperature lattice mismatch. For conditions of near-perfect lattice matching (±0.003% mismatch), the Crosshatch pattern disappears, presumably because there are few or no misfit dislocations present near the interface, and a region free of topographic contrast is observed. The crosshatch-free region occurs for a small positive room-temperature mismatch (about 0.02%); this is attributed to differences in the lattice matching condition at room temperature and the growth temperature. For negative mismatches, where the film is in tension, a mosaic pattern, rather than a crystallographically oriented Crosshatch, is observed in the topograph. Rocking curve full width at half maximum of the epitaxial layer is minimized in the crosshatch-free zone at a value nearly equal to that of the substrate. Etch pit density of the HgCdTe layer shows a strong minimum for perfect room temperature lattice matching, with values as low as 1 x 104 cm−2. For nearly lattice matched layers, Crosshatch is present throughout the thickness of the epitaxial layer except for a narrow graded-composition region near the substrate interface. Crosshatch contrast appears to result from long-range strain fields associated with a misfit dislocation network near the substrate interface. Spatial variations in topographic features and mismatch across relatively small lateral distances are caused by variations in substrate alloy composition. For truly lattice-matched substrates, better control over the substrate lattice parameter is required.

[1]  Michael Schenk,et al.  New defect etchants for CdTe and Hg1-xCdxTe , 1990 .

[2]  C. Ferrari,et al.  Structural characterization of Hg0.78Cd0.22Te/CdTe LPE heterostructures grown from Te solutions , 1991 .

[3]  S. Sen,et al.  Crystal growth of Cd1−xZnxTe and its use as a superior substrate for LPE growth of Hg0.8Cd0.2Te , 1985 .

[4]  G. Destefanis,et al.  Evidence of anomalous behavior in low‐n‐type mercury cadmium telluride induced by extended defects , 1989 .

[5]  I. Utke,et al.  The influence of interdiffusion on the lattice misfit of epitaxial structures , 1992 .

[6]  H. Booyens,et al.  The introduction of misfit dislocations in HgCdTe epitaxial layers , 1983 .

[7]  K. Beck,et al.  Thermal Expansion of Zinc Telluride from 0° to 460°C , 1968 .

[8]  S. Takeuchi,et al.  Observation of dislocations in cadmium telluride by cathodoluminescence microscopy , 1979 .

[9]  D. Chandra,et al.  Dislocation density variations in HgCdTe films grown by dipping liquid phase epitaxy: Effects on metal–insulator–semiconductor properties , 1991 .

[10]  Mitsuo Yoshikawa,et al.  Dislocations in Hg1−xCdxTe/Cd1−zZnzTe epilayers grown by liquid‐phase epitaxy , 1988 .

[11]  M. J. Hampshire,et al.  X-ray determination of the lattice parameters and thermal expansion of cadmium telluride in the temperature range 20–420°C , 1969 .

[12]  R. Carlson,et al.  Characterization of fully lattice‐matched multilayer ZnHgCdTe structures grown by Te‐rich liquid phase epitaxy , 1987 .

[13]  J. C. Brice,et al.  Properties of mercury cadmium telluride , 1987 .

[14]  F. Bailly,et al.  Critical thickness in heteroepitaxial growth of zinc-blende semiconductor compounds , 1994 .

[15]  I. Jones,et al.  Transmission electron microscopy of LPE grown CdHgTe , 1989 .

[16]  J. Rosbeck,et al.  Effect of dislocations on the electrical and optical properties of long‐wavelength infrared HgCdTe photovoltaic detectors , 1992 .