Advertisement

Descending Infrared Transmission Spectra of CdZnTe Substrates Due to Surface Roughness

  • E. SelvigEmail author
  • K. O. Kongshaug
  • R. Haakenaasen
  • T. Lorentzen
  • T. Brudevoll
U.S. Workshop on Physics and Chemistry of II-VI Materials 2018
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. U.S. Workshop on Physics and Chemistry of II-VI Materials 2018

Abstract

The (111)B-oriented Cd0.96Zn0.04Te substrates with rough surfaces have been found to have infrared (IR) transmission spectra which decrease rapidly in intensity as the photon energy increases. The rough surfaces were produced by Everson etching or rough polishing. The descending spectra could be qualitatively described by an equation found in the literature. Flat low intensity IR transmission spectra were found to be due to a combination of free carrier absorption and rough surfaces. The B-side of the substrate is the growth side. By etching the A-side of the substrate only we found that the black layer formed by the Everson etch on this side introduces two features in the IR transmission spectra: a dip at approx. 625 cm−1 and a special kind of ascending IR transmission spectrum: The ascending spectrum increases from approx. 65% at 500 cm−1 up to 72.5% at the highest wavenumbers around 4000 cm−1. There is a correlation between the dip and the ascending spectrum: six out of the seven spectra with largest dip have the highest transmission at 4000 cm−1 suggesting a common origin.

Keywords

CdZnTe IR transmission spectra surface roughness Everson etch 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

Acknowledgments

Laila Trosdahl-Iversen is acknowledged for Everson etching.

References

  1. 1.
    S. Sen, D.R. Rhiger, C.R. Curtis, M.H. Kalisher, H.L. Hettich, and M.C. Currie, J. Electron. Mater. 30, 611 (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    R.D.S. Yadava, B.S. Sundersheshu, M. Anandan, R.K. Bagai, and W.N. Borle, J. Electron. Mater. 23, 1349 (1994).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    G. Li and W. Jie, Mater. Sci. Forum 475, 1841 (2005).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    L. Yujie, G. Zhi, L. Guoqiang, and J. Wanqi, J. Electron. Mater. 33, 861 (2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    H. Bensalah, J. Crocco, V. Carcelén, A. Black, Q. Zheng, J.L. Plaza, and E. Diéguez, J. Cryst. Growth 361, 5 (2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    I. Filinski, Phys. Status Solidi B 49, 577 (1972).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    W.J. Everson, C.K. Ard, J.L. Sepich, B.E. Dean, G.T. Neugebauer, and H.F. Schaake, J. Electron. Mater. 24, 505 (1995).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Y. Xu, N. Jia, Y. He, R. Guo, Y. Gu, and W. Jie, CrystEngComm 17, 8639 (2015).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    L. Burgess, F.J. Kumar, and J. MacKenzie, J. Electron. Mater. 44, 3277 (2015).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.FFI – Norwegian Defence Research EstablishmentKjellerNorway

Personalised recommendations