Advertisement

Journal of Materials Science

, Volume 24, Issue 4, pp 1169–1176 | Cite as

Microanalyses of chemically etched thin film alumina-ferrite interfaces

  • L. M. Gignac
  • S. H. Risbud
Papers

Abstract

Thin films of aluminium oxide were deposited on ferrite (Ni x Zn1−xFe2O4) substrates by r.f. sputtering. The sputtered alumina films were not easily etched by hot phosphoric acid unlike readily etchable films prepared by physical deposition techniques. Microanalytical characterization of unetched films, partially etched films and interfacial regions was conducted to identify the microscopic features responsible for reluctant film etchability. The post-etched films were categorized as easily, partially and un-etchable (EE, PE and U respectively) and were examined using optical microscopy, SEM, XRD, EDS, XPS, AES, and TEM/STEM. TEM examination of cross-sections of partially etchable films revealed a non-uniform crystalline phase at the film-substrate interface. Electron diffraction data identified the phase asη-alumina although AES and EDS results suggest that the interfacial phase also contained some iron. The occurrence and orientation of theη-alumina phase was shown to depend on the orientation of the grains of the ferrite substrate.

Keywords

Thin Film Ferrite Optical Microscopy Phosphoric Acid Electron Diffraction 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    C. A. T. Salama,J. Electrochem. Soc. 117 (1970) 913–917.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    I. H. Pratt,Solid State Tech. 12 (1969) 49–57.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    R. A. Gardner, P. J. Peterson andT. N. Kennedy,J. Vac. Sci. Tech. 14 (1977) 1139–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    R. G. Frieser,J. Electrochem. Soc. 113 (1966) 357–60.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    T. Tanaka andS. Iwauchi,Jpn J. Appl. Phys. 7 (1968) 1420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    A. L. Dragoo andJ. J. Diamond,J. Amer. Ceram. Soc. 50 (1967) 568–574.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    M. G. Mier andE. A. Buvinger,J. Vac. Sci. Tech. 6 (1969) 727–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    E. Ferrieu andB. Pruniax,J. Electrochem. Soc: Solid State Sci. 116 (1969) 1008–1013.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    R. F. Bunshah andR. J. Schramm,Thin Solid Films 40 (1977) 211–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    J. A. Aboaf,J. Electrochem. Soc: Solid State Sci. 114 (1967) 948–952.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    M. T. Duffy andA. G. Revesz,ibid. 117 (1970) 372–377.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    D. J. Barber,J. Electrochem. Soc. 112 (1965) 1143–1145.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    K. Iida andT. Tsujide,Jpn J. Appl. Phys. 11 (1972) 840–849.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    L. M. Gignac, S. H. Risbud, J. V. Pridans andS. A. Schubert, “Statistical Experimental Design used to Evaluate Alumina Thin Films”, IBM, Tucson, Internal Progress Report, Contract No. S-509805, January 1987, unpublished.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    J. C. Bravman andR. C. Sinclair,J. Electron. Microsc. Tech. 1 (1984) 53–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    F. J. Gonzalez andJ. W. Halloran,Bull. Amer. Ceram. Soc. 59 (1980) 727–731.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Chapman and Hall Ltd. 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • L. M. Gignac
    • 1
  • S. H. Risbud
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Materials Science and EngineeringUniversity of ArizonaTucsonUSA

Personalised recommendations