4.6 Article

Arsenic-Doped SnSe Thin Films Prepared by Pulsed Laser Deposition

期刊

ACS OMEGA
卷 6, 期 27, 页码 17483-17491

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acsomega.1c01892

关键词

-

资金

  1. Czech Science Foundation [19-24516S, LM2018103]
  2. Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports of the Czech Republic

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Pulsed UV laser deposition was used to prepare thin films of Sn50-xAsxSe50 to investigate the influence of low arsenic concentration on the properties of the deposited layers. Thin films containing 0.5 atom % of As exhibited extreme values that significantly differed from those of other samples. Signals of SnmSen+ clusters with low m and n values were observed in the mass spectra of both parent powders and deposited thin films.
Pulsed UV laser deposition was exploited for the preparation of thin Sn50-xAsxSe50 (x = 0, 0.05, 0.5, and 2.5) films with the aim of investigating the influence of low arsenic concentration on the properties of the deposited layers. It was found that the selected deposition method results in growth of a highly (h00) oriented orthorhombic SnSe phase. The thin films were characterized by different techniques such as X-ray diffraction, scanning electron microscopy with energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy, atomic force microscopy, Raman scattering spectroscopy, and spectroscopic ellipsometry. From the results, it can be concluded that thin films containing 0.5 atom % of As exhibited extreme values regarding crystallite size, unit cell volume, or refractive index that significantly differ from those of other samples. Laser ablation with quadrupole ion trap time-of-flight mass spectrometry was used to identify and compare species present in the plasma originating from the interaction of a laser pulse with solid-state Sn50-xAsxSe50 materials in both forms, i.e. parent powders as well as deposited thin films. The mass spectra of both materials were similar; particularly, signals of SnmSen+ clusters with low m and n values were observed.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据