In this study, we investigate in situ etching of β-Ga2O3 in a metalorganic chemical vapor deposition system using tert-butyl chloride (TBCl). We report etching of both heteroepitaxial -oriented and homoepitaxial (010)-oriented β-Ga2O3 films over a wide range of substrate temperatures, TBCl molar flows, and reactor pressures. We infer that the likely etchant is HCl (g), formed by the pyrolysis of TBCl in the hydrodynamic boundary layer above the substrate. The temperature dependence of the etch rate reveals two distinct regimes characterized by markedly different apparent activation energies. The extracted apparent activation energies suggest that at temperatures below ∼800 °C, the etch rate is likely limited by desorption of etch products. The relative etch rates of heteroepitaxial and homoepitaxial (010) β-Ga2O3 were observed to scale by the ratio of the surface energies, indicating an anisotropic etch. Relatively smooth post-etch surface morphology was achieved by tuning the etching parameters for (010) homoepitaxial films.
The ultra-wide bandgap semiconductor β-Ga2O3 (∼4.8 eV) has garnered attention recently as a platform for power electronics and radio frequency devices.1 The ultra-wide bandgap results in a high critical breakdown field strength yielding a superior Baliga's figure of merit relative to semiconductors like SiC and GaN.2 Progress in β-Ga2O3 research has been spurred by the availability of large-area (up to 4 in.) melt-grown substrates3 and the ease of n-type doping.4 Metalorganic chemical vapor deposition (MOCVD) has emerged as a technique capable of producing high-quality β-Ga2O3 thin films with room-temperature electron mobilities approaching the polar optical phonon limit.5–8 A low-damage in situ etch to minimize contamination or plasma-induced damage before subsequent deposition of n+ material9 or dielectrics10 will be key for enabling higher-performance devices. In this study, we investigate the use of tert-butyl chloride (TBCl) as a precursor for in situ etching of β-Ga2O3.
In situ etching of β-Ga2O3 has been demonstrated using a flux of elemental gallium in molecular beam epitaxy (MBE) and using triethylgallium in MOCVD.11,12 The etch mechanism for both leverages the formation of volatile gallium suboxides.13 The use of elemental Ga can, however, potentially leave gallium metal droplets on the surface necessitating an ex situ HCl wet etch. Agnitron Technologies has demonstrated that these Ga droplets can be removed in situ with TBCl etching; however, their use of TBCl for etching of β-Ga2O3 itself was not promising, requiring much higher TBCl molar flow compared to those used in this work to achieve appreciable etch rates.14 In situ etching of β-Ga2O3 has also been demonstrated in halide vapor phase epitaxy (HVPE) systems using HCl gas.15,16
UV-vis optical reflectometry was used to measure heteroepitaxial film thickness, while x-ray diffraction (XRD) (PANalytical Empyrean) was used to determine homoepitaxial film thickness. Homoepitaxial films grown for determining the etch rate included a thin (∼10 nm) β-(Al0.07Ga0.93)2O3 interface followed by 200–300 nm of β-Ga2O3 which provided an index contrast resulting in Laue oscillations.25 Atomic force microscopy (AFM) was used to evaluate the surface morphology.
We used heteroepitaxial β-Ga2O3 to map out the etch rate as a function of TBCl molar flow at temperatures between 700 and 900 °C (Fig. 1). At a fixed reactor pressure of 15 Torr, we found that etch rate increases linearly with TBCl molar flows between ∼20 and 61 μmol/min, which enables fine control of the etch rate.
In general, the etch rate increases with increasing temperature; however, the slope of the etch rate vs TBCl molar flow jumps sharply from 800 to 850 °C, indicative of a sudden change in the etch-limiting step. At a fixed TBCl molar flow of ∼61 μmol/min, the etch rate follows an Arrhenius relationship (Fig. 2). There are two distinct activation energy regimes that are commonly observed in CVD growth26 and etching27 processes. In our work, the low-temperature (LT) regime below ∼800 °C has a higher apparent activation energy of ∼1.59 and ∼1.75 eV for 15 and 30 Torr, respectively. The high temperature (HT) regime above ∼800 °C exhibits a much lower apparent activation energy of ∼0.11 and ∼0.04 eV for 15 and 30 Torr, respectively. These values are much lower than the Ga-O bond dissociation energy (∼3.88 eV),28 and we confirmed that even at the highest etch temperature employed, there is negligible thermal decomposition of β-Ga2O3.29
During the etching process, the etchant adsorbs on the surface and then reacts to form an etch product, followed by the desorption of the etch product from the surface. Based on the data from Tsang,24 at temperatures between 700 and 1000 °C used in our work and estimated residence times30 for precursors in the heated boundary layer above the susceptor, TBCl pyrolyzes into isobutene and hydrogen chloride (HCl) (Fig. 3). This temperature range, however, is not high enough to enable further gas-phase pyrolysis of HCl (Fig. 3).31 Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that HCl is the etchant.
In the HT regime, the dominant GaCln species is presumably GaCl based on thermodynamic calculations of gas-phase HVPE growth of GaN.44 The low apparent activation energy in the HT regime agrees with the apparent activation energy (∼0.08 eV) extracted above 800 °C from atmospheric pressure HCl etching of β-Ga2O3.15 The etch rate in the HT regime is determined by the surface concentration of HCl as evidenced by the linear dependence of the etch rate on reactor pressure in Fig. 1(b).45
At high substrate temperatures, MOCVD growth typically occurs in a mass-transport-limited regime. In the absence of significant gas-phase parasitic reactions, and when all the flows are held constant, the growth rate is independent of total reactor pressure within this mass-transport-limited regime.30,46 To determine whether etching with TBCl occurs in a mass-transport-regime, the pressure dependence of the etch rate was explored at a fixed TBCl flow rate at two temperatures: 750 °C (LT regime) and 900 °C (HT regime). The reactor pressure was controlled, independent of the total gas flow, using a computer-controlled butterfly valve in the exhaust manifold. Figures 1(b) and 1(c) show that the etch rate is increasing, and not saturating, with increasing reactor pressure, indicating that etching is not occurring in a mass-transport-limited regime even at the highest substrate temperatures investigated in this study. An increase in etch rate with reactor pressure is likely due to the increased surface coverage of the etchant, HCl, with increasing HCl partial pressure.45
In order to investigate the effect of oxygen on the etch rate, we introduced a 50 sccm flow of O2 into the reactor during etching. In the LT regime, the etch rate was largely not affected; however, in the HT regime, the etch rate was suppressed by a factor of ∼2 as seen in Fig. 4. We believe that the HT etch rate is suppressed due to the competing HVPE growth back reaction.
Next, we etched co-loaded heteroepitaxial and homoepitaxial (010) β-Ga2O3 samples to investigate the etch rate anisotropy. The etch rate for homoepitaxial samples with ∼61 μmol/min TBCl molar flow was determined by XRD (Fig. S1) for four distinct conditions (15 Torr at 750 and 875 °C, and 30 Torr at 750 and 875 °C). Figure 5 summarizes these etch rates, revealing the anisotropy. Also plotted in Fig. 5 are the ratios between the calculated (010) and dangling bond densities (ρ, green) and surface energies (E, blue), which agrees well with the experimental data.47 Etch rate anisotropy has also been observed during etching of β-Ga2O3 using HCl in an HVPE reactor.15
To investigate the surface morphology resulting from TBCl etching, ∼400 nm thick homoepitaxial (010) unintentionally doped (UID) β-Ga2O3 samples were grown and then immediately in situ etched, without cooling down, to a depth of ∼100 nm for each of the four conditions shown in Figs. 6(b)–6(e). The resulting surface morphology resembles that resulting from hot phosphoric wet etching48 and does not exhibit characteristic faceting of the (110) plane along the [001] direction typically seen post-growth49 [as shown for an unetched film in Fig. S1(b)] or after elemental Ga etching.11,12 In general, we observe that etching under higher pressures and low temperatures results in smoother surfaces. Currently, the exact mechanism for surface roughening is unclear, but we note that conditions for smoother etch morphologies also result in longer surface residence time of gas-phase species. We note that heteroepitaxial oriented β-Ga2O3 films grown on c-plane sapphire also exhibited increased surface roughness after etching using TBCl (Fig. S2).
The electrical properties are not compromised for films grown after a 30 min ex situ 48% hydrofluoric acid etch plus a ∼50 nm in situ, ∼61 μmol TBCl etch at 750 °C. (010) homoepitaxial films doped50 to ∼1 × 1017 and ∼2 × 1018 cm−3 exhibit mobilities of ∼115 and ∼102 cm2/V s, respectively. We demonstrate that subsequent regrowth after in situ etching of the substrate results in sub-nanometer RMS roughness (Fig. S3). The surface morphology of regrowth after in situ etching homoepitaxial films is comparable (∼1 nm RMS) and is the subject of future work.
In summary, this study investigated the in situ etching of both heteroepitaxial and homoepitaxial (010) β-Ga2O3 films by TBCl in an MOCVD system over a temperature range of 700–1000 °C, pressure of 10–60 Torr, and TBCl molar flow of ∼20 to 61 μmol/min. Two distinct regimes for TBCl etching of β-Ga2O3 were observed. The LT regime, below ∼800 °C, exhibits an apparent activation energy of ∼1.59 and ∼1.75 eV for 15 and 30 Torr, respectively. In the LT regime, we hypothesize that the etch rate is limited by the desorption of GaCln or likely H2O. In the HT regime, we hypothesize that the thermodynamically favored etch product is GaCl and the apparent activation energy is low. The relationship between the etch rate of and (010) β-Ga2O3 scales by the ratio of surface energies. Finally, the surface morphology of in situ etched homoepitaxial films was evaluated, and it was determined that the lower temperature, higher pressure etch resulted in smoother surfaces. This work lays the groundwork for utilizing in situ TBCl etching and regrowth to obtain low-resistance ohmic contacts and improve the performance of β-Ga2O3 based devices.
SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL
See the supplementary material for details on MOCVD growth conditions for the films etched in this study. Also included are the XRD results used for etch rate determination, as well as AFM images of as-grown and regrown homoepitaxial films and AFM images of an as-grown and etched heteroepitaxial film.
We acknowledge support from the AFOSR/AFRL ACCESS Center of Excellence under Award No. FA9550-18-10529. C.A.G. acknowledges support from the National Defense Science and Engineering Graduate (NDSEG) Fellowship. H.J.B. acknowledges support from the National Science Foundation (NSF) [Platform for the Accelerated Realization, Analysis and Discovery of Interface Materials (PARADIM)] under Cooperative Agreement No. DMR-1539918. We also acknowledge support from PARADIM for the use of XRD. Substrate dicing and AFM were performed at the Cornell NanoScale Facility, a member of the National Nanotechnology Coordinated Infrastructure (NNCI), which is supported by the NSF (Grant No. NNCI-2025233).
AUTHOR DECLARATIONS
Conflict of Interest
The authors have no conflicts to disclose.
Author Contributions
Cameron A. Gorsak and Henry J. Bowman contributed equally to this paper.
Cameron A. Gorsak: Conceptualization (equal); Data curation (equal); Formal analysis (equal); Investigation (lead); Methodology (equal); Visualization (equal); Writing – original draft (equal); Writing – review & editing (equal). Henry J. Bowman: Data curation (equal); Formal analysis (equal); Investigation (equal); Visualization (equal); Writing – original draft (equal). Katie R. Gann: Formal analysis (supporting); Investigation (supporting); Writing – original draft (supporting); Writing – review & editing (supporting). Joshua T. Buontempo: Data curation (supporting); Writing – review & editing (supporting). Kathleen T. Smith: Data curation (supporting); Writing – review & editing (supporting). Pushpanshu Tripathi: Data curation (supporting). Jacob Steele: Data curation (supporting); Writing – review & editing (supporting). Debdeep Jena: Funding acquisition (equal); Supervision (supporting). Darrell G. Schlom: Funding acquisition (equal); Writing – review & editing (equal). Huili Grace Xing: Funding acquisition (equal); Writing – review & editing (equal). Michael O. Thompson: Formal analysis (supporting); Funding acquisition (lead); Supervision (equal); Writing – review & editing (equal). Hari P. Nair: Conceptualization (lead); Formal analysis (equal); Funding acquisition (equal); Investigation (equal); Methodology (equal); Project administration (lead); Supervision (lead); Writing – original draft (equal); Writing – review & editing (equal).
DATA AVAILABILITY
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.