OSA's Digital Library

Optics Express

Optics Express

  • Editor: Andrew M. Weiner
  • Vol. 21, Iss. 8 — Apr. 22, 2013
  • pp: 9643–9651
« Show journal navigation

Optoelectrical and low-frequency noise characteristics of flexible ZnO–SiO2 photodetectors with organosilicon buffer layer

Wei-Chih Lai, Jiun-Ting Chen, and Ya-Yu Yang  »View Author Affiliations


Optics Express, Vol. 21, Issue 8, pp. 9643-9651 (2013)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/OE.21.009643


View Full Text Article

Acrobat PDF (1246 KB)





Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Browse by Journal and Year


   


Lookup Conference Papers

Close Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Article Tools

Share
Citations

Abstract

The present study demonstrates the optoelectrical and low-frequency noise characteristics of ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite solar-blind metal–semiconductor–metal photodetectors (MSM PDs) on flexible polyethersulfone (PES) substrate with and without an organosilicon [SiOx(CH3)] buffer layer. For a given bandwidth of 100 Hz and a −5 V applied bias, the noise equivalent powers of the ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite MSM PD on PES with and without the SiOx(CH3) buffer layer were 1.39 × 10−14 and 5.72 × 10−14 W at 240nm, respectively, corresponding to the normalized detectivities of 5.04 × 1014 and 1.22 × 1014 Hz0.5 W−1, respectively. These findings indicate that a lower noise level and a higher detectivity can be achieved for ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite MSM PDs on PES by introducing a SiOx(CH3) buffer layer.

© 2013 OSA

1. Introduction

Flexible electronic devices, such as wearable displays, detectors, and sensors [1

1. C. Y. Lee, M. Y. Lin, W. H. Wu, J. Y. Wang, Y. Chou, W. F. Su, Y. F. Chen, and C. F. Lin, “Flexible ZnO transparent thin-film transistors by a solution-based process at various solution concentrations,” Semicond. Sci. Technol. 25(10), 105008 (2010). [CrossRef]

,2

2. L. W. Ji, C. Z. Wu, C. M. Lin, T. H. Meen, K. T. Lam, S. M. Peng, S. J. Young, and C. H. Liu, “Characteristic improvements of ZnO-based metal–semiconductor–metal photodetector on flexible substrate with ZnO cap layer,” Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 49(5), 052201 (2010). [CrossRef]

], have attracted considerable attention in recent years. Flexible deep-ultraviolet (DUV) photodetectors (PDs) exhibit bending and torsion characteristics opposite to those of traditional DUV PDs, thereby greatly extending the application range of PDs to include use in artificial muscles or biological tissues. Conventional solar-blind DUV PDs have been fabricated using wide-bandgap materials, such as AlGaN [3

3. H. Jiang and T. Egawa, “High quality AlGaN solar-blind Schottky photodiodes fabricated on AIN/sapphire template,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 90(12), 121121 (2007). [CrossRef]

6

6. V. V. Kuryatkov, B. A. Borisov, S. A. Nikishin, Yu. Kudryavtsev, R. Asomoza, V. I. Kuchinskii, G. S. Sokolovskii, D. Y. Song, and M. Holtz, “247 nm solar-blind ultraviolet p-i-n photodetector,” J. Appl. Phys. 100(9), 096104 (2006). [CrossRef]

], cBN [7

7. A. Soltani, H. A. Barkad, M. Mattalah, B. Benbakhti, J. C. De Jaeger, Y. M. Chong, Y. S. Zou, W. J. Zhang, S. T. Lee, A. BenMoussa, B. Giordanengo, and J. Hochedez, “193 nm deep-ultraviolet solar-blind cubic boron nitride based photodetectors,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 92(5), 053501 (2008). [CrossRef]

], diamond [8

8. A. BenMoussa, A. Soltani, U. Schühle, K. Haenen, Y. M. Chong, W. J. Zhang, R. Dahal, J. Y. Lin, H. X. Jiang, H. A. Barkad, B. BenMoussa, D. Bolsee, C. Hermans, U. Kroth, C. Laubis, V. Mortet, J. C. De Jaeger, B. Giordanengo, M. Richter, F. Scholze, and J. F. Hochedez, “Recent developments of wide-bandgap semiconductor based UV sensors,” Diamond Related Materials 18(5-8), 860–864 (2009). [CrossRef]

], SiC [9

9. W. F. Yang, F. Zhang, Z. G. Liu, and Z. G. Wu, “Effects of annealing on the performance of 4H-SiC metal–semiconductor–metal ultraviolet photodetectors,” Mater. Sci. Semicond. Process. 11(2), 59–62 (2008). [CrossRef]

], and II–VI compounds [10

10. Y. N. Hou, Z. X. Mei, Z. L. Liu, T. C. Zhang, and X. L. Du, “Mg0.55Zn0.45O solar-blind ultraviolet detector with high photoresponse performance and large internal gain,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 98(10), 103506 (2011). [CrossRef]

12

12. J. W. Mares, R. C. Boutwell, M. Wei, A. Scheurer, and W. V. Schoenfeld, “Deep-ultraviolet photodetectors from epitaxially grown NixMg1−xO,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 97(16), 161113 (2010). [CrossRef]

] on crystalline substrates. A high-temperature deposition process is generally needed to obtain good crystalline quality for deposited solar-blind DUV PDs with the materials previously mentioned. A high-temperature deposition process, however, is not suitable for flexible plastic substrates. ZnO-based materials have a wide bandgap, large photoresponse, and low growth temperature in addition to being low cost, innocuous, and easy to etch [11

11. U. Ozgur, Ya. I. Alivov, C. Liu, A. Teke, M. A. Reshchikov, S. Doğan, V. Avrutin, S. J. Cho, and H. Morkoç, “A comprehensive review of ZnO materials and devices,” J. Appl. Phys. 98(4), 041301 (2005). [CrossRef]

]. Given these features, a ZnO-based material is a very good candidate in UV PD applications with flexible plastic substrates. ZnO-based metal–semiconductor–metal (MSM) devices fabricated on a flexible substrate have been successfully demonstrated thus far [13

13. T. P. Chen, S. J. Young, S. J. Chang, C. H. Hsiao, and Y. J. Hsu, “Bending effects of ZnO nanorod metal-semiconductor-metal photodetectors on flexible polyimide substrate,” Nanoscale Res. Lett. 7(1), 214 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. However, a ZnO-based material with a bandgap larger than that of ZnO is required for the detection of deep UV light. ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposites have bandgaps ranging from 2.38 eV to over 5.64 eV [14

14. S. Zh. Karazhanov, P. Ravindran, H. Fjellvåg, and B. G. Svensson, “Electronic structure and optical properties of ZnSiO3 and Zn2SiO4,” J. Appl. Phys. 106(12), 123701 (2009). [CrossRef]

,15

15. S. Chakrabarti, D. Ganguli, and S. Chaudhuri, “Photoluminescence of ZnO nanocrystallites confined in sol–gel silica matrix,” J. Phys. D Appl. Phys. 36(2), 146–151 (2003). [CrossRef]

]. ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite films have also been synthesized through various methods [16

16. V. Musat, E. Fortunato, S. Petrescu, and A. M. Botelho do Rego, “ZnO/SiO2 nanocomposite thin films by sol–gel method,” Phys. Status Solidi., A Appl. Mater. Sci. 205(8), 2075–2079 (2008). [CrossRef]

,17

17. H. Amekura, K. Kono, N. Kishimoto, and C. Buchal, “Formation of zinc-oxide nanoparticles in SiO2 by ion implantation combined with thermal oxidation,” Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. B 91, 96–99 (2007).

] at relatively low temperatures, such as sol–gel coating and sputtering technique, among others. Therefore, we propose a ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite prepared through a low-temperature process, which exhibits great potential in flexible DUV PDs applications. Moreover, a buffer layer on the plastic substrate might be needed for ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite deposition to obtain higher performance DUV PDs. The present study aimed to demonstrate the synthesis of ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite DUV PDs on a flexible polyethersulfone (PES) substrate. This study also aimed to compare the optoelectronic and low-frequency noise characteristics of ZnO–SiO2 MSM PDs on flexible PES substrates with and without an organosilicon SiOx(CH3) buffer layer. The ZnO–SiO2 films were prepared through a room temperature (RT) co-sputtering process.

2. Experiments

The MSM PD fabrication procedure was performed as follows. ZnO−SiO2 nanocomposite films (150-nm thick), SiO2, and ZnO, were simultaneously sputtered and deposited onto PES substrates with and without a SiOx(CH3) buffer layer. An 80 nm-thick organosilicon SiOx(CH3) buffer layer was prepared by plasma-enhanced chemical vapor deposition on the PES substrate. Thin films of SiOx(CH3) were deposited using hexamethyldisiloxane as liquid precursor and mixtures of argon as plasma gas. The radio frequency (RF) power of the SiO2 target and the DC power of the ZnO target were 125 and 75 W, respectively. The substrate temperature was kept at less than 80 °C with low RF sputtering power. The nanocomposite microstructure was examined using high-resolution transmission electron microscopy. Photolithography and a lift-off procedure were used to define the interdigitated Ni/Au (20/100 nm) Schottky contact deposited on the ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposites by evaporation. The size of the fabricated MSM PDs was maintained at 500 μm × 600 μm. An HP 4156 semiconductor parameter analyzer was then used to measure the current–voltage (I–V) characteristics of the fabricated MSM PDs. The spectral responses of the fabricated devices were obtained using a 250-W Xe lamp dispersed by a monochromator as the light source. The monochromatic light, calibrated with UV-enhanced Si PDs and an optical power meter, was modulated by a mechanical chopper and collimated onto the front, that is, the metal side, of the PDs using an optical fiber. A lock-in amplifier at RT recorded the PD photocurrents. Low-frequency noises emitted by the fabricated PDs were also measured in the frequency range 1 Hz to 1700 Hz using a low-noise current preamplifier and an HP35670A fast Fourier transform spectrum analyzer.

3. Results and discussions

Figure 1(a)
Fig. 1 (a) Image of the fabricated devices and (b) schematic of the ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite MSM PDs on PES.
shows an image of the fabricated devices. The ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite MSM PDs were fabricated on a flexible substrate. The size of the ZnO–SiO2 MSM PD structures with and without the SiOx(CH3) buffer layer shown in Fig. 1(b) was kept at 500 μm × 600 μm and 10 μm wide with an inter-electrode spacing of 10 μm.

Figure 2(a)
Fig. 2 (a) I–V characteristics and (b) associated photocurrent and dark current ratios of the fabricated ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite MSM PDs with and without the organic buffer layer.
indicates the I–V characteristics of the fabricated ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite MSM PDs with and without the organic buffer layer on PES measured in the dark and under illumination. Under an applied bias of −10 V, the measured dark currents were 3.5 × 10−13 and 1.4 × 10−13 A for the fabricated ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite MSM PDs with and without the SiOx(CH3) buffer layer on PES, respectively. The dark currents of the ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite MSM PDs with and without the buffer layer on PES were of the same order, although a less dark current was observed for the ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite MSM PD without the buffer. Moreover, under an applied bias of −10 V, the measured photocurrents were 2.38 × 10−7 and 4.54 × 10−8 A respectively for the ZnO–SiO2 compound MSM PDs with and without the buffer layer under an illumination wavelength of 240 nm at 186.53 μW/cm2. Figure 2(b) shows the associated photocurrent and dark current ratios of the ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite MSM PDs with and without the buffer layer at all the applied voltages. The associated photocurrent and dark current ratios of the ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite MSM PDs with SiOx(CH3) buffer layer were larger than those without the SiOx(CH3) buffer layer. The associated photocurrent and dark current ratios at a −10 V applied bias for the ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite MSM PDs with and without the buffer layer were 6.8 × 105 and 3.24 × 105, respectively.

Figure 3(a)
Fig. 3 Measured optical responsivities of the fabricated ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite MSM PDs with and without the organic buffer layer (a) as a function of wavelength at a bias of −10 V and (b) as a function of applied bias at 240 nm illumination. The inset shows the normalized responsivities of the ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite MSM PDs with and without buffer layer as a function of reverse bias voltage under illumination (at 240nm).
shows the measured optical responsivities at a bias of −10 V of the ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposites on PES with and without the SiOx(CH3) buffer layer. The cutoff wavelengths occurred at approximately 270 nm for both ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposites on PES. With an applied bias of −10 V under an illumination wavelength of 240 nm, the measured responsivities were 3.86 and 0.75 A/W for the ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposites on PES with and without the SiOx(CH3) buffer layer, respectively. The responsivity of the ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposites on PES with SiOx(CH3) buffer layer was larger than that without the SiOx(CH3) buffer layer. In the present paper, DUV-to-visible rejection ratio is defined as the responsivity at 240 nm of the ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite PDs measured at −10 V divided by the responsivity measured at 400 nm. The DUV-to-visible rejection ratios of the ZnO–SiO2 (R = 240 nm/R = 400 nm) MSM PDs with and without the SiOx(CH3) buffer layer on PES were 1.75 × 105 and 8.1 × 104, respectively. The ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposites on PES with the SiOx(CH3) buffer layer had higher DUV-to-visible rejection ratios than those without the SiOx(CH3) buffer layer. In addition, with an incident wavelength of 240 nm and −10 V applied bias, it was found that the maximum quantum efficiency (QE) for the fabricated ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite MSM flexible PDs with and without buffer were 2.48x103% and 4.82 x 102%, respectively. Therefore, the opto-electrical characteristics of the ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposites on PES were improved by introducing the SiOx(CH3) buffer layer. Notably, the responsivities of the ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposites on PES with and without the SiOx(CH3) buffer layer showed sudden increases around 370 nm. The sudden responsivity increases of the ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite PDs were attributed to the embedded nanosized ZnO cluster. Moreover, the responsivities at 240 nm of both MSM PDs increased with increasing applied bias as shown in Fig. 3(b). The bias-dependence responsivity of the ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite MSM PD on PES with SiOx(CH3) buffer layer was larger than that without the SiOx(CH3) buffer layer. This result implies that a larger internal gain was obtained from the ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite MSM PD with the SiOx(CH3) buffer layer than that without the SiOx(CH3) buffer layer. The exact origin of this internal gain remains unknown. One of the gains of the ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite MSM PDs might be attributed to the trapping of minority carriers at the semiconductor–metal interface. The trapped photogenerated carriers by defect states at the metal-semiconductor interface were proposed to shrink the depletion region of the metal/ ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite junction [18

18. C. Li, Y. Bando, M. Liao, Y. Koide, and D. Golberg, “Visible-blind deep-ultraviolet Schottky photodetector with a photocurrent gain based on individual Zn2GeO4 nanowire,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 97(16), 161102 (2010). [CrossRef]

]. The narrowed depletion region allows additional electrons to be tunneled into the semiconductor, which enables possible multiple passes of electrons through the semiconductor to yield a current gain greater than 100%. The other reason for the gain of the ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite MSM PDs might be from the photoconductive gain. The recombination of the ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite MSM PDs on PES should be reduced by introducing a organosilicon SiOx(CH3) buffer layer. Moreover, the photoconductive gain of the ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite MSM PDs on PES with buffer layer would also be increased by reducing recombination of the carriers in multiple passes. Besides, the inset of Fig. 3(b) displays the normalized the bias dependence 240nm-responsivities curves of ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite MSM PDs on PES (with and without the buffer). It was found that the ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite MSM PDs on PES with and without buffer layer shows very similar bias dependence 240nm-responsivities curve. Therefore, the higher QE and larger internal gain of the ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite MSM PDs on PES with SiOx(CH3) buffer layer should be attributed to suppress the recombination and enhance the photoconductive gain.

Noise characteristics measurements of the ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite MSM PDs on PES with and without the SiOx(CH3) buffer layer were performed in dark conditions. Figures 4(a)
Fig. 4 Low frequency noise power density spectra with various bias voltages of the ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite MSM PD on PES without (a) and with (b) the SiOx(CH3) buffer layer. (c) 10 Hz noise power density as a function of dark current for ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite MSM PD on PES with and without the SiOx(CH3) buffer layer.
and 4(b) shows the low-frequency noise power density spectra with various bias voltages of the ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite MSM PDs on PES with and without the SiOx(CH3) buffer layer, respectively. Both ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite PDs on PES exhibited typical 1/fγ noise power spectral density, according to
Sn(f)=KIdβfγ
(1)
where Id is the dark current, f is the frequency, K is a constant, and β and γ are the fitting parameters. The measured various-biased noise power density spectra of the ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite MSM PDs on PES with the SiOx(CH3) buffer layer were fitted to Eq. (1), and the fitting parameter γ was approximately 1. However, the fitting parameter γ of various-biased noise power density spectra of the ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite MSM PD on PES without the SiOx(CH3) buffer layer was in the range of 1~1.3. Although the low-frequency noise of the device was dominated by 1/f noise, the 1/f law is valid only up to 100 Hz. The measured noise decreased as 1/f1.3 above 100 Hz. Spatially distributed bulk defect states possibly exist within the ZnO–SiO2 films without a buffer layer. The exponent γ also deviates from 1 because of the spatially distributed trap states within the ZnO and oxide films, as described previously [19

19. C. Y. Lu, S. P. Chang, S. J. Chang, Y. Z. Chiou, C. F. Kuo, H. M. Chang, C. L. Hsu, and I. C. Chen, “Noise characteristics of ZnO-nanowire photodetectors prepared on ZnO:Ga/glass templates,” IEEE Sens. J. 7(7), 1020–11024 (2007). [CrossRef]

,20

20. K. H. Lee, R. W. Chuang, P. C. Chang, S. J. Chang, Y. C. Wang, C. L. Yu, J. C. Lin, and S. L. Wu, “Nitride-based MSM photodetectors with a HEMT structure and a low-temperature AlGaN intermediate layer ,” J. Electrochem. Soc. 155, 959–963 (20108).

]. Moreover, the flicker noise power density of the ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite MSM PD on PES with the SiOx(CH3) buffer layer Sn(f) (f = 1 Hz) varied from 4.1 × 10−29 A2/Hz (at a bias voltage of 1 V) to 3.44 × 10−29 A2/Hz (at a bias voltage of 5 V). The flicker noise power density of the ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite MSM PD on PES without the SiOx(CH3) buffer layer Sn (f) (f = 1 Hz) varied from 2.85 × 10−29 A2/Hz (at a bias voltage of 1 V) to 1.862 × 10−29 A2/ Hz (at a bias voltage of 5 V).

Moreover, for a given bandwidth of B, the total square noise current is estimated by integrating Sn(f) over the frequency range:
in2=0BSn(f)df
(2)
where the Sn(f) in the bandwidth range from 0 to 1 is assumed to be the same and equals Sn(f) at 1 Hz. Thus, the noise equivalent power (NEP) can be given by
NEP=in2R
(3)
where R is the responsivity of the PDs. Then, the normalized detectivity (D*) could be determined by
D*=A×BNEP
(4)
where A and B are the area of the PDs and the bandwidth, respectively. For a given bandwidth of 100 Hz, the NEP and D* as functions of applied bias of the ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite MSM PDs on PES with and without the SiOx(CH3) buffer layer at 240 nm, as shown in Fig. 5
Fig. 5 NEP and D* as functions of applied bias of the ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite MSM PD on PES with and without the SiOx(CH3) buffer layer.
.

4. Conclusions

In summary, this study demonstrated the optoelectrical and low-frequency noise characteristics of ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite PDs on flexible PES with and without the SiOx(CH3) buffer layer. Under an applied bias of −10 V and an illumination wavelength of 240 nm, the ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite on PES with the SiOx(CH3) buffer layer showed a larger measured responsivity with 3.86 A/W than that without the SiOx(CH3) buffer layer with 0.75 A/W. The ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite on PES with the SiOx(CH3) buffer layer showed a larger DUV–visible rejection ratio (1.75 × 105) than that without the SiOx(CH3) buffer layer (8.1 × 104). Moreover, for a given bandwidth of 100 Hz and an applied bias of −5 V, the NEP and D* measured for the ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite MSM PD on PES with the SiOx(CH3) buffer layer were 1.39 × 10−14 W and 5.04 × 1014 cm Hz0.5 W−1, respectively. At the same bias, the NEP and D* of the ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite MSM PD on PES without the SiOx(CH3) buffer layer were 5.72 × 10−14 W and 1.22 × 1014 cm Hz0.5 W−1, respectively. These findings indicate that a ZnO–SiO2 nanocomposite MSM PD on PES with lower noise level and larger detectivity can be achieved by introducing a SiOx(CH3) buffer layer.

Acknowledgments

The authors are very grateful to the National Science Council of Taiwan (Research Grant Nos. NSC101-2221-E-006-066-MY3 and 98-2221-E-006-013-MY3) for their financial support. This work was also made possible in part through the Advanced Optoelectronic Technology Center, NCKU as a project of the Ministry of Education, Taiwan, and in part through the financial support of the Bureau of Energy, Ministry of Economic Affairs of Taiwan, under Contract No. 100-D0204-6.

References and links

1.

C. Y. Lee, M. Y. Lin, W. H. Wu, J. Y. Wang, Y. Chou, W. F. Su, Y. F. Chen, and C. F. Lin, “Flexible ZnO transparent thin-film transistors by a solution-based process at various solution concentrations,” Semicond. Sci. Technol. 25(10), 105008 (2010). [CrossRef]

2.

L. W. Ji, C. Z. Wu, C. M. Lin, T. H. Meen, K. T. Lam, S. M. Peng, S. J. Young, and C. H. Liu, “Characteristic improvements of ZnO-based metal–semiconductor–metal photodetector on flexible substrate with ZnO cap layer,” Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 49(5), 052201 (2010). [CrossRef]

3.

H. Jiang and T. Egawa, “High quality AlGaN solar-blind Schottky photodiodes fabricated on AIN/sapphire template,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 90(12), 121121 (2007). [CrossRef]

4.

T. Tut, N. Biyikli, I. Kimukin, T. Kartaloglu, O. Aytur, M. S. Unlu, and E. Ozbay, “High bandwidth-efficiency solar-blind AlGaN Schottky photodiodes with low dark current,” Solid-State Electron. 49(1), 117–122 (2005). [CrossRef]

5.

T. Tut, M. Gokkavas, A. Inal, and E. Ozbay, “AlxGa1−xN-based avalanche photodiodes with high reproducible avalanche gain,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 90(16), 163506 (2007). [CrossRef]

6.

V. V. Kuryatkov, B. A. Borisov, S. A. Nikishin, Yu. Kudryavtsev, R. Asomoza, V. I. Kuchinskii, G. S. Sokolovskii, D. Y. Song, and M. Holtz, “247 nm solar-blind ultraviolet p-i-n photodetector,” J. Appl. Phys. 100(9), 096104 (2006). [CrossRef]

7.

A. Soltani, H. A. Barkad, M. Mattalah, B. Benbakhti, J. C. De Jaeger, Y. M. Chong, Y. S. Zou, W. J. Zhang, S. T. Lee, A. BenMoussa, B. Giordanengo, and J. Hochedez, “193 nm deep-ultraviolet solar-blind cubic boron nitride based photodetectors,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 92(5), 053501 (2008). [CrossRef]

8.

A. BenMoussa, A. Soltani, U. Schühle, K. Haenen, Y. M. Chong, W. J. Zhang, R. Dahal, J. Y. Lin, H. X. Jiang, H. A. Barkad, B. BenMoussa, D. Bolsee, C. Hermans, U. Kroth, C. Laubis, V. Mortet, J. C. De Jaeger, B. Giordanengo, M. Richter, F. Scholze, and J. F. Hochedez, “Recent developments of wide-bandgap semiconductor based UV sensors,” Diamond Related Materials 18(5-8), 860–864 (2009). [CrossRef]

9.

W. F. Yang, F. Zhang, Z. G. Liu, and Z. G. Wu, “Effects of annealing on the performance of 4H-SiC metal–semiconductor–metal ultraviolet photodetectors,” Mater. Sci. Semicond. Process. 11(2), 59–62 (2008). [CrossRef]

10.

Y. N. Hou, Z. X. Mei, Z. L. Liu, T. C. Zhang, and X. L. Du, “Mg0.55Zn0.45O solar-blind ultraviolet detector with high photoresponse performance and large internal gain,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 98(10), 103506 (2011). [CrossRef]

11.

U. Ozgur, Ya. I. Alivov, C. Liu, A. Teke, M. A. Reshchikov, S. Doğan, V. Avrutin, S. J. Cho, and H. Morkoç, “A comprehensive review of ZnO materials and devices,” J. Appl. Phys. 98(4), 041301 (2005). [CrossRef]

12.

J. W. Mares, R. C. Boutwell, M. Wei, A. Scheurer, and W. V. Schoenfeld, “Deep-ultraviolet photodetectors from epitaxially grown NixMg1−xO,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 97(16), 161113 (2010). [CrossRef]

13.

T. P. Chen, S. J. Young, S. J. Chang, C. H. Hsiao, and Y. J. Hsu, “Bending effects of ZnO nanorod metal-semiconductor-metal photodetectors on flexible polyimide substrate,” Nanoscale Res. Lett. 7(1), 214 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

14.

S. Zh. Karazhanov, P. Ravindran, H. Fjellvåg, and B. G. Svensson, “Electronic structure and optical properties of ZnSiO3 and Zn2SiO4,” J. Appl. Phys. 106(12), 123701 (2009). [CrossRef]

15.

S. Chakrabarti, D. Ganguli, and S. Chaudhuri, “Photoluminescence of ZnO nanocrystallites confined in sol–gel silica matrix,” J. Phys. D Appl. Phys. 36(2), 146–151 (2003). [CrossRef]

16.

V. Musat, E. Fortunato, S. Petrescu, and A. M. Botelho do Rego, “ZnO/SiO2 nanocomposite thin films by sol–gel method,” Phys. Status Solidi., A Appl. Mater. Sci. 205(8), 2075–2079 (2008). [CrossRef]

17.

H. Amekura, K. Kono, N. Kishimoto, and C. Buchal, “Formation of zinc-oxide nanoparticles in SiO2 by ion implantation combined with thermal oxidation,” Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. B 91, 96–99 (2007).

18.

C. Li, Y. Bando, M. Liao, Y. Koide, and D. Golberg, “Visible-blind deep-ultraviolet Schottky photodetector with a photocurrent gain based on individual Zn2GeO4 nanowire,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 97(16), 161102 (2010). [CrossRef]

19.

C. Y. Lu, S. P. Chang, S. J. Chang, Y. Z. Chiou, C. F. Kuo, H. M. Chang, C. L. Hsu, and I. C. Chen, “Noise characteristics of ZnO-nanowire photodetectors prepared on ZnO:Ga/glass templates,” IEEE Sens. J. 7(7), 1020–11024 (2007). [CrossRef]

20.

K. H. Lee, R. W. Chuang, P. C. Chang, S. J. Chang, Y. C. Wang, C. L. Yu, J. C. Lin, and S. L. Wu, “Nitride-based MSM photodetectors with a HEMT structure and a low-temperature AlGaN intermediate layer ,” J. Electrochem. Soc. 155, 959–963 (20108).

21.

S. J. Young, L. W. Ji, S. J. Chang, and Y. K. Su, “ZnO metal–semiconductor–metal ultraviolet sensors with various contact electrodes,” J. Cryst. Growth 293(1), 43–47 (2006). [CrossRef]

22.

S. J. Young, L. W. Ji, S. J. Chang, and X. L. Du, “ZnO metal-semiconductor-metal ultraviolet photodiodes with Au contacts,” J. Electrochem. Soc. 154(1), H26–H29 (2007). [CrossRef]

OCIS Codes
(130.5990) Integrated optics : Semiconductors
(230.5160) Optical devices : Photodetectors
(310.6870) Thin films : Thin films, other properties
(310.6845) Thin films : Thin film devices and applications

ToC Category:
Optical Devices

History
Original Manuscript: March 4, 2013
Revised Manuscript: April 4, 2013
Manuscript Accepted: April 8, 2013
Published: April 11, 2013

Citation
Wei-Chih Lai, Jiun-Ting Chen, and Ya-Yu Yang, "Optoelectrical and low-frequency noise characteristics of flexible ZnO–SiO2 photodetectors with organosilicon buffer layer," Opt. Express 21, 9643-9651 (2013)
http://www.opticsinfobase.org/oe/abstract.cfm?URI=oe-21-8-9643


Sort:  Author  |  Year  |  Journal  |  Reset  

References

  1. C. Y. Lee, M. Y. Lin, W. H. Wu, J. Y. Wang, Y. Chou, W. F. Su, Y. F. Chen, and C. F. Lin, “Flexible ZnO transparent thin-film transistors by a solution-based process at various solution concentrations,” Semicond. Sci. Technol.25(10), 105008 (2010). [CrossRef]
  2. L. W. Ji, C. Z. Wu, C. M. Lin, T. H. Meen, K. T. Lam, S. M. Peng, S. J. Young, and C. H. Liu, “Characteristic improvements of ZnO-based metal–semiconductor–metal photodetector on flexible substrate with ZnO cap layer,” Jpn. J. Appl. Phys.49(5), 052201 (2010). [CrossRef]
  3. H. Jiang and T. Egawa, “High quality AlGaN solar-blind Schottky photodiodes fabricated on AIN/sapphire template,” Appl. Phys. Lett.90(12), 121121 (2007). [CrossRef]
  4. T. Tut, N. Biyikli, I. Kimukin, T. Kartaloglu, O. Aytur, M. S. Unlu, and E. Ozbay, “High bandwidth-efficiency solar-blind AlGaN Schottky photodiodes with low dark current,” Solid-State Electron.49(1), 117–122 (2005). [CrossRef]
  5. T. Tut, M. Gokkavas, A. Inal, and E. Ozbay, “AlxGa1−xN-based avalanche photodiodes with high reproducible avalanche gain,” Appl. Phys. Lett.90(16), 163506 (2007). [CrossRef]
  6. V. V. Kuryatkov, B. A. Borisov, S. A. Nikishin, Yu. Kudryavtsev, R. Asomoza, V. I. Kuchinskii, G. S. Sokolovskii, D. Y. Song, and M. Holtz, “247 nm solar-blind ultraviolet p-i-n photodetector,” J. Appl. Phys.100(9), 096104 (2006). [CrossRef]
  7. A. Soltani, H. A. Barkad, M. Mattalah, B. Benbakhti, J. C. De Jaeger, Y. M. Chong, Y. S. Zou, W. J. Zhang, S. T. Lee, A. BenMoussa, B. Giordanengo, and J. Hochedez, “193 nm deep-ultraviolet solar-blind cubic boron nitride based photodetectors,” Appl. Phys. Lett.92(5), 053501 (2008). [CrossRef]
  8. A. BenMoussa, A. Soltani, U. Schühle, K. Haenen, Y. M. Chong, W. J. Zhang, R. Dahal, J. Y. Lin, H. X. Jiang, H. A. Barkad, B. BenMoussa, D. Bolsee, C. Hermans, U. Kroth, C. Laubis, V. Mortet, J. C. De Jaeger, B. Giordanengo, M. Richter, F. Scholze, and J. F. Hochedez, “Recent developments of wide-bandgap semiconductor based UV sensors,” Diamond Related Materials18(5-8), 860–864 (2009). [CrossRef]
  9. W. F. Yang, F. Zhang, Z. G. Liu, and Z. G. Wu, “Effects of annealing on the performance of 4H-SiC metal–semiconductor–metal ultraviolet photodetectors,” Mater. Sci. Semicond. Process.11(2), 59–62 (2008). [CrossRef]
  10. Y. N. Hou, Z. X. Mei, Z. L. Liu, T. C. Zhang, and X. L. Du, “Mg0.55Zn0.45O solar-blind ultraviolet detector with high photoresponse performance and large internal gain,” Appl. Phys. Lett.98(10), 103506 (2011). [CrossRef]
  11. U. Ozgur, Ya. I. Alivov, C. Liu, A. Teke, M. A. Reshchikov, S. Doğan, V. Avrutin, S. J. Cho, and H. Morkoç, “A comprehensive review of ZnO materials and devices,” J. Appl. Phys.98(4), 041301 (2005). [CrossRef]
  12. J. W. Mares, R. C. Boutwell, M. Wei, A. Scheurer, and W. V. Schoenfeld, “Deep-ultraviolet photodetectors from epitaxially grown NixMg1−xO,” Appl. Phys. Lett.97(16), 161113 (2010). [CrossRef]
  13. T. P. Chen, S. J. Young, S. J. Chang, C. H. Hsiao, and Y. J. Hsu, “Bending effects of ZnO nanorod metal-semiconductor-metal photodetectors on flexible polyimide substrate,” Nanoscale Res. Lett.7(1), 214 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. S. Zh. Karazhanov, P. Ravindran, H. Fjellvåg, and B. G. Svensson, “Electronic structure and optical properties of ZnSiO3 and Zn2SiO4,” J. Appl. Phys.106(12), 123701 (2009). [CrossRef]
  15. S. Chakrabarti, D. Ganguli, and S. Chaudhuri, “Photoluminescence of ZnO nanocrystallites confined in sol–gel silica matrix,” J. Phys. D Appl. Phys.36(2), 146–151 (2003). [CrossRef]
  16. V. Musat, E. Fortunato, S. Petrescu, and A. M. Botelho do Rego, “ZnO/SiO2 nanocomposite thin films by sol–gel method,” Phys. Status Solidi., A Appl. Mater. Sci.205(8), 2075–2079 (2008). [CrossRef]
  17. H. Amekura, K. Kono, N. Kishimoto, and C. Buchal, “Formation of zinc-oxide nanoparticles in SiO2 by ion implantation combined with thermal oxidation,” Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. B91, 96–99 (2007).
  18. C. Li, Y. Bando, M. Liao, Y. Koide, and D. Golberg, “Visible-blind deep-ultraviolet Schottky photodetector with a photocurrent gain based on individual Zn2GeO4 nanowire,” Appl. Phys. Lett.97(16), 161102 (2010). [CrossRef]
  19. C. Y. Lu, S. P. Chang, S. J. Chang, Y. Z. Chiou, C. F. Kuo, H. M. Chang, C. L. Hsu, and I. C. Chen, “Noise characteristics of ZnO-nanowire photodetectors prepared on ZnO:Ga/glass templates,” IEEE Sens. J.7(7), 1020–11024 (2007). [CrossRef]
  20. K. H. Lee, R. W. Chuang, P. C. Chang, S. J. Chang, Y. C. Wang, C. L. Yu, J. C. Lin, and S. L. Wu, “Nitride-based MSM photodetectors with a HEMT structure and a low-temperature AlGaN intermediate layer,” J. Electrochem. Soc. 155, 959–963 (20108).
  21. S. J. Young, L. W. Ji, S. J. Chang, and Y. K. Su, “ZnO metal–semiconductor–metal ultraviolet sensors with various contact electrodes,” J. Cryst. Growth293(1), 43–47 (2006). [CrossRef]
  22. S. J. Young, L. W. Ji, S. J. Chang, and X. L. Du, “ZnO metal-semiconductor-metal ultraviolet photodiodes with Au contacts,” J. Electrochem. Soc.154(1), H26–H29 (2007). [CrossRef]

Cited By

Alert me when this paper is cited

OSA is able to provide readers links to articles that cite this paper by participating in CrossRef's Cited-By Linking service. CrossRef includes content from more than 3000 publishers and societies. In addition to listing OSA journal articles that cite this paper, citing articles from other participating publishers will also be listed.


« Previous Article  |  Next Article »

OSA is a member of CrossRef.

CrossCheck Deposited