User Tools

Site Tools


nnp:piezo:piezoelectricity_in_wurtzite

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
nnp:piezo:piezoelectricity_in_wurtzite [2019/10/21 13:54]
takuma.sato removed
— (current)
Line 1: Line 1:
-===== Piezoelectricity in wurtzite ===== 
-Author: Takuma Sato, nextnano GmbH 
- 
-nextnano++ and nextnano<​sup>​3</​sup>​ can simulate growth orientation dependence of the piezoelectric effect in heterostructures. Following A.E. Romanov //et al//., Journal of Applied Physics **100**, 023522 (2006), we consider In<​sub>​x</​sub>​Ga<​sub>​1-x</​sub>​N and Al<​sub>​x</​sub>​Ga<​sub>​1-x</​sub>​N thin layers pseudomorphically grown on GaN substrates. The c-axis of the substrate GaN is inclined by an angle $\theta$ with respect to the interface of the heterostructure. The layer is assumed to be very thin compared to substrate so that the strain is approximately homogeneous in all direction (pseudomorphic),​ and the ternary alloys mimic the orientation of crystallography direction. The layer material deforms such that the lattice translation vector of each layer has a common projection onto the interface. The strain in a crystal induces piezoelectric polarization,​ which contributes as an additional component to the total charge density profile. The important consequence of their analysis is that the piezoelectric polarization normal to the interface **becomes zero at a nontrivial angle**. The piezoelectric charge in a heterostructure in general results in an additional offset between electron and hole spatial probability distribution,​ thereby reducing the overlap of their wavefunctions in real space. The small overlap of electron and hole leads to an inefficient radiative recombination,​ i.e. lower efficiency of optoelectronic devices. The work by Romanov //et al//. paved the way to device optimization by the growth direction of the crystal. 
- 
-=== References === 
-  * A.E. Romanov //et al//., Journal of Applied Physics **100**, 023522 (2006) 
-  * S. Schulz and O. Marquardt, Phys. Rev. Appl. **3**, 064020 (2015) 
-  * S.K. Patra and S. Schulz, Phys. Rev. B **96**, 155307 (2017) 
-The corresponding input files are: 
-  * Romanov_InGaN_theta_nnp.in 
-  * Romanov_AlGaN_theta_nnp.in 
-  * Romanov_InGaN_theta_nnp_2nd.in 
-  * Romanov_InGaN_theta_nn3.in 
-  * Romanov_InGaN_theta_nn3_2nd.in 
- 
-==== Specify crystal orientation ==== 
-<figure wurtzite>​ 
-{{:​nnp:​piezo:​romanov_wurtzite4.jpg?​direct&​500}} 
-<​caption>​Rotation of a wurtzite structure. The blue plane is parallel to the interface.</​caption>​ 
-</​figure>​ 
- 
-nextnano software treats the rotation of crystal orientation by the **Miller-Bravais indices** in the input file. 
-The setup of our system is as follows: the x-axis of the simulation coordinate system (hereafter **x'​**-axis) is taken to the normal vector of the interface. The z-axis of the simulation system (**z'​**) is normal to the (-1 2 -1 0) plane of the crystal, i.e. it is along **a<​sub>​2</​sub>​** direction in Figure {{ref>​wurtzite}}. The rotation axis indicated with red line is along **z'​**-axis,​ and the interface is shown as the blue plane. The inclination angle $\theta$ is defined as the angle between the c-axis [0001] and the normal vector of the blue plane, which is **x'​**-axis. Then the crystal orientation is specified in nextnano++ input file as 
-<​code>​ 
-crystal_wz{ 
-     x_hkl = [ 1, 0, l(theta)] # x axis perpendicular to (hkl) plane = (hkil) plane 
-     z_hkl = [-1, 2, 0]        # z axis perpendicular to (hkl) plane = (hkil) plane 
-} 
-</​code>​ 
-where $l(\theta)$ is an integer determined by the inclination angle. This statement means //the **x'​**-axis is normal to the (1 0 -1 $l(\theta)$) plane of the crystal, whereas **z'​**-axis is normal to the (-1 2 -1 0) plane//. (Note that nextnano++ does not require the third entry, i.e. the letter ''​i'',​ in Miller-Bravais notation (hkil) because ''​i=-(h+k)''​.) 
- 
-The index $l(\theta)$ is deduced from a simple geometry consideration. Figure {{ref>​crosssection}} shows the cross-section of a wurtzite lattice that is perpendicular to the rotation axis in Figure {{ref>​wurtzite}}. 
- 
-<figure crosssection>​ 
-{{:​nnp:​piezo:​romanov_crosssection.jpg?​direct&​500}} 
-<​caption>​Cross-section of the wurtzite lattice. The dashed blue line indicates the **x'​**-direction,​ which is normal to the interface (solid blue line).</​caption>​ 
-</​figure>​ 
- 
-  * When $\theta=0$, the interface is normal to the (0001) plane, i.e. **x'​**-axis is normal to the (0001) plane. 
-  * When $\theta=90$ degree, the **x'​**-axis should be normal to the (1 0 -1 0) plane of the crystal. 
-  * When $0<​\theta<​90$ degree, definition of the index is $l(\theta):​= \frac{c}{d}$ and the following relation holds $$d=\frac{\sqrt{3}}{2}a\tan{\theta}.$$ From these equations we find $$l(\theta)=\frac{2c}{\sqrt{3}a\tan{\theta}}.$$ The plane to be determined can be then taken as $$(hkil) = (\sin\theta\ \ 0\ \ -\sin\theta\ \ \frac{2c}{\sqrt{3}a}\cos\theta).$$ 
-We note that the expression in the third case includes the other two special cases. To approximate the direction with integer entries, we multiply 100 and take the floor function: 
-<​code>​ 
-$h = floor(100*sin(theta)) 
-$k = floor(100*2c*cos(theta)/​sqrt(3)a) 
-x_hkl = [$h, 0, $l]  # x axis perpendicular to (hkl) plane = (hkil) plane 
-</​code>​ 
-//Since nextnano<​sup>​3</​sup>​ does not support variables in the Miller-Bravais indices, we explicitly give the indices in the input file using statements like// ''​!IF ​  ​%ORIENTATION40 ​  ​hkil-x-direction ​ =  64 0 -64 143''​. 
- 
-==== Parameter sweep of the angle using Template: Sweep over the variable theta ==== 
-  * Input file: Romanov_InGaN_theta_nnp.in 
-One can make use of **'​Template'​** feature of nextnanomat to sweep the angle $\theta$ and obtain crystal orientation dependence of several physical quantities. Here, calculation is performed for every 5 degrees (Figure {{ref>​postprocessing}}). 
-<figure postprocessing>​ 
-{{:​nnp:​piezo:​postprocessing.png?​direct&​700}} 
-<​caption>'​Template'​ tab in nextnanomat.</​caption>​ 
-</​figure>​ 
-We obtain the angle dependence using **'​Postprocessing'​** feature. 
-Here, we collect the strain tensor components $\varepsilon_{xx}$,​ $\varepsilon_{yy}$,​ $\varepsilon_{zz}$,​ $\varepsilon_{xy}$,​ $\varepsilon_{xz}$ and $\varepsilon_{yz}$ that are in columns 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 of the file ''​strain_simulation.dat''​. 
-  * Select file containing values for the strain tensor components ''​strain_simulation.dat''​ by clicking on the folder icon below //​Postprocessing//​. 
-  * Select ''​1''​ for the //Maximum number of values lines//. 
-  * Select ''​2''​ for the //Number of relevant column//. //(to do: Improve nextnanomat to include all columns.)// 
-  * Click on //Create file with combined data// to generate file ''​theta_strain_simulation_Column2.dat''​. 
-  * Select ''​3''​ for the //Number of relevant column//. 
-  * Click on //Create file with combined data// to generate file ''​theta_strain_simulation_Column3.dat''​. 
-  * Select ''​4''​ for the //Number of relevant column//. 
-  * Click on //Create file with combined data// to generate file ''​theta_strain_simulation_Column4.dat''​. 
-  * Select ''​5''​ for the //Number of relevant column//. 
-  * Click on //Create file with combined data// to generate file ''​theta_strain_simulation_Column5.dat''​. 
-  * Select ''​6''​ for the //Number of relevant column//. 
-  * Click on //Create file with combined data// to generate file ''​theta_strain_simulation_Column6.dat''​. 
-  * The postprocessing results are contained in the folder ''<​name_of_input_file>​_postprocessing''​. 
-  * Finally, the plotted results of the postprocessing file can be exported to gnuplot. Add all columns to the Overlay, and then click on: //Create and Open Gnuplot (*.plt) from Items of Overlay// 
- 
-==== Strain ==== 
-Figures {{ref>​strain_sim}} and {{ref>​strain_cry}} are the strain tensor elements as a function of inclination angle $\theta$, with respect to **simulation** and **crystal** coordinate systems, respectively. One can confirm that they reproduce correctly Figure 5 and 6 in [Romanov2006]. Please note that Romanov takes **z'​**-axis as growth direction, while we take **x'​**-axis. Therefore **x'​**- and **z'​**-axes are interchanged from [Romanov2006]. 
- 
-<figure strain_sim>​ 
-{{ :​nnp:​piezo:​romanov_ingan_strain_sim.png?​direct&​500 |}} 
-<​caption>​Elastic strain tensor components as a function of c-axis inclination angle $\theta$ in **simulation** coordinate system.</​caption>​ 
-</​figure>​ 
- 
-<figure strain_cry>​ 
-{{ :​nnp:​piezo:​romanov_ingan_strain_cry.png?​direct&​500 |}} 
-<​caption>​Elastic strain tensor componentsas a function of c-axis inclination angle $\theta$ in **crystal** coordinate system.</​caption>​ 
-</​figure>​ 
- 
- 
-==== Piezoelectric effect (first-order) ==== 
-The piezoelectric effect is at first instance described by a linear response against strain. In crystal coordinate system, 
-$$ 
-P_\mu^{(1)}=\sum_{j=1}^6 e_{\mu j}\epsilon_j,​ 
-$$ 
-where $\mu=1,2,3$ and the strain tensor is expressed in six-dimensional Voigt notation 
-$$ 
-\begin{pmatrix} 
-\epsilon_{1} \\ \epsilon_{2} \\ \epsilon_{3} \\ \epsilon_{4} \\ \epsilon_{5} \\ \epsilon_{6} 
-\end{pmatrix} 
-=\begin{pmatrix} 
-\epsilon_{xx} \\ \epsilon_{yy} \\ \epsilon_{zz} \\ 2\epsilon_{yz} \\ 2\epsilon_{xz} \\ 2\epsilon_{xy} 
-\end{pmatrix}. 
-$$  
-Please note that the indices $x, y, z$ without prime refer to the axes of the crystal coordinate system. The superscript $^{(1)}$ indicates first-order piezoeffect. For the symmetry of the wurtzite structure, only three parameters remain in the piezoelectric coefficient tensor $e_{ij}$ ​ 
-$$ 
-\begin{pmatrix} 
-P_x^{(1)} \\ P_y^{(1)} \\ P_z^{(1)} \\  
-\end{pmatrix} 
-= 
-\begin{pmatrix} 
-0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & e_{15} & 0 \\ 
-0 & 0 & 0 & e_{15} & 0 & 0 \\ 
-e_{31} & e_{31} & e_{33} & 0 & 0 & 0 
-\end{pmatrix} 
-\begin{pmatrix} 
-\epsilon_{xx} \\ \epsilon_{yy} \\ \epsilon_{zz} \\ 2\epsilon_{yz} \\ 2\epsilon_{xz} \\ 2\epsilon_{xy} 
-\end{pmatrix} 
-= \begin{pmatrix}2e_{15}\epsilon_{xz} \\ 2e_{15}\epsilon_{yz} \\ e_{31}(\epsilon_{xx}+\epsilon_{yy})+e_{33}\epsilon_{zz} \end{pmatrix},​ 
-$$ 
-cf. Eq. (4) in [Schulz2015]. __**Note that Eq. (14) in [Romanov2006] misses the factor 2 for off-diagonal elements of the strain tensor.**__ 
- 
-These equations are implemented in both the nextnano++ and nextnano<​sup>​3</​sup>​ software with corresponding material parameters in the respective database. The following flags export the strain tensor components and piezoelectric polarization vector in **crystal** and **simulation** coordinate systems (cf. [[https://​www.nextnano.com/​nextnanoplus/​software_documentation/​input_file/​strain.htm|nextnano++]] and [[https://​www.nextnano.com/​nextnano3/​input_parser/​keywords/​output-strain.htm|nextnano3]] documentation). The piezoelectric polarization vector with respect to the simulation coordinate system can be found in the file ''​Strain\piezoelectric_polarization_vector_simulation.dat''​. 
-<​code>​ 
-# nextnano++ 
-strain{ 
-   ​output_strain_tensor{ 
-      crystal_system ​   = yes 
-      simulation_system = yes 
-   } 
-    
-   ​output_polarization_vector{ 
-      crystal_system ​   = yes 
-      simulation_system = yes 
-   } 
-} 
-</​code>​ 
-<​code>​ 
-! nextnano3 
-$output-strain 
-   ​strain-simulation-system = yes 
-   ​strain-crystal-system ​   = yes 
-   ​polarization-vector ​     = yes 
-$end_output-strain 
-</​code>​ 
-For consistency,​ we have used the same material parameters as [Romanov2006],​ i.e. we have overwritten our default material parameters of the database with the values specified in the input file.  
- 
-Analytical expression is derived as follows [Schulz2015]. Since we are interested in the polarization normal to the interface, it is useful to switch to the simulation coordinate system $(x', y', z')$. This can be done by transforming the polarization vector and the strain tensor to the simulation system, 
-$$ 
-P_{\mu'​}^{(1)}=\sum_{\mu=1}^3 R_{\mu'​\mu} P_\mu^{(1)},​\ \  
-\epsilon_{\mu'​\nu'​}=\sum_{\mu,​\nu=1}^3 R_{\mu'​\mu}R_{\nu'​\nu}\epsilon_{\mu\nu},​ 
-$$ 
-where the $3\times3$ rotation matrix $R$ accounts for a rotation of angle $\theta$. Prime denotes the axes in simulation coordinate system. These equations can be expressed in vector form as 
-$$ 
-\begin{pmatrix} 
-P_{x}^{(1)} \\ P_{y}^{(1)} \\ P_{z}^{(1)} 
-\end{pmatrix} 
-=R^{-1}(\theta)  ​ 
-\begin{pmatrix} 
-P_{x'​}^{(1)} \\ P_{y'​}^{(1)} \\ P_{z'​}^{(1)} 
-\end{pmatrix},​\ \  
-\begin{pmatrix} 
-\epsilon_{xx} \\ \epsilon_{yy} \\ \epsilon_{zz} \\ 2\epsilon_{yz} \\ 2\epsilon_{xz} \\ 2\epsilon_{xy} 
-\end{pmatrix} 
-=S^{-1}(\theta) 
-\begin{pmatrix} 
-\epsilon_{x'​x'​} \\ \epsilon_{y'​y'​} \\ \epsilon_{z'​z'​} \\ 2\epsilon_{y'​z'​} \\ 2\epsilon_{x'​z'​} \\ 2\epsilon_{x'​y'​} 
-\end{pmatrix} 
-$$  
-where $S(\theta)$ is a $6\times6$ matrix. The second transformation is given in Eq. (13) in [Romanov2006]. From equations above, we obtain the first-order piezoelectric effect in the simulation coordinate system 
-$$ 
-\begin{pmatrix} 
-P_{x'​}^{(1)} \\ P_{y'​}^{(1)} \\ P_{z'​}^{(1)} 
-\end{pmatrix} 
-=R(\theta) 
-\begin{pmatrix} 
-0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & e_{15} & 0 \\ 
-0 & 0 & 0 & e_{15} & 0 & 0 \\ 
-e_{31} & e_{31} & e_{33} & 0 & 0 & 0 
-\end{pmatrix} 
-S^{-1}(\theta) 
-\begin{pmatrix} 
-\epsilon_{x'​x'​} \\ \epsilon_{y'​y'​} \\ \epsilon_{z'​z'​} \\ 2\epsilon_{y'​z'​} \\ 2\epsilon_{x'​z'​} \\ 2\epsilon_{x'​y'​} 
-\end{pmatrix}. 
-$$ 
-The **z'​**-component is explicitly 
-$$ 
-P_{z'​}^{(1)}= 
-e_{31}\cos\theta\epsilon_{x'​x'​}\\ 
-+\left(e_{31}\cos^3\theta+\frac{e_{33}-2e_{15}}{2}\sin\theta\sin 2\theta \right) \epsilon_{y'​y'​} \\ 
-+\left(\frac{e_{31}+2e_{15}}{2}\sin\theta\sin 2\theta+e_{33}\cos^3\theta \right) \epsilon_{z'​z'​} \\  
-+\left[(e_{31}-e_{33})\cos\theta\sin 2\theta+2e_{15}\sin\theta\cos 2\theta\right] \epsilon_{y'​z'​}. 
-$$ 
-__**Note that the corresponding analytical expression Eq. (18) in [Romanov2006] misses the factor $2$ in front of $e_{15}$ in the 2<​sup>​nd</​sup>,​ 3<​sup>​rd</​sup>​ and 4<​sup>​th</​sup>​ line, and contains a typo in the 3<​sup>​rd</​sup>​ line, i.e. $e_{33}$ has to be $e_{31}$ in the first term.**__ Figure {{ref>​comparison}} compares the results of the nextnano software with the results of [Romanov2006] and [Schulz2015],​ respectively. The analytical results in Figure {{ref>​comparison}} are the plot of the equation above, with an interchange of **x'​**- and **z'​**-axes. ​ 
- 
-<figure comparison>​ 
-{{ :​nnp:​piezo:​romanov_ingan_comparison7.png?​direct&​600 |}} 
-<​caption>​Piezoelectric polarization as a function of inclination angle. The gray dotted curve contains a typo $e_{33}\leftrightarrow e_{31}$ and misses the factor $2$. When the first typo is fixed, the gray solid curve is obtained and looks to be consistent with Figure 7 in [Romanov2006]. With the factor $2$ the result becomes the black curve. nextnano<​sup>​3</​sup>​ and nextnano++ reproduce the black curve.</​caption>​ 
-</​figure>​ 
- 
-From the results we can see that the piezoelectric polarization vanishes at an intermediate angle around 38 degree and that it is maximized when inclination angle is zero. 
-==== Alloy content dependence ==== 
-One can also sweep the alloy content $x$. The following results correspond to Figure 7(a) in [Romanov2006]. One can see that the zero point is universal for different alloy contents. 
-<figure alloy> 
-{{ :​nnp:​piezo:​romanov_ingan_piezo_nnp_alloy.png|direct}} 
-<​caption>​Alloy content dependence of the piezoelectric polarization for In<​sub>​x</​sub>​Ga<​sub>​1-x</​sub>​N/​GaN structure. In<​sub>​x</​sub>​Ga<​sub>​1-x</​sub>​N is under biaxial compressive strain with respect to GaN.</​caption>​ 
-</​figure>​ 
- 
-==== AlGaN ==== 
-  * Input file: Romanov_AlGaN_theta_nnp.in 
-Similarly, piezoelectric polarization of Al<​sub>​x</​sub>​Ga<​sub>​1-x</​sub>​N/​GaN structure is calculated and shown in Figure {{ref>​alloy_Al}}. 
-This result corresponds to Figure 8(a) in [Romanov2006]. The piezoelectric effect vanishes at around 38 degree in this case as well. 
-<figure alloy_Al>​ 
-{{ :​nnp:​piezo:​romanov_algan_piezo_nnp_alloy.png|direct}} 
-<​caption>​Alloy content dependence of the piezoelectric polarization for Al<​sub>​x</​sub>​Ga<​sub>​1-x</​sub>​N/​GaN structure. Al<​sub>​x</​sub>​Ga<​sub>​1-x</​sub>​N is under biaxial tensile strain with respect to GaN.</​caption>​ 
-</​figure>​ 
-==== Piezoelectric effect (second-order) ==== 
-  * Input file: Romanov_InGaN_theta_nnp_2nd.in 
-Optimization of optoelectronic device design requires an accurate and detailed knowledge of the growth-direction dependence of the built-in electric field. Recently, the second order piezoelectric effect has been reported to be relevant for wurtzite III-N materials, namely GaN, AlN and InN. This potentially affects the electronic and optical properties of the devices. The piezoelectric polarization is generalized in crystal coordinate as [Patra2017] 
-$$ 
-P_\mu^{\mathrm{pz}}=\sum_{j=1}^6e_{\mu j}\epsilon_j+\frac{1}{2}\sum_{j,​k=1}^6 B_{\mu jk}\epsilon_j\epsilon_k+\cdots 
-$$ 
-where $e_{\mu j}$ and $B_{\mu jk}$ are first- and second-order piezoelectric coefficients,​ respectively. For binary wurtzite structure, one can show that $B_{\mu jk}$ has 8 independent components $B_{311}, B_{312}, B_{313}, B_{333}, B_{115}, B_{125}, B_{135}, B_{344}$. The explicit expression of the second-order term is given in Eq. (3) in [Patra2017],​ which is also implemented in nextnano++. 
- 
-One can turn on the second-order contribution in [[https://​www.nextnano.com/​nextnanoplus/​software_documentation/​input_file/​strain.htm|nextnano++]] as 
-<​code>​ 
-# nextnano++ 
-strain{ 
-   ... 
-   ​second_order_piezo = yes        # default: no 
-} 
-</​code>​ 
-and in [[https://​www.nextnano.com/​nextnano3/​input_parser/​keywords/​numeric-control.htm|nextnano3]] 
-<​code>​ 
-! nextnano3 
-$numeric-control 
-   ... 
-   ​piezo-second-order = 2nd-order ​   ! [no/​2nd-order/​2nd-order-Tse-Pal] 
-$end_numeric-control 
-</​code> ​ 
- 
-Figure {{ref>​2nd_order}} shows the result of nextnano software. While the second-order contribution becomes negligible between the orientation $(1 0 \bar{1} 3)$ and $(1 0 \bar{1} 2)$, it enhances the piezo effect up to 14% in other directions. This figure can be qualitatively compared to Figure 1 ( c ) in [Patra2017],​ but note that they consider binary InN/GaN structure there. The pink curve is different from the one in Figure {{ref>​comparison}} because we employed the material parameters used in [Patra2017]. nextnano<​sup>​3</​sup>​ yields slightly deviated result, as it uses different formula for the second-order effect, L. Pedesseau et al., Appl. Phys. Lett. 100, 031903 (2012). Also see [[https://​www.nextnano.com/​nextnano3/​input_parser/​keywords/​numeric-control.htm|nextnano3 documentation]]. 
- 
-<figure 2nd_order>​ 
-{{ :​nnp:​piezo:​romanov_ingan_comparison6.png|direct&​400}} 
-<​caption>​Second-order piezoelectricity. Interface planes are indicated at corresponding angles.</​caption>​ 
-</​figure>​ 
- 
-  * Please help us to improve our tutorial! Should you have any questions and comments, please contact support [at] nextnano.com.