Elsevier

Journal of Crystal Growth

Volume 264, Issue 4, 31 March 2004, Pages 593-604
Journal of Crystal Growth

Czochralski growth of oxides

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrysgro.2003.12.044Get rights and content

Abstract

The first oxide grown using the Czochralski technique (CaWO4) was in 1960. Since that time, the Czochralski technique has become the method of choice for the growth and production of many bulk oxide materials used in the electronics and optical industries, e.g. lasers, substrates, scintillators, nonlinear and passive optical devices. This paper will trace the development of the initial process from its beginnings in the early 1960's to its present state and highlight some of the significant advances over the years that have allowed the oxide crystal growth industry to develop. It will conclude with an assessment of the current status and outline directions for further research and development.

Introduction

The use of the Czochralski [1] process to grow semiconductor crystals (Si and Ge) was well established by the mid-1950s [2], [3], [4]. The first reported oxide material grown using the Czochralski technique (CaWO4) was in 1960 [5]. This initial paper was followed quickly by numerous other papers dealing with the growth of a variety of oxide materials such as LiNbO3 [6], LiTaO3 [7], BGO [8], YAG (Y3Al5O12) [9], Nd:YAG [10] and Al2O3 (Sapphire) [11], [12]. By the mid-1960s, the Czochralski process for the growth of oxide materials was becoming well established. Today, the Czochralski technique, also known as crystal pulling, has become the method of choice for the growth and production of many bulk oxide materials used as components for the electronics and optical industries, e.g. lasers, substrates, scintillators, nonlinear and passive optical devices. To achieve this progress, numerous advances to the understanding of the role that liquid and crystal composition, interface shape/fluid dynamics, thermal geometry and puller design have on the quality of the resulting crystal had to be determined. This paper will trace the development of the initial process from its beginnings in the early 1960s to its present state and highlight some of the significant advances over the years that have allowed the oxide crystal growth industry to develop so that today the size and variety of materials has expanded to include 125 to 150 mm diameter oxide single crystal that can weigh as much as 50 kg. It will then conclude with an assessment of the current status and outline directions for further research and development.

Section snippets

Crystal composition

One of the first problems encountered during the growth of various crystals was that the properties were found to vary through the crystal length as well as from crystal to crystal and from one researcher to another. It was always assumed that the composition of these oxide materials was stoichiometric; hence, the initial starting melt composition was also stoichiometric. The first oxide material identified to show variations in properties due to stoichiometric variations of the liquid was LiTaO

Interface shape/fluid dynamics

With the growth of oxide materials in the early 1960s, very little attention was paid to the shape of the growth interface and its influence on the quality of the resulting crystal. The growth systems were small and the crystals usually were 1–2 cm in diameter. Given such small growth systems, most early crystals were grown with a high thermal gradient and the shape of the growth interface was conical. Furthermore, it was assumed that a conical interface was necessary to maintain stable growth

Diameter control

Of the many mechanical advances that were made in the growth system and furnace construction for oxide materials, the one that has made the most contribution to the growth and quality of oxides has been the development of a useful method for active control of the diameter of the growing crystal. Initial control systems were based solely on control of the power input based on the assumption that if the power input into the furnace was constant then the resulting temperature during growth would

Future directions

As the demand for oxide crystals and their uses increases, the need for the growth of larger crystals (>75 mm diameter) with improved quality will also increase, i.e. the oxide crystal growth industry will follow the same path as the semiconductor industry with cost becoming the main driver. This has already happened for several materials such as Nd: YAG, Sapphire (Al2O3), LiNbO3 and several garnets (GGG and SGGG). However, unlike the semiconductor industry, adequate models for the design of

Summary

Over the past 40+ years of Czochralski oxide growth, significant progress has been made in understanding the various factors involved in the growth of these materials. Each decade has addressed a series of pressing problems that have advanced the Czochralski growth of oxide materials (Table 1). We have progressed from the growth of small (1 cm diameter×3 cm length) 100 g crystals suitable for research purposes to the growth of large oxide crystals that now are 75 mm or larger in diameter that can

References (63)

  • S.L. Blank et al.

    J. Crystal Growth

    (1972)
  • C.D. Brandle et al.

    J. Crystal Growth

    (1972)
  • C.D. Brandle et al.

    J. Crystal Growth

    (1972)
  • C.D. Brandle et al.

    J. Crystal growth

    (1974)
  • V.J. Fratello et al.

    J. Crystal Growth

    (1987)
  • C.D. Brandle et al.

    J. Crystal growth

    (1973)
  • D. Mateika et al.

    J. Crystal Growth

    (1979)
  • N. Iyi et al.

    J. Solid State Chem.

    (1984)
  • H.L. Glass et al.

    Mater. Res. Bull.

    (1973)
  • K. Takagi et al.

    J. Crystal Growth

    (1976)
  • J.R. Carruthers

    J. Crystal Growth

    (1976)
  • J.C. Brice et al.

    J. Crystal Growth

    (1977)
  • C.D. Brandle

    J. Crystal Growth

    (1977)
  • S. Miyazawa

    J. Crystal Growth

    (1980)
  • D.C. Miller et al.

    J. Crystal Growth

    (1978)
  • D.C. Miller et al.

    J. Crystal Growth

    (1981)
  • C.D. Brandle

    J. Crystal Growth

    (1982)
  • J.J. Derby et al.

    J. Crystal Growth

    (1987)
  • D.F. O’Kane et al.

    J. Crystal Growth

    (1972)
  • K.J. Gartner et al.

    J. Crystal Growth

    (1972)
  • W. Bardsley et al.

    J. Crystal Growth

    (1972)
  • A.E. Zinnes et al.

    J. Crystal Growth

    (1973)
  • A.J. Valentino et al.

    J. Crystal Growth

    (1974)
  • W. Bardsley et al.

    J. Crysral Growth

    (1974)
  • J.A.S. Ikeda et al.

    J. Crystal Growth

    (1988)
  • V.J. Fratello et al.

    J. Crystal Growth

    (1993)
  • X. Chen et al.

    J. Crystal Growth

    (1999)
  • P.F. Paradis et al.

    J. Crystal Growth

    (2003)
  • C.D. Brandle et al.

    J. Crystal Growth

    (1974)
  • C.D. Brandle

    J. Crystal Growth

    (1982)
  • J. Czochralski

    J. Phys. Chem.

    (1918)
  • Cited by (91)

    • Distribution coefficients for rare-earth doping in Y<inf>3</inf>Ga<inf>5</inf>O<inf>12</inf> garnet: Comparison with Y<inf>3</inf>Al<inf>5</inf>O<inf>12</inf>

      2022, Journal of Crystal Growth
      Citation Excerpt :

      The cubic lattice parameter a is obtained as 12.268 Å from the positions of eight peaks in 45° < 2θ < 80°, and this value agrees well with those reported previously on polycrystalline samples [17]. It should be noted that crystals pulled from the melt have larger a, due to partial substitution of Y3+ for Ga3+ at the octahedral B site [4,25]. Such defect is much less severe in flux-grown crystals [4], which is also evidenced in thermal conductivity data [26].

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text