Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-sh8wx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-19T05:49:23.297Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

PZT and PMN-PT Thin Film Cantilevers: Comparison between Monomorph and Bimorph Structures

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 March 2011

Marcus Hoffmann ,
Carsten Kügeler ,
Ulrich Böttger  and
Rainer Waser
Marcus Hoffmann
Affiliation:
Institute of Materials in Electrical Engineering and Information Technology II, University of Aachen, Sommerfeldstrasse 24, 52074 Aachen, Germany
Carsten Kügeler
Affiliation:
Institute of Materials in Electrical Engineering and Information Technology II, University of Aachen, Sommerfeldstrasse 24, 52074 Aachen, Germany
Ulrich Böttger
Affiliation:
Institute of Materials in Electrical Engineering and Information Technology II, University of Aachen, Sommerfeldstrasse 24, 52074 Aachen, Germany
Rainer Waser
Affiliation:
Institute of Materials in Electrical Engineering and Information Technology II, University of Aachen, Sommerfeldstrasse 24, 52074 Aachen, Germany Institute of Electroceramic Materials (EKM), Department IFF, Research Center Jülich, 52425 Jülich, Germany
Get access

Abstract

Piezoelectric and electrostrictive materials are potential candidates for integrated micro systems. They can be used in cantilever laminated structures for different applications, e.g. active vibration control or agile transducers [1-3]. Due to the necessity of miniaturization of MEMS devices and the reduction of process costs and time, the use of chemical solution deposition (CSD) technique with microlithography and reactive ion etching (RIE) are essential.

Within this work we used these techniques in combination with silicon bulk micro machining technique to fabricate piezoelectric Pb(Zr,Ti)O3 (PZT) and electrostrictive Pb(Mg1/3,Nb2/3)O3-PbTiO3 (PMN-PT) coated micro cantilevers with different lengths which can be used in micro switch or micro mirror applications. In general PMN shows no elastic hysteresis and a better aging behavior than PZT ceramics. Since the electrostrictive effect is smaller than the piezoelectric effect the tip deflection of PMN-PT coated beams is much lower. Cantilevers with two ceramic thin film layers and an internal electrode (bimorph) were designed and compared to such with single ceramic thin film layers (monomorph). For fabrication control and electrical characterization SEM, polarization hysteresis-, and CV-measurements were performed. Laser interferometry measurements were used to characterize the electromechanic performance of the ceramic thin films and cantilevers.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 688: Symposium C – Ferroelectric Thin Films X , 2001 , C7.2.1
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2002

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Wang, Q.-M., Du, X.-H., Xu, B., Cross, L. E., IEEE Trans. Ultras. Ferro. and Freq. Cont., 46, pp. 638–645 (1999).Google Scholar
2. Smits, J. G., Ballato, A., J. Microelectromechanical Syst., 3, No. 3, pp. 105–111 (1994).Google Scholar
3. Polla, D. L. and Robbins, W. P., in Handbook of Thin Film Devices, edited by Taylor, D. J. (Academic Press, London, 2000) pp. 203–226.Google Scholar
4. Smits, J. G., Choi, W.-S., IEEE Trans. Ultra. Ferro. and Freq. Cont., 38, pp. 256–270, (1991).Google Scholar
5. Watanabe, J., Someji, T., Jomura, S., Jpn. J. Appl. Phys., 38, pp. 3331–3333 (1999).Google Scholar
6. Hoffmann, M., Küppers, H., Schneller, T., Böttger, U., Schnakenberg, U., Mokwa, W., and Waser, R., IEEE Applications of Ferroelectrics, 1, pp. 519–524 (2000).Google Scholar
7. Küppers, H., Hoffmann, M., Leuerer, T., Schneller, T., Böttger, U., Waser, R., Mokwa, W., and Schnakenberg, U., Transducers'01, 2, pp. 1018–1021 (2001).Google Scholar
8. Hoffmann, M., Hofer, C., Schneller, T., Böttger, U., Waser, R., submitted to J. Am. Cer. Soc. (2001).Google Scholar
9. Maiwa, H., Maria, J., Christman, J., Kim, S., Streiffer, S., Kingon, A., Int. Ferro., 24, pp.139–146 (1999).Google Scholar
10. Abe, T., Reed, M. L., IEEE MEMS, pp. 164–169 (1994).Google Scholar
11. Yoon, K. H., Lee, B. D., Park, J., Park, J. H., J. Appl. Phys., 90, No. 4, pp. 1968–1972 (1972).Google Scholar
12. Nagarajan, V., Alpay, S. P., Ganpule, C. S., Nagaraja, B. K., Aggarwal, S., Williams, E. D., Roytburd, A. L. and Ramesh, R., J. Appl. Phys. Let., 77, No. 3, pp. 438–440.Google Scholar
13. Gerber, P., Thesis, IWE, RWTH Aachen (2001).Google Scholar
14. Schaumburg, H., Keramik, Teubener, B. G., Stuttgart (1994).Google Scholar
15. Cohen, R. E., Heifets, E., Fu, H. (unpublished).Google Scholar
16. Park, J. H., Xu, F., Troiler-McKinstry, S., J. Appl. Phys., 89, pp. 568–574 (2001).Google Scholar
17. Muralt, P., Int. Ferro., 17, pp. 297–307 (1997).Google Scholar
18. Dubois, M. A., Muralt, P., Taylor, D. V., Hiboux, S., Int. Ferro., 22, pp. 535–543 (1998).Google Scholar