1. Phys. Chm. Solid4 Vol. II, pp. 1355-1359 Pergdmon Press Ltd., 1989. Prinkd in Great Britain
DIFFUSION OF “Cr IN Cr-DOPED MgOt G. W. WEBER. W. R. BITLER and V. S. STUBICAN Department of Materials Science
and Engineering,
The Pennsylvania U.S.A.
State University,
(Received 17 December 1979~ ctccepted in revised form
University
Park, PA 16802,
2 Mug 1980)
Abstract-An arc fusion technique was used to grow single crystals of MgO and Cr-doped MgO. Diffusion coefficients for “Cr in Cr-doped single crystals were measured at three temperatures 1383, 1444 and 1495°C using a high specific activity isotope “Cr. An approximately linear relationship between the concentration of Cr-ions in MgO and diffusion coefficients of “Cr was obtained. It is shown that the activation energy of 19.6 kcal/mole obtained for the doped crystals is the difference between the energy for motion and the energy for association of the Cr-vacancy complexes. Using a previously determined value of 39.9 kcal/mol for the energy of motion, the energy of association for the Cr-vacancy complex is calculated to 20.3 ? 3 kcallmol or 0.88 2 0. I3 eV.
I. INTRODUCTION The substitution requires
of a divalent
the creation
to Lidiard[l]
of one lattice
when an impurity
nearest neighbor
position,
in which, however,
ion in an alkali vacancy.
According
a complex
is formed
with an
energy arising from the electrostatic
tion
departs
which
are considered
from
a simple
separations.
coulombic
Impurities
to exist either
attracform
or as un-
of defects tends towards
value as the impurity
In the same way the diffusion ion, according
to Lidiard’s
then reach a constant
concentration coefficient
theory,
a
increases.
of the impurity
should increase and
value at high impurity
concen-
Hanlon[Z]
observed
diffusion
in Cd-doped
obtained
similar
Mn-doped Similar
silver
saturation
bromide
for
and
the diffusion
Cd2+
Siiptitz[3]
of Mn2+ in
have been conducted
in metal deficient
semiconductors,
amount
of metal vacancies
was varied
oxygen
pressure.
diffusion
conflicting Co,_,0
for
silver bromide and silver chloride. investigations
primarily
apparent
results
Several
of
“Fe
results.
Fe1_,0[4,
The diffusion
in the amount
of metal vacancies
the
diffusion
of an aliovalent
were
Crystals
coefficient
homogeneously is available
in oxides
alternating
current,
Single crystals
M20rM0
from
vertical
with a beryllium-copper
interdiffusion
in
data
couples
arc furnace. from
I pm finish with a piston-in-cylinder
solidified
blocks to
type device having a
machining tolerance of 5 pm. impurities:
Fe
containing
more
analysis indicated 104Oppm than
the following
(IOO-300ppm
0.3 mole
%
major
in specimens
Cr,O,),
Ca
IOO-
300 ppm, Si 200-500 ppm, and Cu l-3 ppmf. Crystal size decreased as the Cr203 concentration increased. Doping levels of 0.3 mole % of Cr203 produced transmission
anneal
crystals
size of 3 x 3 x 5 mm. Electron
maximum
electron
microscopy
Prepared
has not been studied
magnesium
wire saw and were polished
precipitates
on the tracer
precalcined
were removed
often
Comparable
of solute concen-
of MgO and Crz03 powders in an
of 6oCo in
as shown by several
doped single crystals.
only from
grown
51 with
with the increase
solute
the
chromium-
2. EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
43,500 X) of the crystals
authors [6, 71. The influence
to determine
in single crystal
tration and temperature.
have examined
coefficient
was found to increase linearly
in oxides
in which the
by varying
investigators in
was designed
of “Cr
doped magnesium oxide as a function
Spectrographic
trations.
the
study
coefficient
oxide or from mixtures
The degree of association
cation gradient in the MO
at
associated charged defects. saturation
present
diffusion
and vacancies
as complexes
a trivalent
material is present [8,9]. The
ion and vacancy are in a
association
nearest neighbor
halide
with a
microprobe
and
(magnification
to
did not reveal any discernible
or heterogeneities. crystals
were preannealed
temperature
for
at the diffusion
approximately
100% of
diffusion
anneal time to ensure that the dislocation
vacancy
substructures
were
equilibrated
the and
at the tem-
perature of interest. The high specific activity an activity
chromium
isotope used has
of l50m Ci/mg of 5’Cr in a 0.5N HCI solution.
The radiometric
purity
was >99%
with
no detectable
I solution of the isotope and a 0.01m solution of MgSO, . 7H20 were prepared, radioactive
tThis research was part of a thesis submitted by G. W. Weber in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Phisosophy in Ceramic Science. SPpm by weight.
PCS Vol. 41. No. U-E
contamination.
and applied in IOA aliquots evaporation
of water,
A 2:
to the crystal
the sulfates
surface. After
were converted
to
oxides by heating at 1200°C in air for 30 min. The crystal was then annealed face to face with a duplicate uncoated
G. W. WEBER et al.
1356
crystal. The couple was held together with Pt-wire and annealed in a vertical Pt4ORh or molydbenum-resistance furnace which could be controlled to ?l”C. Diffusion annealed crystals were edge- and back-sectioned to a depth of >15 m to eliminate edge effects from vapor transport. The crystal was then mounted to a piston-in-cylinder polishing device and sectioned with diamond paste which was no coarser than 3 pm. The thickness of the section removed from the crystal was determined by a k2.5 pm hand-held micrometer, a dial guage comparator (accuracy kO.5 pm) and the weight loss technique. An analysis of variance performed on the results obtained by the three techniques indicated that there was no statistically significant variation attributable to the different techniques. Counting was done for the 0.320 MeV “Cr y-ray with a heavily shielded Tl doped NaI scintillation crystal and single channel spectrometer. The residual activity in the crystal was counted after a section of specified thickness was removed. To optimize counting statistics only activities larger than five times the background count level were utilized.
RESULTS AND DlSCUSSlON
The residual-penetration diffusion in undoped MgO “tail” was characteristic of study. The solution of the Fick’s
data obtained for the “Cr is shown in Fig. I. A long all profiles measured in this Law for this case is[ IO]:
Q
N(x, t) = 2(rD*t)l~2
2
( 4;*t>
exp --
(1)
where N(x, t) is the activity at a distance x after a diffusion anneal time I, Q is the quantity of diffusing
material, and D* the tracer diffusion coefficient. If a ratio is established between the total initial activity before any section is removed, A(O), and the activity remaining after a thickness x has been removed, A(x), in which activity is the integral of expression (1) over the applicable limits it can be shown that:
where F is the error function and erfc is the complementary error function. If a relatively high energy radiation passes through a material with low absorption and for small distances, the absorption corrections developed by Gruzin[ll] are not required. This could be shown to be true for 0.320 MeV y-radiation in the current experimental situation[lt]. The plot of the inverse complementary error function of A(x)/A(O) vs penetration distance for the data in Fig. 1 is given in Fig. 2. The two distinct regions of diffusion were consistently observed in the results if sufficient activity was available to resolve the curve fully. The first portion of the curve was used to determine the volume diffusion coefficient, D*, and the effect of the second slope (probably due to pipe diffusion) upon the first was mathematically extracted to yield a representative value for the initial slope[ 131. Diffusion was studied at three different temperatures 1383, 1444 and 1495°C using MgO crystals doped with O-O.34 mole % Cr203. Results obtained for the different temperatures are shown on Fig. 3. It is evident that there is an approximately linear relationship between D(Cr*) and the concentration of dopant. According to Lidiard’s model in which the complexes are regarded as diffusing species, the intrinsic diffusion coefficient, D(G), of the impurity is related to diffusion of the complexes as
COUNTS
1,000
1
L
0
20
1
I
40 PENETRATION
Fig. 1. Residual
counts
vs penetration
distance
I
60
for an undoped
60 (MICRONS MgO
I
I
100
120
1
single crystal
at 1490°C for 6.19 x I@ s.
Diffusion of “0
in Cr-doped MgO
PENETRATION
1357
(MICRONS)
vs penetration distance for an undopedMa0 crystalat Fig. 2. Inverse complementary error function of [A(x)/A(O)] 1490°Cfor 6.19~ lo’s
15.
P 1383°c 0 1444oc cl 1495oc
MOLE
PERCENT
Cr203
Fig. 3. Diffusion coefficient of “Cr in Cr-doped MgO single crystals as the function of the concentration of dopant and temperature.
developed an expression for p:
follows:
I/Z D(Cr) = Do [y]
(3)
where & is the diffusion coefficient of the complex, p is the degree of association, c is the total impurity concentration [CrJ expressed as atomic fraction. For diffusion of Cr* tracer in uniformly doped crystals p is constant along the diffusion profile so that: (4)
D(Cr*) = Dep. Perkins
and
Rapp[9]
following
Lidiard’s
theory
p =3/4+&This yields for D(Cr*)
l/16+3+1 4cA
4c2A2
’
(5)
in the limit of low concentration: D(Cr*) = Doy
(6)
Do = const. exp (- E,/kT) where I?,,, = activation energy for motion of the Cr-vacancy complex A = 12 exp (-EJAT)
G. W. WEBER ef
1358
al.
EA = the association energy of the Cr-vacancy complex and c = total Cr ion concentration expressed as atomic fraction. For the above conditions the slope of In D* vs l/T would yield the difference in the energy of association and energy of motion: AE=E,,,-IEp,/
(7)
In the current observations, the diffusion data were well represented as being proportional to c but did not extrapolate to zero as predicted by the model. The extrapolated values for D(Cr*) to zero concentration of Cr3+ were consistent in order of magnitude with the values obtained in measurements on similar but undoped MgO crystals as shown in Figs. 3 and 4. It is postulated that the diffusivity observed in the undoped MgO and the non zero extrapolated values of D(Cr*) for the doped MgO crystals result from the contribution of the background impurities to the diffusivity. Assuming for example that the significant impurity is W+, that at the temperature of interest Si” is sufficiently associated such that it does not effect the Cr ion-vacancy association equilibrium, the contribution of the Si4’ to the observed D(Cr*) would be then independent and additive to the Lidiard expression. The data for the undoped MgO crystals were therefore used to determine a D(Cr*)sit which was subtracted from the measured data for the doped crystals. These corrected data were then analyzed according to the Lidiard model as extended by Perkins and Rapp[9] and are shown in Fig. 5. A computer program (MINITAB) for multiple regression applied to Arrhenius representation of the data, Fig. 6, yielded an average energy of
ATOMIC
5.6
OF
CHROMlUM
(x103)
5.7
5.6
5.9
6.0
104/ T(“K-‘)
Fig. 6. LogD
71
FRACTION
Fig. 5. Corrected values for diffusion coefficient of 5’Cr in Crdoped MgO as the function of the concentration of dopant and temperature.
vs l/T
for the diffusion of J’ in Cr-doped obtained from Fig. 5.
MgO
19.6? 1.7kcal/mol and the overall accuracy is *3 kcal/mol. It is concluded that the observed activation energy in the undoped crystals represents the activation energy of motion for an associated impurity. For the crystals used in this investigation this energy was 74.3 kcallmol and is identified as the energy of motion for the Si-vacancy associate. The activation energy determined from the doped crystals corrected for the background impurity contribution is then the difference between the energy of motion and the energy of association of a Cr-vacancy complex: AE = E,,, - lEAI = 19.6kcallmol
Fig. 4. Log D vs l/T
for the diffusion of s’Cr in the MgO single crystal.
tD(Cr*)si is the tracer diffusion coefficient of Crr’ controlled by the Si’+ impurity concentration.
in MgO
(8)
According to Glass and Searly[l4] the energy for motion of the Cr-vacancy complex in MgO is 39.9 kcal/mol. If we take this value to be correct then according to our results the energy for association of chromium-vacancy pairs is 20.3 -+3 kcal/mol or 0.88 * 0.13 eV.
Diffusion of s1 Cr in Cr-doped MgO Acknowledgements-Experimental part of this work was supported by the Office of Naval Research under contract No. N001467-0385-001 I and the work on the theoretical interpretation of results was supported by the Department of Energy under Contract No. ER-78-S-02-4998.
REFERENCES
I. Lidiard A. B., In Handbuch der Physik (Edited by S. Fluegge), Vol. XX, pp. 298-339. Springer-Verlag, Berlin (1957). 2. Hanlon, J. E., J. Chem. Phys. 32, 1492 (1960). 3. Siiptitz P., Proc. 6th ht. Symp. on Reactivity of Solids, (Edited by J. W. Mitchell, R. C. DeVries, R. W. Roberts and P. Cannon) pp. 39-36. Wiley-Interscience, New York (1%9). 4. Hembre P. and Wanner J. B.. Trans. Met. Sot. AIME 245. 1547 (1%9). 5. Chen W. K., Peterson N. L. and Robinson L. C., In Annual
6. 7. 8. 9. IO. I I.
1359
Review of Materials Science (Edited by R. A. Huggins), Vol. 3, pp. 75-109. Annual Reviews Inc., Palo Alto, California, (1973). Carter R. E. and Richardson F. D., Trans. AIME 200, 1244 (1954). Rahman S. F. and Berard M. F., J. Am. Gem. Sot. 60, 67 (1977). Minford W. J. and Stubican V. S., J. Am. Gem. Sot. 57,363 (1974). Perkins R. A. and Rapp R. A., Met Trans. 4, 193 (1973). Jost W., In D&ion in So/ids, Liquids and Gases, p. 17. Academic Press, New York (l%O). Gruzin P. L., Izvesl. Akad. Nauk SSSR, Ord. Tekhn. Nauk 3,
353 (1953). 12. Weber G. W., Ph.D.
Thesis. The Pennsylvania State University (1974). 13. Harding B. D., Phys. Status Solidi BSO, 135 (1972). 14. Glass A. M. and Searly T. M., J. Chem. Phys. 48, 1420 (1968).