4.6 Article Proceedings Paper

Extending the 3ω-method to the MHz range for thermal conductivity measurements of diamond thin films

期刊

DIAMOND AND RELATED MATERIALS
卷 15, 期 2-3, 页码 389-393

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.diamond.2005.08.041

关键词

thermal conductivity; 3 omega method; Thin films; CVD diamond

向作者/读者索取更多资源

With diamond becoming increasingly important for high-power and high-speed electronics, optical, and micro-electromechanical system (MEMS) applications, we are developing experimental techniques to measure the thermal conductivity of this material. Thermal conductivity values reported in the literature cover a wide range depending on the particular crystalline structure of these thin films which range from nano to poly (micro) crystalline structures. A special challenge is the measurement of the thermal conductivity of very thin diamond films. In this paper we summarize our implementation of the so-called 3 omega method [D. G. Cahill, R. O. Pohl, Phys. Rev. B 35 (1987) 4067.; D. G. Cahill, H. E. Fischer, T. Klitsner, E. T. Swartz, R. O. Pohl, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. A7 (1989) 1259.; D. G. Cahill, Ref Sci. Instrum. 61 (2) (1990) 802.; D. G. Cahill, M. Katiyar, J. R. Abelson, Phys. Rev. B 50 (1994) 6077. [1-4]]. Our technique aims at measuring the thermal conductivities of the entire range of diamond materials including thin films. The experiments are designed to measure at driving frequencies in the megahertz range to keep the thermal wavelength shorter than the film thickness. In addition the appropriate data analysis technique for filling the results in this frequency range has been developed. To test the method we performed measurements on thick glass disks (1.5 W/m(.)K) and silicon dioxide thin films (thicknesses between 300 nm and 3 mu m, 1.6 W/m(.)K). The first successful measurements on diamond films were performed on a 16 mu m thick ultra-nano crystalline thin film, which yielded 26 W/m(.)K. (c) 2005 Elsevier B.V All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据