| Literature DB >> 35334769 |
Juan Zhang1,2, Qiulin Tan1, Lei Zhang1, Nan Zhao1, Xiaorui Liang1.
Abstract
We proposed a novel Langasite (LGS) bonding method only using high temperature to solve the manufacturing difficulty of the sealed microcavity of pressure sensors. The optimal bonding parameters by comparative experiments were defined as 1350 °C for 3 h. Due to simple experimental conditions, low experimental cost, and be suitable for bonding wafers with various sizes, the method is convenient for popularization and mass-production, thus promoting the development of surface acoustic wave (SAW) devices at high temperatures. Simultaneously, an intact microcavity was observed by scanning electron microscopy, and a tight and void-free bonding interface with a transition layer thickness of 2.2 nm was confirmed via transmission electron microscopy. The results of tensile and leakage experiments indicated that the bonded wafer with the sealed microcavity exhibited a high bonding strength of 4.02 MPa and excellent seal performance. Compared to the original wafer, the piezoelectric constant of the LGS bonded wafer had a reduction of only 4.43%. The above characteristics show that the sealed microcavity prepared by this method satisfies the conditions for fabricating the LGS SAW pressure sensors. Additionally, based on the bonding interface characterizations, the mechanism of LGS bonding has been investigated for the first time.Entities:
Keywords: bonding mechanism; direct bonding; high temperature; langasite; sealed microcavity
Year: 2022 PMID: 35334769 PMCID: PMC8952366 DOI: 10.3390/mi13030479
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Micromachines (Basel) ISSN: 2072-666X Impact factor: 2.891
The bonding results under various bonding conditions.
| Bonding Conditions | Bonding Results | |
|---|---|---|
| Temperature (°C) | Time (h) | |
| 1100 | 2 | Failure |
| 1200 | 2 | Failure |
| 1300 | 2 | Failure |
| 1350 | 2 | Partially bonded |
| 1350 | 3 | Fully bonded |
Figure 1(a) Image of the LGS bonded wafer; (b) C-SAM image of the LGS bonded wafer; (c) LSCM image of the cross-section; (d) SEM image of the LGS bonded wafer; (e) SEM image of the microcavity.
Figure 2TEM images of the LGS direct bonding interface. (a–d) TEM images of the bonding interface at different magnifications; the inset images in (d) are EDPs of regions on both sides of the translation layer; (e) Elemental analysis across the bonding interface; (f–i) Elementary mappings of La, Ga, Si, and O, respectively.
Figure 3(a) Tensile graph of the LGS bonded wafer; (b) Fracture surface image of the LGS bonded wafer.
Comparison of the piezoelectric properties of the original and bonded wafers.
| Wafer Type | Piezoelectric Constant (|d|/pC/N) | Decrease (%) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | Average | ||
| Original wafer | 0.7 | 0.8 | 0.8 | 0.767 | - |
| Bonded wafer | 0.8 | 0.7 | 0.7 | 0.733 | 4.43% |
Figure 4Schematic diagram of piezoelectricity mechanism of the LGS bonded wafer: (a) coordination polyhedral structure of LGS; (b) structure variation of LGS during heating; (c) piezoelectric effect of the LGS bonded wafer.
Figure 5Schematic diagram of the mechanism for high-temperature direct bonding of LGS via O2 plasma activation: (a–c) bonding process; (d–f) microcosmic changes of bonding interface; (g–i) atomic mechanism of bonding.