Evaluated thicknesses of films using ellipsometry and profilometry as a function of deposition time. While the linear relationship between the thickness using profilometry and deposition time is recognized up to a thickness of 250 nm, the thickness using ellipsometry is saturated to be , independent of deposition time.
Experimental variations in spectra of ellipsometric angles (a) and (b) in the energy range 0.7–3.3 eV as a function of elapsed time. These spectra were measured every 2.75 s using 4% in Ar with a flow rate of 15 SCCM.
Structural models to analyze the hydrogenation process of the complete switchable mirror using a alloy. The model in phase I (a) is composed of a single mixture layer of and capped with metal Pd, -Pd, on a quartz substrate. The model in phase II (b) is composed of three layers of the Mg–Ni alloy layer, which are uniform , a mixture of and , and uniform layers stacked from the substrate side, capped with a mixture layer of -Pd and -Pd using Bruggeman EMA. The model in phase III (c) is composed of two layers of the Mg–Ni alloy layer, which are uniform , and and mixture layers stacked from the substrate side, capped with a mixture layer of -Pd and -Pd using Bruggeman EMA.
Ellipsometric (a), (b), and optical transmittance (c) spectra at elapsed times of 0.0, 18.5, and 85.0 min, together with the corresponding fitted spectra. Ellipsometric spectra were measured using an incident angle of 70° for the energy range 0.75–3.25 eV. The optical transmittance spectrum at is not shown in (c) since it was not possible to measure.
Dispersion in refractive index and extinction coefficient for -Pd, -Pd, , , and ; solid lines in (a) and (b): -Pd; dotted lines in (a) and (b): -Pd; solid lines in (c) and (d): ; dashed-dotted line in (c) and (d): ; and dotted lines in (c) and (d): . These spectra were determined from the fits in Fig. 4.
Experimental variations in ellipsometric angles (a) and (b) at photon energies of 2.49, 2.01, 1.50, and 1.01 eV as a function of elapsed time together with their fitted curves. In these figures, the time scales of phase II are expanded to improve the visibility of the variation in and .
Variation in film thickness (a) of the Mg–Ni alloy layer, and concentration (b) of and in the mixture layers during hydrogenation as a function of elapsed time. Fit parameters are shown in Fig. 3. In these figures, the time scales of phase II are expanded to improve the visibility of the variation in thickness and concentrations. The -values are zero after elapsed time of 60 min, because the mixture layer of and disappeared after the time.
Estimated concentration of in the whole Mg–Ni alloy layer, taking into consideration the thickness of each of the layers: , , and ; and concentration in the structural model (b) in Fig. 3, as a function of elapsed time.
Concentration of -Pd, , in the Pd layer during hydrogenation as a function of elapsed time. For the fitting in phase I, we assumed that the Pd layer did not hydrogenate in this phase. In this figure, the time scales of phase II are expanded to improve the visibility of the variation in concentration.
Schematic phase diagram summarizing the analytical results of the hydrogenation process. In phase I, the vertical axis indicates the concentrations of and -Pd in the mixture layer. In phases II and III, the vertical axis for the layer indicates the thickness of each layer, while the axis for the Pd layer indicates the concentration.
The calculated variation in transmittance , reflectance from the film surface side , and reflectance from the substrate side at a wavelength of 670 nm during hydrogenation as a function of elapse time. These values are calculated using structural models and optical constants for each material evaluated using ellipsometry.
Lorentz–Drude parameters obtained from ellipsometric and transmittance data (see Fig. 4) for -Pd, -Pd, , , and . . All parameters are in eV.
Article metrics loading...
Full text loading...