Dear Anjan,

Welcome,

Thermal co-evaporation of the dopant atoms is an a thermodynamic equilibrium process which means that the atoms are built on their equilibrium positions in the lattice. No post annealing is required after the deposition. However, the control ability of the doping concentration is crude and difficult.

The ion implantation is a very precise doping method with very controlled dosing of the dopants. However it is a dynamic doping process leading to damage after implantation requiring post annealing to recover the crystallinty of the material. One can also get a specific doping profile even for thin films which may not achievable at all by the gas phase doping.

Best wishes

You can use both techniques given that a little optimization is required. However, in Ion implantations methods many of the dopants may also occupies the interstitial sites. Adding to that, as Zerky mentioned, there is a possibility that with this method, crystalline quality of the films goes bad.

In the co-evaporation method, you have to make sure that there is no large fluctuation of the flux with time otherwise the dopant distribution may not be uniform. Secondly, in nanostructure it has been observed that dopants diffuse towards the surface of the materials. Thus, getting a perfect distribution is very difficult here.

Hope this help abit.

Best wishes

Sanjay

EDS Sprctroscopy

Dear Prof. Abdelhalim Zekry,

Thank you very much for your valuable answer.

Can you kindly explain me that why the ‘thermal co-evaporation’ method is not suitable for controlling doping concentration?

With best regards,

Anjan

Dear Sanjay,

Thank you very much.

With best regards,

Anjan Da