American Journal of Condensed Matter Physics
p-ISSN: 2163-1115 e-ISSN: 2163-1123
2015; 5(2): 51-55
doi:10.5923/j.ajcmp.20150502.02
Mohammad Ghaffar Faraj
Department of Physics, School of Science, Faculty of Science and Health, University of Koya, Koya, Iraq
Correspondence to: Mohammad Ghaffar Faraj, Department of Physics, School of Science, Faculty of Science and Health, University of Koya, Koya, Iraq.
Email: |
Copyright © 2015 Scientific & Academic Publishing. All Rights Reserved.
Lead sulfide (PbS) thin films of different thicknesses ranging from 100 to 300 nm were prepared on glass substrates at 325℃ by chemical spray pyrolysis(CSP) technique. PbS thin films were prepared using a solution of Lead nitrate and thiourea. The structural properties were carried out by X-ray diffraction (XRD). X-ray diffraction patterns reveal that the films exhibit the cubic rock salt (NaCl) type structure. The crystalline grain sizes of the films increase with increasing film thickness. The root mean square (RMS) roughness of the films was measured using scanning tunneling microscope (STM). The root mean square roughness of the films increases as the film thickness increases. At room temperature, electrical resistivity and charge-carrier concentration of the PbS film varies from 53.72x103 to 1.1 x103 Ω.cm and 2.98 × 1010 to 1.2× 1012 cm− 3, respectively.
Keywords: Lead Sulfide, Chemical Spray Pyrolysis, Thin Film, Semiconductor
Cite this paper: Mohammad Ghaffar Faraj, Effect of Thickness on the Structural and Electrical Properties of Spray Pyrolysed Lead Sulfide Thin Films, American Journal of Condensed Matter Physics, Vol. 5 No. 2, 2015, pp. 51-55. doi: 10.5923/j.ajcmp.20150502.02.
(3.1) |
Figure 1. X-Ray diffraction patterns of PbS thin film of different thicknesses: (a) 100 nm, (b) 200 nm and (c) 300 nm |
Figure 2. Crystalline grain sizes as a function of thickness |
Figure 3. Variation of FWHM of (200) plane of PbS films with thickness |
Figure 4. STM analysis of PbS films deposited on glass substrates with different thicknesses |
Figure 5. Variation of the RMS roughness with different thicknesses |
|