Multiple-Layer Triangular Defects in 4H-SiC Homoepitaxial Films Grown by Chemical Vapor Deposition

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This manuscript reports on multiple-layer triangular defects in 4H-SiC homoepitaxial films grown by chemical vapor deposition. The authors approach the problem in a really interesting and original way, while research questions they have investigated and answered are of great practical interest and impact. Characterization details and choices are adequate and well-chosen, especially Raman, SEM, AFM are always necessary the kind of study as applied here. Characterization methods are very well documented and presented. Equally important, the discussion is feasible and fitting the ambitious task of approaching similar defects in similar material systems. The authors also put the emphasis on the good motivation for such a study. Thus, the authors achieved useful and convincing results clearly interesting to a wide audience of readers.

In addition, besides being very timely, the present work is also much credible and highly original.

The presentation of results is clear and appealing, an easy and consistent read and thus can promote for future studies. Useful and employable solutions can be extracted from the present modeling, while the results are given excellent context.

All in all, this work certainly represents a valuable contribution with possible wider impact to the field.

The authors chose an adequate structure of the manuscript. Also, concise, and nicely illustrated figures and their corresponding analysis are provided.

This work once published would be instructive and suggestive in terms of further studies and with excellent chances of being widely cited.

There are some very minor issues with this already excellent manuscript that will need to be addressed before the manuscript becoming suitable for publication, i.e., it can be considered for publication after a minor revision:

1: Title: The introducing phrase “Investigation of a kind of …” should be omitted, it makes title too long and detracts from the impact of the work.

2: May be the thermal aspects of the growth of buffer layer in relation to the defects can be discussed in more detail?

3: Abstract should mention characterization techniques employed.

4: In the introduction, the authors should also mention that theoretical methods have been applied to structural aspects of layered systems of complexity, also to clarify the genesis of defects, namely [CrystEngComm 23 (2021) 385-390; Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics 25 (2023) 829-837]. Such works should be acknowledged thus providing a wider context of the present work.

5: Spell-check and stylistic revision of the paper are necessary. Some long sentences, as well as misspellings, etc., are noticeable throughout the text.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Spell-check and stylistic revision of the paper are necessary. Some long sentences, as well as misspellings, etc., are noticeable throughout the text.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript titled “Investigation of a kind of multiple-layer triangular defects in 4H-SiC homoepitaxial films grown by chemical vapor deposition,” authored by Pei et al., is a very interesting report on a new type of triangular defect in 4H-SiC. The authors have also discussed the methods to suppress these defects. The study presents important and interesting results and deserve publication in Crystals. The authors may consider the below mentioned minor points which may help to improve the quality of the manuscript further.

  1. The phrase ‘kind of’ may be removed from the title altogether or may be changed to ‘… a new kind of…’.

  2. Abstract, line 16: Write (TD) instead of (TDs).

    3. Line 28, 'drift velocity' is a more accurate phrase than 'drift speed'.

 

  4.  Line 30, C should be lower case. 

  5.  Introduction: Apart from power electronics, a major application of the 4H-SiC is radiation detection in various fields of applications such as space missions, nuclear reactors etc. The detector performance is very much dependent of crystal defects. The authors should mention these facts and cite relevant article such as:

a.       S. K. Chaudhuri and K. C. Mandal, (2022) “Radiation detection using n-type 4H-SiC Epitaxial Layer Surface Barrier Detectors,” in Advanced Materials for Radiation Detection Ed. K. Iniewski, pp. 183-209, Springer, Cham.

b.       M. D. Napoli, "SiC detectors: A review on the use of silicon carbide as radiation detection material," Front. Phys., vol. 10, Oct. 2022.

c.       K. C. Mandal, R. M. Krishna, P. G. Muzykov, S. Das, and T. S. Sudarshan, “Characterization of Semi-Insulating 4H Silicon Carbide for Radiation Detectors,” IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science, 58, 1992-1999, 2011.

  6. Figure 1. I believe the arrows show heights. Shouldn’t they be vertical instead of slanted?

  7.  Line 114: “…3 different epitaxial…” – Please explain how these epilayers are different. Were they grown under different conditions?

 

  8. Line 119: Expand FLO, FTO etc. on their first appearance.

  9. The meaning of the sentence “In the process of Raman measurement, the Raman scattering peak at 798.2 cm-1 can be used as a criterion.” In line#122 is not clear  the peak can be used as criterion for what purpose.

 

  10.   Line 137: “…there is a small 4H-SiC FLO peak…” I do not see any peak labelled as FLO at 770.0 cm-1 in Fig. 3(b).

  11.   The sentence in Line# 147-148 “As shown in…as examples” is not complete.

  12.   List of references: The authors’ names corresponding to Ref.#7 are missing.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The overall grammatical correctness should be improved.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf