arxiv:cond-mat/ v1 [cond-mat.stat-mech] 28 Mar 2000

Transcription

1 arxiv:cond-mat/ v1 [cond-mat.stat-mech] 28 Mar 2000 High Field Mobility and Diffusivity of Electron Gas in Silicon Devices S. F. Liotta 1 and A. Majorana 2 Dipartimento di Matematica - University of Catania - Viale A. Doria 6, Italy Abstract. In this paper the Boltzmann equation describing the carrier transport in a semiconductor is considered. A modified Chapman-Enskog method is used, in order to find approximate solutions in the weakly non-homogeneous case. These solutions allow to calculate the mobility and diffusion coefficients as function of the electric field. The integral-differential equations derived by the above method are numerically solved by means of a combination of spherical harmonics functions and finite-difference operators. The Kane model for the electron band structure is assumed; the parabolic band approximation is obtained as a particular case. The numerical values for mobility and diffusivity in a silicon device are compared with the experimental data. The Einstein relation is also shown. Keywords: Boltzmann equation; Silicon devices; Mobility; Diffusivity 1. Introduction Many commercial simulators of microelectronic devices are based on the well-known Drift-Diffusion equations. In this model the electron current density J n is given by the equation [2], [3] (1) J n = µ n ρe + D n x ρ, where ρ is the electron density, E the electric field, µ n and D n the mobility and the diffusion coefficient, or diffusivity, respectively. The symbol x denotes the gradient operator with respect to x. For low electric field the two transport coefficients µ n 1 liotta@dipmat.unict.it 2 majorana@dipmat.unict.it 1

2 and D n are related by the well-known Einstein relation ( ) kb T L (2) D n = µ n e where k B is the Boltzmann constant, T L the lattice temperature and e the absolute value of the electron charge. The transport coefficients µ n and D n are often assumed constant. This approximation becomes inadequate in presence of high electric fields. In these cases Eq. (1) remains valid only if the transport coefficients are considered as functions of the electric field. Many expression for these functions were proposed (see, for instance, Refs. [3], [8], [11]). They were obtained by fitting experimental data or Monte Carlo simulations [4], [12]. In this paper we obtain the functions µ n (E) and D n (E) directly from the Boltzmann transport equation. The paper is organised as follows. In Sec. 2 we briefly introduce the Boltzmann transport equation for an electron gas in a semiconductor. Only electron-phonon scatterings are considered. So that, electron-electron and electron-impurity interactions are assumed negligible. In Sec. 3 we perform a Chapman-Enskog expansion, and in Sec. 4 a numerical scheme is proposed in order to solve the obtained equations. In the last section we show numerical results for µ n and D n, which we compare with experimental data. Further, we analyze the validity of the Einstein relation for different values of the electric field. 2. Basic equations For an electron gas in a semiconductor device the coupled system Boltzmann-Poisson equations [2] writes (3) (4) F t + v(k) xf ē h E kf = Q(F), x E = e ( ) N D (x) N A (x) F dk ǫ where the unknown function F(t,x,k) represents the probability of finding an electron at the position x, with wave-vector k, at time t. The wave-vector k belongs 2

3 to R 3. The integrals with respect to k are performed over the whole space and the parameter h is the Planck constant divided by 2π. The group velocity v(k) depends on the band structure and it will be defined in the following. The symbol k denotes the gradient with respect to the variables k. The functions N A, N D are the concentration of acceptors and donors and ǫ is the dielectric constant. Here we assume that the low-density approximation holds, so that Q is a linear operator. If K(k,k ) is the symmetric scattering kernel, then (5) Q(F)(t,x,k) = K(k,k )F(t,x,k ) dk F(t,x,k) K(k,k) dk. We consider the scattering kernels describing acoustic phonon interactions (in the elastic approximation) K ac (k,k) = G K 0 δ(ε(k ) ε(k)), and non-polar optical phonon interactions ( ) nq + 1 K op (k,k) = G Kδ(ε(k ) ε(k) ± hω). n q Here, K 0 and K are constant and the overlap factor G for the conduction band is taken equal to 1 (see [4], [10]). We consider negligible the ionized impurity scattering; i.e. we assume low density of doping. With these assumptions, the collision operator esplicitelly writes (6) Q(f)(t,x,k) = (n q + 1) + n q + Kδ(ε(k ) ε(k) hω)f(t,x,k ) dk Kδ(ε(k ) ε(k) + hω)f(t,x,k )dk K 0 δ(ε(k ) ε(k))f(t,x,k )dk ν(k)f(t,x,k), where (7) ν(k) = n q Kδ(ε(k ) ε(k) hω)dk + (n q + 1) Kδ(ε(k ) ε(k) + hω)dk + K 0 δ(ε(k ) ε(k))dk. 3

4 For every admissible function F(t,x,k), we have [7] Q(F)dk = 0, which implies mass conservation. The band structure is assumed to be spherically symmetric. Hence, the electron energy ε is given by the equation (8) γ(ε) = h2 2m k2, where m is the reduced electron mass. We choose the Kane formula (9) γ(ε) = ε(1 + αε), which is simple but sufficiently accurate to describe high field regime. By putting α = 0 one obtain the usual parabolic band approximation. The velocity v(k) is explicity given by (10) v(k) := 1 h kε(k) = hk m (2αε + 1). 3. The Chapman-Enskog expansion The Chapman-Enskog method [5] allows us to find approximate solutions of the Boltzmann equation. They are valid only for a very small space domains. Moreover, these regions must be far enough from boundary layers. Nevertheless, these solutions have a great importance since they allow to obtain the transport coefficients. In the framework of electron transport in semiconductors, we expect that such solutions are valid in spatial domain, where the electric field and the doping are almost constant. Therefore, they should not furnish good results near junctions or boundaries. We follow the standard scheme [5], assuming that the solution of Eq. (3) is approximately expressible by the following relation (11) F(t,x,k) f(t,x,k) + δf(t,x,k). 4

5 As usually, the typical Chapman-Enskog constrain (12) δf(t,x,k)dk = 0 is imposed. Therefore using Eqs. (11)-(12) we obtain that the electron density is ρ(t,x) := F(t,x,k)dk f(t,x,k)dk. We assume that time and space partial derivatives of f are of the same order of δf and that the corresponding derivatives of δf are negligible. By inserting Eq. (11) into Eq. (3) and splitting terms of different orders, we obtain the following equations (13) (14) ē h E kf = Q(f), f t + v(k) xf ē h E kδf = Q(δf). In this approximation, the Poisson equation becomes (15) x E e ǫ ( N D N A ) f dk. In order to solve Eqs. (13)-(14) we assume that E is constant. This is a reasonable assumption, if the difference between the density of electrons and doping is negligible in the small domains, where we consider the Boltzmann equation. Of course, we solve before Eq. (13) and then the next one. Since Eq. (13) is linear and it does not depend explicitly on the variables (t,x), a solution can be written as (16) f(t,x,k) = ρ(t,x)g(k). We note that the function g(k) is also the stationary homogeneous solution of Eq. (3) for constant electric field, verifying the condition (17) g(k)dk = 1. Now, we consider Eq. (14). Using (16), it becomes [ ] ρ (18) g(k) t + v(k) xρ ē h E kδf = Q(δf). 5

6 By integrating Eq. (18) with respect to k, we find a compatibility condition, as usually arises in integral equations. Assuming the reasonable hypotesis k δfdk = 0, we obtain (19) where (20) ρ t + V xρ = 0, V := g(k)v(k) dk is the constant macroscopic electron velocity in the stationary homogeneous case. This vector is parallel to E (see appendix A). By eliminating the time derivative of ρ in Eq. (18) by using Eq. (19), we get (21) g(k) [v(k) V] x ρ ē h E kδf = Q(δf). The form of Eq. (21) suggest us to assume (22) δf(t,x,k) = x ρ(t,x) h(k). Now, Eq. (12) implies that (23) h(k)dk = 0. We denote by u the unit vector in the direction of x ρ; i.e. x ρ = x ρ u. It in general may depend on the variables (t,x). Using Eq. (22), it is easy to see that Eq. (21) becomes (24) g(k) [v(k) u V u] ē h E kh = Q(h). The case u parallel to E is the most meaningfull. 4. Approximate equations In order to obtain f and δf we have to solve the following set of equations for the unknowns g and h (25) ē h E kg = Q(g), 6

7 (26) (27) g(k) [ v(k) cosθ V ] ē h E kh = Q(h), g(k)dk = 1, h(k)dk = 0. Here θ is the angle between v(k) and u, and V = V. Since g and h are functions of the 3-dimensional variable k, we use a spherical harmonics expansion to reduce the dimension of the space of the indipendent variables. Taking in account the symmetries of the problem and considering only the first two terms of the expansion, we can choose (28) (29) g(k) g 0 (ε) + g 1 (ε) cosθ, h(k) h 0 (ε) + h 1 (ε) cosθ. The use of the Galerkin method allows to derive from Eqs. (25)-(26) a set of equations for g 0, g 1, h 0 and h 1. This approach recalls the well-known method of the spherical harmonics expansion to solve the Boltzmann-Poisson system, [6], [9], [13]. Since Eqs. (25)-(26) contain the same diffusion and collisions terms of the Boltzmann Equation, many calculations are performed following Ref. [9]. Then, the system (25)-(26) gives the following set of ordinary differential-difference equations (30) (31) (32) (33) ee ( γ ) (ε) 3 γ(ε) g 1 + g 1 v(ε) = Q 1(g 0 ) eeg 0 1 v(ε) = Q 2(g 1 ) V g 0 (ε) 3 v(ε) + g 1(ε) ee ( γ ) (ε) 3 γ(ε) h 1 + h 1 v(ε) = Q 1(h 0 ) V g 1 (ε) 1 v(ε) + g 0(ε) eeh 0 = 1 v(ε) = Q 2(h 1 ), where the prime indicates the derivative with respect to ε, v(ε) := 2 γ(ε) m γ (ε), 7

8 and Q 1 (ϕ) =(n q + 1)K σ(ε + hω)ϕ(ε + hω) + n q K σ(ε hω)ϕ(ε hω) (34) (35) [n q K σ(ε + hω) + (n q + 1)K σ(ε hω)]ϕ(ε), Q 2 (ϕ) = [n q K σ(ε + hω) + (n q + 1)K σ(ε hω) + K 0 σ(ε)]ϕ(ε). The density of states σ(u) is given by σ(u) := δ(ε(k) u) dk = 4 2π ( m h ) 3 H(u) γ(u)γ (u), where H(u) is the Heaviside step function. 5. Physical model and numerical results We use the following values for the parameters, appropriate for a silicon device: m = 0.32 m e T L = 300 K hω = ev K = (D tk) 2 8π 2 ρω K 0 = D t K = 11.4 ev A 1 ρ = 2330 Kg m 3 k BT L 4π 2 hv 2 0ρ Ξ2 d Ξ d = 9 ev v 0 = 9040 m sec 1. α = 0.5 ev 1 In the table, m e is the electron rest mass. We have solved numerically Eqs. (30)- (33) with the conditions (27) for different values of the electric field. The numerical procedures are similar to that used in Ref. [6]. The kinetic definition of the current density is (36) J n := F(t,x,k)v(k)dk ρ(t,x)v + x ρ(t,x) h(k)v(k) dk. Since V = V u and h(k)v(k) dk [h 0 (ε) + h 1 (ε) cosθ]v(k) dk (37) = h 1 (ε) v(k) u v(k) v(k) dk = u (v(k) u)2 h 1 (ε) dk, v(k) 8

9 a comparison between Eqs. (36)-(37) and (1) gives (38) µ n = V E and D n = (v(k) u)2 h 1 (ε) dk. v(k) They are functions of E, because V and h 1 depend on this parameter. In fig. 1 we show the mobility µ n against the electric field. The values are compared with two curves which fit experimental data by means of simply formulas (see [11], pp ). For low values of the electric field there is a small difference. It is meaningless because many different values (up to 20 % ) of low field mobility are reported in literature (see [11], pp ). In fig. 2 the value of diffusivity is shown together with experimental data (see [1], p. 6715). The agreement is very good for all range of E. Fig. 3 and fig. 4 compare the mobility and the diffusivity using Kane model and the parabolic band approximation. The last figure shows that Einstein relation is valid only for moderate fields. Acknowledgments We acknowledge partial support from Italian Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche (Prog. N PS01) and TMR project n. ERBFMRCT Asymptotic Methods in Kinetic Theory. Appendix A The unknown g must satisfy Eq. (25), which contains only two vectors, k and E. Since g is a scalar function, the only possibility is that g depends on k only throught the scalars k and k E i.e. g = g( k, k E). Therefore, from Eq. (20) we have V := g(k)v(k) dk = hk g( k,k E) m (2αε + 1) dk. Hence, it is evident that V is parallel to E. 9

10 References [1] Brunetti R., Jacoboni C., Nava F., reggiani L., Bosman G. and Zijlstra R.J.J., Diffusion Coefficient of Electrons in Silicon, J. Appl. Phys 1981; 52: [2] Ferry D. K., Semiconductors, New York, Macmillan Publ. Comp., [3] Hänsch W., The Drift-Diffusion Equation and its Applications in MOSFET Modelling, New York, Springer-Verlag, [4] Jacoboni C. and Lugli P., The Monte Carlo Method for Semiconductor Device Simulation, New York, Springer-Verlag, [5] Lifshitz E.M. and Pitaevskij L.P., Physical Kinetics, vol. 10, in the Landau & Lifshitz course of theoretical physics, Oxford, Pergamon press, [6] Liotta S. F. and Majorana A., A Novel Approach to Spherical-Harmonics Expansion for Electron Transport in Semiconductors,, Preprint Univ. of Catania, [7] Majorana A., Trend to Equilibrium of Electron Gas in a Semiconductor According to the Boltzmann Equation, Transport Theory Statist. Phys. 1998; 27: [8] Markowich P. A., Ringhofer C. and Schmeiser C., Semiconductor Equations, New York, Springer-Verlag, [9] Rahmat K., White J. and Antoniadis D. A., Simulation of Semiconductor Devices Using a Galerkin/Spherical Harmonic Expansion Approach to Solving the Coupled Poisson-Boltzmann System, IEEE Trans. Computer-Aided Design 1996; 15: [10] Reggiani S., Vecchi M. C. and Rudan M., Investigation on Electron and Hole Transport Properties Using the Full-Band Spherical-Harmonics Expansion Method, IEEE Trans. on Electron Devices 1998; 45: [11] Selberherr S., Analysis and Simulation of Semiconductors Devices, Wien-New York, Springer-Verlag, [12] Tomizawa K., Numerical Simulation of Sub Micron Semiconductor Device, Boston, Artech House, [13] Ventura D., Gnudi A. and Baccarani G., A Deterministic Approach to Solution of the BTE in Semiconductors, Rivista del Nuovo Cimento 1995; 18:

11 mobility (cm 2 /Vs) Electric Field (V/cm) Figure 1: Mobility as a function of electric field: dots indicates values obtained using Kane band model, solid line a fit with parameters of Canali et. al. and dashed line another fit with parameters of Caughey and Thomas (see Ref. [11]). 11

12 10 2 D n (cm 2 /sec) Electric Field (V/cm) Figure 2: Diffusivity as a function of electric field: solid line indicates values calculated using Kane band model and squares and circles experimental data (see Ref. [1]). 12

13 mobility (cm 2 /Vs) Electric Field (V/cm) Figure 3: Mobility versus electric field: Kane band model (solid line) and parabolic band approximation (dashed line). 13

14 10 2 D n (cm 2 /sec) Electric Field (V/cm) Figure 4: Diffusivity versus electric field: Kane band model (solid line) and parabolic band approximation (dashed line). 14

15 D n (cm 2 /sec) Electric Field (V/cm) Figure 5: Comparison between diffusivity calculated directly (dashed line) and using Einstein relation (solid line), both with Kane band model. 15