Advertisement

Journal of Computational Electronics

, Volume 3, Issue 3–4, pp 183–187 | Cite as

A Non-Parabolic Six Moments Model for the Simulation of Sub-100 nm Semiconductor Devices

  • Tibor GrasserEmail author
  • Robert Kosik
  • Christoph Jungemann
  • Bernd Meinerzhagen
  • Hans Kosina
  • Siegfried Selberherr
Article

Abstract

Macroscopic transport models derived from Boltzmann’s equation by using the method of moments are often used to efficiently evaluate the electrical behavior of semiconductor devices. The most commonly used model is the drift-diffusion model which comprises the first two moments of Boltzmann’s equation. In this model the carrier gas is assumed to be in equilibrium with the lattice, an assumption severely violated in submicron semiconductor devices. Hydrodynamic and energy-transport models have therefore been proposed to overcome this limitation. However, these extended models have never been widely accepted as a viable substitute, because for small devices they often do not deliver the expected improved accuracy. Here we present a non-parabolic six moments model which predicts considerably more accurate currents than the energy-transport model down to gate-lengths as small as 40 nm.

Keywords

device simulation Boltzmann’s equation moments method macroscopic transport models energy-transport model six moments model 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    T. Grasser et al., “Using six moments of Boltzmann’s transport equation for device simulation,” J. Appl. Phys., 90(5), 2389 (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    T. Grasser et al., “A review of hydrodynamic and energy-transport models for semiconductor device simulation,” Proc. IEEE, 91(2), 251 (2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    A. Gehring et al., “Simulation of hot-electron oxide tunneling current based on a Non-Maxwellian electron energy distribution function,” J. Appl. Phys., 92(10), 6019 (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    T. Grasser et al., “Accurate impact ionization model which accounts for hot and cold carrier populations,” Appl. Phys. Lett., 80(4), 613 (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    R. Thoma et al., “Hydrodynamic equations for semiconductors with nonparabolic band structure,” IEEE Trans. Electron Devices, 38(6), 1343 (1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    C. Jacoboni and P. Lugli, The Monte Carlo Method for Semiconductor Device Simulation (Springer Wien, New York, 1989).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    C. Jungemann and B. Meinerzhagen, Hierarchical Device Simulation: The Monte-Carlo Perspective (Springer Wien, New York, 2003).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    T. Grasser et al., “Reformulation of macroscopic transport models based on the moments of the scattering integral,” in Proc. Simulation of Semiconductor Processes and Devices (2003) p. 63.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    C. Levermore, “Moment closure hierarchies for kinetic theories,” J. Stat. Phys., 83(1), 1021 (1996).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    A.M. Anile et al., “Extended hydrodynamical model of carrier transport in semiconductors,” SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics, 61(1), 74 (2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    E. Wang et al., “Application of cumulant expansion to the modeling of non-local effects in semiconductor devices,” in Proc. Intl. Workshop on Computational Electronics (1998) p. 234.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    H. Grad, “On the kinetic theory of rarified gases,” Comm. Pure and Appl. Math., 2, 311 (1949).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    K. Sonoda et al., “Moment expansion approach to calculate impact ionization rate in submicron silicon devices,” J. Appl. Phys., 80(9), 5444 (1996).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    T. Grasser et al., “Investigation of spurious velocity overshoot using monte carlo data,” Appl. Phys. Lett., 79(12), 1900 (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    F. Bufler et al., “Monte carlo, hydrodynamic and drift-diffusion simulation of scaled double-gate MOSFETs,” J. of Comp. Electronics, 2, 81 (2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    M. Nekovee et al., “Failure of extended moment equation approaches to describe ballistic transport in submicron structures,” Physical Review B, 45(10), 6643 (1992).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tibor Grasser
    • 1
    Email author
  • Robert Kosik
    • 1
  • Christoph Jungemann
    • 2
  • Bernd Meinerzhagen
    • 2
  • Hans Kosina
    • 3
  • Siegfried Selberherr
    • 3
  1. 1.Christian Doppler Laboratory for TCAD in Microelectronics at the Institute for MicroelectronicsAustria
  2. 2.NSTBraunschweigGermany
  3. 3.Institute for MicroelectronicsViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations