Solid-State Electronics 103 (2015) 115–121

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Solid-State Electronics
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/sse

Estimation of the accuracy of the microwave FET equivalent circuit

using the quasi-hydrodynamic model of electron transport
Gennadiy Z. Garber
Pulsar R&D Manufacturing Company, Moscow 105187, Russia

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Computational methods are considered for the time- and frequency-domain simulations of a microwave
Received 7 April 2014 power amplifier with a transistor built on a diamond-like semiconductor. The first method is based only
Received in revised form 6 August 2014 on a two-dimensional model of the intrinsic transistor that includes the quasi-hydrodynamic model of
Accepted 15 August 2014
electron transport and electric field equations. The second method, which is less accurate but much more
Available online 11 September 2014
computer-time-saving, is based on the intrinsic transistor large-signal lumped-element equivalent circuit
The review of this paper was arranged by model with the parameters and spline characteristics calculated by means of the abovementioned
Prof. S. Cristoloveanu two-dimensional model. Using these two methods, the microwave parameters of the amplifier are
calculated for frequencies varying from 15 to 90 GHz. When using the equivalent circuit at frequencies
Keywords: of up to 60 GHz, the calculation error (equal to the difference between the results of the time- and
Equivalent circuit frequency-domain simulations) does not exceed 5% for the input impedance and 0.6 dB for the transducer
FET power gain.
Frequency-domain simulation Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Quasi-hydrodynamic model
Spline characteristics
Time-domain simulation

1. Introduction The microwave parameters will be calculated in two ways:

Currently, field effect transistors (FETs) are widely used as the  using only the 2D model of the IFET that includes the quasi-
active elements of power amplifiers in the frequency range from hydrodynamic model of electron transport and electric field
several hundred megahertz to several hundred gigahertz [1–3]. equations and
Therefore, the adequacy of the intrinsic FET (IFET) large-signal  combining the 2D model with the IFET equivalent circuit.
lumped-element equivalent circuit model (Fig. 1) used for
designing these amplifiers is becoming a key issue. 2. 2D model of the intrinsic transistor
In [4–6], we developed a method for calculating the charac-
teristics and parameters of the IFET equivalent circuit that is Under the operating conditions of the transistor, we can neglect
based on the cubic spline construction [7] and the two- the impact ionization of semiconductor molecules by electrons and
dimensional (2D) quasi-hydrodynamic model of electron trans- holes. Then, the 2D quasi-hydrodynamic model of electron
port [8–11]. Below, we will calculate a number of microwave transport takes the following form:
parameters of a power amplifier based on a transistor that @n
‘‘is made’’ on an n-type semiconductor, in which the field ¼ r~jn ; ð1Þ
@t
dependence of the drift velocity of electrons is close to the
~jn ¼ l !
field dependence of the drift velocity of holes in boron-doped n E n þ rðDn nÞ; ð2Þ
diamond [1,12–14]. The physical parameters of the semicon-
@ðnuÞ ! u  u0
ductor and insulator (Fig. 2) are close to the corresponding ¼ r~jnu þ q~jn E  n ; ð3Þ
constants for diamond. @t sn
~jnu ¼ n l !E nu þ rðn Dn nuÞ; ð4Þ
n n n

where u(x, y, t) = 3kTe/2 is the mean kinetic energy of electrons; x

E-mail address: gzgarber@gmail.com and y are the horizontal and vertical coordinates (Fig. 2); t is the
URL: http://www.gzgarber.narod.ru time; k is the Boltzmann constant; Te(x, y, t) is the electron gas

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sse.2014.08.008
0038-1101/Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
116 G.Z. Garber / Solid-State Electronics 103 (2015) 115–121

Fig. 2. The active region of the delta-doped MISFET on the diamond-like

semiconductor.

Fig. 1. Large-signal equivalent circuit of the IFET without impact ionization of The field dependence of the electron drift velocity appearing in
semiconductor molecules by electrons and holes: ich is the channel current
(7) is given by
generator; Cgs and Rgs, the input capacitance and resistance; and Cgd, the transfer
(feedback) capacitance. V n ¼ v e  ½1  expðle Eus =v e Þ; ð11Þ
  3 2 15 3
where le = 2  10 cm /(V s) at Nd = 10 cm and 500 cm /(V s) at 2
@ @
temperature; r ¼ ; is the gradient operator; u0 = 3kT0/2 is the
@x @y
Nd = 1018 cm3 and ve = 1.1  107 cm/s. The field dependence of the
mean kinetic energy of electrons in thermodynamic equilibrium; T0 energy relaxation time in (8) has the following form: function
is the lattice temperature (in our case, T0 is set equal to 300 K); Tn(x, y, Eus) is equal to vese/Vn(x, y, Eus) for Eus > Ee and to vese/
n(x, y, t), ln(x, y, u), Dn(x, y, u) = (kTe/q)ln, sn(x, y, u), and Vn(x, y, Ee) for Eus 6 Ee, where se = 1 ps and Ee = 3ve/le. With function
nn(x, y, u) are the concentration, mobility, diffusion coefficient, Tn(x, y, Eus) taken in such a form, the abovementioned solution to
energy relaxation time, and relative Peltier coefficient of electrons, (10) at u > u0 is unique. The field dependence of the relative Peltier
respectively; q is the positive elementary charge; ~ jn ðx; y; tÞ and coefficient in (9) is given by
~jnu ðx; y; tÞ are the electron flux density and electron energy flux 2
! ! Kn ¼ expðEus =Ee Þ þ 1:
density, respectively; E ðx; y; tÞ is the electric field intensity; ln E 3
!
is the electron drift velocity; and E ¼ j E j. System (1)–(6) is considered in the transistor active region
!
Electric field intensity E ðx; y; tÞ is calculated using the electric depicted in Fig. 2. Boundary conditions are the following:
field equations
!  n = Nd and Te = T0 at the source and drain contacts;
!
rðe E Þ ¼ Q ; ð5Þ  the normal component of ~ jn , ~
jnu , and E is equal to zero at the
contact-free semiconductor parts of the boundary;
! !
E ¼ ru; ð6Þ  the normal component of E equals zero at the contact-free
insulator parts;
where u(x, y, t) is the electric potential and e(x, y) is the absolute  the electric potentials of the source, gate, and drain contacts (us,
permittivity of the semiconductor or insulator; in our case, the ug, and ud, respectively) are given constants (when we calcu-
relative permittivity is equal to 5.7 for both the semiconductor late the characteristics and parameters of the IFET equivalent
and insulator. Charge density Q is equal to zero in the insulator circuit) or are determined by the extrinsic electrical circuit
and to q(Nd  n) in the semiconductor, where Nd(x, y) is the concen- (when we simulate the transistor amplifier without using the
tration of ionized donors. IFET equivalent circuit).
The kinetic coefficients for electrons are calculated by the
formulas At the insulator–semiconductor interface, we require that only
ln ðx; y; uÞ ¼ V n ½x; y; Fðx; y; uÞ=Fðx; y; uÞ; ð7Þ the normal component of ~ jn and ~
jnu be zero (because the permittiv-
ity of the semiconductor and insulator is one and the same).
sn ðx; y; uÞ ¼ T n ½x; y; Fðx; y; uÞ; ð8Þ In addition to the formulated boundary conditions, initial
conditions are necessary. They are arbitrary or are determined by
nn ðx; y; uÞ ¼ K n ½x; y; Fðx; y; uÞ; ð9Þ the 2D distributions of u, n, and Te, which result from the previous
solution of (1)–(6).
where Vn(x, y, Eus), Tn(x, y, Eus), and Kn(x, y, Eus) are the given field
For solving the above initial-boundary value problem, we solve
dependences of the drift velocity, energy relaxation time, and rela-
at each time step
tive Peltier coefficient, respectively, and Eus is the intensity of the
uniform stationary electric field.
 Eqs. (5) and (6) by the method of matrix elimination [15] and
When finding the field dependences, we assume that the semi-
then
conductor is homogeneous and its chemical composition is the
 Eqs. (1) and (2) and, concurrently, (3) and (4) using the locally
same as at a point with coordinates x and y (in the semiconducting
one-dimensional scheme [15] with jnx, jny, jnux, and jnuy
part of the transistor active region depicted in Fig. 2). Quantity
expressed as the electron current density in [16].
Vn(x, y, Eus) is the drift velocity of electrons in such a semiconductor
subjected to uniform stationary electric field Eus. Quantities
Then we calculate the source, gate, and drain currents:
Tn(x, y, Eus) and Kn(x, y, Eus) have the same meaning. ZZ  
@
Function F(x, y, u) involved in (7)–(9) is zero at u 6 u0 and is a is ¼ q jny þ e Ey dxdz; ð12Þ
solution to the energy balance equation, source @t
ZZ  
qFV n ðx; y; FÞT n ðx; y; FÞ ¼ u  u0 ; ð10Þ @
ig ¼ e Ey dxdz; ð13Þ
gate @t
at u > u0. This equation follows from (2) and (3) at r = o/ot = 0.
 G.Z. Garber / Solid-State Electronics 103 (2015) 115–121 117

Fig. 3. Grid on the gate bias – drain bias plane.

ZZ  
@
id ¼ q jny  e Ey dxdz; ð14Þ Fig. 4. Output current–voltage characteristics (continuous lines) and 90-GHz cycles
drain @t calculated without using (dashed cycle) and using (dash-and-dot cycle) the IFET
equivalent circuit.
where z is the third axis directed perpendicularly to the plane of
Fig. 2. In our case, the gate width along the z axis is equal to 1 mm.

3. Equivalent circuit of the intrinsic transistor

Calculation of the characteristics and parameters of the equiva-

lent circuit depicted in Fig. 1 starts with constructing a rectangular
grid on the plane with axes Ugs = ug + ub  us and Uds = ud  us
(Fig. 3), where ub = 5 V is the built-in potential of the structure
depicted in Fig. 2. This grid is uniform in Ugs and nonuniform in
Uds; Ugs,i and Uds,j are the nodal coordinates; i = 0, 1, ..., m; j = 0, 1,
..., n; Uds,0 = 0. The values of Ugs,0, Ugs,m, and Uds,n must be such that
the grid entirely covers the operating region of the IFET on the
Ugs–Uds plane.
At each node of the grid, we solve the initial-boundary value
problem for (1)–(6). The 2D distributions of the electric potential,
electron concentration, and electron gas temperature at t = 1,
u(x, y) = u(x, y, 1), n(x, y) = n(x, y, 1), and Te(x, y) = Te(x, y, 1),
respectively, are filed.
Fig. 5. Charge–voltage characteristics (continuous lines) and 90-GHz cycles calcu-
This file also contains the time dependences of the following
lated without using (dashed cycle) and using (dash-and-dot cycle) the IFET
physical characteristics: equivalent circuit.

 the source, gate, and drain currents – is(t), ig(t), and id(t);
 the electrostatic induction vector flux to the gate – qg(t) = The dependence of qg(1) = Qg on Ugs and Uds written as
RR
gate e Ey dxdz (it has the dimension of charge). Qg(Ugs, Uds) determines the input and transfer capacitances
according to the formulas Cgs(Ugs, Uds) = oQg/oUgs  oQg/oUds and
The dynamic transconductance and dynamic conductance Cgd(Ugs, Uds) = oQg/oUds, respectively.
describing the channel current generator (ich in Fig. 1) are calcu- The resistance in the input branch is given by Rgs = sgs/Cgs, where
lated as sgs is the time constant of the resistor–capacitor network. The cur-
rent in this branch is calculated by the formula based on the
sinðxsÞ
SðxÞ ¼ expðjxsÞS0 ; ð15Þ assumption that sgs is small in comparison with the oscillation
xs period:
sinðxsÞ  
GðxÞ ¼ expðjxsÞG0 ; ð16Þ dcgs w0 dw0
xs iin ðtÞ ¼ w0 ðtÞ þ sgs   : ð17Þ
dt cgs dt
where S0 = oId/oUgs and G0 = oId/oUds are the static transconductance
and static conductance; Id(Ugs, Uds) is the dependence of id(1) = Id Here, cgs(t) = Cgs[ugs(t), uds(t)] and w0(t) = cgs(t)  dugs/dt. The deriva-
on Ugs and Uds; x is the circular frequency; j is the imaginary unit; tion of formula (17) is given in Appendix A.
s = sch/2; and sch is the time of electron transit through the chan- The current in the transfer branch is given by
nel’s nonohmic part. Note that Id = Is = is(1) since the gate current
dugd
at t = 1 is absent. itr ðtÞ ¼ cgd ðtÞ ;
Formulas (15) and (16) taking into account the electron transit dt
through the channel’s nonohmic part correspond to the following where cgd(t) = Cgd[ugs(t), uds(t)] and ugd(t) = ug(t) + ub  ud(t).
time-domain expression for the channel current: We use the cubic spline construction [7] to analytically con-
Z t tinue the discrete dependences found by solving (1)–(6) at the grid
1 0
ich ðtÞ ¼ Id ½ugs ðt 0 Þ; uds ðt0 Þdt ; nodes on the Ugs  Uds plane depicted in Fig. 3. Therefore, the
sch tsch
dependences Id(Ugs, Uds) and Qg(Ugs, Uds) may be called the spline
where ugs(t) = ug(t) + ub  us(t) and uds(t) = ud(t)  us(t). characteristics of the IFET equivalent circuit.
118 G.Z. Garber / Solid-State Electronics 103 (2015) 115–121
Fig. 6. Time dependences of the (a) gate and (b) drain currents (continuous lines)
and their exponential approximations (dashed lines).
A method for calculating parameters sgs and sch of the equiva-
lent circuit will be considered below.
We developed a version of the DIHEMT program [10] to solve
the initial-boundary value problem for (1)–(6) at the grid nodes.
The continuous lines in Figs. 4 and 5 show the calculated character-
istics Id(Ugs, Uds) and Qg(Ugs, Uds), respectively.
One execution of the DIHEMT code makes it possible to simu-
late all nodes of one vertical line on the Ugs  Uds plane (Fig. 3):
i = 0, 1, ..., m; j = const. Under the assumption that Cgd = 0, parame-
ters sgs and sch can be found from the time dependences of gate
current ig(t) and drain current id(t) as follows.
In Figs. 6a and b, continuous lines are the ig(t) and id(t) depen-
dences calculated in going from the node (5; 10 V) to the adjacent
node (4.5; 10 V) and dashed lines (calculated by the least-squares
method) represent the exponential approximations of ig(t) and
id(t). The time constants of these exponential curves are equal to
0.788 and 1.229 ps, respectively. According to [6], these values
Fig. 7. Electrical circuit of the model amplifier: resistors of 0.3 and 2 X are the parasitic elements of the transistor.
are required parameters sgs and sch for the node (4.5; 10 V):
sgs = 0.788 ps and sch = 1.229 ps. They are determined using the
TIFET macro for Microsoft Office Excel.
4. Simulation of the amplifier in the time and frequency
domains
In the model amplifier depicted in Fig. 7, the operating point of
the IFET has the coordinates Ugs = 4.63 V and Uds = 10.06 V, at
which the transfer capacitance is equal to Cgd = 0.014 pF. For com-
parison, the corresponding value of the input capacitance is
Cgs = 0.347 pF, i.e., the assumption that Cgd = 0 used to determine
the time constants, sgs and sch, is valid.
After using the TIFET macro for calculating sgs and sch in the
nodes (5; 10 V), (5; 12 V), and (4.5; 12 V), which (as well as the
node (4.5; 10 V) considered above) are the closest to the operating
point, we obtain sgs = 0.794 ps and sch = 1.283 ps for the IFET oper-
ating point (4.63; 10.06 V) with linear interpolation. These values
of sgs and sch are the parameters of the IFET equivalent circuit.
We will simulate the amplifier (Fig. 7) in the time and frequency
domains for a given amplitude and frequency of the electromotive
force of the input RF generator.
In what follows,
 Ld(ud, ug, us), Lg(ud, ug, us), and Ls(ud, ug, us) are, respectively,
currents at points d, g, and s determined by a linear active three
port (LATP), part of the circuit in Fig. 7 that is outside the IFET
unit;
 Md(ud  us, ug  us), Mg(ud  us, ug  us), and Ms(ud  us,
ug  us) = Md + Mg are currents at points d, g, and s determined
by the IFET unit.
When simulating the amplifier in the time domain, the solution
of the initial-boundary value problem for (1)–(6) lasts until
periodic oscillations (with period T) set in. At each time step, the
quadratic discrepancy
Fðud ; ug ; us Þ ¼ ½Md ðud  us ; ug  us Þ  Ld ðud ; ug ; us Þ2
þ ½Mg ðud  us ; ug  us Þ  Lg ðud ; ug ; us Þ2
þ ½Ms ðud  us ; ug  us Þ  Ls ðud ; ug ; us Þ2 ð18Þ
of the IFET drain, gate, and source currents is minimized, with Ms
(ud  us, ug  us), Mg(ud  us, ug  us), and Md(ud  us, ug  us)
calculated by (12)–(14). The electric potentials at points d, g, and
s (relative to ground, Fig. 7) are adjustable parameters.
We use the Powell method [17] to minimize (nearly to zero)
function (18) at each time step. Note that not only functions Ld
 G.Z. Garber / Solid-State Electronics 103 (2015) 115–121 119

Table 1
Calculation of the transistor input impedance.

Frequency Power available from the Simulation Input voltage Real part of the Imaginary part of the Accuracy of input
1/T (GHz) RF generator (mW) approach standing wave ratio input impedance (O) input impedance (O) impedance calculation (%)
15 4.9 QHM only 19.2 3.436 28.2
QHM & EC 17.45 3.864 29.44 4.6
QHM & EC0 29.34 2.301 29.57 6.3
30 15.6 QHM only 15.12 3.578 14.28
QHM & EC 14.29 3.794 14.49 2
QHM & EC0 24.04 2.261 14.75 9.5
60 62.5 QHM only 13.48 3.784 7.078
QHM & EC 13.76 3.702 6.872 2.8
QHM & EC0 22.74 2.247 7.384 19.5
90 160 QHM only 12.65 3.988 4.684
QHM & EC 14.07 3.579 4.225 10
QHM & EC0 22.47 2.247 4.932 28.6

Table 2
Calculation of the transducer power gain of the amplifier.

Frequency Power available from the L C Simulation Input voltage Output RF Transducer Accuracy of transducer power
1/T (GHz) RF generator (mW) (nH) (pF) approach standing wave ratio power (mW) power gain (dB) gain calculation (dB)
15 4.9 0.484 0.693 QHM only 1.202 658.3 21.28
QHM & EC 1.313 673.5 21.38 0.1
QHM & EC0 2.339 757.4 21.89 0.61
30 15.6 0.156 0.379 QHM only 1.065 555 15.5
QHM & EC 1.066 569.4 15.62 0.12
QHM & EC0 1.578 729.4 16.69 1.19
60 62.5 0.0572 0.191 QHM only 1.079 498.2 9.015
QHM & EC 1.051 568.7 9.59 0.57
QHM & EC0 1.636 718.6 10.61 1.6
90 160 0.0341 0.125 QHM only 1.158 464.4 4.628
QHM & EC 1.145 631.3 5.961 1.33
QHM & EC0 1.736 729 6.586 1.96

(ud, ug, us), Lg(ud, ug, us), and Ls(ud, ug, us) but also functions Md
(ud  us, ug  us), Mg(ud  us, ug  us), and Ms(ud  us, ug  us)
are linear. This assertion follows from the fact that, during minimi-
zation, we solve (5) with charge density Q taken from the previous
time step. Since Ld(ud, ug, us), Lg(ud, ug, us), Ls(ud, ug, us), Md
(ud  us, ug  us), Mg(ud  us, ug  us), and Ms(ud  us, ug  us)
are linear, function (18) is quadratic, which facilitates the search
for its minimum point. We developed a version of the DIHEMT
program [10] for the time-domain simulation of the amplifier.
The frequency-domain simulation, which is much more effi-
cient in terms of CPU time saving, is based on the IFET equivalent
circuit depicted in Fig. 1. We use the harmonic balance method (in
our case, for five harmonics of the input RF generator frequency,
1/T) to obtain the periodic oscillation mode. To this end, the system
of algebraic equations
M d ðud  us ; ug  us Þ ¼ Ld ðud ; ug ; us Þ;
M g ðud  us ; ug  us Þ ¼ Lg ðud ; ug ; us Þ;
M s ðud  us ; ug  us Þ ¼ Ls ðud ; ug ; us Þ
is solved, where Md, Mg, Ms, Ld, Lg, and Ls are the complex amplitudes
of currents at points d, g, and s determined by the IFET and LATP and
ud, ug, and us are the complex amplitudes of potentials at points d,
g, and s. Here, functions Md, Mg, and Ms are nonlinear.
The system of nonlinear algebraic Eqs. (19)–(21) is solved by
the Newton method with the Jacobian matrix including the
derivatives of the cubic splines that describe the characteristics
of the IFET equivalent circuit. When analyzing this equivalent cir-
cuit, the direct and inverse discrete Fourier transformations [18]
are performed. The Visual C++ program HIFETA (Harmonics In
FET Amplifier) implements the frequency-domain simulation of
the model amplifier.
The calculated periodic time dependences of the currents and
potentials (in both the time and frequency domains) govern the
microwave parameters of the amplifier, some of which are given
in Tables 1 and 2.
Below, QHM stands for 2D model (1)–(6) and EC stands for the
IFET equivalent circuit. The simulation frequencies are 1/T = 15, 30,
60, and 90 GHz.
5. Estimation of the accuracy of the transistor equivalent circuit
using the input impedance
ð19Þ
First, we will consider the model amplifier (Fig. 7) with L = C = 0,
ð20Þ i.e., with the unmatched impedances at the input. In this case, the
input impedance of the amplifier can be assigned to the transistor.
ð21Þ The frequency of the electromotive force of the input RF gener-
ator is given in the first column of Table 1. The amplitude of the
electromotive force is set such that the amplitude of id(t) in the
periodic oscillation mode is close to 80 mA for each of the four fre-
quencies. The corresponding values of the maximum power of the
RF generator are listed in the second column.
The values of the microwave parameters found by the
time-domain simulation (without using the IFET equivalent cir-
cuit) are given in rows ‘‘QHM only’’. The values of these parameters
120 G.Z. Garber / Solid-State Electronics 103 (2015) 115–121

determined by the frequency-domain simulation (using the IFET Appendix A

equivalent circuit at sgs = 0.794 ps and sch = 1.283 ps) are given in
rows ‘‘QHM & EC’’. Since the determination of parameters sgs and
sch is a labor-intensive procedure, the results obtained at sgs =
sch = 0 are also given in Table 1 (rows ‘‘QHM & EC0’’).
The last column shows errors in the input impedance calculated
with the IFET equivalent circuit. The impedance listed in rows
‘‘QHM only’’ is viewed as a reference because the 2D model (which
is the base of the time-domain simulation) is higher than the
equivalent circuit in the IFET model hierarchy.
A.1. Derivation of expression (17) for the current in the input branch of
the IFET equivalent circuit
Consider ‘‘central’’ point c of the input branch of the IFET equiv-
alent circuit in Fig. 1. Here, uc is the electric potential at this point,
ugc = ug + ub  uc, and ucs = uc  us. Since ucs = Rgsiin, where iin is
the current in the input branch, the equation ugs(t) = ugc(t) + ucs(t)
gives
cgs ugs ¼ cgs ugc þ sgs iin ;

6. Estimation of the accuracy of the transistor equivalent circuit where cgs(t) = Cgs[ugs(t), uds(t)]; sgs = Rgscgs is the time constant of the
using the transducer power gain resistor–capacitor network (Rgs is a function of t). Differentiating
both sides of this equation with respect to time, we have
The first two columns in Table 2 are the same as in Table 1. The dcgs dugs dcgs dugc diin
third and fourth columns show the values of L and C providing the ugs þ cgs ¼ ugc þ cgs þ sgs
dt dt dt dt dt
complex conjugate matching of the 50-ohm impedance of the RF
generator with the transistor input impedance given in rows or
‘‘QHM only’’ of Table 1. dcgs dugs dugc diin
As above, rows ‘‘QHM & EC’’ were obtained at sgs = 0.794 ps and ucs þ cgs ¼ cgs þ sgs : ð22Þ
dt dt dt dt
sch = 1.283 ps and rows ‘‘QHM & EC0’’ correspond to the assump-
tion sgs = sch = 0. In Figs. 4 and 5, dashed and dash-dotted lines Since
show cycles calculated at a frequency of 90 GHz, L = 0.0341 nH, dcgs dcgs Rgs dcgs 1
C = 0.125 pF, sgs = 0.794 ps, and sch = 1.283 ps. ucs ¼ sgs iin ¼ sgs iin
dt dt sgs dt cgs
The last column shows errors in the transducer power gain cal-
culated using the IFET equivalent circuit. Gain values listed in rows and
‘‘QHM only’’ are considered as reference ones.
dugc
cgs ¼ iin ;
dt
Eq. (22) takes the form
7. Conclusion
 
diin dcgs 1 dugs
According to our results, the use of the IFET large-signal equiv-
sgs þ 1  sgs iin ¼ cgs : ð23Þ
dt dt cgs dt
alent circuit (with parameters sgs = 0.794 ps and sch = 1.283 ps)
instead of the 2D model at frequencies of up to 60 GHz introduces Under the assumption that sgs is small compared with oscilla-
an error not exceeding tion period T, we represent a solution to (23) in the form [19]
sgs
iin ðtÞ ¼ w0 ðtÞ þ w1 ðtÞ; ð24Þ
 5% for the input impedance (Table 1) and T
 0.6 dB for the transducer power gain (Table 2).
where sgs/T is a small quantity. Substituting (24) into (23) yields the
following expressions for terms of the zero and first orders of
The computer time expenses are as follows.
smallness:
 For calculating the values of each row ‘‘QHM only’’ (in Tables 1 dugs
and 2), four oscillation periods were simulated. The calculation
w0 ðtÞ ¼ cgs ;
dt
of the content of all eight rows ‘‘QHM only’’ took about 20 h of
the 3-GHz processor, Intel Core 2 Quad CPU Q9650. sgs dcgs w0 dw0
w1 ðtÞ ¼ sgs  sgs :
 For calculating characteristics Id(Ugs, Uds) and Qg(Ugs, Uds), the T dt cgs dt
initial-boundary value problem for (1)–(6) was solved at
11  17 grid nodes (Fig. 3). It took about 24 h of the abovemen- Thus, (24) gives expression (17) for the current in the input branch
tioned processor. of the IFET equivalent circuit.
 For calculating the values of rows ‘‘QHM & EC’’ and ‘‘QHM &
EC0’’, the HIFETA code was executed 16 times. It took less than References
4 s.
[1] Kasu M, Ueda K, Kageshima H, Yamauchi Y. RF equivalent-circuit analysis of p-
type diamond field-effect transistors with hydrogen surface termination. IEICE
This article should be considered as a technique for estimating Trans Electron July 2008;E91-C:1042–9.
the accuracy of the microwave FET equivalent circuit in compari- [2] Chung JW, Hoke WE, Chumbes EM, Palacios T. AlGaN/GaN HEMT with 300-GHz
fmax. IEEE Electron Dev Lett March 2010;EDL-31:195–7.
son with the 2D model, which is higher than the equivalent circuit [3] Radisic V, Deal WR, Leong KMKH, Mei XB, Yoshida W, Liu P-H, et al. A 10-mW
in the IFET model hierarchy. We use this technique for verifying submillimeter-wave solid-state power-amplifier module. IEEE Trans
the equivalent circuit of real transistors. To this end, the model Microwave Theory Tech July 2010;MTT-58:1903–9.
[4] Garber GZ. Analysis of nonlinear microwave circuits based on Schottky-gate
amplifier (Fig. 7) is complemented by the substrate conductance
field effect transistors (in Russian). Electron Eng Ser 2 1984;5:27–30.
(between points d and s) and output matching network. [5] Garber GZ. Numerical modeling of the characteristics of nonlinear equivalent
The HIFETA program (which is efficient in terms of CPU time circuits for s.h.f. Schottky-gate GaAs field-effect transistors. Soviet
saving) is used for optimizing power amplifiers, in particular, based Microelectron March 1991;22:202–7.
[6] Garber GZ. Method for calculating a small-signal equivalent circuit of
on the boron-doped diamond structure similar to the depicted in extremely high frequency heterostructural field-effect transistors. J Commun
Fig. 2. Technol Electron July 2005;50:822–5.
 G.Z. Garber / Solid-State Electronics 103 (2015) 115–121
[7] Ahlberg JH, Nilson EN, Walsh JL. The Theory of Splines and Their
Applications. New York and London: Academic Press; 1967 [ch. 2].
[8] Stratton R. Diffusion of hot and cold electrons in semiconductor barriers. Phys
Rev June 1962;126:2002–14.
[9] Garber GZ. Modeling of operation of field effect transistors with submicron
Schottky gate on GaAs (in Russian). Electron Eng Ser 2 1985;2:103–7.
[10] Garber GZ. Quasi-hydrodynamic modeling of heterostructure field-effect
transistors. J Commun Technol Electron Jan 2003;48:114–7.
[11] Garber GZ. Model for simulation of AlGaAs–GaAs power heterostructure FETs.
In: Proc IEEE Int Conf EUROCON, Belgrade; 2005. p. 867–70.
[12] Reggiani L, Bosi S, Canali C, Nava F, Kozlov SF. Hole-drift velocity in natural
diamond. Phys Rev B March 1981;23:3050–7.
[13] Volpe P-N, Pernot J, Muret P, Omnes F. High hole mobility in boron doped
diamond for power device applications. Appl Phys Lett March
2009;94:092102-1–2-3. http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.3086397.
121
[14] Garber GZ, Dorofeev AA, Zubkov AM, Ivanov KA, Kolkovsky YuV. Design of the
SHF power FETs on diamond base with assistance of computer simulation (in
Russian). Electron Eng Ser 2 2013;1:9–16.
[15] Samarskii AA. The Theory of Difference Schemes. New York: Marcel Dekker;
2001 [ch. 9,10].
[16] Scharfetter DL, Gummel HK. Large-signal analysis of a silicon Read diode
oscillator. IEEE Trans Electron Dev Jan 1969;ED-16:64–77.
[17] Powell MJD. An efficient method for finding the minimum of a function of
several variables without calculating derivatives. Comput J 1964;7:155–62.
http://comjnl.oxfordjournals.org/content/7/2/155.full.pdf+html.
[18] Hamming RW. Numerical Methods for Scientists and Engineers. New
York: McGraw-Hill; 1962 [ch. 6].
[19] Cole JD. Perturbation Methods in Applied Mathematics. Waltham,
MA: Blaisdell; 1968 [ch. 2].