2017 Devices for Integrated Circuit (DevIC), 23-24 March, 2017, Kalyani, India
Study of the Variation of the Threshold Voltage with
the Doping Concentration and Channel Length
Subhashis Maitra
Department of Electronics and Communication Engineering
Jalpaiguri Government Engineering College
Jalpaiguri, West Bengal
e-mail: subha_shis06@yahoo.co.in
Abstract - Threshold voltage is an important parameter in case of
device modelling. Variation of threshold voltage affects
significantly the modelling of a device specially in case of short
channel MOSFET. Variation of threshold voltage also affects the
analysis of circuits. Threshold voltage depends on different
parameters like doping concentration, surface potential, channel
length, oxide thickness, temperature etc. Threshold voltage also
depends on random dopant fluctuation. In wide planar
transistors the threshold voltage is essentially independent of the
drain–source voltage and is therefore a well defined
characteristic, however it is less clear in modern nanometer-sized
MOSFETs due to drain induced barrier lowering. Survey of
different literatures on device modelling shows the necessity of
the study of the variation of the threshold voltage with the doping
concentration, channel length and oxide thickness. Here the
variation of the threshold voltage has been studied through
empirical formula and graphically.
Key-words - Channel length, doping concentration, oxide
thickness, threshold voltage.
I. INTRODUCTION
Threshold voltage of MOSFET is a voltage which must be
applied to the gate terminal to form an inversion layer. It
depends on different parameters like positive charge on the
gate electrode, permittivity of silicon, flat band voltage, oxide
thickness, doping concentration etc. The expression of
threshold voltage of MOSFET is given by[1][2][3]
VTH = − + +2 + (1)
Where, = metal – semiconductor work function
difference, = charge in the oxide, = interface density
trap.
From (1), it is clear that VTH depends on doping
concentration and on the material used to form the gate
electrode. Equ. (1) is valid only when the source and the
substrate are at the same potential. But if the source and the
substrate are at different potential, then the threshold voltage
will be somewhat different. Now if the source and the
substrate are at same potential, the threshold voltage can be
written as
978-1-5090-4724-6/17/$31.00 ©2017 IEEE
388
VTH = VFB + 2 + 2 (2)
With VS – VSub = 0, where VSub is the substrate potential. In
equ. (2), =
Now if a negative bias is applied to the substrate with the
source grounded, the bias across the source junction is VSub
and that across the drain junction is – VD + VSub. Hence the
energy band curvature between the inversion channel and the
substrate is no longer equal to 2 + ( ) but equal to
2 + ( ) - VSub. Hence the depletion charge under the
channel is
Qd(y) = - 2 (2 + ( ) − (3)
Now when the gate voltage is equal to the threshold voltage,
then
( )
VG = VFB + 2 + VS - (4)
Hence
Cox(VG – VFB - 2 - VS) = - 2 (2 + ( ) −
(5)
So VTH = VFB + 2 + VS 2 + − (6)
From (6), it is clear that VTH depends on VSub.
All of the above discussions about threshold voltage are for
long channel MOSFET. For short channel MOSFET, the
expression for threshold voltage will be somewhat different. In
(1). Qox can be considered as depletion charge Qd, which can
be represented by a trapezoid area as shown in Figure 1[1].
As shown in Fig., the area of the trapezoid section is (L +
L1)Xdmax/2. For long channel, the area is approximately
LXdmax, since in that case, L1 is approximately equal to L. But
for short channel, L1 < L, and the depletion charge due to VG
under the gate electrode is reduced. Suppose the MOSFET is
at threshold voltage VTH and the built-in-potential of the
source and drain junctions relative to the substrate, is
approximately equal to the surface potential in the channel,
2 , such that the width of the depletion region around the
source and the drain is equal to Xdmax, then according to
Pythagoras’s theorem,
(Xdmax)2 + (rj + x)2 = (rj + Xdmax)2 (7)
Where ‘rj’ is the radius of curvature of the junction and is
equal to the depth of the source and the drain junction.
Equation (7) can be written as
 2017 Devices for Integrated Circuit (DevIC), 23-24 March, 2017, Kalyani, India 389

x2 + 2rjx – 2rjXdmax = 0 (8) function of the device length, that is, as the device length is
reduced. Though for long channel MOSFET, it is seen that
threshold voltage is independent of device length, in reality, it
can be shown that the threshold voltage is a strong function of
the channel length and it actually decreases with the decrease
in channel length. The reduction of threshold voltage with a
reduction in the channel length can be explained using charge
sharing model. Random dopant fluctuation is caused from the
variation in the implanted impurity concentration. In
MOSFET, random dopant fluctuation in the channel region
can alter the transistor’s properties, especially threshold
voltage, sub-threshold leakage current etc. So the variation of
the threshold voltage with doping concentration is an
important issue to the current researchers. Table I shows the
variation of threshold voltage with channel length and Table II
shows the variation of threshold voltage with doping
concentration.

-20
Fig. 1. Parameters involved in short channel effect.[1]

So, x = - rj( 1 ± 1 + 2 ) (9) -40

Since ‘x’ must be a positive value, so,

Thres hold v oltage --------------->
x = rj ( 1+2 - 1) (10) -60

Hence, L1 = L – 2x = L – 2rj( 1 + 2 - 1) (11) -80

The depletion charge controlled by the gate voltage is then

-100

= = 1+ =1- ( 1+2 - 1)
-120
(12)
Where Qdo is the depletion charge that would be found
underneath the gate if the depletion region was rectangular -140
instead of trapezoidal as in long channel device. Hence the
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
channel length -----------------> -4
threshold voltage x 10

VTH = VFB + 2 − Fig. 2. Variation of threshold voltage with channel length.

= VFB + 2 − (1 − ( 1 + 2 − 1) -20

(13) -40
II. PROPOSED STUDY
Threshold voltage ------------------>

-60
From (13), it is clear that the threshold voltage is a function
of the doping concentration, channel length, width of the -80
depletion region etc. The study of the variation of the
threshold voltage with respect to the above parameters is an -100
important factor to the MOSFET designers. Here a study of
the variation of threshold voltage w. r. t. the above parameters -120

will be depicted graphically and in tabular form. Figure 2

shows the variation of the threshold voltage with channel -140

length for Na = 6x1016 cm-3, VFB = -1 V, rj = 300 nm, tox = 25 -160

nm, Cox = 6.9x10-10 F, L = 0 .1 to 5 micro meter, q=1.6x10-19,
= - 0.9 V. Figure 3 shows the variation of threshold voltage -180
for different doping concentration in the range 6x1016 cm-3 to 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Doping concentration --------------------------->
6x1017 cm-3. Another interesting feature occurred in short
17
x 10

channel MOSFET, that is the saturation current increases as a

Fig. 3. Variation of threshold voltage with doping concentration.
 2017 Devices for Integrated Circuit (DevIC), 23-24 March, 2017, Kalyani, India 390

TABLE I Variation of threshold voltage with channel length. 2.7000 x1017 -82.3235 5.5000 x1017 -164.7923
2.8000 x1017 -85.2688 5.6000 x1017 -167.7376
Channel length in Threshold Channel length Threshold 2.9000 x1017 -88.2141 5.7000 x1017 -170.6829
cm. voltage in V. in cm. voltage in V. 3.0000 x1017 -91.1594 5.8000 x1017 -173.6282
0.0100x10-3 -20.4719 0.2600 x10-3 -137.2590 3.1000 x1017 -94.1047 5.9000 x1017 -176.5735
0.0200 x10-3 -81.2012 0.2700 x10-3 -137.4320 3.2000 x1017 -97.0500 6.0000 x1017 -179.5188
0.0300 x10-3 -101.4443 0.2800 x10-3 -137.5926 3.3000 x1017 -99.9954
0.0400 x10-3 -111.5658 0.2900 x10-3 -137.7422
0.0500 x10-3 -117.6387 0.3000 x10-3 -137.8818
0.0600 x10-3 -121.6873 0.3100 x10-3 -138.0124
0.0700 x10-3 -124.5792 0.3200 x10-3 -138.1349
0.0800 x10-3 -126.7481 0.3300 x10-3 -138.2499
0.0900 x10-3 -128.4350 0.3400 x10-3 -138.3581
III. CONCLUSION
0.1000 x10-3 -129.7846 0.3500 x10-3 -138.4602
0.1100 x10-3 -130.8887 0.3600 x10-3 -138.5566 Though the variation of threshold voltage with channel
0.1200 x10-3 -131.8089 0.3700 x10-3 -138.6478 length and doping concentration have been explained here,
0.1300 x10-3 -132.5875 0.3800 x10-3 -138.7342 threshold voltage also varies with oxide thickness, random
0.1400 x10-3 -133.2548 0.3900 x10-3 -138.8161
0.1500 x10-3 -133.8332 0.4000 x10-3 -138.8940 dopant fluctuation, impurity defects, crystal defect,
0.1600 x10-3 -134.3393 0.4100 x10-3 -138.9680 temperature etc. All of these factors has significant effects in
0.1700 x10-3 -134.7858 0.4200 x10-3 -139.0386 case short channel device modelling. In the future, CMOS
0.1800 x10-3 -135.1827 0.4300 x10-3 -139.1058 technology generations, supply and the threshold voltages will
0.1900 x10-3 -135.5379 0.4400 x10-3 -139.1700
0.2000 x10-3 -135.8575 0.4500 x10-3 -139.2314 have to continually scale to sustain the increase in
0.2100 x10-3 -136.1467 0.4600 x10-3 -139.2900 performance and also to limit the energy consumption, to
0.2200 x10-3 -136.4096 0.4700 x10-3 -139.3462 control power dissipation and to maintain reliability. These
0.2300 x10-3 -136.6496 0.4800 x10-3 -139.4000 continual scaling requirement on the supply and the threshold
0.2400 x10-3 -136.8697 0.4900 x10-3 -139.4517
0.2500 x10-3 -137.0721 0.5000 x10-3 -139.5013 voltages pose several technology and circuit design
challenges. One of these challenges is the increase in threshold
voltage variation due to short channel effects. In a given
technology node, the threshold voltage depends on the choice
TABLE II Variation of threshold voltage with doping concentration of oxide and oxide thickness and the threshold voltage is
directly proportional to some parameters which are the
Doping Threshold Doping Threshold
concentration/cm3 voltage concentration/cm3 voltage in V parameters for oxide thickness and hence can be viewed as
0.6000x1017 -20.4719 3.4000 x1017 -102.9407 directly proportional to oxide thickness. Hence the variation of
0.7000 x1017 -23.4172 3.5000 x1017 -105.8860 threshold voltage is now a major research issue to take the
0.8000 x1017 -26.3625 3.6000 x1017 -108.8313 challenges of scaling technology.
0.9000 x1017 -29.3078 3.7000 x1017 -111.7766
1.0000 x1017 -32.2531 3.8000 x1017 -114.7219
1.1000 x1017 -35.1985 3.9000 x1017 -117.6672
1.2000 x1017 -38.1438 4.0000 x1017 -120.6125 REFERENCES
1.3000 x1017 -41.0891 4.1000 x1017 -123.5579
1.4000 x1017 -44.0344 4.2000 x1017 -126.5032
1.5000 x1017 -46.9797 4.3000 x1017 -129.4485 1. J. P. Colinge, C. A. Colinge, Physics of semiconductor
1.6000 x1017 -49.9250 4.4000 x1017 -132.3938 devices, Kluwer Academic Publishers, p.213.
1.7000 x1017 -52.8703 4.5000 x1017 -135.3391 2. D.V. Morgan and K. Board, An introduction to
1.8000 x1017 -55.8156 4.6000 x1017 -138.2844 semiconductor microtechnology, John Wiley and Sons, p.
1.9000 x1017 -58.7610 4.7000 x1017 -141.2297
2.0000 x1017 -61.7063 4.8000 x1017 -144.1751 18, 1991
2.1000 x1017 -64.6516 4.9000 x1017 -147.1204 3. S.K. Ghandhi, The theory and practice of
2.2000 x1017 -67.5969 5.0000 x1017 -150.0657 microelectronics, John Wiley and Sons, p. 38, 1968.
2.3000 x1017 -70.5422 5.1000 x1017 -153.0110
2.4000 x1017 -73.4875 5.2000 x1017 -155.9563
2.5000 x1017 -76.4328 5.3000 x1017 -158.9016
2.6000 x1017 -79.3782 5.4000 x1017 -161.8469