IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ELECTRON DEVICES, VOL. 69, NO.

3, MARCH 2022 973

Simulation Research on Single Event Burnout

Performances of p-GaN Gate HEMTs With
2DEG AlxGa1−xN Channel
Shuang Liu , Jincheng Zhang , Member, IEEE, Shenglei Zhao , Member, IEEE, Lei Shu ,
Xiufeng Song , Xuexue Qin, Yinhe Wu , Weihang Zhang , Member, IEEE,
Tongde Li , Student Member, IEEE, Liang Wang , Graduate Student Member, IEEE,
Zhihong Liu, Yuanfu Zhao, Senior Member, IEEE, and Yue Hao, Senior Member, IEEE

Abstract — In this article, the single event burnout (SEB)
performances for 2DEG Alx Ga1−x N channel p-GaN gate high
electron mobility transistors (HEMTs) have been investi-
gated comprehensively to reveal the failure mechanisms
and broaden applications in harsh environments. As Al
composition x increases from 0.0 to 0.4, VBR increases
from 500 to 730 V, and the corresponding SEB voltage
VSEB at linear energy transfer (LET) = 10 pC/μm increases
from 300 to 450 V. Possible mechanisms of Alx Ga1−x N
channel HEMTs from the perspective of electric field (E-field)
are proposed. E-field near source and drain side after radi-
ation would have a high peak E-field and that of p-GaN
layer exceeds 3.3 MV/cm of critical E-field for GaN material,
causing SEB to occur (LET = 10 pC/μm). When SEB occurs
in HEMTs, E-field would increase rapidly and cannot be
recovered. A new phenomenon has been first discovered
when SEB occurs in Alx Ga1−x N channel HEMTs with p-GaN
gate (x = 0.0–0.4, step = 0.1). In addition to the back-
channel effect, an excess of holes would be left in the buffer
layer after electrons flow toward the drain. It allows the
injection of an excess of holes in the buffer layer into the
gate with low potential, resulting in a sharp increase in IG .
Simulation results indicate that AlGaN channel HEMTs have
great advantages in SEB performances compared with the
traditional GaN channel HEMTs.
Manuscript received October 25, 2021; revised December 17,
2021 and January 5, 2022; accepted January 6, 2022. Date of publication
January 21, 2022; date of current version February 24, 2022. This work
was supported in part by the National Natural Science Foundation of
China under Grant 62074122, in part by the National Science Fund for
Distinguished Young Scholars under Grant 61925404, in part by the
Fundamental Research Plan under Grant JCKY2020110B010, and in
part by the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities
under Grant JB211107. The review of this article was arranged by Editor
K. Alam. (Corresponding authors: Jincheng Zhang; Shenglei Zhao.)
Shuang Liu, Jincheng Zhang, Shenglei Zhao, Xiufeng Song, Yinhe Wu,
Weihang Zhang, Zhihong Liu, and Yue Hao are with the Key Lab-
oratory of Wide Bandgap Semiconductor Materials and Devices,
School of Microelectronics, Xidian University, Xi’an 710071, China
(e-mail: jchzhang@xidian.edu.cn; slzhao@xidian.edu.cn).
Lei Shu, Tongde Li, Liang Wang, and Yuanfu Zhao are with the Beijing
Microelectronics Technology Institute, Beijing 100076, China.
Xuexue Qin is with the Material Management Department, China
Academy of Space Technology, Xi’an 710100, China.
Color versions of one or more figures in this article are available at
https://doi.org/10.1109/TED.2022.3141985.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TED.2022.3141985
Index Terms — AlGaN channel, electric field (E-field),
p-GaN gate high electron mobility transistors (HEMTs), radi-
ation, single event burnout (SEB).
I. I NTRODUCTION
G aN-CHANNEL high electron mobility transis-
tors (HEMTs) have become attractive candidates
for the harsh environment of radiation and high-temperature
applications, which is due to the wide bandgap, high
breakdown field strength, high electron mobility, low
ON -resistance (RON ), and great antiradiation performance
[1]–[4]. The next generation AlGaN channel HEMT has more
advantages in high temperature, space and aeronautic power
applications owing to the larger bandgap and better thermal
stability performance than GaN channel HEMTs. AlGaN
channel HEMTs with excellent electrical characteristics have
been widely reported [5]–[15]. Single event effect (SEE)
is very important for GaN power transistors in the natural
radiation environment of space and aeronautic [16]. The
major vulnerability stems from energetic particles that can
fully penetrate the device and cause the SEE, and the single
event burnout (SEB) is one of the most important categories
for SEE failure of GaN power transistors [17]. The SEB effect
with two different failure modes was evaluated, including
an increase in drain current with a corresponding decrease
in gate current and an increase in both drain and gate
current [18]. SEB mechanisms for the AlGaN/GaN-based
MISFET were numerically researched and hardened methods
were proposed to improve the SEB threshold voltages
[19], [20]. The effects of bipolar, back-channel [21] and
significant charge amplification [22] could cause the SEB
failure for the GaN-channel HEMTs.
However, few studies have been carried out to analyze SEB
of AlGaN channel power HEMTs, especially AlGaN channel
HEMTs with p-GaN gate. Martinez et al. [23] first presented
DD, total ionizing dose (TID) and SEB effects on AlGaN
channel HEMTs. Failure analysis indicated that there existed
a point of a heavy ion strike with location random, which could
cause the short circuit between the gate and drain electrodes.

0018-9383 © 2022 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.

Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Florida. Downloaded on September 24,2022 at 16:27:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
974
Fig. 1. (a) 3-D and (b) cross-sectional structure schematics of p-GaN
gate HEMTs with 2DEG Alx Ga1−x N channel. The red arrow indicates
where the single-particle is incident.
And subsequently, a cascade of events would be initiated,
resulting in damage to the device.
In this work, performances on SEB for Alx Ga1−x N channel
HEMTs with p-GaN gate have been studied by TCAD simula-
tion. As the Al composition increases from 0.0 to 0.4 at 300 K,
the breakdown voltage increases from 500 to 730 V, and
the corresponding SEB voltage increases from 300 to 450 V.
Based on electron, hole concentration distributions, and elec-
tric field (E-field) distributions, the possible SEB mechanism
and the new phenomenon of the AlGaN channel HEMTs are
proposed, and the influence of the different linear energy trans-
fer (LET) values on the characteristics of SEB are analyzed.
Simulation and analysis demonstrate the tremendous potential
of AlGaN channel HEMTs for space and aeronautic power
applications.
II. D EVICE S TRUCTURES , M ODELS AND A DVANTAGE
Fig. 1(a) and (b) shows the 3-D and cross-sectional struc-
ture schematics of p-GaN gate HEMT with Alx Ga1−x N chan-
nel (x = 0.0–0.4, step = 0.1), which includes 15 nm barrier
layer, 0.1 μm 2DEG channel layer, 2 μm buffer layer and
substrate. An ionized acceptor concentration of 7 × 1017 cm−3
is induced in the p-GaN layer with a thickness of 100 nm.
Si3 N4 with a thickness of 200 nm is used to form the
passivation layer. Ni Schottky gate electrode metal is deposited
with a function of 5.2 eV, while the source and drain electrode
are ohmic contacts. The main design parameters of Alx Ga1−x N
channel HEMTs are shown in Table I. The deep acceptor
and donor traps are considered in the channel and buffer
layer, which correspond to the energy level of E C –2.85 eV
with a density of 1016 cm−3 and E C –0.5 eV with a density
of 1016 cm−3 , respectively. The deep acceptor trap with the
energy level of E C –2.85 eV, which is associated with the
current collapse related to carbon incorporation and struc-
tural defects [24]–[27]. While the deep donor trap with the
energy level of E C –0.5 eV is associated with the surface-state
dynamics [28]–[31].
To investigate SEB performances, the Alx Ga1−x N channel
HEMTs were simulated using a 2-D simulator of SILVACO-
ATLAS. First, the detailed methods and models were estab-
lished based on our previous reported simulation work [32].
The key models used in this article include the SRH recom-
bination model, the Auger recombination model, the impact
ionization model, the field-dependent mobility, the trap model,
and contact resistance model. The relatively large contact
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Florida. Downloaded on September 24,2022 at 16:27:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ELECTRON DEVICES, VOL. 69, NO. 3, MARCH 2022
TABLE I
M AIN D ESIGN PARAMETERS IN S IMULATION
resistance is considered, which is mainly caused by the
increase in the Al composition of the barrier layer [33]. HEMT
for 2DEG channel mobility adopts the low-field mobility
model, and these values are determined by the total channel
mobility of [34] with different Al compositions x of the
channel layer. Then, using our previous experimental work
of AlN/GaN superlattice channel HEMT [35] to calibrate
models employed above, and AlN/GaN superlattice channel
can be regarded as a kind of AlGaN channel. Finally, reported
experimental data [36] of AlGaN channel HEMTs are used
to verify the accuracy of the calibrated models. Results in
Fig. 2 show that the simulation models have excellent wide
applicability and accuracy.
Compared with GaN channel HEMTs, AlGaN channel
HEMTs possess better breakdown characteristics due to higher
critical E-field and worse output current characteristics due
to strong alloy disorder scattering. The degradation degree of
AlGaN channel HEMTs at a high temperature is lower than
that of GaN channel HEMTs as shown in Fig. 3. Fig. 3(a)
shows breakdown characteristics of the Alx Ga1−x N channel
HEMTs from 300 to 700 K, and the breakdown voltage is
defined as the voltage at which ID = 1 mA/mm. With x
increasing from 0.0 to 0.4 at 300 K, the breakdown volt-
age VBR increases from 500 to 730 V. When temperature
increases to 700 K, the VBR increases from 10 to 570 V
with the x from 0.0 to 0.4. It shows that GaN channel
HEMTs have no high-voltage blocking capability at high
temperature, while the breakdown voltage of the Al0.4 Ga0.6 N
channel at 500 and 700 K degrades to 98% and 78% of that
at 300 K, respectively. The power figure of merit (FOM) can
be estimated as FOM = (VBR )2 /RON to evaluate the power
performance of Alx Ga1−x N HEMTs at different temperatures,
LIU et al.: SIMULATION RESEARCH ON SEB PERFORMANCES OF p-GaN GATE HEMTs
Fig. 2. Model calibrations of the AlN/GaN superlattice channel HEMT
in (a) transfer, (b) output, and (c) breakdown characteristics. Model
verifications in (d) transfer, (e) output, and (f) breakdown performances
of p-GaN gate HEMT with AlGaN channel.
as shown in Fig. 3(b). Although the power FOM of GaN
channel HEMTs at 300 K is better than that of the AlGaN
channel, the FOM of the AlGaN channel HEMT at 500 and
700 K is one and three orders of magnitude higher than that
of the GaN channel, respectively.
Transfer characteristics of the Alx Ga1−x N channel HEMTs
at 300 and 700 K are shown in Fig. 3(c) and (d). It shows
that a lot of electrons accumulate under the gate as the
temperature increases, resulting in a negative shift of the
threshold voltage. Therefore, the negative shift of the threshold
voltage makes the HEMT unable to turn off at VGS = 0 V,
resulting in serious degradation of the breakdown voltage at
high temperature. It can be found that the GaN channel HEMT
still maintains good power characteristics at room temperature,
while its performance would be much worse than that of the
AlGaN channel due to the severe degradation of the VBR at
high temperature. And this also reflects the potentially huge
advantages of AlGaN channel HEMT replacing GaN channel
in high temperature applications.
Furthermore, it is of significance to broaden the research on
the advantages of AlGaN channel HEMTs in the field of radi-
ation, especially the SEB. Considering the complexity of SEB
experiments and the limitations of simulation, it is impossible
to calibrate SEB codes with experimental data due to the pre-
maturity of this technology that remains uncontrolled even by
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Florida. Downloaded on September 24,2022 at 16:27:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
975
Fig. 3. (a) Breakdown characteristics of Alx Ga1−x N (x =
0.0–0.4, step = 0.1) channel HEMTs from 300 to 700 K. (b) Logarithmic
FOM of Alx Ga1−x N channel HEMTs as a function of Al composition x
from 300 to 700 K. Transfer characteristics of Alx Ga1−x N channel HEMTs
at (c) 300 K and (d) 700 K and at VDS = 10 V.
manufacturers (epitaxy limited, defects, and dislocations) [37].
Compared with [23], the most important improvement is
the use of p-GaN/Al0.25+x Ga0.75−x N/Alx Ga1−x N structure to
achieve normally-OFF HEMTs. Enhanced operation is desired
for safety reasons and to simplify the driver circuitry for
the power electronics applications, especially in radiation for
space and aeronautic environments. To our knowledge, studies
on SEB mechanisms simulation in AlGaN channel HEMTs
have not been reported. Therefore, the purpose of this article
is to explain the possible mechanism and provide qualitative
guidance for experiments based on the predictive single event
model.
III. SEB P ERFORMANCES
In order to study the SEB of Alx Ga1−x N channel HEMTs,
single particle strike model was introduced and added to
the 2-D simulation. For carriers induced by single particle
radiation, the electron–hole pairs generated along track of the
heavy ion are a function of the radial distance r from the
center of the single particle track to the point, the distance l
along the track and the transient time t. The generation rate G
as the number of electron–hole pairs along the track of single
particle strike is described by the following formula [38]:
 
1
× e(− R )
r 2
G(r, l, t) = DENSITY + × B.DENSITY
qπ R 2
 2
2e − t−T 0
Tc
× √   (1)
Tc πerfc −T Tc
0
where the single particle incidence is the Gaussian profile
with the radius defined with the R-parameter, DENSITY,
and B.DENSITY are the number of generated electron–hole
pairs per cubic centimeter, Tc is the characteristic time of the
976 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ELECTRON DEVICES, VOL. 69, NO. 3, MARCH 2022

Gaussian profile, and T0 is the initial time of the generated

charge.
This model is consistent with that used in the reported
literature [19], [20], [38], which both describes the generation
rate of electron–hole pairs as the temporal and spatial Gaussian
distribution. At the same time, the important parameters of the
code model are set according to the reported simulation condi-
tions to ensure the accuracy and feasibility of the simulation.
The radiation radius of the single particle R, the initial time of
the generated charge T0 , and the characteristic time Tc of the
Gaussian profile is set to 0.05 μm, 1 × 10−13 and 2 × 10−12 s,
respectively [19]. The characteristics of SEB are highly corre-
lated with the incident angle and the position of the heavy
ions. In order to research the performance of Alx Ga1−x N
channel HEMTs under the worst radiation environment of the
single event, heavy ion is assumed to strike perpendicular
and penetrate all entire HEMTs. Considering that the most
sensitive region is near the gate closing to the drain [39], the
incident position of the single particle is fixed at the edge of
the gate in the simulation process, which is at the position
x = 6.5 μm (At the right edge of the gate electrode along the
source to drain direction). Radiation research on the energy
loss of the single particle as it suffers collisions in a material,
and it is usually measured by the LET value, which defines the
actual charge deposited in units of MeV-cm2 /mg or pC/μm.
The current value depends especially on the bias voltage but
not on the ion energy or range [37], and LET is set to 10, Fig. 4. ID as a function of the transient time for the (a) GaN channel
and (d) Al0.2 Ga0.8 N channel HEMTs at different VDS and T after the
1, and 0.1 according to the reported simulation. Considering particle striking at x = 6.5 µm with LET value of 10 pC/µm. Evolution
that the actual application environment of space radiation is a of ID , IG , and IS as a function of the transient time for the GaN channel
very complicated and necessary design for derating, we mainly HEMTs at (b) VDS = 200 V and (c) VDS = 300 V. ID , IG , and IS versus
transient time for the Al0.2 Ga0.8 N channel HEMTs at (e) VDS = 300 V
focus on the analysis of SEB caused by the energetic particles. and (f) VDS = 400 V.
Although the LET value may be different from the actual
single particle experiment, the possible mechanism obtained
by the qualitative analysis can provide theoretical guidance
for experiments. reached a reverse peak at this time. For VDS = 200 V, the ID ,
Al0.45 Ga0.55 N/Al0.2 Ga0.8 N HEMT is selected as a typical IG and IS all return to a stable state and low value after a
application of mechanism analysis, and it also played a key long period of time. While for VDS = 300 V, the ID and IG
role in future experiments. Fig. 4(a) and (d) shows the drain remain in the high-current state after a long period of time and
current as a function of transient time with the two different could not be recovered, indicating that the HEMT burned out.
channel HEMTs at different operating biases. After heavy- Fig. 4(e) and (f) shows the excellent single particle radiation
ion striking, the SEB voltages VSEB of HEMTs with the performance of the Al0.2 Ga0.8 N channel HEMT. It confirms
GaN channel and Al0.2 Ga0.8 N channel are 300 and 400 V, that the transient current is relatively low after radiation
respectively. It shows that the GaN channel HEMT has reached compared with the GaN channel HEMTs, while keeping the
a breakdown state before radiation, and there is no meaning in same shape of current curves.
studying SEB of the GaN channel HEMT at high temperature. The sharp increase in the current of the ID and IG under the
However, for the AlGaN channel HEMT under the same drain voltage of 400 V indicates the occurrence of SEB, and
conditions, the breakdown will not occur and the final ID this phenomenon that IG in p-GaN layer contributes a large
after radiation is restored to below 1 mA/mm. As a result, the part of the burnout current is different from the traditional
HEMT with a high Al composition channel has the advan- MISHEMT device [19], [20]. In extremely complex space
tage of suppressing leakage current during high-temperature and aerospace applications, MISHEMTs not only introduce
radiation. As shown in Fig. 4(b) and (c), the graphs show the trap states at the dielectric interface to affect the performance,
drain current ID , the gate current IG , and the source current IS but also the characteristics of HEMT will deteriorate due
as a function of transient time for the GaN channel HEMTs to the total dose effect introduced by the dielectric layer.
at 300 K after the heavy particles striking at the position For the approach of using a dielectric layer on top of the
x = 6.5 μm with LET = 10 pC/μm. Both ID and IG have a p-GaN layer [40], which is a method worthy of research and
current peak around t = 1 × 10−11 s after particle striking, consideration. Generally, the dielectric layer grown by ALD or
subsequently the drain current gradually decreases. ID has a PECVD will introduce a lot of traps, resulting in poor radiation
forward current peak at t = 5 × 10−11 s, and IG has also performance. However, it may be possible to reduce the trap

Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Florida. Downloaded on September 24,2022 at 16:27:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
LIU et al.: SIMULATION RESEARCH ON SEB PERFORMANCES OF p-GaN GATE HEMTs
Fig. 5. Log-electron concentration distributions of Al0.2 Ga0.8 N channel
HEMTs at (a) t = 8.0 × 10−12 s, (b) t = 5.0 × 10−11 s, and (c) t =
3.0 × 10−9 s with VGS = 0 V and VDS = 400 V. Log-hole concentration
distributions of Al0.2 Ga0.8 N channel HEMTs at (d) t = 8.0 × 10−12 s,
(e) t = 5.0 × 10−11 s, and (f) t = 3.0 × 10−9 s with VGS = 0 V and
VDS = 400 V.
states by using the in situ dielectric layer on top of the p-GaN
layer, thereby reducing the gate current and improving the
radiation performances of the HEMT with the p-GaN gate.
In order to further investigate the mechanism of SEB
characteristics with the Al0.2 Ga0.8 N channel HEMTs, the log-
electron and log-hole concentration distributions at different
VDS are shown in Figs. 5 and 6.
A lot of electron–hole pairs are generated at the incident
track of x = 6.5 μm below the right edge of the gate due to
the single particle incident when t = 8 × 10−12 s. These
ionized holes move from the incident position to the gate
with low potential to form the peak current of IG . When
t = 5 × 10−11 s, the ionized electrons move to the drain
under the E-field to form current of ID . A part of the ionized
holes at the incident position would move to the buffer layer
causing a slight decrease in IG . When t = 3 × 10−9 s, two
phenomena caused SEB of GaN channel HEMTs. The first
is the back-channel effect, that is, an excess of holes are
left in the buffer layer after electrons flow toward the drain,
which reduces the potential barrier between the source and
channel allowing the injection of electrons from the source
to the drain via the channel. The second phenomenon is that
the injection of an excess of holes in the buffer layer into the
gate with low potential, resulting in a sharp increase in IG .
As shown in Fig. 6, the characteristics of the concentration
distribution of electrons and holes at low VDS and different
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Florida. Downloaded on September 24,2022 at 16:27:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
977
Fig. 6. Log-electron concentration distributions of Al0.2 Ga0.8 N channel
HEMTs at (a) t = 8.0 × 10−12 s, (b) t = 5.0 × 10−11 s, and (c) t =
1.0 × 10−6 s with VGS = 0 V and VDS = 300 V. Log-hole concentration
distributions of Al0.2 Ga0.8 N channel HEMTs at (d) t = 8.0 × 10−12 s,
(e) t = 5.0 × 10−11 s, and (f) t = 1.0 × 10−6 s with VGS = 0 V and
VDS = 300 V.
transient times have not changed at t ≤ 5 × 10−11 s. When t =
1 × 10−6 s, the current can be recovered to a state of low value,
showing that the electron–hole pairs generated by the radiation
are completely absorbed and HEMT returns to its normal
state. Fig. 7 shows the log-electron and log-hole concentration
distributions of GaN channel HEMTs. The burning mechanism
of the GaN channel HEMTs is the same as that of the AlGaN
channel HEMTs, and the difference is that the latter has a
lower background carrier concentration. The increase in gate
current can be considered as the effect of hole injection into
the gate, which is mainly from ionized holes generated by
high-energy single particles incident on the HEMT channel
or the buffer layer. Considering that the depletion effect of
pGaN is limited due to material quality and fabrication process
in applications, we will use low work-function gate metal
[41], [42] to further improve the performance and reliability
of p-GaN gate HEMT in future experiments.
As shown in Fig. 8, E-field strength distributions of the
p-GaN layer, the channel region before and after the impact
of heavy ion are systematically discussed at different VDS . For
Al0.2 Ga0.8 N channel HEMTs at VDS = 400 V, compared with
the E-field before radiation, the peak E-field of the channel
near the gate decreases and that of the p-GaN layer near the
right side of the gate increases slightly at t = 8 × 10−12 s.
At t = 5 × 10−11 s, the E-field of the p-GaN layer is greatly
reduced, while the E-field of the channel near the drain side is
978
Fig. 7. Log-electron concentration distributions of GaN channel HEMTs
at (a) t = 8.0 × 10−12 s, (b) t = 5.0 × 10−11 s, and (c) t = 3.0 × 10−9 s
with VGS = 0 V and VDS = 300 V. Log-hole concentration distributions
of GaN channel HEMTs at (d) t = 8.0 × 10−12 s, (e) t = 5.0 × 10−11 s,
and (f) t = 3.0 × 10−9 s with VGS = 0 V and VDS = 300 V.
greatly increased. When HEMTs burnout at t = 3 × 10−9 s,
the E-field of channel near the source and the drain side has a
high peak E-field. At the same time, the E-field of the p-GaN
layer under the gate reaches the critical E-field of breakdown,
which causes IG to increase rapidly. If the VDS is reduced
to 300 V, the E-field of the channel near the source or the drain
side and that of the p-GaN layer would recover to the value
before the radiation after a certain time. The E-field changes
of GaN channel HEMTs are similar to that of AlGaN channel
HEMTs, while the difference is that the latter has a higher
critical E-field, resulting in a higher voltage of SEB. The
simulation results reveal the SEB mechanism of Alx Ga1−x N
channel HEMTs from the perspective of E-field. The E-field
near the source and the drain side after radiation would have
a high peak E-field, and the E-field of p-GaN layer exceeds
3.3 MV/cm of GaN material critical E-field.
Furthermore, the effect of low LET values on the char-
acteristics of single event for the Alx Ga1−x N HEMTs is
considered. Results in Fig. 9(a) show the evolution of the
ID as a function of time after heavy ion impact for different
LETs at VDS = VBR . A lower LET value generates a lower
concentration of electron–hole pairs inside the HEMTs, which
affects transient time when the drain current peak appears.
Unlike current curves in Fig. 4, values of ID corresponding to
different LETs all recover to the initial state with a low value
at VDS ≤ VBR . Considering that it is meaningless for the drain
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Florida. Downloaded on September 24,2022 at 16:27:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ELECTRON DEVICES, VOL. 69, NO. 3, MARCH 2022
Fig. 8. E-field strength distributions of Al0.2 Ga0.8 N channel HEMT versus
time for channel at (a) VDS = 400 V and (c) VDS = 300 V, p-GaN layer
at (b) VDS = 400 V and (d) VDS = 300 V. E-field strength distribution for
(e) channel and (f) p-GaN layer of GaN channel HEMT at VDS = 300 V.
Fig. 9. (a) Evolution of ID as a function of the transient time for the
Alx Ga1−x N channel HEMTs at VDS = VBR and different values of LET.
(b) Voltage of SEB as a function of Al composition in Alx Ga1−x N channel
layer at different values of LET.
voltage of HEMT to exceed VBR , the voltage of SEB is equal
to the VBR . VSEB as a function of Al composition x at different
values of LET as shown in Fig. 9(b). As the Al composition
x increases from 0 to 0.4, VSEB at LET = 10 pC/μm increases
from 300 to 450 V, while VSEB at LET = 1 and 0.1 pC/μm
increases from 500 to 730 V. Results show that AlGaN channel
HEMTs have excellent SEB voltage compared with GaN
channel.
The changing characteristics in the E-field strength dis-
tribution before and after radiation at low LET have been
investigated as shown in Fig. 10. For Al0.2 Ga0.8 N channel
HEMTs at LET = 1 pC/μm, the channel near the drain side
LIU et al.: SIMULATION RESEARCH ON SEB PERFORMANCES OF p-GaN GATE HEMTs 979

mechanism of the Alx Ga1−x N HEMTs are different, which

is mainly reflected in the E-field. Although break down of
Alx Ga1−x N channel HEMTs occurs when the E-field strength
in the transient process reaches the critical E-field, and it
may not cause SEB. The reason may be that although HEMT
reaches the critical E-field at low LET values, the ionized
electrons and holes are not enough to form a large burnout
current (the E-field has recovered to the initial state at
t = 1 × 10−6 s).

IV. C ONCLUSION
In this article, performances for the SEB of Alx Ga1−x N
channel HEMTs with different Al compositions have been
investigated comprehensively. The following conclusions
obtained in this article can provide qualitative guidance for
experiments and clearly understanding the mechanism for the
single event of AlGaN channel HEMTs with p-GaN gate.
1) As Al composition x increases from 0.0 to 0.4, VBR
increases from 500 to 730 V, and the corresponding
SEB voltage VSEB at LET = 10 pC/μm increases
from 300 to 450 V.
2) When LET decreases from 10 to 1 pC/μm or 0.1 pC/μm,
SEB does not occur as VDS increases to VBR . Therefore,
the operating voltages of HEMTs can be improved for
low LET radiation environment.
3) E-field near source and drain side after radiation would
have a high peak E-field and that of p-GaN layer
exceeds 3.3 MV/cm of critical E-field for GaN material,
causing SEB to occur (LET = 10 pC/μm).
4) When SEB occurs in HEMTs, E-field would increase
rapidly and cannot be recovered. Transient E-field
shows a tendency to increase first and then recover at
LET = 1 pC/μm or 0.1 pC/μm and VDS = VBR .
5) A new phenomenon has been discovered for the first
time when SEB occurs in Alx Ga1−x N channel HEMTs
with p-GaN gate (x = 0.0–0.4, step = 0.1). For the
Fig. 10. E-field strength distribution of (a) channel at LET = 1 pC/µm,
(b) p-GaN at LET = 1 pC/µm, (c) channel at LET = 0.1 pC/µm, back-channel effect, an excess of holes would be left
and (d) p-GaN at LET = 0.1 pC/µm for Al0.2 Ga0.8 N channel HEMTs in the buffer layer after electrons flow toward the drain,
at different transient time. E-field strength distribution versus time of which reduces the potential barrier between source and
(e) channel at LET = 1 pC/µm, (f) p-GaN at LET = 1 pC/µm, (g) channel
at LET = 0.1 pC/µm, and (h) p-GaN at LET = 0.1 pC/µm for GaN channel channel allowing the injection of electrons from source
HEMTs. to drain via the channel. While the new phenomenon
is that the injection of an excess of holes in the buffer
layer into the gate with low potential, resulting in a sharp
reaches a larger E-field peak at t = 5 × 10−11 s, while the increase in IG .
p-GaN layer near the right side of the gate exhibits a larger
peak E-field at t = 8 × 10−12 s. If the LET value is reduced to R EFERENCES
0.1 pC/μm, the E-field of the channel layer decreases slightly
[1] Y. H. Hwang et al., “Effect of proton irradiation on AlGaN/GaN
during the transient period, while the E-field of p-GaN layer high electron mobility transistor off-state drain breakdown voltage,”
increases greatly at t = 5 × 10−11 s. Compared with the Appl. Phys. Lett., vol. 104, no. 8, Feb. 2014, Art. no. 082106, doi:
E-field distribution of SEB at LET = 10 pC/μm, there is no 10.1063/1.4866858.
[2] T. J. Anderson et al., “Substrate-dependent effects on the response
E-field peak in the channel layer near the source at a lower of AlGaN/GaN HEMTs to 2-MeV proton irradiation,” IEEE Elec-
LET value, and the radiated p-GaN layer does not maintain tron Device Lett., vol. 35, no. 8, pp. 826–828, Aug. 2014, doi:
a high E-field peak. Although E-field of channel and p-GaN 10.1109/LED.2014.2331001.
[3] J. Hu, Y. Zhang, M. Sun, D. Piedra, N. Chowdhury, and T. Palacios,
layer have recovered to the initial level at t = 1 × 10−6 s, “Materials and processing issues in vertical GaN power electronics,”
ID has reached the magnitude of the current at break down. Mater. Sci. Semicond. Process., vol. 78, pp. 1–10, Sep. 2017, doi:
E-field distributions of GaN channel HEMTs at different LET 10.1016/j.mssp.2017.09.033.
[4] H. Amano et al., “The 2018 GaN power electronics roadmap,”
values are consistent with that of the Al0.2 Ga0.8 N channel. J. Phys. D, Appl. Phys., vol. 51, no. 16, pp. 1–48, Mar. 2018,
The results show that the SEB mechanism and breakdown doi: 10.1088/1361-6463/aaaf9d.

Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Florida. Downloaded on September 24,2022 at 16:27:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
980
[5] T. Nanjo et al., “First operation of AlGaN channel high electron mobility
transistors,” Appl. Phys. Exp., vol. 1, Dec. 2008, Art. no. 011101, doi:
10.1143/APEX.1.011101.
[6] T. Nanjo et al., “Remarkable breakdown voltage enhancement in AlGaN
channel high electron mobility transistors,” Appl. Phys. Lett., vol. 92,
no. 26, pp. 263502-1–263502-3, Jun. 2008, doi: 10.1063/1.2949087.
[7] T. Nanjo et al., “AlGaN channel HEMT with extremely high breakdown
voltage,” IEEE Trans. Electron Devices, vol. 60, no. 3, pp. 1046–1053,
Mar. 2013, doi: 10.1109/TED.2012.2233742.
[8] H. Tokuda et al., “High Al composition AlGaN-channel high-electron-
mobility transistor on AlN substrate,” Appl. Phys. Exp., vol. 3, no. 12,
Dec. 2010, Art. no. 121003, doi: 10.1143/APEX.3.121003.
[9] A. Raman, S. Dasgupta, S. Rajan, J. S. Speck, and U. K. Mishra,
“AlGaN channel high electron mobility transistors: Device performance
and power-switching figure of merit,” Jpn. J. Appl. Phys., vol. 47, no. 5,
pp. 3359–3361, May 2008, doi: 10.1143/JJAP.47.3359.
[10] Y. Wu et al., “More than 3000 V reverse blocking Schottky-drain
AlGaN-channel HEMTs with >230 MW/cm2 power Figure-of-Merit,”
IEEE Electron Device Lett., vol. 40, no. 11, pp. 1724–1727, Nov. 2019,
doi: 10.1109/LED.2019.2941530.
[11] M. Xiao et al., “High performance Al0.10 Ga0.90 N channel HEMTs,”
IEEE Electron Device Lett., vol. 39, no. 8, pp. 1149–1151, Aug. 2018,
doi: 10.1109/LED.2018.2848661.
[12] P. H. Carey et al., “Extreme temperature operation of ultra-wide
bandgap AlGaN high electron mobility transistors,” IEEE Trans.
Semicond. Manuf., vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 473–477, Nov. 2019, doi:
10.1109/TSM.2019.2932074.
[13] P. H. Carey et al., “Operation up to 500 ◦ C of Al0.85 Ga0.15 N/Al0.7 Ga0.3 N
high electron mobility transistors,” IEEE J. Electron Devices Soc., vol. 7,
pp. 444–452, 2019, doi: 10.1109/JEDS.2019.2907306.
[14] N. Yafune, S. Hashimoto, K. Akita, Y. Yamamoto, H. Tokuda, and
M. Kuzuhara, “AlN/AlGaN HEMTs on AlN substrate for stable high-
temperature operation,” Electron. Lett., vol. 50, no. 3, pp. 211–212,
Jan. 2014, doi: 10.1049/el.2013.2846.
[15] A. G. Baca et al., “High temperature operation of
Al0.45 Ga0.55 N/Al0.30 Ga0.70 N high electron mobility transistors,” ECS J.
Solid State Sci. Technol., vol. 6, no. 11, pp. S3010–S3013, 2017, doi:
10.1149/2.0041711jss.
[16] S. Kuboyama et al., “Single-event damages caused by heavy ions
observed in AlGaN/GaN HEMTs,” IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 58, no. 6,
pp. 2734–2738, Dec. 2011, doi: 10.1109/TNS.2011.2171504.
[17] A. Lidow, J. W. Strydom, M. de Rooij, and D. Reusch, “GaN tran-
sistors for space applications,” in GaN Transistors For Efficient Power
Conversion, 2nd ed. Chichester, U.K.: Wiley, 2014, pp. 172–178.
[18] M. Rostewitz, K. Hirche, J. Lätti, and E. Jutzi, “Single event
effect analysis on DC and RF operated AlGaN/GaN HEMTs,” IEEE
Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 60, no. 4, pp. 2525–2529, Aug. 2013, doi:
10.1109/TNS.2013.2247774.
[19] X. Luo et al., “Research of single-event burnout and hardening of
AlGaN/GaN-based MISFET,” IEEE Trans. Electron Devices, vol. 66,
no. 2, pp. 1118–1122, Feb. 2019, doi: 10.1109/TED.2018.2887245.
[20] Y. Wang et al., “Simulation study of single-event burnout in GaN
MISFET with Schottky element,” IEEE Trans. Electron Devices, vol. 67,
no. 12, pp. 5466–5471, Dec. 2020, doi: 10.1109/TED.2020.3027533.
[21] S. Onoda et al., “Enhanced charge collection by single ion strike
in AlGaN/GaN HEMTs,” IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 60, no. 6,
pp. 4446–4450, Dec. 2013, doi: 10.1109/TNS.2013.2289373.
[22] C. Abbate et al., “Experimental study of single event effects
induced by heavy ion irradiation in enhancement mode GaN power
HEMT,” Microelectron. Rel., vol. 55, pp. 1–5, Dec. 2015, doi:
10.1016/j.microrel.2015.06.139.
[23] M. J. Martinez et al., “Radiation response of AlGaN-channel HEMTs,”
IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 66, no. 1, pp. 344–351, Jan. 2019, doi:
10.1109/TNS.2018.2885526.
[24] H. Hanawa, H. Onodera, A. Nakajima, and K. Horio, “Numerical
analysis of breakdown voltage enhancement in AlGaN/GaN HEMTs
with a high-K passivation layer,” IEEE Trans. Electron Devices, vol. 61,
no. 3, pp. 769–775, Mar. 2014, doi: 10.1109/TED.2014.2298194.
Authorized licensed use limited to: University of Florida. Downloaded on September 24,2022 at 16:27:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ELECTRON DEVICES, VOL. 69, NO. 3, MARCH 2022
[25] S. C. Binari, P. B. Klein, and T. E. Kazior, “Trapping effects in GaN
and SiC microwave FETs,” Proc. IEEE, vol. 90, no. 6, pp. 1048–1058,
Jun. 2002, doi: 10.1109/JPROC.2002.1021569.
[26] W. Yang and J.-S. Yuan, “Experimental investigation of buffer traps
physical mechanisms on the gate charge of GaN-on-Si devices under
various substrate biases,” Appl. Phys. Lett., vol. 116, no. 8, Feb. 2020,
Art. no. 083501, doi: 10.1063/1.5124871.
[27] K. Horio, K. Yonemoto, H. Takayanagi, and H. Nakano, “Physics-
based simulation of buffer-trapping effects on slow current transients
and current collapse in GaN field effect transistors,” J. Appl. Phys.,
vol. 98, no. 12, Dec. 2005, Art. no. 124502, doi: 10.1063/1.2141653.
[28] H. Onodera and K. Horio, “Analysis of buffer-impurity and field-plate
effects on breakdown characteristics in small-sized AlGaN/GaN high
electron mobility transistors,” Semicond. Sci. Technol., vol. 27, no. 8,
Jul. 2012, Art. no. 085016, doi: 10.1088/0268-1242/27/8/085016.
[29] K. Horio and A. Nakajima, “Physical mechanism of buffer-related
current transients and current slump in AlGaN/GaN high electron
mobility transistors,” Jpn. J. Appl. Phys., vol. 47, no. 5, pp. 3428–3433,
May 2008, doi: 10.1143/JJAP.47.3428.
[30] K. Horio, K. Yonemoto, H. Takayanagi, and H. Nakano, “Physics-
based simulation of buffer-trapping effects on slow current transients
and current collapse in GaN field effect transistors,” J. Appl. Phys.,
vol. 98, no. 12, Dec. 2005, Art. no. 124502, doi: 10.1063/1.2141653.
[31] A. Nakajima, K. Fujii, and K. Horio, “Numerical analysis of buffer-trap
effects on gate lag in AlGaN/GaN high electron mobility transistors,”
Jpn. J. Appl. Phys., vol. 50, no. 10, Oct. 2011, Art. no. 104303, doi:
10.1143/JJAP.50.104303.
[32] S. Liu et al., “Comprehensive design of device parameters for GaN
vertical trench MOSFETs,” IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 57126–57135,
2020, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2977381.
[33] G. Greco, F. Iucolano, and F. Roccaforte, “Ohmic contacts to gallium
nitride materials,” Appl. Surf. Sci., vol. 383, pp. 324–345, Oct. 2016,
doi: 10.1016/j.apsusc.2016.04.016.
[34] S. Bajaj, T. H. Huang, F. Akyol, D. Nath, and S. Rajan, “Modeling of
high composition AlGaN channel high electron mobility transistors with
large threshold voltage,” Appl. Phys. Lett., vol. 105, no. 26, Dec. 2014,
Art. no. 263503, doi: 10.1063/1.4905323.
[35] S. Liu et al., “AlN/GaN superlattice channel HEMTs on silicon sub-
strate,” IEEE Trans. Electron Devices, vol. 68, no. 7, pp. 3296–3301,
Jul. 2021, doi: 10.1109/TED.2021.3078674.
[36] L. Zhang et al., “AlGaN-channel gate injection transistor on silicon
substrate with adjustable 4–7-V threshold voltage and 1.3-kV breakdown
voltage,” IEEE Electron Device Lett., vol. 39, no. 7, pp. 1026–1029,
Jul. 2018, doi: 10.1109/LED.2018.2838542.
[37] M. Zerarka, P. Austin, A. Bensoussan, F. Morancho, and A. Durier,
“TCAD simulation of the single event effects in normally-OFF
GaN transistors after heavy ion radiation,” IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci.,
vol. 64, no. 8, pp. 2242–2249, Aug. 2017, doi: 10.1109/TNS.2017.
2710629.
[38] Atlas User’s Manual, Silvaco, Inc. Santa Clara, CA, USA,
Aug. 2016.
[39] L. Scheick, “Determination of single-event effect application
requirements for enhancement mode gallium nitride HEMTs
for use in power distribution circuits,” IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci.,
vol. 61, no. 6, pp. 2881–2888, Dec. 2014, doi: 10.1109/TNS.2014.
2365545.
[40] T. Sugiyama, D. Iida, M. Iwaya, S. Kamiyama, H. Amano, and
I. Akasaki, “Threshold voltage control using SiNx in normally off
AlGaN/GaN HFET with p-GaN gate,” Phys. Status Solidi C, vol. 7,
nos. 7–8, pp. 1980–1982, Jun. 2010, doi: 10.1002/pssc.200983595.
[41] G. Greco, F. Iucolano, and F. Roccaforte, “Review of technology for
normally-off HEMTs with p-GaN gate,” Mater. Sci. Semicond. Process.,
vol. 78, pp. 96–106, May 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.mssp.2017.09.027.
[42] G. Greco, F. Iucolano, S. Di Franco, C. Bongiomo, A. Patti, and
F. Roccaforte, “Effects of annealing treatments on the properties of
Al/Ti/p-GaN interfaces for normally OFF p-GaN HEMTs,” IEEE Trans.
Electron Devices, vol. 63, no. 3, pp. 2735–2741, Jul. 2016, doi:
10.1109/TED.2016.2563498.