You are on page 1of 1

Channel Quantization Models for

NanoScale MOSFETs
A. Appaswamy, M. Bajaj*, R. Pandey, S. S. Fukay1 and K. V. R. M. Murali
IBM Semiconductor Research and Development Center, Bangalore-54, India
IBM Semiconductor Research and Development Center, Essex Junction, VT, USA

Motivation: Predictive Modeling of Channel Modeling Channel Quantization: Implementation

Channel Quantization of MLDA
Implementation of MLDA Model Model
in TCAD Simulator
• Charge Confinement in 2D Channel Under Strong Quantum corrected density is formulated in terms of an equivalent quantum
Inversion potential
• Drastic Modification of Band Structure and Electron
Distribution Channel
Fermi Integral of order 1/2
source SiO2 drain
n+ channel n+ IBM proprietary device simulator FIELDAY is used for TCAD modeling.
p-type substrate Drift-Diffusion Equations: FIELDAY
SiO2 • Electro-thermal device simulator solves
the 6 coupled PDEs using finite volume
Electron Density Profile
• Inversion Capacitance method.
• Solves for Carrier (hole and electron)
Electron Density


• Threshold Voltage (Vt) Generation Rate

mass and energy transport
Quantum Current Density Equation Recombination Rate • Solves 1D, 2D and 3D semiconductor
• Sub-Threshold Slope
Distance from the interface
Fast but typically not predictive – Need repeated calibration
Modeling Channel Quantization: Schrodinger-
TCAD Simulation: MLDA Model Calibration for
Poisson Solution
chrodinger-Poisson Solution
Accurate solution using: Triangular Wall Approximation PolySilicon
(Analytical Solution)

Schrodinger Equation
Gate tox = 2 nm

E1 Substrate
Poisson Equation
Depth Under Interface

Electrical Potential

Numerical Self-Consistent Solution for Electron Density

n-type MOS Capacitor
Hole Density
Non-linear Potential Distribution Donor Concentration Electron concentration as a function of depth under interface
Acceptor Concentration
• Accurate and Predictive Fixed Charge Density Charge Profile – Good Fit between Schrodinger-Poisson and MLDA Predictions
• Convergence Issues Material Permittivity

• Computationally Intensive – ‘Slow’

Wave Function
Effective Electron Potential TCAD Simulation: MLDA Model Predictions
Electron Energies
Lg = 40 nm
Source Drain Tox = 0.7 nm
Modeling Channel Quantization: Local Density
ocal Density Approximation (LDA) (LDA)

• Electrons treated homogeneous locally.


• Constant potential replaced by spatially

varying potential.
• Applicability for slowly varying potential

Schrodinger Equation Distance

40 nm Floating Body nFET on SOI

Triangular Wall Approximation
(Analytical Solution)
TCAD Simulation: MLDA Model Predictions
Solving Schrodinger Equation for

V(r) = Slowly varying potential E1

Carrier density near the Si/SiO2 interface:
Depth Under Interface

Effective density of states in Abrupt Change in Potential

conduction band

Fermi Level
at semiconductor-insulator
Interfaces: LDA not Applicable The MLDA solution is within 10% of the SP Transfer characteristics of 40 nm gate Transfer characteristics of 40 nm
solution across all the gate and drain biases. length nFET with substrate doping scaled by floating gate pFET. The MLDA model
Modeling Channel Quantization: Modified Local 4 X. matches the SP solution within 10%

• Tox – 0.7 nm (40nm nFET), Model Calibrated for 2 nm Tox (MOSCap)

dified Approximation
Local Density Approximation (MLDA) • ~75% Less Computational Time for MLDA Simulations
Triangular Wall
Schrodinger Equation Conclusions and References

E1 • Excellent match of MLDA model predictions to Schrodinger-Poisson solution

for both the nFET and pFET structures
Solving Schrodinger Equation for Ef • Verified predictive nature of MLDA model for varying oxide thicknesses and
Depth Under Interface substrate doping
1. G. Paasch, and H. Ubensee,” A modified local density approximation,” Physica
Carrier density near the Si/SiO2 interface: Effective density of states in Status Solidii (b), vol. 113, pp. 165-178, 1982.
conduction band
Fermi Level 2. W. Hansch, T. H. Vogelsang, R. Kircher, and M. Orlowski,” Carrier transport near
Bessel Function of zeroth
order the Si/SiO2 interface of a MOSFET,” Solid State Electronics, vol. 32, no. 10,
Distance from Si/SiO2 interface
pp. 839-849, 1989.