Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Modeling Thermal Effects in Submicron Semiconductor Devices
Modeling Thermal Effects in Submicron Semiconductor Devices
DOI: 10.1685/2010CAIM482
Abstract
In this paper an Extended Hydrodynamic Model for the coupled system formed by
electrons and phonons has been formulated, in which the problem of the closure for the
high-order moments is solved by means of the Maximum Entropy Principle of extended
thermodynamics. Simulation results for a 1D n+ n n+ silicon diode are presented.
Keywords:
Semiconductor devices, hydrodynamic models, maximum entropy
principle, self-heating.
AMS Subject Classification: 65C05, 82D37
1. Introduction.
The technological revolution that started with the introduction of the
transistor just over half a century ago is without parallel in the way it
has shaped our economy and our daily lives. The current trend toward
nanoscale electronics is expected to have a similar impact into the third
millennium. Commercial integrated circuits are currently available with
transistors whose smallest lateral feature size is less than 100 nm and the
thinnest material films are below 2 nm, or only a few atomic layers thick.
Such miniaturization has led to tremendous integration levels, with a hundred million transistors assembled together on a chip area no larger than
a few square centimeters. Due to this nanometric scale, large electric fields
and field gradients are produced inside the material, which generate a very
large quantity of heat as well as hot or energetic electrons, that will prevent
the reliable operation of the integrated circuits. Overheating is one of the
most common causes of device failure; the efficient removal of heat from
such submicron devices is a daunting task.
The heat conduction in crystalline materials is related to the lattice vibrations. According to quantum mechanics, these oscillations are quantized
DOI: 10.1685/2010CAIM482
and the associated particle is called phonon. Phonons travel through space
and engage anharmonic interactions with one another, and with electrons,
impurities and geometric boundaries. These interactions are called scatterings.
The transport mechanism starts by applying an external bias voltage. The
electrons are accelerated by the self consistent and external electric field,
thanks to which they gain energy. This energy is lost by inelastical scattering with geometric boundaries and phonons, heating up the lattice through
the mechanism known as Joule heating. If the characteristic size of a solid
material is much larger than the mean free path of the resident phonons,
which is approximately 300 400 nm in bulk silicon at room temperature, then the number of scattering events is large. Moreover, if there are
small temperature gradients, the local thermodynamic equilibrium is restored. This regime (diffusion-like) can be described accurately using the
non-isothermal drift-diffusion model, in which the classical drift-diffusion
equations are coupled with the Fourier law of heat conduction, via a heat
generation rate term [1]:
(1)
H = J E + (R G)(EG + 3kB T ) .
In the previous equation, the dot product of the electric field E and the
current density J represents the Joule heating and the second right-handside term represents the heating rate due to the generation-recombination
processes. With continued scaling into the nanometric scale, this nonisothermal drift diffusion model is no more valid because, as said, high
electric field and high field-gradient conditions in the active region of the
device (whose length is of the order of 10 100 nm), drive the system out
of local thermal equilibrium. Moreover, in spite of the small electron mean
free path (approximately 5 10 nm in bulk silicon at room temperature),
a small amount of hot electrons, which belong to the tail of the electron
distribution function, can travel in the device without losing appreciable
energy (in a ballistic regime). In this picture, degradation effects, substrate
current, injection into the gate oxide regions, impact ionization and lattice
heating are produced. Consequently, the commercial TCAD tools, based
on the drift-diffusion equations, are not able to describe accurately these
regimes; for this reason other transport models are needed.
The most complete description of a system formed by electrons and
phonons, is based on the Bloch-Boltzmann-Peierls (BBP), coupled with
the Poisson equation. To solve the BBP is not an easy task also from the
numerical point of view. The Monte Carlo solution of the BBP has been
recently achieved [2], at expenses of extensive computational times. For this
reason, it is important to have alternative models which are sufficiently ac-
111
V. Di Stefano
X
f
e
+ v(k) x f E k f =
Qep
g [f, Ng ]
t
~
g
Ng
pp
+ ug (q) x Ng = Qpe
g [f, Ng ] + Qg [Ng ] ,
t
g = {g1 , g2 , g3 , ...}
112
DOI: 10.1685/2010CAIM482
where e is the absolute value of the electron charge, ~ the Planck constant divided by 2, v=(v1 , v2 , v3 ) and ug =(u1 , u2 , u3 ) are the electron and
phonon group velocities
(4)
v(k) =
1
k ,
~
ug (q) = q g
E = x
where n(t, x) is the electron density, (t, x) is the electric potential, ND and
NA are the donor and acceptor densities respectively, the permittivity.
We treat the electrons in the parabolic band approximation, in which the
dispersion relation is given by
(6)
(k) =
~2 k2
2m
ac (q) = vs |q|
(8)
op (q) = const.
The collisional operator e-p, in the low density approximation (not degenerate case), writes:
Z
V
ep
(9)
Qg [f, Ng ] = 3 dk w(k , k)f (k ) w(k, k )f (k)
8
where V is the crystal volume, and w(k , k) is the scattering rate e-p which,
according to the Fermi rule, writes
X
1 1
(10)w(k, k ) =
s(q) Ng (q) +
k ,kq (k ) (k) ~(q) .
2 2
q
113
V. Di Stefano
s(q) is the scattering function, is the Diracs Delta, the upper and lower
signs refer to phonon absorption or emission processes respectively. The
scattering function for acoustic phonons is given by
(11)
sac (q) =
2 |q|
DA
vs V
sop (q) =
D2 Z
V
where the coupling constants are given in [7]. The collisional operator p-e
is
X
Qpe
s(q)f (k) [Ng (q) + 1] k ,kq (k ) (k) + ~(q)
g [f, Ng ] = 2
k,k
(13)
Ng (q)k ,k+q (k ) (k) ~(q)
114
DOI: 10.1685/2010CAIM482
(2) by a weight function A (k) and (3) by B (q), and integrating over R3 ,
one finds :
Z
Z
f
e i
f
MA
i
+ 3 A (k)v (k) i dk E
A (k) i dk
(14)
3
t
x
~
k
R
R
Z
X
=
A (k)Qep
g [f, Ng ]dk
3
R
g
(15)
Z
Z
MB
Ng
i
pp
+ 3 B (q)ug (q) i dq =
B (q) Qpe
g [f, Ng ] + Qg [Ng ] dq
3
t
x
R
R
where
(16)
MA =
R3
A (k)f dk
MB =
R3
B (q)Ng dq
are the moments relative to the weight functions A (k) and B (q). Since
Z
Z
Z
(k)
f
i
A (k) i dk =
A (k)f n d
f
dk
k
ki
D
D
D
with ni the outward unit normal field on the boundary D of the domain
D and d as the surface element of D, supposing that f tends to zero
sufficiently fast as k , the integral over D vanishes and eq.(3) becomes
Z
Z
MA
e i
A (k)
i
(17)
+ i
A (k)v (k)f dk + E
f
dk
3
3
t
x R
~
ki
R
=
XZ
g
A (k)Qep
g [f, Ng ]dk .
n (nV i )
+
=0
t
xi
(nP i ) (nU ij )
+
+ neE i = nCPi
t
xj
(nW ) (nS i )
+
+ neVi E i = nCW
t
xi
(nS i ) (nF ij )
i
+
+ neEj Gij = nCW
t
xj
115
V. Di Stefano
(22)
(23)
(24)
(25)
where Wac is the acoustic phonon energy density, Qi the acoustic phonon
heat flux, Mij the acoustic phonon flux of heat flux, C the production
of acoustic phonon energy density, C i the production of acoustic phonon
heat flux, Wop the optical phonon energy density and Cop the production of
optical phonon energy density.
4. Maximum Entropy Principle and closure relations.
The moment equations (18)-(21),(23)-(25) are not closed. If we assume
as fundamental variables n, V i , W , S i , Wac , Qi , Wop , which have a direct
physical interpretation, the closure problem consists in expressing the highorder fluxes U ij , Gij , F ij , Mij and the moments of the collisional terms
i , C, C i , C
CPi , CW , CW
op as function of the fundamental variables. A good,
physically motivated way to obtain constitutive equations is by means of
the Maximum Entropy Principle (MEP) [5,10]. It gives a form of the distribution function that makes the best use of the knowledge of a finite number
of moments. By using this ansatz, the closure equations for the fluxes of
the electron transport write [11]
(26)
2
U ij = W ij
3
m F ij =
10 2
W ij
9
5
m Gij = W ij
3
116
DOI: 10.1685/2010CAIM482
1
1
M = vs2 Wac ij + vs2 Wac (3 1)
3
2
s
2
3
5 4
Q
1
=
,
3 3
4 vs Wac
ij
Qi Qj
1
ij
2
Q
3
Q=
Qi Qi .
Moreover, following a very crude approximation used in most hydrodynamic models [3,13], we shall assume the energy production terms to be of
relaxation type. Since the electrons lose their energy to optical phonons, we
shall assume
(29)
nCW = H = n
W Wop
W
Wop
= ~op
2
C=
(30)
Wop Wac
op
and, since the energy of any system can only change because of the
interactions with some external agent, i.e. the total energy production
(Rc = nCW + C + Cop ) must be zero, we obtain
(31)
Cop = n
W Wop
Wop Wac
W
op
nV i
P
i
nCW
=
nS i
S
C i = m vs2
nV i
Qi
P
ac
The relaxation times for the energy and momentum are those obtained
in [14], i.e.
(32)
P = m
0 TL
e Te
W =
m 0 TL 3 0 kB Te TL
+
2 e Te
2 evs2 Te + TL
117
V. Di Stefano
TL is the lattice temperature and 0 (TL , ND ) is the Caughey-Thomas electron mobility. In order to have an estimate of the relaxation time for the
energy flux S , we have introduced the ratio r=S /P . MC simulations have
been performed in intrinsic (bulk) silicon [15], showing a weak dependence
on the lattice temperature. In the sequel we shall take r= 0.8.
5. The Extended Hydrodynamic model
By using the results of the previous sections, substituting eq.(19) with
a linear combination of equations (19) and (21), we have the following
Extended Hydrodynamic Model (hereafter EHM):
(33)
(34)
n (nV i )
+
=0
t
xi
(nm V i )
+ j n(U ij 2m F ij ) + neEj (1 2m Gij )
t
x
=
nS i
nP i
+ 2m
P
S
(35)
W Wop
(nW ) (nS i )
i
+
+
neV
E
=
n
i
t
xi
W
(36)
(nS i ) (nF ij )
nS i
ij
+
+
neE
G
=
j
t
xj
S
(37)
Wac
Qi
Wop Wac
+
=
i
t
x
op
(38)
i
Qi
Qi Mij
2 nP
+
=
v
s
t
xj
P
ac
(39)
W Wop
Wop
Wop Wac
=n
t
W
op
together with the closure relations for the fluxes (26), (27), (28).
The mathematical properties of the above system have been studied in [16],
showing that the system is of hyperbolic type.
118
DOI: 10.1685/2010CAIM482
W Wop
H = n
W
(40)
d(nV )
=0
dx
2 d(nW )
d
nm V
ne
=
3 dx
dx
P
W Wop
d(nS)
d
neV
= n
dx
dx
W
d
nm S
10 d(nW 2 ) 5
neW
=
9
dx
3
dx
S
dQ
Wop Wac
=
dx
op
dM
nm V
Q
= vs2
dx
P
ac
W Wop
Wop Wac
n
=0 .
W
op
op
(W Wop
)
W
fn =
d(nV )
=0
dx
(49)
fV =
2 d(nW )
d nm V
ne
+
=0
3 dx
dx
P
(50)
fW =
W Wop
d(nS)
d
neV
+n
=0
dx
dx
W
(51)
fS =
10 d(nW 2 ) 5
d nm S
neW
+
=0
9
dx
3
dx
S
119
V. Di Stefano
(52)
fWac =
(53)
fQ =
(54)
f =
W Wop
dQ
n
=0
dx
W
dM
nm V
Q
vs2
+
=0
dx
P
ac
d2
+ e(ND n) = 0
dx2
together with the closure relations (27),(28). The acoustic phonon energy
density can be related to the acoustic phonon temperature, via the specific
heat at constant volume cV [17], i.e.
(55)
1
0
(Wac Wac
)
cV (T0 )
n(0) = n(L) = ND
3
0
kB T0 , S(0) = S(L) = 0 , Wac (0) = Wac
2
kB T0
n
kB T0
n
(0) =
log
, (L) =
log
+ eVb
e
ni
e
ni
W (0) = W (L) =
0
Wac
Wac (L) =
then, the results obtained with the EHM model show oscillations, which
are likely due to insufficient modeling of the boundary.
120
DOI: 10.1685/2010CAIM482
One possibility is to fix Robin boundary conditions, which interpolate between Dirichlet and Neumann boundary conditions. These conditions are:
dWac
0
+ 1 (Wac Wac
) = 0 at
dx
dQ
+ 2 Q = 0 at
dx
dTac
+ 3 (Tac T0 ) = 0 at
dx
x=L
x = 0, L
x=L
f~ = (fn , fV , fW , fS , f , fTac )T .
V =0
3
W = kB T0
2
S=0 ,
kB T0
n
log
, Tac = T0 = 300K .
e
ni
Starting from this initial guess, the new solution is given by
=
121
V. Di Stefano
1.5
0.5
50
100
150
x (nm)
200
250
300
Fig. 1. The mean electron velocity versus the position, evaluated with EHM and an
isothermal MC simulator.
given by eq. 40 and eq.(1) (with R = G = 0). This figure reveals a small
negative heat generation at the beginning of the channel, with a minimum
122
DOI: 10.1685/2010CAIM482
0.35
EHM
MC isoth.
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
50
100
150
x (nm)
200
250
300
Fig. 2. The electron temperature versus the position, evaluated with EHM and an
isothermal MC simulator.
0.2
EHM
MC isoth.
0
potential (eV)
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.2
50
100
150
x (nm)
200
250
300
Fig. 3. The electric potential versus the position, evaluated with EHM and an isothermal
MC simulator.
of -0.5 1011 W/cm3 for the formula given in eq.(1) and about -0.3 1011
W/cm3 for the EHM model. This is a thermoelectric (Peltier) effect due
to electron injection across the potential barrier from the cathode to the
channel. This is the so called built-in potential, shown in figure 3 at x =
100 nm. Electrons diffusing against the energy barrier extract the energy
required to move up the conduction band slope from the lattice, through
net phonon absorption. Moreover, the EHM model predicts that most of
the Joule heat is dissipated into the anode region, and not in the channel,
as shown by the eq.(1) and confirmed by MC studies [21].
The Fig. 5 shows the acoustic phonon temperature.
In figure 6 we plot the heat flux produced in the device by using the EHM
123
V. Di Stefano
4
EHM
JxE
3.5
11
W/cm )
2.5
1.5
0.5
0.5
50
100
150
x (nm)
200
250
300
Fig. 4. The heat generation rate H versus the position, evaluated with EHM by using
eq. 40 and an isothermal MC simulator.
301.8
EHM
301.6
301.4
301.2
301
300.8
300.6
300.4
300.2
300
299.8
50
100
150
x (nm)
200
250
300
Fig. 5. The acoustic phonon temperature Tac versus the position obtained by using the
EHM model.
model: in this case the heat flux is an independent variable of the model.
The sign of the heat flux is consistent with the corresponding acoustic
phonon temperature, as in Fig. 5.
7. Conclusions
We have introduced an Extended Hydrodynamic model to study the
heat conduction in thin silicon semiconductor devices.
In this model the closure of the high-order moments has been achieved with
the Maximum Entropy Principle, whereas the closure of the production
terms with relaxation terms, consistently to the first principle of Thermo-
124
DOI: 10.1685/2010CAIM482
0.84
EHM
0.85
0.86
0.87
0.88
0.89
Fig. 6.
50
100
150
x (nm)
200
250
300
The acoustic heat flux density versus the position evaluated with EHM.
dynamics.
The most important differences between the EHM model and the isothermal
MC simulator are in the electron velocity and in the electron temperature.
In fact, in the first case, as seen, EHM produces a bigger spike with respect
to MC, near the second junction, while the electron temperature is smaller.
Moreover, the EHM model predicts that most of the Joule heat is dissipated
into the anode region and not in the channel.
These behaviours should be studied also in the 2D case for more realistic
devices. Work along this line is in progress and will be presented in the next
future.
Acknowledgements.
This work has been supported by Progetti di ricerca di Ateneo Universit`a degli Studi di Catania, and Progetto Giovani Ricercatori GNFM
2009.
REFERENCES
1. G. K. Wachutka, Rigorous thermodynamic treatment of heat generation
and conduction in semiconductor device modeling, IEEE Trans. CAD,
vol. 9, no. 11, pp. 11411149, 1990.
2. Z. Aksamija and U. Ravaioli, Anharmonic decay of non-equilibrium intervalley phonons in silicon, J. Phys. Conf. Ser., vol. 193, p. 012033,
2009.
3. J. Lai and A. Majumdar, Concurrent thermal and electrical modeling
of sub-micrometric silicon devices, J. Appl. Physics, vol. 79, pp. 7353
7361, 1996.
125
V. Di Stefano
126
DOI: 10.1685/2010CAIM482
127