Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

Physics Procedia 21 (2011) 47 – 52

The thermal drift characteristics of piezoresistive pressure sensor

R. Otmani, N. Benmoussa, B. Benyoucef
Abou Bakr Belkaïd University of Tlemcen, BP 119, Tlemcen 13000, Algeria

Abstract

Piezoresistive pressure sensors based on silicon have a large thermal drift because of their high sensitivity to temperature. The
study of the thermal behavior of these sensors is essential to define the parameters that cause the output characteristics drift. In
this study, we adopted two different holes mobility models to determine how the temperature affect the sensor’s gauges values.
We calculated the thermal coefficients for both mobility models and we compared them with experimental results. Finally, we
calculated the effect of temperature and doping concentration on the output characteristics of the sensor. This study allows us to
predict the sensor behavior against temperature and to minimize this effect by optimizing the doping concentration.
© 2011 Published by Elsevier B.V. Open access under CC BY-NC-ND license.
Selection and/or peer-review under responsibility of the Organizer.
Keywords: Carriers Mobility; Piezoresistivity; Piezoresistive coefficients; Pressure; Sensor; Silicon; Thermal drift.

Symbols Definition Symbols Definition Symbols Definition Symbols Definition

Resistance at Offset voltage Doping Applied
R0 οୱ଴ ୅ P
ambient temp. variation concentration pressure
1st order Membrane
Output voltage Membrane
Ƚ thermal οୱ a sides h
variation thickness
coefficient dimension
2nd order Lateral and
Piezoresistive Sensor
Ⱦ thermal Ɏସସ ɐഥ୪ ǡ ɐഥ୲ transversal S
coefficient sensitivity
coefficient stress

1. Introduction

In this paper, we model the thermal behavior of a piezoresistive micro pressure sensor based on Silicon
monocrystal. Our formulation is based on a simple and good accurate analytical model. Which allow us to calculate
the thermal effect on sensor characteristics in very short time and very good accuracy.
We adopted two different models of the mobility of holes in Silicon: The Arora mobility model [1] based on the
interaction of carriers with the crystal lattice and ionized impurities, and the Dorckel mobility model [2] based on
the interaction of carriers with the crystal lattice, with ionized impurities and on charge-charge collisions.

1875-3892 © 2011 Published by Elsevier B.V. Selection and/or peer-review under responsibility of the Organizer.
Open access under CC BY-NC-ND license. doi:10.1016/j.phpro.2011.10.008
48 R. Otmani et al. / Physics Procedia 21 (2011) 47 – 52

A comparative study of the two models with experimental results [3], [4] allows us to choose the model that is
more appropriate for our case. After this, we will then study the thermal drift of sensor characteristics on rest and
under constant and uniform pressure (offset voltage, linearity and sensitivity).
We will study too, the geometric influence parameters and doping on these characteristics to optimize the sensor
performance.

2. Modeling of the Thermal Behavior of Silicon Piezoresistances

Relative variations on gauges P-type Silicon in both mobility models are given in Fig. 1. These curves show that
the relative variation of resistance as a function of temperature is a parabola. It can therefore be modeled by the
equation 1.

ܴሺܶሻ ൌ ܴ଴ ሺͳ ൅ ߙܶ ൅ ߚܶ ଶ ሻ (1)

0.8 1

0.9 Na=2e17
0.7 Na=2e17
Na=1e18
Na=1e18
0.8 Na=5e18
Na=5e18
0.6 Na=1e19
Na=1e19
0.7
0.5
0.6
dR/R0

dR/R0

0.4 0.5

0.4
0.3

0.3
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1

0 0
300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 460 480 500 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 460 480 500
T(K°) T(K°)

(a) (b)

Fig. 1. (a) Arora mobility model; (b) Dorckel mobility model.

6000 10
Arora model Arora model
Dorkel Model Dorkel Model
8
5000

6
4000
ALPHA(T-1)

BETA(T-2)

3000
2

2000
0

1000
-2

0 -4
17 18 19 20 17 18 19 20
10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
Dopage Na(cm-3) Dopage Na(cm-3)

(a) (b)

Fig. 2. (a) Variation of Į as a function of doping concentration; (b) Variation of ȕ as a function of doping concentration.
 R. Otmani et al. / Physics Procedia 21 (2011) 47 – 52 49

The parameters Į and ȕ can be obtained by interpolating curves of Fig. 1 with Eq. 1. Then, Į and ȕ are extracted
from the two mobility models and plotted as function of doping concentration in Fig. 2.
We remark that there is a clear difference in values and evolution way of coefficients obtained from the two
models (Arora and Dorckel) in depending on doping concentration. To choose the appropriate model to our
application, we compared these theoretical results with the experimental one obtained by Boukabache [3] on gauges
with different doping concentration.
This comparison, given in Table 1 shows that the Dorckel mobility model based on the interaction of carriers
with the crystal lattice, with ionized impurities and on charge-charge collisions gives values closer to experimental
results than the Arora mobility model who is based only on the interaction of carriers with the crystal lattice and
ionized impurities.

Table 1. Comparison of theoretical and experimental values of the temperature coefficients.

Doping 1017 2.1018 5.1018 1019

Alpha Beta Alpha Beta Alpha Beta Alpha Beta
Arrora model 4600 7,4 1000 0,51 1200 -0,99 1500 -1,36
Dorckel model 3000 8,5 522 3,86 532 2,32 983 0,67
Experimental values 820 4,5 516 3,6 400 3,2 905 1,2

3. Thermal Drift of the Offset Voltage

In a Wheatstone bridge who’s in perfect equilibrium and at rest, the output voltage must be equal to zero. Under
the effect of temperature, the values of its four resistances will change, and an offset voltage is created at the exit of
the bridge. This offset voltage is the difference between the output voltages of the two half-bridges given by the
equations 2 and 3.

ο௏ೄభబ ଵ
ൌ ሾሺߙଵ െ ߙଶ ሻܶ ൅ ሺߚଵ െ ߚଶ ሻܶ ଶ ሿ (2)
௏೐ ସ

ο௏ೄమబ ଵ
ൌ ሾሺߙସ െ ߙଷ ሻܶ ൅ ሺߚସ െ ߚଷ ሻܶ ଶ ሿ (3)
௏೐ ସ

The relative variations of output voltages of the two half-bridges as a function of temperature have a parabolic
form as shown in Fig. 3.a.
-3
x 10 -4
1.6 x 10
7
1st half-bridge
1.4 2nd half-bridge
6

1.2
5

1
4
dVS0

dVS0

0.8

3
0.6

2
0.4

0.2 1

0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
T (C°) T (C°)

(a) (b)

Fig. 3. (a) Thermal variations of the Vs voltages of the two half-Bridges; (b) Thermal variation of offset voltage of the full bridge.
50 R. Otmani et al. / Physics Procedia 21 (2011) 47 – 52

The relative variation of the output voltage of the complete bridge at rest will be given by the equation 4 and
represented in Fig. 3.b. It has a parabolic form too.
In Table 2 we compare the results of our theoretical modeling with those obtained experimentally [4].
This comparison confirms the validity of modeling based on the 2nd degree thermal behavior of the gauges of
Silicon.

ο௏ೄబ ο௏ೄభబ ο௏ೄమబ

ൌ െ (4)
௏೐ ௏೐ ௏೐

Table 2. Maximal variation of output voltages of the two half-bridges and complete bridge.

1st half-bridge 2nd half-bridge Complete bridge

Tm ¨VS01 Tm ¨VS02 Tm
¨VS0 (mV)
(C°) (mV) (C°) (mV) (C°)

Theo. 75 1,58 85 0,95 60 0,63

Results
Exp. 74 1,95 86 1 100 0,95
Results

4. Thermal Behavior of the Sensor Under Uniform Pressure Applied

If we apply a constant and uniform pressure P on the membrane, the values of four resistances will change and a
voltage output will be created at the exit of the bridge. Under the effect of temperature, this tension will vary and its
law of variation is given by equation 5.

ο௏ೞ గరర ሺேಲ ǡ்ሻ ௔ ଶ

ൌ ܲ ቀ ቁ ሺߪഥ௟ െ ߪഥ௧ ሻ (5)
௏೐ ଶ ௛

The term Ɏସସ ሺ୅ ǡ ሻ traduce the variation law of the piezoresistive coefficients as a function of temperature and
doping concentration given by Kanda [5] and simplified by Plantier [6].

4.1. Temperature effect on the response of piezoresistive pressure sensor

As shown in Fig. 4 the variation in output voltage ǻVS(P) of a bridge biased by 2.5 volt is given for different
temperature values.
We note that the output voltage of the bridge decreases when temperature increase. However, the response of the
sensor is linear in the temperature range considered.

4.2. Doping Concentration Influence on the Sensitivity of the Sensor

Another factor that greatly affects the sensitivity of piezoresistive pressure sensors is the doping concentration.
The equation 6 allows us to draw in Fig. 5 the variation of the sensitivity as a function of doping concentration
and geometric parameters. The sensor is biased by 2.5 volt. The pressure applied on the membrane is 100 KPa.

గరర ሺேಲ ǡ்ሻ ௔ ଶ

ܵሺܶǡ ܰ஺ ሻ ൌ ቀ ቁ ሺߪഥ௟ െ ߪഥ௧ ሻ (6)
ଶ ௛

It is noted that the increase in doping degrades the sensor's sensitivity to pressure. Thus we remark a decrease of
about 28% on the sensitivity when the doping varies from 1018 cm-3 to 1019 cm-3. The thickness of the membrane
affects also the sensitivity. The sensor is more sensitive when h is going smaller.
 R. Otmani et al. / Physics Procedia 21 (2011) 47 – 52 51

80
T=250K
T=300K
70
T=350K
T=420K
60

50

VS(P)(mV)
40

30

20

10

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
P (Pa) 4
x 10

Fig. 4. ¨VS(P) for different values of temperature.

h=30μm
0.5
h=40μm
h=35μm
h=55μm
0.4
S(NA ) (mV/V/KPa)

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
18 19 20
10 10 10
Na (cm-3)

Fig. 5. Sensitivity against doping concentration for different membrane thickness.

5. Conclusion

In conclusion, this paper has demonstrated that it is possible to model, with good precision, the thermal behavior
of the piezoresistive micro pressure sensor by adopting a simple approach based on the thermal behavior of
piezoresistance at the 2nd degree and on the thermal drift of the piezoresistive coefficients ʌij.
This approach allows us to see the influence of doping concentration and geometric parameters of the sensor
(surface and thickness) on their characteristics. This property allows us to optimize the sensor performance in
function to the application for which it is dedicated (range of use of temperature, maximal pressure of use, accuracy
and sensitivity required, etc.).
Nevertheless, our model is not valid on very high temperature range. It is limited by the same temperature range
of validity of Dorckel mobility model.

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Research Unit of Materials and Renewable Energies (URMER) - Tlemcen
University.
52 R. Otmani et al. / Physics Procedia 21 (2011) 47 – 52

References

1. N.D. Arora, J.R. Hauser, D.J. Roulston, Electron and hole mobilities in silicon as a function of concentration and temperature, IEEE Trans.
Electron devices, ED-29 (2), pp. 292-295, 1982.
2. J.M. Dorckel, P. Leturcq, Carrier mobilities in silicon semi-empirically related to temperature doping and injection level, Solide-State
electronics, Vol.24, pp. 821-825, 1981.
3. A. Boukabache, Conception, Modeling and Realization of a Piezoresistance Pressure Sensor, Doctoral thesis, CNRS laboratory, 1993.
4. A. Boukabache, G. Blasquez, P. Pons, Z. Dibi, Study of the thermal drift of the offset voltage of silicon pressur sensor, IEEE, pp. 1051-
1054, 1999.
6. Y. Kanda, Agraphical representation of the piézorésistance coefficients in silicon, IEEE Trans. On electron devices, Vol.29, n°1, Jan. 1982.
7. C. Plantier, Feasibility Study of Piezoresistive Pressure Sensor with Polycrystalline gauges, Doctoral thesis, CNRS laboratory, 1992.