From MOSFETs to MISHEMTs -

an evolution

Amitava DasGupta
Dept. of Electrical Engg.
IIT Madras
E-mail: adg@ee.iitm.ac.in
 Organization
• How do we get high speed in circuits?
• MOSFETs
– How do we get higher speed?
– Limitations
• GaAs MESFETs
– Advantages and limitations
• HEMTs
– Why HEMTs?
– AlGaAs/GaAs vs pseudomorphic vs GaN
– Technology
– Modeling
2
 How do we get high speed?
VDD

Circuit I Circuit
Block Block
V V C
GND

 Delay

• To decrease delay
– Decrease C  reduce device dimensions
– Decrease V  reduce power supply voltage
– Increase I  For a smaller V, we expect higher I
 increase device conductance
3
 MOSFETs – how do we get high speed?

• To reduce td
– Reduce L  Use the smallest gate length possible
– Increase n  Use a material with high carrier mobility
• Not completely true: n degrades at high lateral electric field
• Also need high vsat
– Increase  Higher power dissipation
• Not completely true: n degrades at high
• W and tox has no effect on td !! 4
 MOSFETs – for analog applications

• We need high transconductance (gm)

• For high gm
– Cox should be high  tox should be low
• Gate should be as close as possible to the channel
• More charges for same change in input voltage
– n (and vsat for small geometry devices) should be high
• Charges travel faster for same drain field resulting in higher
current 5
 MOSFETs –present generation
• For any technology node
– Channel length is as small as possible
– Power supply voltage and oxide thickness dictated by scaling laws
– Channel width is adjustable
– IDmax/W is an important figure of merit (captures mobility degradation
at high fields)
• 14 nm node
– FinFET technology
– Gate length = 20 nm
– Equivalent oxide thickness (EOT) = 0.9 nm
• Almost reached its limit
– VDD = 0.7 V
– IDmax/W  1mA/m = 1A/mm
• To improve performance, need to go for other materials with
higher carrier mobility
– Germanium?
6
– GaAs?
 GaAs vs Silicon
• Advantages
– Electron mobility is more than 5 times than in silicon
• Saturation velocity almost same as silicon
– Higher bandgap (1.42 eV compared to 1.1 eV)
• Higher temperature of operation
• Possibility of semi-insulating substrate
• Disadvantages
– No native oxide
– High interface states
• Cannot make MOSFET
• Suitable for MESFET (Metal-Semiconductor FET)
– Use a Schottky metal-semiconductor junction as gate
7
 MESFET

• Normally ON device
• Uses a Schottky barrier gate to control current
– conducts when gate voltage is positive
• As VGS is made more negative, depletion layer
width in n-GaAs increases to switch off device
8
 Schottky Metal-Semiconductor Junction
m > s
• Rectifying in nature
• p-n junction like I-V characteristics
• The depletion region in n-region
increases with increasing reverse
bias

9
 Ohmic Metal-Semiconductor Junction
m < s n-type
Vacuum level Metal semiconductor

qm EC
I
qs
qs
EFm EFs
EFm q(s-m)
EC q(s-m)

EFs
V
EV

EV
Metal n-type
semiconductor

• No potential barrier
• Conducts almost equally for both forward and reverse bias
• Depending on the work-function of the metal, the metal-
semiconductor junction will be either ohmic or Schottky type
• A junction between metal and heavily doped semiconductor
is usually ohmic 10
 MESFET characteristics

• For high drain current/transconductance

– Electron concentration in channel must be
high
• ND must be high
– Electron mobility (μn) must be high
• μn degrades at high ND due to ionized impurity
scattering
 limits maximum possible ND
• Physical separation of electrons and ionized
donors preferred
11
– Can be achieved with heterojunction
Band diagram for AlGaAs/GaAs
heterojunctions

12
 HEMT

• A heterojunction (AlGaAs/GaAs) is the heart of the device

• The n+ AlGaAs layer is depleted
• The channel is created in a thin layer at the undoped GaAs surface
– The high concentration of electrons in the thin layer is referred to as 2-
Dimensional Electron Gas (2-DEG)
• The electrons in 2-DEG have very high mobility as ionized impurity
scattering is eliminated
• Hence these transistors are referred to as High Electron Mobility 13
Transistor (HEMT)
 MOSFET -> MESFET -> HEMT
Drain Drain
MOSFET
n+ n+

p p

Gate
Gate

n+
VG n+

Source Source

EC EC
EF
EF EV qVG EV
14
 MOSFET -> MESFET -> HEMT
Drain Drain
MESFET
n+ n+
n

SI-Substrate

SI-Substrate
Gate
Gate

VG
Depletion n+ n+
region
Source Source

EC
EC
EF qVG
EF
15
 MOSFET -> MESFET -> HEMT
Drain
Drain
HEMT
n+

Un-doped
Gate
Un-doped
Gate

VG

Depletion
region Source
Source

EC EC
EF qVG
2DEG
EF
16
 Similarities between HEMT and MOSFET
Metal Oxide Semiconductor

EC
Ei
EFp
qB
EV
-qVBS EFn
qVGB >0
qB
EFm

• Charges formed in a quantum well in conduction band at

interface between narrow bandgap and wide bandgap material
17
 AlxGa1-xAs/GaAs heterojunction

• Lattice matched for all values of Aluminium mole

fraction (x)
– Usually limited to x < 0.3 due to introduction of
defects resulting in DX centres in the bandgap
• Bandgap of AlxGa1-xAs: 1.424+1.247x eV
• Type 1 band alignment with EC = 0.79x eV
18
 Variation of sheet charge
concentration with gate bias

Al0.3Ga0.7As/GaAs

• The maximum value of ns for Al0.3Ga0.7As/GaAs

– limited to 1.4x1012/cm2
– depends on EC
• Why not use other heterojunctions to get higher EC ?
19
 Pseudomorphic HEMT
• It is possible to grow good
quality heterostructures from
materials with different lattice
constants, provided the
thickness of the grown layer
does not exceed a certain
critical value tc.
• If the grown layer is thinner
than tc, its crystalline structure
accommodates to that of the
substrate material.  a lattice
deformation in the grown
layer (pseudomorphic layer)
• Pseudomorphic
AlGaAs/InGaAs/GaAs
heterostructures with In
contents in the range of 15-
25% were successfully grown
on GaAs substrates and used
in pseudomorphic HEMTs.
20
 AlGaAs/InGaAs/GaAs Pseudomorphic HEMT

• Compared to AlGaAs/GaAs HEMT

– Larger EC  larger ns  larger gm
– Larger n  larger gm
21
Properties of different heterojunctions

22
 Advantages of GaN over GaAs
Si GaAs 4H-SiC GaN
Eg(eV) 1.1 1.42 3.26 3.4
Ebr (MV/cm) 0.3 0.4 3.0 3.3
µn (cm2/V s) 1350 8500 700 2000
Vsat (107 cm/s) 1.0 1.0 2.0 2.5

• Higher Eg  operation at higher temperature

• Higher Ebr  Higher breakdown voltage
• Higher vsat  Higher saturation currents
• AlGaN/GaN system  attractive for HEMT devices
• For Al0.3Ga0.7N/GaN
– EG  0.84 eV compared to 0.37 eV for Al0.3Ga0.7As/GaAs
– EC  0.42 eV compared to 0.22 eV for Al0.3Ga0.7As/GaAs
23
 GaN based devices! Why?
TMAX

GaN

EBR fMAX

High Power
Operation GaAs
Si High Frequency
Operation
IMAX NFMIN
24
Adapted from Ph.D thesis of Behat Tridel , Technischen Universität Berlin, 2012.
 GaN based devices! Why?

Adapted from Dr. Palacios , Associate Professor, Dept. of Electrical Engg. and Comp. Sci., MIT 25
.
 GaN based HEMTs: status
• AlGaN/GaN based HEMTs replacing Si-based devices for power
amplifier and power switching applications
- wide signal bandwidth, multiband power amplifier, higher efficiency,
higher breakdown voltage, low Ron, reduced size and weight

• GaN-based multiband power amplifiers in production for both

commercial and defense purpose
Leading players : Cree, Analog devices, Infineon, RFMD

• High efficiency GaN-based power devices (600 V) are already

commercially available
Leading players : Panasonic, Infineon, Transphorm

• Besides AlGaN/GaN, AlInN/GaN and AlN/GaN based HEMTs

are also emerging
- thinner barrier layer, higher 2DEG, stable contacts, higher reliability26
 Polarization effect in GaN

Ga Psp
N
N
N

Ideal Tetrahedron Tetrahedron in GaN Wurzite structure

Psp AlGaN PPE

Psp GaN
Psp GaN

27
 Polarization effect in AlGaN/GaN HEMT

Psp AlGaN PPE q  (PSP  PPE )AlGaN  (PSP )GaN

  1  1.5  1013 cm2
Psp GaN

Psp AlGaN PPE

 ns  7  8  1012 cm2
2DEG q(  ns )
Psp GaN (ns) E

EF EC E  1 MV/cm at VG = 0 V
E  2.5 MV/cm at VG = VTh
28
 HEMT operation

S G D
AlGaN

2DEG
GaN (Channel)

VTh can be extracted from (ID)0.5

vs. VGS curve

29
 AlGaN/GaN HEMT devices
 High Polarization induced 2DEG – High Current Density
 High Breakdown Electric Field – High Drain Bias
 High Peak Electron Velocity – High Speed/Frequency Operation
 Output Power Density Pout > 10W/mm (in C – Band)*
 Current Gain Cutoff Frequency, ft > 100 GHz#

AlGaN/GaN HEMTs have proven its high frequency and high

power operation capability

*Y. F. Wu, et al, IEEE Trans. on Electron Devices, vol. 28, pp.586-590, 2001.
#V. Kumar, et al, IEEE Electron Device Lett., vol 23., pp 455-457, 2002. 30
 Inverse piezoelectric effect
Piezoelectric Charge
Strain
Separation
Inverse Electric
Piezoelectric Field

 Negative voltage applied Source Gate Drain

to turn-off the device
increases the electric field AlGaN

across the barrier

GaN
 Increased electric field
increases the tensile strain in
the barrier  structural
breakdown
31
del Alamo and Joh, Microelectronics Reliability, 49, pp1200 – 1206, 2009.
 Al0.83In0.17N/GaN HEMT devices

 Al0.83In0.17N is lattice matched to GaN – Stress free barrier layer

 Band gap about 4.6 eV for 83% Al mole fraction
 Difference in spontaneous polarization is close to 2-3 times
higher than that for AlGaN with 30% Al mole fraction
 Higher conduction band offset (1 eV)
*F. Medjdoub et al., The open electrical and electronic journal., vol. 2, pp. 1–7, 2008. 32
 Al0.83In0.17N/GaN HEMT devices
Comparison with AlGaN/GaN HEMTs
Parameter Al0.3Ga0.7N/GaN Al0.83In0.17N/GaN
(barrier thickness) (30nm) (10 nm)
2DEG concentration (cm-2) ~ 1.5 x 1013 2.5 x 1013
2DEG mobility (cm2V-1s-1 ) ~ 2000 ~1200
Conduction band offset (eV) 0.42 1
Barrier band-gap (eV) 4.03 4.6

Surface potential (eV) ~ 1.5 ~ 0.5

 Lower surface potential  Thinner barrier  Higher gm

 (Little) Additional tensile strain
  Enhanced carrier concentration
 Demonstrated excellent thermal stability
33
 Al0.83In0.17N/GaN AlN/GaN: Why?
a) Al0.83In0.17N is lattice matched to GaN
 stress free barrier layer
 No/less inverse piezoelectric effect For AlInN/GaN
b) Stable ohmic contact up to 900oC
 higher temperature operation
AlInN/GaN and AlN/GaN also enjoys:
c) Higher spontaneous polarization than conventional AlGaN
 higher 2DEG density (>1013 cm-3)
Source Gate Drain
d) Thinner barrier layer
 better gate control AlGaN
 higher Id, gm, fT
GaN
e) Higher conduction band offset
 better 2DEG confinement

34
Al.83In.17N/GaN AlN/GaN HEMTs: Gate leakage issues
Schottky barrier gate in HEMTs
 High gate leakage
 increased off-power dissipation
 limited positive gate voltage swing
 low current drive

These issues are more severe in

AlInN and AlN compared to AlGaN AlGaN/GaN HEMT
o due to higher polarization charge
hence, higher electric field
o higher gate leakage current due to
FN tunneling

S. Turuvekere et al., IEEE Trans. Electron Devices,

vol. 60, p. 3157, 2013

Solution: MIS-HEMTs AlInN/GaN HEMT 3535

 GaN based MIS-HEMTs
 Gate dielectrics tried : Al2O3, HfO2, TiO2, SiO2, SiNx
 Al2O3 found to be very promising
- techniques: ALD, MOCVD, thermal oxidation of Al
 MIS-HEMT characteristics:
 significant decrease in gate leakage
 higher gate over-drive
 negative shift in VTh compared to HEMT
 This negative shift is not only due to reduced gate capacitance,
but due to large positive charge density (>1013 cm-2) at
oxide/AlGaN interface*
 Ga-O or Al-O bond at the interface is reported to be
responsible for this positive interface charge*
* S. Ganguly et al., Appl. Phys. Lett., V 99, p. 193504, 2011 36
 Enhancement mode devices – Why?
 simplifies circuit design - only positive power supply required
 no/insignificant off-state leakage current  reduced power loss
 increased efficiency  smaller heat sink
(compact size, reduced cost)
 fail safe operation (device remains in OFF state, even if gate supply fails)
 complementary FET based logic applications

Earlier attempts
F-ion implantation, gate recessing, p-(Al)GaN cap layer
have several reliability and process related issues:
 stability of VTh (over temperature, time, VG swing)
 control of positive interface charge or donor states – more negative VTh
 limited positive VTh

37
 MIS-HEMTs using RIS-Al2O3
Reactive-Ion-Sputtered (RIS) Al2O3 has been reported to have
stable negative fixed oxide charge in it
 may be useful for reducing interfacial positive charge

• Room temperature deposited oxide is self-aligned with gate metal

• Ohmic contact resistance 1.1 Ω. mm (Ti/Al/Ni/Au 780o C) *Feb. 2014
• Lg = 4 µm, Lsd = 30 µm, Lgd = 20 µm (Gen-1 devices) *Feb. 2014
38
 MIS-HEMTs using RIS-Al2O3
Deposited RIS-Al2O3
 XPS analysis confirms the
formation of Al2O3
 slow deposition rate (~1
nm/min) better tox control
 room temp. deposition
1. self-alignment of insulator and gate metal
2. more useful for recessed-gate MIS-HEMT

Comparison of gate leakage:

Significant reduction of leakage
current with 7 nm of Al2O3

39
G. Dutta et al., IEEE Electron Device Letters, V 35 (11), p 1085, 2014
 Transfer characteristics
• HEMT VTh = – 7 V
MIS-HEMT VTh = – 5.5 V
- positive shift in VTh
• same ID for same (VGS-VTh)
• low ID-VGS hysteresis – less trapping
• Ion/Ioff ratio improves by ~ 102 times
• increase in gm for MIS-HEMT
– due to increase in channel mobility

40
G. Dutta et al., IEEE Electron Device Letters, vol. 35 (11), p 1085, 2014
 Reason for positive shift in VTh
1st level modelling of VTh:
Q p1
VTh _ HEMT  b 
C AlInN
Q f  Q sp2 Q p1
VTh _ MIS HEMT  b  
C ox C AlInN
Qsp2 - Qf
VTh 
C ox

Qf < Qsp2 will result positive shift in VTh

Present case, Qf = 1.2 × 1013 cm-2 and Qsp2 = 2.1 × 1013 cm-2
- net negative interface charge (~ 9 × 1012 cm-2) results in
positive shift in VTh
41
 Prospect for Enhancement mode device

AlIn
Metal Al2O3 GaN

N
Thicker oxide Thinner barrier

Threshold voltage can be adjusted by controlling oxide and

barrier layer thicknesses
Possibility of achieving normally-off (E-mode) devices using
thicker oxide / thinner barrier layer 42
 AlGaN/GaN and AlInN/GaN MIS-HEMTs

Non-recessed
MIS-HEMTs

Recessed gate
MIS-HEMTs

AlInN/GaN AlGaN/GaN

Device dimensions: Lg = 1.5 µm, Lsd = 6 µm and Lgd = 3 µm (Gen-2)

Contact resistance: AlInN/GaN  0.4 - 0.5 Ω. mm
AlGaN/GaN  0.5 – 0.6 Ω. mm 43
 MIS-HEMT transfer characteristics

Non-Recessed
MIS-HEMTs

Recessed gate
MIS-HEMTs

AlInN/GaN AlGaN/GaN
• AlInN/GaN MIS-HEMTs showed greater positive shift in VTh
• Quasi normally-off AlInN/GaN MIS-HEMT with RIS-Al2O3
• Possibility of E- mode with optimized layer thicknesses 44
 MIS-HEMT output characteristics

AlGaN/GaN

AlInN/GaN

Maximum ID of 800 mA/mm achieved: Comparable to best in

literature for devices of similar geometry
G. Dutta et al., IEEE Trans. Electron Devices, vol. 63, no. 4, pp. 1480–1488, Apr. 2016 45
Enhancement mode MIS-HEMT realized!

Enhancement mode devices achieved for the first time using RIS-Al203
G. Dutta et al., IEEE Trans. Electron Devices, vol. 63, no. 4, pp. 1480–1488, Apr. 2016
46
Evolution of models for HEMTs
from MOSFET models
 QM effect in MOSFETs – Why & What?
• Scaling of device dimensions
– Lower oxide thickness (< 2 nm)
– Higher doping conc. (> 1018 /cm3)
– Higher electric field
• Carriers are confined in a short
distance from the Si/SiO2
interface (2-Dimensional
Electron Gas or 2-DEG)
– Creation of sub-bands
• Classical theory no longer
sufficient for modelling

48
 What is the result of QM effect?
• QM effects result in
– Increased effective bandgap
– Reduced inversion layer charge density
– Modified inversion layer charge profile
– Increased effective oxide thickness
– Reduced gate capacitance
– Modified surface potential
– Increased threshold voltage
– Modified carrier mobility
– Lower drain current
– Modified gate current

G.S. Jayadeva & A. DasGupta, “Quantum mechanical effects in bulk MOSFETs from
a compact modelling perspective: A review”, IETE Technical Review, vol. 29, no.1,
49
pp. 3 – 28, Jan-Feb 2012
 Inversion charge concentration profile

a: classical
b: quantum mechanical

• Due to QM effects, peak carrier concentration

occurs away from Si/SiO2 interface
– The depth is more for holes than electrons
A.P. Gnädinger and H.E. Talley, “Quantum mechanical
calculation of the carrier distribution and thickness of
inversion layer of a MOS field-effect transistor”, Solid-
State Electron, vol. 13, pp. 1301-1309, 1970
C.Y. Hu, S. Banerjee, K. Sadra, B.G. Streetman and
R. Sivan, “Quantization effects in inversion layers
of PMOSFET’s on Si (100) substrates”, IEEE
50
Electron Dev. Letter, Vol. 17, pp. 276-278, 1996
 Calculation of inversion charge
• Consider formation of sub-
bands
• Solve Schrödinger and
Poisson equations self-
consistently
– computationally very
intensive
– not suitable for compact
models
– benchmark for simpler
models
F. Stern and W.E. Howard, “Properties of semiconductor surface inversion layer
in the electric quantum limit”, Phys. Rev., vol. 163, pp. 816-835, 1967. 51
 Self Consistent Poisson-Schrödinger
equation solution
• Poisson equation ( polysilicon, oxide and silicon region )
– Boundary condition : (z)  VG at the gate contact (z)  0 and
at the bulk
d  d(z)   N D (z)  N A (z)  n(z)  p(z) 
 (z)  q
dz  dz   

• Schrodinger equation ( dielectric and silicon regions )

– Boundary condition :  ij  0 at the gate dielectric interface
 h2 d 1 d 
 *
 V(z)   ij (z)  Eij ij (z)
 2 dz m di dz 

• Electron concentration
k BT   EF  Eij   2
n(z)  2  i di 
gm *
ln 1  exp     ij
 i j   k B T  
52
Flowchart for self-consistent solution

53
 Triangular potential well approximation
• Constant electric field

• Standard form of solution of

Schrödinger equation
involving Airy functions
• Simplifies self-consistent
solution, although iteration is
not avoided
• Very good match obtained 
with exact solution
T. Janik and B. Majkusiak, “Analysis of the MOS transistor based on the self-
consistent solution to the Schrodinger and Poisson equations and on the local 54
mobility model”, IEEE Trans. Electron Devices, vol. 45, pp. 1263-71, 1998
 Drain current model of intrinsic HEMT
• First step
– Derive expression for
electron density in
channel (ns) vs Gate
voltage (Vg)
– Result of self-consistent
solution of Poisson and 𝑛 𝑎𝑡
Schrodinger equations 𝑠
𝛾0 𝐶𝑔 𝑉𝑔𝑚
– Expression too 𝐶𝑔 𝑉𝑔𝑚1 𝑉𝑔𝑚1 + 𝑉𝑡ℎ 1 − 𝑙𝑛 𝛽𝑉𝑔𝑜1 − 𝛼1 3 𝑞
=
complicated and not 𝑞 𝑉𝑡ℎ 2𝛾0 𝐶𝑔 𝑉𝑔𝑚
integrable 𝑉𝑔𝑚1 1 + 𝛼
𝑉𝑔𝑜2 1 + 3 1𝛼 𝑞
– However, ns for a
particular Vg can be easily
calculated
N. Karumuri, S. Turuvekere, N. DasGupta and A. DasGupta, “A continuous analytical model for
2-DEG charge density in AlGaN/GaN HEMTs valid for all bias voltages,” IEEE Trans. Electron
55
Devices, vol. 61, no. 7, pp. 2343-2349, July 2014.
 Core Drain current model of intrinsic HEMT
Based on charge linearization 

N. Karumuri, G. Dutta, N. DasGupta and A. DasGupta, “A compact model of drain current for
GaN HEMTs based on 2DEG charge linearization,” IEEE Trans. Electron Devices, vol. 63, no. 56
11,
pp. 4226-4232, Nov. 2016.
 Add secondary effects
• Field dependent mobility
– Effect of both lateral and transverse field
• Velocity saturation of electrons
• Parasitic conduction in barrier layer
• Channel length modulation (CLM)
• Drain Induced barrier lowering (DIBL)
• Self-heating
• Capacitances
– for small signal and transient simulations
57
 Modeling Access regions
• Access regions
modeled as HEMTs
– Unlike resistors in most
models
• Experimental results
show that access
regions have HEMT like
characteristics
– Current saturates due
to velocity saturation of
electrons

58
 Model validation
1.5 µm
S 1.5 µm G 3 µm D

15 nm Al0.83 In0.17 N

GaN

Sapphire

1 µm 1 µm
S G 1 µm D

25 nm Al0.15 Ga0.85N
GaN

Sapphire
59
 Model validation
1 µm 0.7 µm 1 µm
S G D

18 nm Al0.5 Ga0.5N

GaN

Sapphire

1 µm 0.35 µm 3 µm
S G D

30 nm Al0.15 GaN

GaN

SiC
60
 Summary &Conclusions
• HEMTs have evolved from MOSFETs for high frequency (HF)
operation
– Pseudomorphic HEMTs provide best HF performance
• GaN based HEMTs are best suited for high frequency power
amplifiers and power switches
– Depletion mode operation due to Schottky gate
• MIS-HEMTs can provide
– Lower gate leakage
– Higher gate swing as gate voltage can be positive
• Enhancement mode AlInN/GaN MIS-HEMTs with RIS-Al2O3
demonstrated
• Model for GaN based HEMT developed
• Further need for model and technology development
• Lots of scope for research

61
THANK YOU

62