Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 22

# 1

## Analytical Model Progress

Andr Sopczak
Lakhdar Dehimi,Salim Aoulmit
and Khaled Bekhouche
2
OUTLINE

Introduction

## Effect of edges (suggestions)

Conclusion
3
Introduction

Models:
Hardy model

with assumption
Where
t
emit
is the total emission time from the previous packet=tw
t
join
is the time during which the charges can join their parent packet
e c

( )
e emit
t e join
t
s
t
e e
n
N
CTI

2
Improved Hardy model : include capture time
( )( )
e emit
t e join
t
c sh
t
s
t
e e e
n
N
CTI

1 2
tsh is the shift time, that is the time spend under each node
4
Updated CTI Analytical Model
The fraction of filled traps (r
f
):
s
f
c e
f
c
f f
r r r
dt
dr

1
1
( ) ( )
c
s
s c
s
f f
t
r t r

,
`

.
|

,
`

.
|
exp 0
( ) ( ) { 0
f f
s
t
r t r
N
N
CTI
t
f
f
N
n
r
Where
n
f
is the density of filled traps
N
t
is the density of traps
5
Diagram of the consecutive transfer stages
One pixel
0
t
1
t
2
time
A
B
Node 1 Node 2
C
r
f
(0)
r
f1A
r
f1B
r
f2B
r
f2C
Space
t
1
Joining
6
Model for CP-CCD (2-phase)
r
f1A
is the fraction of filled trap under node1 during time t
1
(when
signal packet is present).
( ) ( )
c
s
s
t
c
s
f
r t
A f
r

+
,
`

.
|

,
`

.
|
1
exp 0
1 1
( ) ( )

,
`

.
|

e
A f B f
t
t r t r

2
1 1 2 1
exp
r
f1B
is the fraction of filled trap under node1 during time t
2
(when
signal packet is present under the second node).
(1)
(2)
7
( ) ( )
c
s
s c
s
f B f
t
r t r

,
`

.
|

,
`

.
|

2
2 2
exp 0
( ) ( )

,
`

.
|

e
B f C f
t
t r t r

1
2 2 1 2
exp
r
f2B
is the fraction of filled trap under node2 during time t
2
(when signal
packet is present).
r
f2C
is the fraction of filled trap under node2 during time t
1
(when signal
packet is present under the first node of the next pixel).
(3)
(4)
8
So the CTI is the sum of the CTI under each node
2 1
CTI CTI CTI +
( ) ( ) ( ) { 0 2
1 2 2 1 f C f B f
s
t
r t r t r
n
N
CTI +
r
f
(0) is defined by considering the fact that initially all taps
are filled and emit during the waiting time and then:
( )

,
`

.
|

e
w
f
t
r

exp 0
(5)
(6)
(7)
9
From equations 1 to 7 we obtain
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]

'

'

,
`

.
|

,
`

.
|

,
`

.
|

+

,
`

.
|

,
`

.
|

,
`

.
|

+

,
`

.
|

'

'

,
`

.
|

,
`

.
|

,
`

.
|

,
`

.
|
+ + +

e s
e s
c
s
e
w
t t
t t
t
e
t
s
t
e
t
s
t
s
n
t
N
CTI

1 2
2 1
exp exp 1
exp exp 1
exp 2
1 2
exp
2 1
exp
10
Case of t
1
=t
2
=t
]
]
]
]
]
]

,
`

.
|

,
`

.
|

,
`

.
|

,
`

.
|

,
`

.
|

,
`

.
|

,
`

.
|

,
`

.
|

,
`

.
|

,
`

.
|

,
`

.
|

+

+
e
w
t
e
t
e s
t
s
t
e
s
e c
t
s
n
t
N
CTI

exp exp
1 1
exp 1
exp 1
2 1
exp 1 2
11
Comparison with Full Simulations
Comparison of AM, Updated, Full simulations Glasgow and Lancaster for the 0.17 eV trap
100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
Temperature(K)
C
T
I

(
%
)

ImpAM
UpdatedAM
Full SimGlasgow
Full SimLancaster
0.17eV
50MHz
1e12/cm
3
Occ=1%
12
Comparison of AM, Updated, Full simulations Glasgow and Lancaster for the 0.44 eV trap
200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550
0
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.1
0.12
Temperature(K)
C
T
I

(
%
)

ImpAM
UpdatedAM
Full SimGlasgow
Full SimLancaster
0.44eV
50MHz
1e12cm
-3
Occ=1%
13
Frequency effect using Updated Model
100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.45
Temperature(K)
C
T
I

(
%
)

50MHz
25MHz
15MHz
10MHz
0.17eV
1e12cm
-3
Occ=1%
14
Frequency effect with Full Simulation (Dima)
120 140 160 180 200 220 240
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
Temperature(K)
C
T
I

(
%
)

50MHz
25MHz
15MHz
10MHz
0.17eV
1e12cm
-3
Occ=1%
15
Comparison Updated Model with Full
Simulation (Dima) for 0.17 eV at 10 MHz
100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
Temperature(K)
C
T
I

(
%
)

UpdatedAM
Full Sim
0.17eV
10MHz
1e12cm
-3
Occ=1%
16
Comparison Updated Model with Full
Simulation (Dima) for 0.17 eV at 15 MHz
100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
Temperature(K)
C
T
I

(
%
)

UpdatedAM
Full Sim
0.17eV
15MHz
1e12cm
-3
Occ=1%
17
Comparison Updated Model with Full
Simulation (Dima) for 0.17 eV at 25 MHz
100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
Temperature(K)
C
T
I

(
%
)

UpdatedAM
Full Sim
0.17eV
25MHz
1e12cm
-3
Occ=1%
18
Comparison Updated Model with Full
Simulation (Dima) for 0.17 eV at 50 MHz
100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
Temperature(K)
C
T
I

(
%
)

UpdatedAM
Full Sim
0.17eV
50MHz
1e12cm
-3
Occ=1%
19
Edges Effect
Substrate
x
n p
w
p 0
-w
n
-x
t1
E
C
E
V
E
Fi
-x
t2
V
2
V
1
E
f
E
t1
E
t2
E
t1,2
are the trap energy levels,
E
C
and E
V
are respectively the conduction and the valence band,
E
f
and E
Fi
are respectively Fermi level and intrinsic Fermi level,
w
n
and w
p
are the edges of the depletion region,
x
t1,2
are the intersection points of Fermi level with trap energy level.
1 m
Gate
I
n
s
u
l
a
t
o
r
20

X
t
is not the same for both traps (0.17,
0.44 eV) depending on the energy level.

t

for each trap.
21
Conclusion

## Updated model is a systematic

development from Hardy original model.

Simulation.

## As the frequency is increasing the fast

and full simulation agree better.

## Volume of the ionised traps depends on

trap level (Effect of volume change
understudy).
22
Next: List of systematic uncertainties
Doping profile,
Clock voltage (form and amplitude), we suggest to
use a rectangular or square signal,