Computer Physics Communications 79 (1994) 190-200 North-Holland

Computer Physics Communications

Generalized Scharfetter-Gummel scheme reducing the crosswind effect for the current continuity equation including energy balance
Teng Zhimeng, He Ye and Tong Qinyi
Microeleetronics Center, Southeast University, Nanjing 210018, China
Received 26 July 1993; in revised form 5 November 1993

This paper presents a generalized Scharfener-Gummel scheme for the two-dimensional current continuity equation including energy balance. Both numerical experimental results and analyses of the discretization error associated with the crosswind effect for the classical and present schemes show that the present scheme is superior to the classical scheme for efficient reduction of the crosswind effect, so the present scheme can be substituted for it in semiconductor device simulations.

1. Introduction

As is well-known, the current continuity equation is a typical convection-diffusion equation. To avoid nonphysical oscillations a n d / o r reduce the crosswind effect efficiently in numerical results, several discretization schemes have been developed in semiconductor device simulations [1-9]. Among them, the Scharfetter-Gummel scheme is popular and is widely used in semiconductor device simulators [1-8]. However, although it is stable, the Scharfetter-Gummel scheme exhibits a significant crosswind effect in convection dominated cases [8], so that corresponding numerical results cannot represent realistic solutions of the physical model around boundary and interior sharp layers. This problem led to the development of the NOSU (NonOscillatory Streamline Upwind) scheme [10]. Unfortunately, this scheme cannot be used for the current continuity equation including energy balance. To solve this problem, we present a generalized Scharfetter-Gummel scheme, and analyze discretization errors associated with the crosswind effect for the present scheme and the classical Scharfetter-Gummel scheme, respectively. The analysis shows that the present scheme is superior to the classical scheme, a result which has been verified by numerical experiments. The present scheme will be used in our semiconductor device simulator.

2. Finite difference formulation

The steady-state electron current continuity equation including energy balance can be written as [11]

V "L =R,

(1)

where R is net recombination-generation rate, electron current density J, is composed of the convection

Correspondence to: Z.M. Teng, Microelectronics Center, Southeast University, Nanjing 210018, China. 0010-4655/94/$07.00 1994 - Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved

SSDI 0 0 1 0 - 4 6 5 5 ( 9 3 ) E 0 1 2 8 - A

Z.M. Teng et al. / Generalized Scharfetter-Gummel scheme reducing the crosswind effect

191

(i,j+l)
D

(i,j)
0-1,j) l

,'5 0

(i+l,j)

h,

(i,bl)

Fig. 1. Two-dimensional meshes.

term and the diffusion term

Jn = I~n( VC~-- ~TUTn)n -- ~nUTn~Tn.

(2)

/Xn is the electron mobility, ~b is the electrostatic potential, Urn is the electron temperature, n is the electron density. Assuming ~ , to be constant and VCb, VUrn to be constant vectors in a local domain g2e, we can write the streamline direction as L

V~- vur. I V~ - VUrn l

= cos 0 i + sin 0 j ,

(3)

where 0 is the angle made by L with the direction of the x-axis. Equation (1) can be rewritten as
--

aJ E

aL

+ V'JD = R ,

(4)

where JE is convection component of Jn along the streamline; JD is diffusion component of Jn, which is the second term at the right hand side of (2). For the meshes shown in fig. 1, the central finite difference formulation of (4) at (i, j) is

1 j ) - J o x ( i - ' -~, j) JE(Dx/z)-JE(U,/2) + Jox(i + $, AL hx + Joy(i,j+)--JDy(i,j -1)

hy

= n ( i , j),

(5)

where U, D are crosspoints made by the streamline with the upstream boundary and downstream boundary of the local domain O e, respectively; U1/2, D1/2 are midpoints from U to (i, j) and from (i, j) to D along the streamline, respectively; h x, hy are mesh cell lengths in x and y directions, respectively; A L is the streamline cell length; Jox, Joy are components of Jo in x and y directions, respectively. Accordingly, eq. (2) can be rewritten as (a~
J L = l~ n ~-~

BUr,,)
-~

an
n -- I~nUTn-~

(6)

192 and

Z.M. Tenget al. / GeneralizedScharfetter-Gummel scheme reducing the crosswindeffect

On j v = _l.t~Ur ~ 3L v (7)

where L v is a streamline-normal unit vector; j,L, ,iv are components of Jn in streamline and streamline-normal directions, respectively. The Scharfetter-Gummel formulation of eq. (6) is n(U,/2) = (1 where

-g(gl/2) )

n(g)

g(gl/2) n( i, j),

(8)

1- exp(A(U,/2)(In UT~(U,/2)- In UT~(U))) g(Ul/2) = 1 - exp(A(U,/2)(In UTn(i, j) --In UT~(U)))

and O4~ /OL - OUT~/OL

(9)

(10)

Substituting (8) only into the convection term in eq. (6), we obtain

JE(UI/2) = ]J'n OL

OUT" OL ) u,/2n(UI/2)"

(ll)

Similarly, one can derive expressions of n(D1/2), and JE(DI/2). Substituting these expressions into eq. (5), and discretizing other partial derivatives with the central finite difference method, we have

ALe (4~(D) -&(i, j) - UT~(D) + Ur.(i, j))((1 --g( Dl/2)) n( i, j) +g(D,/2) n( D)) - ~ ( c h ( i , j) -(~(U) - UT.(i, j) + UT~(U)) ((l_g(U,/z))n(U ) +g(U'/2)n(i j))_ iz~Ur.(i + ~, j)(n(i + l, j) -n(i, j))
' h .,2
I

~tt

; j)(n(i, j) - n ( i - i, j)) + ]ZnUTn(i-~

tZnUTn(i, j - )(n(i, j) - - n ( i , j 1))

~ U T ~ ( i , j + )(n(i, j + 1) - n(i, j ) )

=R(i

j),

(12)

Z.M. Teng et al. / Generalized Scharfetter-Gummel scheme reducing the crosswind effect where 1 - exp(A(U1/z)(ln U r n ( < / 2 ) - l n UTn(U))) 1 - exp(A(Ul/2)(ln gTn(i , J) --In UTn(U)) ) ' 1 - exp(a(D1/2)(ln UTn(D1/2)-In Urn(i, j)))
1

193

g(U1/2) =

(13)

g(Ol/2) =

-exp(A(D,/z)(ln Urn (D) - I n UTn(i , j ) ) )

UTn(i, J) -- Urn(U ) '

(14)

go(i, j) - go(U) - WTn(i , J) + UTn(U )

A(U1/2) = (15) q~( O ) - t i p ( i , J) - UTn( D ) + UTn( i , j ) A(D1/2) =

Urn(D) - Urn(i , J)

(16)

From eq. (12), we can find that the present scheme is equivalent to the Scharfetter-Gummel scheme for one-dimensional problems and (12) can eliminate the crosswind effect because the convection term is discretized only along the streamline direction. However, because U and D are not grid points, we choose the linear interpolation for n(U) and n(D) as follows (0 < 0 < 90); tg0 n(i-l,j)+ 1 - tg 01

tg 0
tg01

n(U)=
and

n(i-l,j-1)AL=--

hx cos 0

if0 <0<01 -

(17)

n(U) = 1
where hy tg 0 x = h---~-"

tg 01 n(i, j - 1 ) ~-~

+ tg tg

o:

n ( i - 1, j - 1)AL = s i n 0

if 01 < 0 < 90

(18)

(19)

Similarly, n(U) can be derived in an other angle range (90 , 180), (180 , 270 ) or (270 , 360). n(D) can be obtained from the same procedure as is stated above.

3. Discretization error associated with the crosswind effect

As is well-known, the conventional discretization error derived from Taylor expansions at a central grid point cannot satisfactorily represents the discretization error of the convection-diffusion equation, because it cannot account for why the first-order upwind scheme is superior to the second-order central finite difference scheme in convection dominating cases. To solve this problem (considering the fact that the Scharfetter-Gummel scheme can give very reasonable results in the cases of low Peclet numbers, while its discretization error is maximum in the cases of high Peclet numbers, which arises from crosswind diffusion and is represented by the crosswind effect), we analyze the discretization error associated with the crosswind effect for the classical and present schemes in this section.

194

Z.M. Tenget al. / GeneralizedScharfetter-Gummel schemereducingthe crosswindeffect

3.1. The classical scheme

From two-dimensional Taylor expansions of n(i - 1, j) and n(i, j - 1) at crosspoint U 1 (see fig. 1), we can derive hy h x tg 0 (20)

nv,

hxtgO+hyn(i-l,J)+h~tgO+hyn(i,j-1)-Eu,,

where the first and second terms at the right hand side of eq. (20) construct the linear interpolation of nu,, Eu, actually represents nodal discretization error

( hZx + h 2 )hxhy tg O [ a2n ] E u = 2 ( h x t g O + h y ) 2 l ~ - ~ l ] u ,.

(21)

an/aL 1 is a directional derivative along the line point (i - 1, j) to point (i, j - 1). It is not difficult for us to derive the expression of nDl (see fig. 1) in the same way as indicated above. Substituting these expressions into (12) and U1, D 1 for U and D in (12) respectively, we obtain F 1 = a w l n ( i - 1, j) +aeln(i + 1, j) + asln(i, j - 1) + a,ln(i, j + 1) + apln(i, j) - avlEu,
where #n hy
aDIED, --

R(i, j) =0,

(22)

awl-

ALz(qb(i,j)-qb(U1)-Urn(i,j)+Urn(U1))(1-g(Ul*/2))hxtgO+hy
~ . U r n ( i -- ' h~x
(23)

I.,tn
a~ = ~ - ~ ( 6 ( D ~ ) -6(i,

j) - UT~(D1) + UT,,(i, j)) g(D~/z)h ~

hy tg O+hy
(24) h x tg 0

~nUTn(i + , J) h~
/xn

a,,

AL ] (qb(i, j) - d)(U1) - Urn(i, j) + Urn(U,))(1 - g(U,*/2)) hx tg 0 + hy

.nUTn(~,J-)
(25)

h~
Ix~ an1 = ~-~1(c~( D1) - 6 ( i . j) - UT.(D1) + Urn(i, J) ) g( D?/2) h x tg 0 hx tg
0 + hy

~nVrn( i, j + 1) h~
I-t,
av, AL 2 (&(i, j) - 6 ( U 1 )
-

(26)

Urn(i , j)

Ur.(UO)(1 - g(Ul%)),

(27)

Z.M. Teng et al. / Generalized Scharfetter -Gummel scheme reducing the crosswind effect

195
(28)

aD, = - ~ 1 (~b(Ol) -b( i, j) - Ur,,( D1) + UTn( i, J) ) g(Ol*/2), Eo ' (h2+h2)hxhytgO(OZnlDl = 2(hxtgO+hy) 2 t-~z] ' hxhy
ALI=h xsin0+hycos0' aPl ~n ALl (6(i, j) - 6(U~) - Urn(i, j) + UTn(U1) ) g(Ul~,2)

["~n

(29)

(30)

+--~l(~b(O,) --~b(i, j) - UTn( D1) UT.( i - l~, j ) + UTn( i + 7 , j h2x

/xn

UTn( i , j))(1 - g( O~/2) )

Urn(i , j - ) + Vrn( i , j + )

+l~n

+ l&n

2 hy

(31)

On/OL 2 is a directional derivative along line point (i, j + 1) to point (i + 1, j), Ul*/2, D~/2 are midpoints from U1 to (i, j) and from (i, j) to D~, respectively. Considering V~b and VUrn are constant vectors, we
have A(U,~2)(In UTn(UI*/2) --In Ur.(U~) ) = 2a and A(UI~z)(In UTn( i , j) -- In Ur.( U1) ) .~ 2a, where a is the mesh Peclet number a =
06/aL -

Ur.(i, J) + Ur.(U1)
UTn(i, J) + 3 U r . ( U I )

(32)

(33)

OUr./aL

2Ur.

AL.

(34)

Because the mesh Peclet number is very large in convection dominated cases, we derive g(Ul~,2)=O, Similarly, we obtain a>>l, g(Ul~2)=l, ot<<-l. (35)

g(D~/2)=O,

a>>l,

g(D~/2)=l,

ot<<-l.

(36)

For simplicity, assuming that the mesh Peclet number is larger than zero, we can rewrite (22) as
F1 = - h-~- cos 0 0L 0L ~-y sin 0 0L

OUTn I n(i j - 1) 0L i

cos O + ~-y sin 0

aL

OUT") OL n ( i ' j ) +

b*-~l ( a~b OL

OL EU1-R(i, j).

(37)

196

Z.M. Teng et al. / Generalized Scharfetter-Gummel scheme reducing the crosswind effect

On the other hand, from (1) and (2) with the classical S c h a r f e t t e r - G u m m e l scheme, we can derive

F2-

I~n oh(i, j) - d~(i - 1, j) - U T n ( i , j) + Urn(i - 1, j) 2 1 n( i - 1, j) h~ e x p ( - a ( i ~-, j ) ( l n Uyn(i, j) --In U r n ( i - 1, j))) - 1

/~n 6 ( i + 1, j ) - 6 ( i , J) - Urn( i + 1, j) + Ur.(i, j) -']- h x 2 exp(A(i + ' 7, j ) ( l n Urn(i + 1, j) - In Urn(i, j))) -- 1 n(i + 1, j) /-tn 6 ( i , J) - 6 ( i , J - 1) - VTn(i, j) + UTn(i , j -- 1) -- h2y e x p ( - a ( i , j - )(ln Urn(i, j) - I n UTn(i, j -- 1))) -- 1 n(i, j -- 1)

gn 4'(i, J + 1) -- 6 ( i , j) -- Urn(i, j + 1) + Urn(i, j) "Jr-hy2 exp(A(i, j + )(In Urn(i, j + 1) - In Urn(i, j))) -- 1 n(i, j + 1)
/-% 6 ( i , J) - 6 ( i - 1, j) - Urn(i, j) + Urn(i -- 1, j )
ex(7--;17756" 1

>n

~b(i + 1, j ) - 6 ( i , J) - UTn( i + 1, j) + Urn(i, j)

--

h 2 e x p ( - A ( i + l , j ) ( l n Vrn(i + 1, j) - I n Urn(i, j))) + ~n

6 ( i , j ) - ~b(i, j - 1) - Urn(i, j) + UTn(i, j -- 1)

)(In U:,.n(i, j ) - - I n Urn(i, j 1)))1

h2y exp(A(i, j -

4a(i, j + l) -ga(i, j) - Urn(i, j + l) + UTn(i, j)

h2y e x p ( - a ( i , j + )(In Urn(i, j + 1) - In Urn(i, j))) - 1

)n(i, j)

R(i, j)=O.

(38)

For convection dominated flows (a > 0), (38) can be rewritten as

0x

0,

0,

Considering that (39) exhibits the crosswind effect while (37) physically avoids crosswind diffusion, we can obtain the discretization error associated with the crosswind effect for the classical ScharfetterGummel scheme

"n ( Ock E=F I-F 2~-~ OL

OUrn ) OL Evl'

(40)

which results from the nodal discretization error E v . To make the dependence of Ev, on crosswind diffusion more clear, we introduce On On On 0L1 - c o s ( 0 + 01) 0--E + sin(0 + 01) OLv" Considering that
Oil R -- Id, n W T n ( O 2 n / O g 2 -}-

(41)

02///OL 2)
, (42)

0~ =

txn(Ocb/OL _ OUTn/OL)

Z.M. Teng et al. / Generalized Scharfetter -Gummel scheme reducing the crosswind effect

197

substituting (42) into (41), then (41) into (21), we obtain

[ i)2n

E v ~ = h x h y s i n 2 0 / ~ J vl' a > > l ,

(43)

where the third-order derivative terms are neglected and R is assumed to be zero for simplicity. Equation (43) clearly indicates that the nodal discretization error EuI is mainly contributed by the crosswind diffusion.

3.2. The present scheme

As stated above, (12) physically avoids crosswind diffusion. However, the linear interpolation indeed results in the crosswind effect. At the crosspoint U, the nodal discretization error arising from the linear interpolation can be expressed as

Eu=hxhytgO 1 - t g 0 1
or

10-~

ifO<O<01

(44)

Eu=hxhyctgO( 1

t0 g2 0n 1l)t(g 0

O-~]lu

i f 0 1 < 0 < 9 0 ,

(45)

where third-order terms are neglected. With the same derivation procedure of (43), we obtain

Ev= hxhy sin 20 1

or

( tgOl[2n)
~g ~ ] l-~--~v
tg0 l~]lv

if 0 < 0 _< 01

(46)

E U=jhxhysin20 1

if 01 ( 0 _< 90 .

(47)

3.3. Comments on discretization errors of both schemes

Comparing (43) with (46) or (47), we find that (1) Both schemes are second-order accurate. (2) The crosswind effect inherent in the classical scheme is more significant than that inherent in the present scheme because Eul is always larger than E U at the same flow angle. (3) The maximum of Eul is at the angle 0 = 45 , the minimum is at angles 0 = 0 and 90, while the 1 1 maximum of E U is at the angle 0 = ~01 or 45 + ~O 1, the minimum is at angles O = 0, 01 and 90. (4) The discretization errors of both schemes reach the same when hy/h x approaches infinity or zero.

4. Numerical experiments and discussions

In this section, a popular discriminating test problem, shown in fig. 2 [12], is analyzed with the present scheme and the classical scheme, where the discretization of the convection-diffusion equation is given

198

Z.M. Teng et al. / Generalized Scharfetter - Gummel scheme reducing the crosswind effect

F2

F2

0.25

t2
N

Fl

Fig. 2. Analysis structure of the test problem.

by (12) and (38), respectively, except that R equals zero. T h e meshes are uniform and /~n equals 1 for simplicity. W e define the numerical error as E= E Ine-nil,
1

(48)

where N is the total n u m b e r o f grid points (11 11), ne, n i are the exact and numerical solution, respectively. For (12) and (38), one can give their expressions for an uniform t e m p e r a t u r e distribution with the help of Taylor series. F o r convection d o m i n a t e d flows, assuming that

IV l = 104
and

(49)

uT. = ].

(5o)

we obtain relationships of E versus 0 illustrated in fig. 3, from which we can find that the present scheme indeed suppresses the crosswind diffusion efficiently, especially at the angle 0 = 45 . Similarly,

15

10

O
0 45 90

Fig. 3. Relationship of E versus 0: - -

the classical scheme; * -- * - - * the present scheme.

Z.M. Teng et al. / Generalized Scharfetter -Gummel scheme reducing the crosswind effect

199

15

lo

45

gO

Fig. 4. Relationship of E versus 0: ~

the classical scheme; * - - * - - *the present scheme.

the present scheme is superior to the classical scheme for efficient reduction of the crosswind effect for a bilinear t e m p e r a t u r e distribution as indicated in fig. 4, where
I VCb - V U r , , I = 105

(51)

and Ur, , = 2xy + 3x + 4y + 10. (52)

5. Conclusions
This p a p e r presents a generalized S c h a r f e t t e r - G u m m e l scheme for the two-dimensional current continuity equation including energy balance. Numerical experiments and analyses of the discretization error associated with the crosswind effect show that the present scheme is indeed superior to the classical scheme, especially when 0 is equal to 01, so in semiconductor device simulation, the present scheme is r e c o m m e n d e d in order to reduce the crosswind effect, and h y / h x can be chosen so that the inequality is satisfied: tg0 ) sin20 1 or sin20 1 tg tg 01 <C if0<0<01 (53)

01 )

tg 0

<C

if01<0<90

(54)

where C is a defined tolerance for the generation of adaptive meshes.

References
[1] D.L. Scharfetter and H.K. Gummel, Large signal analysis of a silicon read diode oscillator, IEEETrans. Electron Devices 16 (1969) 64. [2] S. Selberherr, A. Schfitz and H.W. P6tzl, MINIMOS - A two-dimensional MOS transistor analyzer, IEEETrans. Electron Devices 27 (1980) 1540.

200

Z.M. Teng et al. / Generalized Scharfetter -Gummel scheme reducing the crosswind effect

[3] A. Husain and S.G. Chamberlain, Three-dimensional simulation of MOSFET's: the three-dimensional simulation program WATMOS, IEEE J. Solid State Circuits 17 (1982) 261. [4] R.E. Bank, D.J. Rose and W. Fichtner, Numerical method for semiconductor device simulation, IEEE Trans. Electron Devices 30 (1983) 1031. [5] J.F. Biirger, R.E. Bank, W. Fichtner and R.K. Smith, A new discretization scheme for the semiconductor current continuity equations, IEEE Trans. Computer-Aided Design8 (1989) 479. [6] J.P. Kreskovsky, A hybrid central difference scheme for solid state device simulation, IEEE Trans. Electron Devices 34 (1987) 1128. [7] M. Sharma and G.F. Carey, Semiconductor device simulation using adaptive refinement and flux upwinding, IEEE Trans. Computer-Aided Design 8 (1989) 590. [8] Y. He and G.X. Cao, A generalized Scharfetter-Gummel method to eliminate crosswind effect, IEEE Trans. Computer-Aided Design 10 (1991) 1579. [9] T.Y. Chou and Z.J. Cendes, Tangential vector finite elements for semiconductor device simulation, IEEE Trans. ComputerAided Design 10 (1991) 1193. [10] Y. He and Z.M. Teng, Nonoscillatory streamline upwind formulations for drift-diffusion equation, IEEE Trans. ComputerAided Design, to appear. [11] W. H~insch and S. Selberherr, MINIMOS 3: A MOSFET simulator that includes energy balance, IEEE Trans. Electron Devices, 34 (1987) 1074. [12] A.N. Brooks and T.J.R. Hughes, Streamline upwind/Petrov-Galerkin formulations for convection dominated flows with particular emphasis on the incompressible Navier-Stokes equations, Comput. Methods. Appl. Mech. Eng. 32 (1982) 199.