Simulation

Assignment #1
1a.
This graph is
very similar to
what was
presented to us
in class and in
the book. The
biggest
difference is
the
temperature
range that was
being explored.
As the
temperature
increases, the
implications on
materials
include an
increase in probability that the states will be unoccupied. The Fermi energy may not change with the
temperature, but the probability does. As visible above, the further beneath the Fermi energy level an
energy level is, the higher the chance the energy state will be filled.
1b.
The drift mobility for
electrons and holes varies
very significantly at lower
doping concentrations. This
is likely due to the
difference in the mass of
electrons and holes. In both
cases, the mobility
decreases as the
concentration increases.
This is because the amount
of particles is so high that
there is not very much
space for the particles to
move.

1c.
This graph
clearly reveals
the trend
between voltage
and current. As
concentration
increases, the
current
increases
dramatically.
When increasing
concentrations,
the rate of
current increase
grows with the
concentration.
The clear trend
is that current increases with voltage, but it is visible that concentration has a much greater effect on
the current. This makes sense when compared to the previous graph as the donors have a lower current
since they have an increased mobility compared to the holes.
Resistivity table:

Acceptors
Donors

N=1013
1250
446.43

N=0
1250000
446428.57

N=1016
1.43
.501

N=1017
.189
.078

This table shows the extreme changes from no doping to average doping and high doping. There seems
to be minimal resistivity when the concentration is above 10^16/cm3 . This makes sense when
referencing the mobility table. The resistivity is determined by the amount of doping and the mobility,
so the higher the mobility and the concentration, the lower the resistivity.

2a.















In comparison to the silicon plot that was generated in Matlab, the plot generated in ATLAS was similar.
There was very little difference in the gap between the acceptor doped and the donor doped silicon. The
only line that I couldnt compare was the compensated line. Overall, the trend holds for silicon as
current increases with voltage.

















The germanium plot reveals a larger gap between the acceptor doping and the donor doping. This is
likely due to the increased density of the atoms in germanium. The compensation has a smaller effect on
the germanium than on the silicon.

The gallium-arsenic sample showed an even larger separation between the donor doped and acceptor
doped samples. This is likely due to the combination of the two materials that increased the atom
density. Compensation doping was basically the same as the donor doping due to the high
concentration of electrons.

Na=10^16
Nd=10^16
Na=10^16, Nd=2*10^16

Silicon
7271.79
2651.91
3049.8

Germanium
1.445*109
2616.9
3009.95

Gallium Arsenic
5.93*1020
2130.46
2006.04

This table makes sense when using the equation to analyze it. The analysis done by ATLAS was very
accurate and can be double checked by using the equation below. The resistivity correlates well with the
large differences seen in the plots and seems to be based on the inverse slope of the I-V curves.
=

!
!!!!

2b.















For the experiment of my choice, I chose to see how the temperature affected a very highly doped piece
of silicon. The current decreased as the temperature increased, and the current increased with the
voltage as before. The increase due to voltage was much more prominent than before and the current
was higher. Overall, the large doping density increased every value of interest.

Appendix:
1a.
x=linspace(-.3,.3,1000); %set up x axis
k=8.617*10^-5 %Define Boltzmanns constant

y1=(1+exp(x/(k*50))).^-1 %Define equations for various temperatures
y2=(1+exp(x/(k*150))).^-1
y3=(1+exp(x/(k*250))).^-1
y4=(1+exp(x/(k*350))).^-1
y5=(1+exp(x/(k*450))).^-1

hold all; %overlay graphs with different colors

plot(x,y1) %Plot graphs
plot(x,y2)
plot(x,y3)
plot(x,y4)
plot(x,y5)

1b.
n=6.948*10^-18 %Define constants for ease of use
p=3.750*10^-18
N=14:.1:20 %Define range of input values with .1 step increments

y1=(((1+n*(10.^N)).^-1)*1252)+88 %Define equations for electrons and
y2=(((1+p*(10.^N)).^-1)*407)+54.3 %holes

hold all %overlay graphs with different colors
plot(N,y1) %Plot graphs
plot(N,y2)

1c.
n=6.948*10^-18; %Define constants for ease of use
p=3.750*10^-18;
q=1.6*10^-19;

N1=0; %Define different concenrations
N2=10^13;
N3=10^16;
N4=10^17;

u1n=(((1+n*N1).^-1)*1252)+88; %Find necessary values for next step
u1p=(((1+p*N1).^-1)*407)+54.3;
u2n=(((1+n*N2).^-1)*1252)+88;
u2p=(((1+p*N2).^-1)*407)+54.3;
u3n=(((1+n*N3).^-1)*1252)+88;
u3p=(((1+p*N3).^-1)*407)+54.3;


u4n=(((1+n*N4).^-1)*1252)+88;
u4p=(((1+p*N4).^-1)*407)+54.3;

x=linspace(0,10,1000); %setup x-axis

y1p=q*N1*u1p*x*2; %Find solution using previous information
y1n=q*N1*u1n*x*2;
y2p=q*N2*u2p*x*2;
y2n=q*N2*u2n*x*2;
y3p=q*N3*u3p*x*2;
y3n=q*N3*u3n*x*2;
y4p=q*N4*u4p*x*2;
y4n=q*N4*u4n*x*2;

semilogy(x,y1n);%Plot all graphs with y axis log scale
hold all; %overlay all graphs
plot(x,y1p);
plot(x,y2n);
plot(x,y2p);
plot(x,y3n);
plot(x,y3p);
plot(x,y4n);
plot(x,y4p);

2a.
go atlas

# Define simulation mesh, units in microns
mesh space.mult=1.0
x.mesh loc=0.00 spac=100
x.mesh loc=10000.00 spac=100
y.mesh loc=0.00 spac=100
y.mesh loc=5000.00 spac=100

# Define device structure and composition
region number=1 material=Silicon
electr name=anode top
electr name=cathode bottom
doping p.type uniform conc=1.e16

# Uncomment this to verify device structure
#save outf=ece416_sim1_structure.str
#tonyplot ece416_sim1_structure.str -set=viewstructure.set

# Define models and numerical solution method
# "contact" statement apparently can't go earlier for some reason
models bipolar temperature=300 kla analytic

method newton

# Determine equilibrium solution
solve init

# Define and run an I-V sweep
log outfile=t0.log
solve vanode=1 vstep=1 vfinal=10 name=anode

# Display results
tonyplot -overlay t0.log t1.log t2.log


quit

I repeated this 3 times for each material and generated 3 different plots in order to overlay them all
by changing the output log file and the concentration.

2b.
go atlas

# Define simulation mesh, units in microns
mesh space.mult=1.0
x.mesh loc=0.00 spac=100
x.mesh loc=10000.00 spac=100
y.mesh loc=0.00 spac=100
y.mesh loc=5000.00 spac=100

# Define device structure and composition
region number=1 material=Silicon
electr name=anode top
electr name=cathode bottom
doping p.type uniform conc=1.e20

# Uncomment this to verify device structure
#save outf=ece416_sim1_structure.str
#tonyplot ece416_sim1_structure.str -set=viewstructure.set

# Define models and numerical solution method
# "contact" statement apparently can't go earlier for some reason
models bipolar temperature=100 kla analytic
method newton

# Determine equilibrium solution
solve init

# Define and run an I-V sweep
log outfile=t0.log

solve vanode=1 vstep=1 vfinal=10 name=anode

# More I-V sweeps at different temperatures
models bipolar temperature=250 kla analytic

solve init
log outfile=t1.log
solve vanode=1 vstep=1 vfinal=10 name=anode

models bipolar temperature=350 kla analytic
solve init
log outfile=t2.log
solve vanode=1 vstep=1 vfinal=10 name=anode

# Display results
tonyplot -overlay t0.log t1.log t2.log


quit