20 views

Uploaded by toanproanh

ni

ni

© All Rights Reserved

- mosfetbasics
- Electric Railway Systems in Common Use
- CMOS Transistor Layout KungFu
- Cadence Tutorial
- Application Note Pvt v4
- How To Select a VFD
- Gate Resistors – Principles and Applications _ PowerGuru - Power Electronics Information Portal
- Eto
- m902
- DESIGN OF DIFFERENT DIGITAL CIRCUITS USING SINGLE ELECTRON DEVICES
- Characterization of Optical MISFET
- Product Catalog
- 7mbr20sc060 Fuji
- Bsnl Placement Papers 2008 2026
- power semiconductor devices poster
- part_1
- Set Review 1 Presentation
- Lec_2 Power Electronics
- mis6
- EDC notes.docx

You are on page 1of 221

A Thesis

Submitted to the Faculty

of

Drexel University

by

Bryan A. Weaver

in partial fulfillment of the

requirements for the degree

of

Doctor of Philosophy

August 2011

Copyright 2011

Bryan A. Weaver. All Rights Reserved

ii

Acknowledgement

Any undertaking of this size cannot take place in a vacuum, with the research for and

writing of this dissertation being no exception. Since this work was often punctuated by

other activities such as family and the formation of my consulting practice, patience and

encouragement were key elements that provided me with the energy and motivation to

complete this undertaking. I would like to thank all of my friends and family who kept

just enough pressure and encouragement on me to assure completion of this endeavor.

Most of all I am indebted to my dear wife Harrie, as I am sure that I would not have been

able to complete this undertaking without her support and encouragement.

I would like to thank committee members Dr. Karen Miu, Dr. Arye Rosen, Dr. Afshin

Daryoush, and Dr. Bahram Nabet for their insightful questions and suggestions during

my thesis defense.

Finally I am also indebted to my advisor Dr. Chika Nwankpa for his support and

guidance, helping me to see solutions when all that I saw was the enormity of this project.

iii

Table of Contents

List of Tables .................................................................................................................... vii

List of Figures .................................................................................................................. viii

Abstract ............................................................................................................................. xii

1.

Introduction................................................................................................................. 1

1.1.

2.

Background ......................................................................................................... 2

1.1.1.

1.1.2.

1.1.2.1.

Schottky Diode.................................................................................... 8

1.1.2.2.

Power MOSFET.................................................................................. 9

1.1.2.3.

1.1.3.

1.1.4.

1.2.

Motivation......................................................................................................... 16

1.3.

Organization of Thesis...................................................................................... 17

2.1.

2.1.1.

2.1.2.

Native Models........................................................................................... 25

2.1.3.

Macro-Models........................................................................................... 26

2.1.4.

2.1.5.

2.2.

iv

2.2.1.

Numerical.................................................................................................. 30

2.2.2.

SABER...................................................................................................... 30

2.2.3.

SPICE........................................................................................................ 31

2.2.4.

2.3.

2.3.1.

2.3.2.

2.3.3.

MOSFET................................................................................................... 42

2.3.4.

IGBT ......................................................................................................... 43

2.4.

3.

2.4.1.

Load-Lines ................................................................................................ 45

2.4.2.

2.4.3.

3.1.

Electro-Thermal Model..................................................................................... 55

3.1.1.

3.2.

3.2.1.

3.2.2.

3.2.3.

3.2.4.

3.2.5.

3.3.

3.3.1.

3.3.2.

3.3.3.

3.3.4.

3.3.5.

3.4.

3.4.1.

3.4.2.

3.4.3.

3.4.4.

3.4.5.

3.4.6.

3.5.

4.

5.

4.1.

4.2.

4.3.

5.1.

Conclusions..................................................................................................... 130

5.2.

Appendix A: Parameter Naming Convention ................................................................. 141

Appendix B1: Thermal Model Parameter Extraction Script........................................ 144

vi

Appendix C1: Schottky Diode Model Subcircuit Diagram ......................................... 150

Appendix C2: Schottky Diode Model SPICE Subcircuit File ..................................... 151

Appendix C3: Schottky Diode Model Parameter Extraction Scripts........................... 154

Appendix C4: Schottky Diode Model Collected Input Data ....................................... 172

Appendix D1: Power MOSFET Model Subcircuit Diagram....................................... 175

Appendix D2: Power MOSFET Model SPICE Subcircuit File................................... 176

Appendix D3: Power MOSFET Model Parameter Extraction Scripts ........................ 179

Appendix D4: Power MOSFET Model Collected Input Data ..................................... 186

Appendix E1: IGBT Model Subcircuit Diagram ......................................................... 190

Appendix E2: IGBT Model SPICE Subcircuit File..................................................... 191

Appendix E3: IGBT Model Parameter Extraction Scripts .......................................... 194

Appendix E4: IGBT Model Collected Input Data ....................................................... 202

Vita.................................................................................................................................. 206

vii

List of Tables

Table 3.1 Transient Thermal Impedance Model Accuracy .............................................. 63

Table 3.2 Schottky Diode CRM Static Test Results 100C Heatsink............................... 77

Table 3.3 Power MOSFET CRM Switching Test Results 100C Heatsink...................... 96

Table 3.4 IGBT CRM Switching Test Results 50C Heatsink ....................................... 109

Table 4.1 MOSFET / Schottky Test: Initial Power Calculations.................................... 118

Table 4.2 MOSFET / Schottky Test: Simulation Results 60C ...................................... 119

Table 4.3 Power MOSFET Performance vs. Switching Frequency ............................... 123

Table 4.4 IGBT / Schottky Test: Initial Power Calculations .......................................... 126

Table 4.5 IGBT / Schottky Test: Numerical Results 60C Heatsink .............................. 126

Table 4.6 IGBT Performance vs. Switching Frequency ................................................. 128

viii

List of Figures

Figure 1.1 Summary of Switching Device Capabilities...................................................... 6

Figure 1.2 Schottky Diode .................................................................................................. 8

Figure 1.3 Enhancement Mode MOSFET Schematic Symbol ........................................... 9

Figure 1.4 Insulated Gate Bipolar Transistor Schematic Symbol..................................... 11

Figure 1.5 CREE C2D20120D Datasheet and SPICE Model Comparison ...................... 13

Figure 1.6 Circuit Response Model of a Diode Forward Conduction Voltage Drop ....... 15

Figure 2.1 CREE C2D20120D Temperature Dependent Forward Characteristics .......... 22

Figure 2.2 Small Signal and Large Signal Model Contributions...................................... 36

Figure 2.3 Logarithmic and Straight Line Models at Low Forward Current.................... 37

Figure 2.4 Dissipation of Logarithmic and Straight Line Diode Models ......................... 38

Figure 2.5 Schematic Representation of Diode Forward Voltage ABM .......................... 39

Figure 2.6 CREE C2D20120D Leakage Current Characteristics..................................... 40

Figure 2.7 IXT12N120 MOSFET 25C Output Characteristics ....................................... 42

Figure 2.8 IXG12N120A2 25C Output Characteristics .................................................. 43

Figure 2.9 IGBT Equivalent Models ................................................................................ 44

Figure 2.10 Basic Buck Converter Circuit with Current Flow ......................................... 46

Figure 2.11 Voltage and Current Characteristics of an Inductive Switching Circuit ....... 47

Figure 2.12 Square Load-Line Switching with Diode Voltage Drop ............................... 48

Figure 2.13 Diode Voltage Drop Model Subcircuit.......................................................... 49

Figure 2.14 IXT12N120 MOSFET 25C Output Characteristics ..................................... 50

Figure 2.15 Power MOSFET Output Characteristics with 8 Amp Square Load Line ..... 52

Figure 2.16 IGBT Output Characteristics with 10 Amp Square Load Line ..................... 53

ix

Figure 3.2 Typical Thermal Model Circuit Configurations.............................................. 58

Figure 3.3 C2D20120D Thermal Model Parameters and Accuracy................................. 61

Figure 3.4 IXT12N120 Thermal Model Parameters and Accuracy.................................. 62

Figure 3.5 IXG12N120A2 Thermal Model Parameters and Accuracy ............................ 63

Figure 3.6 Schottky Diode Circuit Response Model Subcircuit Diagram..................... 65

Figure 3.7 CRM Voltage Drop Contributions with Current-Voltage Plane Excursion.... 66

Figure 3.8 VFWD(IFWD,T) Input Data(-) and Model Data(+) ............................................. 67

Figure 3.9 Percentage Error Between Input Data and Logarithmic VFWD Model ............ 69

Figure 3.10 Percentage Error Between Input Data and Straight Line VFWD Model ......... 69

Figure 3.11 Leakage Current Input Data .......................................................................... 71

Figure 3.12 Leakage Current with Model Parameter Data ............................................... 72

Figure 3.13 Reverse Bias Capacitance in pF (a), and 1/pF2 (b)........................................ 73

Figure 3.14 Reverse Bias Capacitance Input and Extended Data.................................. 74

Figure 3.15 Comparison of Charge Input Data and Model Results.................................. 75

Figure 3.16 CRM and SPICE Models Response to 39 nC Reverse Charge.................... 79

Figure 3.17 Power MOSFET Circuit Response Model Subcircuit Diagram................. 80

Figure 3.18 Input Data and Straight Line Model Input Admittance................................. 81

Figure 3.19 IXT12N120 CRM Input Admittance Characteristics.................................... 82

Figure 3.20 IXT12N120 Terminal Capacitance ............................................................... 84

Figure 3.21 Calculated MOSFET Gate Parameters.......................................................... 85

Figure 3.22 MOSFET Gate Charge Curve with Region Boundaries................................ 86

Figure 3.23 IXT12N120 25C Output Characteristics...................................................... 88

Figure 3.25 Voltage and Current Characteristics of an Inductive Switching Circuit ....... 90

Figure 3.26 IXT12N120 Output Characteristics as a Function of Temperature............... 91

Figure 3.27 IXT12N120 CRM RDS(on) Model Data (+) and Parameters........................... 92

Figure 3.28 CRM MOSFET Functional Test Schematic.................................................. 95

Figure 3.29 MOSFET Turn-On Pulse with 18 nS VDS Fall Time .................................... 96

Figure 3.30 MOSFET Turn-Off Pulse with 33 nS VDS Rise Time................................... 97

Figure 3.31 IGBT Circuit Response Model Subcircuit Diagram .................................. 98

Figure 3.32 IGBT Capacitance from Datasheet................................................................ 99

Figure 3.33 Calculated IGBT Gate Parameters .............................................................. 100

Figure 3.34 IGBT Input Admittance with Model Parameters ........................................ 101

Figure 3.35 IGBT Forward Conduction Voltage Drop 25C.......................................... 102

Figure 3.36 Dissipation Error of Model in Watts 25C .................................................. 102

Figure 3.37 IGBT Forward Conduction Voltage Drop 125C........................................ 103

Figure 3.38 Dissipation Error of Model in Watts 125C ................................................ 104

Figure 3.39 IXG12N120A2 Gate Charge Characteristics .............................................. 108

Figure 3.40 IXG12N120A2 CRM Turn-On Pulse.......................................................... 109

Figure 3.41 IXG12N120A2 Turn-Off Pulse................................................................... 110

Figure 4.1 Buck Converter with Waveforms and Current Paths .................................... 113

Figure 4.2 Buck Converter / CRM Model Test Schematic............................................. 116

Figure 4.3 Power MOSFET Turn-On Current................................................................ 119

Figure 4.4 MOSFET On VDS Comparison with Inductor Current 25C (1S/div)......... 120

Figure 4.5 MOSFET On VDS Comparison with Inductor Current 60C (1S/div)......... 120

xi

Figure 4.6 Diode On VAC Comparison with Inductor Current 25C (250nS/div) .......... 121

Figure 4.7 Diode On VAC Comparison with Inductor Current 60C (250nS/div) .......... 121

Figure 4.8 1S Off Full Pulse With Overlaid Traces 60C (200nS/div) ........................ 122

Figure 4.9 1S Off Pulse VDS Falling Edge 60C (25nS/div)......................................... 122

Figure 4.10 1S Off Pulse VDS Rising Edge 60C (25nS/div) ....................................... 123

Figure 4.11 IGBT VCE(ON) with Inductor Current 25C Heatsink................................... 127

Figure 4.12 IGBT VCE(ON) with Inductor Current 60C Heatsink................................... 127

xii

Abstract

High Power Switching Device SPICE Models

Based on Circuit Response

Bryan A. Weaver

Chika O. Nwankpa Ph.D.

Power electronics converter capabilities are expanding into power levels of 10 kW and

above with the support of steadily growing high power semiconductor device capabilities.

Computer aided design and circuit simulation tools are likewise growing, yet the supply

of available and accurate SPICE models for high power semiconductor devices isnt

keeping pace with the expanding device capabilities. In an effort to improve model

availability and accuracy, user configurable high power switching device SPICE models

for the Schottky diode, Insulated Gate Bipolar and power MOSFET transistors will be

developed. In a departure from conventional physics based semiconductor modeling

techniques, circuit response models establish how the device responds to circuit

characteristics. These SPICE circuit response models will be user configurable by means

of data from either or both device measurements and datasheet figures. With access to

these models, the circuit designer / application engineer will minimize the need to search

for SPICE models of the selected component or need to investigate the overall accuracy

of the models that are available.

1. Introduction

Power electronics systems are ubiquitous in our daily lives and are becoming even more

essential in this age of Green Engineering. From the most basic linear voltage

regulators to complex systems that drive the motors of a Navy vessel, power electronic

systems charge our cell phones, power our hybrid cars and link alternative energy sources

(solar, wind, tidal) to the power grid. Todays power electronics systems, no longer the

power supply of yesterday, will continue to support our ever growing hunger for

electrical power.

Though the demand for ever-increasing conversion and volumetric efficiency has fueled

the growth of power electronics systems, the success of this growth is supported by the

evolution of power semiconductor devices. From the earliest switching power supplies

using mechanical vibrators [1], to todays power MOSFET, Insulated Gate Bipolar

Transistor (IGBT), and the long anticipated wide bandgap devices [2,3,4] at our door

step, the core components of power electronics systems have evolved in just a few

decades.

Totally unrelated to the field of power electronics, the Computer Aided Design (CAD)

industry is likewise growing. This growth is fueled by the availability of ever increasing

computing power, algorithm development and the complexity of todays system designs.

Amongst the multitude of computer driven analysis programs, there are a number of

electrical circuit simulation programs available to the power electronics design engineer.

The well known and widely available application, Simulation Program with Integrated

Circuits Emphasis (SPICE) [5], is the de facto standard circuit simulation program for the

Personal Computer (PC) platform. This staple of the electrical design community has

been around for almost 40 years [6,7]. During these years there have been numerous

program enhancements, for example accessibility to PC users, with the introduction of

PSpice in 1984. Many companies have further enhanced the basic SPICE program by

adding additional proprietary features or enhancements most notably in regards to the

machine-operator interface [8,9]. In order for the power electronics application engineer

to accomplish his or her job, accurate semiconductor device models that are compatible

with the most widely used design simulation platforms must be readily available.

1.1. Background

A review of the numerous papers, books and articles on power electronics systems

reveals a common description, enabling technology. While the power electronics industry

is recognized for enabling many of todays sophisticated systems, it is the power

semiconductor devices that are themselves the enabling technology of power electronics

systems. A successful power electronics design cannot occur with a haphazard selection

of either circuit topology, control circuitry [10] or power semiconductor devices. This

chapter provides background on power electronics systems, power semiconductor

devices, semiconductor device models, model availability / accuracy and circuit response

modeling. This work is directed towards the power electronics system, design and

development engineer (application engineer). The role of the application engineer is to

build complex systems using sub-assemblies and components, such as power

semiconductors. From the system level perspective, the application engineer is more

interested in a semiconductor devices external steady state and transient responses to

circuit stimuli, as opposed to the semiconductor physics equations that power typical

semiconductor device models.

In broad terms, power electronics is the conversion of electrical energy from one form to

another. More descriptive examples of power electronics converters are DC-DC (direct

current-to-direct current), AC-DC, DC-AC and DC-RF (radio frequency). A

characteristic that is common in most power converter systems is the periodic storage and

release of electrical energy by capacitors and inductors. Depending on the configuration

of the switching and storage elements, power converters perform the following functions:

Voltage Step-Down

Voltage Step-Up

Galvanic Isolation

Though this list is not inclusive of all possible functions, these are the most commonly

performed functions of power electronics converters. Providing these functions are one or

more of the basic power electronics topologies:

Buck

Boost

Forward

Bridge

Flyback

There are other topologies, as well as combinations of topologies, but these are the most

widely used converter topologies. The building blocks of most power converters are

power switches and diodes as the switching devices with capacitors and inductors as the

energy storage devices. There are a wide variety of switching devices available to the

power electronics application engineer, with many of these devices described in the

literature [11,12,13]. The most widely used switching devices in power electronics

systems are PIN and Schottky diodes as uncontrolled switches, the Thyristor as a

semi-controlled switch and the Gate Turn-Off Thyristor (GTO), power MOSFET and

Insulated Gate Bipolar Transistor (IGBT) as controlled switches. The diode is termed

uncontrolled since it is circuit conditions, not a control signal that dictates whether or not

the device is conducting. The Thyristor is semi-controlled since a control signal can turn

the device on, but only circuit conditions can turn it off. Controlled switches can be

commanded on and off by a control signal though ultimately it is the circuit that

determines if and how much current is flowing.

The voltage, current and switching frequency of a power electronics converter weighs

heavily on the power semiconductor device selection. Figure 1.1 [14], dated Mar. 2006, is

an illustration of the relationship between voltage current and frequency capabilities of

the Thyristor, GTO, IGBT and power MOSFET. According to figure 1.1, the Thyristor

and GTO are truly high power devices, but they are also restricted to relatively low

switching frequencies. The IGBT doesnt have the power capability of either the

Thyristor or GTO, but the decades faster switching frequency makes it ideal for high

power non line-frequency applications. The power MOSFET is the clear leader in

switching frequency, but it lacks high voltage capability, an issue that will be discussed

later in further detail. A search for present day capabilities of these power semiconductor

devices indicates significant improvement in voltage capabilities of the IGBT. At the

time of this writing, the approximate voltage / current limits are.

From these numbers it is clear that, except for the power MOSFET, all of the devices

have seen improvements in power capabilities since 2006. The most notable

improvement is indicated for the IGBT which is now pretty much on par with the GTO

and Thyristor in regards to voltage capabilities.

When wide bandgap power MOSFETs and IGBTs become widely available, they are

expected to reach power levels equaling those of the Thyristor and GTO possibly at even

higher switching frequencies. This large scale control of electrical energy requires proper

selection and application of the power semiconductor devices. For the purpose of this

study and subsequent model development, and considering the current availability of 1.2

kV Schottky diodes, this study will focus on the following power semiconductor devices;

Schottky Diode

Power MOSFET

These devices were chosen because, not only are they widely available, but they can also

operate at suitable power converter switching frequencies. One of the pressures placed on

modern day power converters is size reduction, which can be accomplished by operating

at higher switching frequencies. Moving to higher switching frequencies allows a

reduction in the size of transformers, inductors and capacitors which are usually the

bulkiest of power converter components. With todays size and performance demands,

these devices are most likely to be used in the design and development of 10 kW to 100

kW power electronics systems. Though there is also a market for power converters that

are rated for even greater power levels, they are often assembled using multiple lower

power assemblies [15].

The promise of wide bandgap power semiconductor devices has been around for many

years [3,16,17]. Early signs of this promise are upon us with the availability of 1.2 kV

Schottky diodes [18] and 1.2 kV power MOSFETs utilizing Silicon Carbide (SiC) [19]. It

is anticipated that when these devices become mainstream, they will operate at voltages

in the levels of 10 kV or more [20]. This could potentially put the IGBT into voltage

capabilities that exceed those of todays GTO and Thyristors. It is not unlikely that the

GTO and Thyristor could themselves see a decade increase in voltage capability, though

some reports are indicating shortcomings for the wide bandgap bipolar devices due to the

large ratio of electron to hole mobility and large IGBT voltage drop due to the higher

bandgap energy [3,17].

1.1.2.1.Schottky Diode

The Schottky diode [11,21], first described by Walter H. Schottky in 1938, utilizes a

metal semiconductor junction as opposed to the traditional PN diode which utilizes two

semiconductor layers, one with an absence of electrons (holes), and the other with an

excess of electrons to form a junction [22]. A major advantage of the Schottky junction

over the PN and PIN junctions is the absence of reverse recovery [13]. This lack of

reverse recovery reduces EMI/EMC issues that are often the result of high current surges

that stress both the switching transistor and diode every time the transistor is commanded

on. A factor which limits widespread application of silicon based Schottky diodes is

reverse leakage current, which for a given voltage level, can be substantially greater than

that of the PN and PIN junction devices [11]. The higher leakage current levels have

typically limited silicon based Schottky diodes to a maximum reverse voltage rating of

200 V. This maximum voltage limit is being raised with the availability of wide bandgap

devices with 1.2 kV SiC devices presently available [18], 3 kV devices in development

[23] and 4.9 kV devices in the laboratory (1999) [20].

1.1.2.2.Power MOSFET

The power Metal Oxide Semiconductor Field Effect Transistor (MOSFET) was

developed in the mid 70s as an alternative to the, then standard power device, bipolar

transistor [21]. The bipolar transistor suffers from two major shortcomings that directly

impacts its application in power circuits. The first being low current gain, which results

from the relatively large base width needed for high voltage hold off [12,13]. As a result

10

of the low gain, additional driver stages are necessary, increasing size cost and

complexity of the power converter. The second shortcoming is termed second breakdown

[13,24,25]. In this condition, the transistor can breakdown during periods of simultaneous

large amplitude VCE and IC, a condition that is common in switching converters and will

be discussed in following sections.

The power MOSFET will continue to dominate the world of high current, low to medium

voltage power systems. This high current capacity is due to the ability to fabricate

devices with thousands if not millions of parallel cells allowing for RDS(on) values, which

ultimately determines the forward conduction voltage drop, in the m range. The power

MOSFET becomes limited in the area of moderate voltages from a few hundred volts and

upward. This limitation is due to the Specific Resistance of the device which is a function

of the semiconductors dielectric constant, carrier mobility and critical electrical field for

breakdown [21]. For a silicon device the equation simplifies to equation (1.1) where

2.5

Ron sp ,ideal = 5.93*109 * BVPP

(1.1)

BVPP is the breakdown voltage of the drain channel, and relates the Specific OnResistance to the breakdown voltage raised to the power of 2.5. The Specific OnResistance is a component of the overall RDS(on) of the MOSFET and becomes the

predominant contributor to RDS(on) as the VDS rating approaches a few hundred volts.

With all other things being equal, a 500 V device will have 5.66 times the RDS(on) of a 250

V device.

11

Widely used in medium and high power systems, the Insulated Gate Bipolar Transistor

(IGBT) was developed in the early 80s as an alternative to both bipolar transistors and

power MOSFETs [26]. Utilizing a MOS Gate, the MOSFET channel component of

The IGBT supplies a portion of the collector current and the base current to the bipolar

component eliminating the low gain characteristic of the bipolar transistor. The second

breakdown issue is eliminated by the very same MOSFET channel which is supplying

sometimes as much as half of the collector current [11,13] supporting the IGBTs square

Reverse Biased Safe Operating Area (RBSOA). A characteristic of the early generation

IGBTs, which is a P-N-P-N structure, was the possibility of an uncontrolled latching of

the parasitic thyristor [27] rendering loss of turn-off control. An understanding and

subsequent control of this unwanted characteristic makes todays IGBT a very rugged

high power device [21,26]. Today, IGBTs are available up to 6.5 kV and 750 Amps,

classifying them as a truly high power device.

12

At first look, the application engineer might think that the large selection of SPICE

models, which many vendors supply in support of their product, will include the power

semiconductor devices that have been chosen for their application. Further inspection

often reveals that this is not the case. In fact SPICE models are quite scarce for devices

with the capacity to be used in power converters of 10 kW and greater. An additional

problem that the application engineer will soon discover during a model search is that

there are some low and medium power IGBT device models available, but they are

proprietary to PSpice and non SPICE platforms making them incompatible with SPICE

and other SPICE derivative programs. In addition to problems with model availability,

there is also the possibility of significant errors in the modeled results in the few models

that are found. For example, most of the SPICE diode models that can be found for

systems of a few kW or more are missing parameters that are needed to properly reflect

the forward conduction voltage drop as a function of both current and temperature. Figure

1.5 is an example of the model error that results from these missing parameters. Figure

1.5(a) shows the datasheets forward conduction characteristics while figure 1.5(b) is the

SPICE model results for the same conditions. This is a shortcoming that will be

addressed in this work.

13

20

(a) Specification Sheet Data

IFWD (A)

15

25oC

10

75oC

125oC

175oC

0

0.5

1.5

2.5

3.5

4.5

20

(b) SPICE Model Data

IFWD (A)

15

25oC

10

75oC

125oC

175oC

0

0.5

1.5

2.5

VFWD (V)

3.5

4.5

consider more than electrical issues. Most important of the non-electrical issues is related

to the heat generated by even a highly efficient high power converter. The presence of

this heat is important, not only for the system as a whole, but also to the underlying

power semiconductor characteristics. As will be discussed later in further detail,

temperature is a variable that appears in most semiconductor equations with wide ranging

degrees of dependence. The proposed models will dynamically control the models

behavior as a function of temperature, a feature that is not available in SPICE.

The availability and accuracy concerns of SPICE models for 10 kW and higher power

semiconductor devices have been discussed and the device types that would most likely

14

be used in those systems have been identified. In response to these concerns, a family of

SPICE models for the power MOSFET, IGBT and Schottky diode devices will be

introduced. These models will dynamically respond to temperature variations and can be

configured by the application engineer; using either or both measurement data and

datasheet input hereafter called collected input data.

Prior to developing these models, the concept of Circuit Response Modeling (CRM) is

introduced. Typical semiconductor device models calculate and control the current that is

flowing through the device from circuit variables, such as the junction voltage. The result

of this practice is that the simulator determines the voltage across the device, calculates

the current that would flow under that condition, and controls a current source to the

calculated value. If the calculated current doesnt equal the circuit current, a number of

things could happen. If the current difference is small, the simulator could shorten the

simulation time steps. This could result is a reduction in the error between the calculated

and actual values, at the expense of lengthening the simulation time. If the difference is

large, the two competing currents (actual circuit current in series with a controlled current

source) could introduce large voltage errors resulting in a convergence error ending the

simulation. This simplistic example can be carried to other device models and

characteristics, and will be further discussed in following chapters.

device in an ideal fashion i.e. as a perfect switch when analyzing the design [13]. For

example when a power diode is viewed as an ideal device, it is understood that there is no

15

voltage drop in its forward biased condition, and it is the circuits configuration and

component values that determine the magnitude of the current flowing through the diode.

As the concept moves from the ideal device concept to the proposed models, the circuit

configuration and component values will continue to be the factors that determine the

magnitude of the current. Figure 1.6 is a voltage current plot illustrating an example of

20

18

Reference Diode

16

ABM (175 C)

14

ABM (25oC)

IFWD (A)

12

10

8

6

25oC

4

75oC

125oC

175oC

0

0.5

1.5

2.5

VFWD (V)

3.5

4.5

Figure 1.6 Circuit Response Model of a Diode Forward Conduction Voltage Drop

Circuit Response Modeling the forward conduction voltage drop of a diode. The expected

voltage drop as a function of current and temperature is used as the collected input data.

This expected voltage drop is subtracted from the calculated forward drop of a

temperature independent reference diode for the same current. The difference voltage is

supplied by a Voltage Controlled Voltage Source (VCVS) Analog Behavioral Model

(ABM) with the sum of the two voltages (i.e. reference diode voltage drop and voltage

difference) equaling the collected input data value. With data collected at multiple

16

temperatures, the VCVS voltage contribution will be a function of both current and

temperature providing an electro-thermal capability to the model.

For a power electronics converter, where the diode voltage drop is very small compared

to the circuit voltage, the forward current through the diode changes little whether the

diode is ideally modeled or realistically exhibits a few volts of forward drop. The

difference between the proposed Circuit Response Models and the typical semiconductor

device model is that existing models observe the junction voltage and control a current

source based on the observed junction voltage. Approaching this from a systems

perspective, Circuit Response Models monitor the current that is flowing through the

device and control a series connected voltage source to model the corresponding voltage

drop that was determined by the collected input data. This concept of Circuit Response

Modeling is a true form of behavioral modeling which will be further explored in

following chapters.

1.2. Motivation

With the increasing availability of high power semiconductor devices, the concepts of all

electric cars and cycle-by-cycle control of the power grid are no longer science fiction.

Increasingly large systems are costly and the expense of start-up failures is to be avoided.

Even hardware prototypes, though very important, are themselves costly warranting some

form of design verification prior to assembly and test. A review of SPICE compatible

17

power semiconductor device models reveals sparse availability that becomes more

pronounced as the search extends to devices appropriate for 10 kW and greater power

converters. Even when models are found, many of these models barely utilize the limited

capabilities of SPICE especially in regards to temperature dependent effects. With these

significant shortcomings in device model availability and accuracy in mind, a set of

configurable models is being proposed. These models can be characterized by the

application engineer using collected input data. With the limited availability and accuracy

of high power semiconductor device SPICE models, these models will further encourage

the application engineer to include SPICE simulation as an indispensable step in the

design process.

simulation model types and platforms followed by a simulation speed vs. complexity

trade-off. The concept of Circuit Response Modeling will be further explored with

examples illustrated with the use of a current voltage plane for hard switched power

electronic converters. Semiconductor behavioral characteristics as they pertain to power

electronics systems will be discussed and illustrated. Chapter 3 will contain the details of

the development of the SPICE subcircuits that will later be interconnected to complete

the device models. Upon completion of device model development, they will be

characterized and compared to the data that was used to characterize the models. Chapter

18

4 will be a review of the models used in the simulation of a high power buck converter

with comparison to expected results. Chapter 5 will conclude the study and provide

suggestions for further research.

19

Power electronics systems are playing increasingly important roles in todays technology

driven world. The continuous demand to improve a power electronics systems

performance and efficiency has been firmly planted in low power systems with power

factor correction [29,30] and power consumption / idle power draw requirements [31].

Similar performance pressures are moving into the world of medium and high power

systems that operate from 10 kW to 100 kW. In order for the design and development

(application) engineer to meet these requirements, careful design practices and circuit

analysis must be carried out well ahead of the hardware design phase. Computer aided

design (CAD) programs in the form of electrical circuit simulation packages can help the

application engineer meet design goals, provided that the appropriate component models

are available.

Key components of power electronics systems are the power semiconductor switching

devices Thyristor, Gate Turn-Off Thyristor (GTO), Schottky diode, power MOSFET, and

Insulated Gate Bipolar Transistor (IGBT). A review of power and switching frequency

characteristics of these key components reveals that the Thyristor and GTO are

appropriate for very high power applications that operate at frequencies of a few hundred

Hertz or lower. The IGBT is a faster switching device capable of operating up to 100

kHz, depending on the end users preference of the low saturation voltage vs. high

switching speed trade-off. Even faster power devices, the Schottky diode and power

20

MOSFET, are capable of switching at frequencies in the MHz, permitting compact sized

medium power systems. The power level of interest in this study is 10 kW to 100 kW

which is prime territory for the Schottky diode and IGBT devices, with 10 kW within

reach of power MOSFETs. A search of power semiconductor device manufacturers

technical data will reveal a large availability of computer simulation models for switching

devices that are appropriate for power converters up to 10 kW. However as power

electronic systems expand into levels of 10 kW and above, the availability of SPICE

models to support high power system development is sparse. Reasons for the sparse

availability arent totally clear, though one reason could be limited use of SPICE

modeling by power electronics application engineers. Other possibilities include the

application engineer having access to computer simulation platforms other than SPICE

such as Saber, or that the market size at these power levels is too limited to justify the

expense of model development.

This chapter will briefly review types of power semiconductor device models, computer

simulation programs; the role that model complexity vs. simulation speed plays in the use

of simulation models and proposes the concept of Circuit Response Modeling. High

power semiconductor device Schottky diode, power MOSFET and IGBT models will be

proposed and presented to help fill the void of model availability. Using these models, the

application engineer will be able to configure their own models from either or both

measurement data and datasheet input, collected input data.

21

A literature search on the topic of computer simulation models for the Schottky diode,

power MOSFET and IGBT, will result in a very large number of papers and books to

select from. These search results can be further sorted into topics including, but not

limited to, existing model reviews [32,33,34,35], recommendations for unified modeling

methods [34,36,37], model types [38,39,40,41] and model platforms [42,43,44]. In [32],

the authors provided a comprehensive review of IGBT model types and limitations at the

turn of the century. The models were categorized by their modeling method and

numerically scored for complexity. In [33], the authors reviewed the characteristics that

they felt were important to accurately model a power MOSFET for various power

converter topologies. The work was identified as being geared toward SPICE, but nothing

that was platform specific was presented. In [34], the authors described a commercially

available diode model that covers a wide range of diode technologies. The model was

developed with many of the SPICE diode model shortcomings in mind. Unfortunately

that model is proprietary to SYNOPSIS for use on Saber, hence it isnt available to the

larger base of SPICE users.

The goal of this research and subsequent development is to produce a set of power

semiconductor device models that are user configurable and compatible across all SPICE,

or its derivatives, platforms. With these models in hand, the application engineer can

configure the models to a required level of complexity and not need to be concerned

about either the availability or accuracy of SPICE models for the chosen power devices.

22

indicating the need for models that link performance with temperature. Unlike SPICE

which maintains a constant temperature profile throughout an analysis, electro-thermal

models provide a means to calculate the instantaneous junction temperature and feed that

result back to the model which adjusts the results accordingly. The proposed models will

have electro-thermal capabilities wherein they will be able to instantaneously vary their

response to changes in the calculated junction temperature. The proposed models will be

20

18

16

14

IFWD (A)

12

10

8

6

25oC

4

75oC

125oC

175oC

0

0.5

1.5

2.5

V FWD (V)

3.5

4.5

truely behavioral as a behavioral model derives its results from equations that describe

the outwardly visible response while having limited or no knowledge of the inner

workings of the device. Without concern as to the doping density, material type, device

area, etc. CRM models will provide the user with a circuit point of view on how the

device or devices will respond to circuit characteristics.

23

Semiconductor device models come in many different types with each type having

features that, depending on the end users goals, requirements and resources, makes it the

better choice. The type of model that will be used is also dependent on the computer

platform that is available to the application engineer. This work favors the SPICE

simulator because it is the most widely available simulator program for the personal

computer (PC) the most widely used platform. The model types that are most appropriate

for simulating high power semiconductor devices on the SPICE platform are PhysicsBased, Native, Macro-Model, Behavioral and Electro-Thermal.

The majority of semiconductor device models are physics based. That is the equations

within these semiconductor device models are derived from fundamental semiconductor

equations that describe the modeled device [21,22,44,45]. The actual derivation of these

models is beyond the scope of this work however an example [45] will be included in

order to better describe the difference between classic physics based models and the

proposed Circuit Response Models (CRM). The forward current of a diode is described

by equation (2.1) [22,45] where

qV

I D = I S exp D 1

kT

(2.1)

24

I S = Saturation current

q = Electron charge

VD = Junction Voltage

k = Boltzmans constant

T = Temperature (Kelvin).

Equation (2.1) is applicable for different levels of both forward and reverse bias, though

it doesnt properly account for all bias conditions. To better account for carrier

generation-recombination while under small bias conditions [22] and reduce the

occurrence of convergence errors during simulation [45], the SPICE model of the diode

junction becomes

qV

I D = I S exp D 1 + VD GMIN

nkT

for VD 5

nkT

q

(2.2)

where n is an emission coefficient, typically between 1 and 2, [22,45] which accounts for

the carrier generation-recombination rate and GMIN is added by SPICE across all

semiconductor junctions as a means to reduce convergence errors. For different reverse

biased operating regions, SPICE further expands equation (2.1) to account for different

reverse biased regions [45] resulting in equation (2.3).

25

qV

I S exp D 1 + VD GMIN

nkT

I S + VD GMIN

ID =

IBV

q ( BV + VD ) qBV

1 +

I S exp

kT

kT

nkT

for BV < VD < 5

q

for VD = BV

for VD < BV

for 5

nkT

VD 0

q

(2.3)

As previously discussed, SPICE uses either equation (2.2) or (2.3) to control a current

source internal to the diode model. The preceding discussion is a very high level example

of physics based equations, without even considering other characteristics such as reverse

bias leakage current, junction capacitance, breakdown voltage etc.

Simply put, native models are typically defined as a compiled form of physics based

models. Examples of native models start with the simple one line description of passive

components like the resistor or capacitor. As simple as the resistor and capacitor models

appear to the casual SPICE user, they are fairly sophisticated including linear and

quadratic temperature coefficients for both linear and quadratic voltage coefficients for

the capacitor model [8,9]. On the other extreme of complexity, the Berkeley Short

Channel IGFET Model (BSIM) utilizes approximately eight pages worth of parameters to

model a MOSFET using the BSIM3 v3.2 model [8,9]. The advantage of a compiled

26

model is that the code knows exactly what to do with the models defined parameters and

contains the default values of the unspecified parameters. These models often employ the

previously discussed physics based equations. Since the models are specific to the

simulation program and computer platform, speed, accuracy and performance issues

should be resolved ensuring minimal convergence error problems. A down side to native

models is that they only work for that particular simulation program and computer

platform. The result of this downside is that models native to, for example, PSpice will

likely not work in other SPICE or SPICE derivative simulators. This appears to be the

case for the few PSpice IGBT models which are available from some device

manufacturers.

2.1.3. Macro-Models

A device can be modeled by combining two or more native models and is often called a

macro-model [6,40,42]. The construction of a macro-model often uses existing native

models which can include higher level as well as simple passive device models. This

approach works well for composite devices such as opto-couplers, and has been used for

the development of IGBT models [42,43,46]. In [40] a MOSFET macro-model was

developed by adding diodes capacitors and a controlled resistance to better model nonlinear gate capacitance, and the temperature dependence of RDS(on), which is the drain to

source resistance of a power MOSFET which has sufficient gate voltage to operate in the

ohmic region [13]. There can be a one-to-one correspondence between the composite

27

device components and those of the macro-model, although some functions may be

performed by using controlled voltage or current sources. The terms macro-model and

subcircuit are often used interchangeably in SPICE documentation and literature. Since

macro-models are often combinations of platform specific native models, they too can be

subject to platform specific availability.

without having actual knowledge of what is contained within the system. This type of

modeling is often used in an attempt to reduce the models complexity or when it is not

known what actually exists within the system and is sometimes referred to as a black

box. A large number of the papers that were found during this research used the term

behavioral model in either the title or description of the paper. In virtually all instances,

the term was used to indicate the use of SPICE Analog Behavioral Models (ABM) that

were controlled by physics-based equations [47,481]. The models that are proposed in this

study are truly behavioral based and use SPICE Analog Behavioral Models to exhibit the

non-ideal response the modeled components exhibit to externally connected circuit

characteristics and not physics-based equations. True to the meaning, a behavioral model

is not platform specific as it is a means to define a system. The actual implementation of

1

The author of references [48] and [61], Dr. Adrian Maxim had a number of papers retracted in June 2008

by the IEEE for containing falsified information and subsequently has been indefinitely placed on the

Prohibited Authors List. None of his papers on the use of Analog Behavioral Models in power

semiconductor models are amongst the list of papers that were retracted.

28

a behavioral model will however become specific to the platform that it was written for

such as MAST for Saber, SPICE, or even MATLAB.

The majority of all semiconductor device equations are either directly or indirectly

temperature dependent. As an example, equation (2.1) is the fundamental diode current

which is clearly dependent with temperature (T) in the equation. I S is also temperature

dependent as shown in equation (2.4) used by SPICE for modeling temperature effects

that are static during the simulation. Where T1 is the nominal (27C) temperature, T2 is

T

I S (T ) = I S (T1 ) 2

T1

XTI / n

qEg (300) T2

*exp

* 1

nkT

2

T1

(2.4)

the modified temperature XTI is the SPICE diode parameter IS temperature exponent

and Eg is the semiconductor bandgap energy which is itself temperature dependent [46].

If the SPICE model does not supply model parameters such as XTI and n, the simulation

will run with the default values which could give incorrect results as was previously seen

in figure 1.5. For an Integrated Circuit (IC), the temperature is often constant within the

short term as well as consistent across the small area of the device. However with power

electronics devices, the junction temperature of each device will be different due to

instantaneous power dissipation, junction-to-case thermal impedance (RJC) and location

on the heatsink. Power semiconductor devices are also subject to transient junction

temperature changes during every switching event and especially during a fault event

29

[49]. SPICE was written for the purpose of simulating integrated circuits which, with the

exception of power ICs, are small enough and low enough in power that the temperature

across the die and over the time of the simulation will be relatively constant. The SPICE

platform has the ability to set a temperature for a simulation, however during the entirety

of that simulation that set temperature value is fixed.

A review of the semiconductor device model literature surfaces a number of papers that

have brought forward the idea of linking the electrical and thermal characteristics of a

power device during circuit simulation. This technique is seen mostly for the Saber

platform [28,50], though there is also limited prior art for the SPICE platform [48,51].

The actual availability of electro-thermal SPICE models is very sparse and seems to be

limited to the proprietary PSpice platform.

There are a multitude of computer simulation platforms available to the power electronics

application engineer, but not all of them are appropriate for simulating power electronics

systems. Many of the more sophisticated numerically based platforms are briefly

discussed in 2.2.1, but the two platforms that are more appropriate for simulating power

electronics systems are Saber, SPICE and SPICE derivatives. Due to the probability that

the application engineer will have greater access to SPICE than Saber, greater attention

will be given to the SPICE simulation platforms.

30

2.2.1. Numerical

Semiconductor device models come in many different types with each type having

features that, depending on the end users goals, requirements and resources make it the

better choice for the task at hand. There are many semiconductor device model programs

with capabilities and requirements that far exceed the scope of this research and the

reader is referred to [44] as a starting point to learn more about these programs. A short

list of these programs includes SILVACO [52] and Taurus Medici [53], which are both

multi-dimensional, and Basic Analyzer of MOS and Bipolar devices (BAMBI) [44].

These powerful simulators are well suited for the semiconductor device manufacturer

who has access to and control of manufacturing characteristics such as mask dimensions,

impurity profiles and recombination data, not for the power electronics application

engineer who is most interested in circuit and system level details.

2.2.2. SABER

A large number of papers that were reviewed during this work described and developed

device models for use in simulations on the Saber platform. Historically Saber [54,55]

has been a Unix based, multi-physics simulation program that was and is often found in

academic, research and large system development programs. An important feature of

Saber which was introduced in 1986 is the MAST modeling language, which provides the

31

user with the capability of describing functions which govern the operation of the devices

[6]. Present day Saber is available for Unix, Linix and Windows platforms as a number of

system level analysis programs with far ranging capabilities. In 2010 Synopsis released

SaberRD [56] which is called a Desktop Environment for Power Electronic Design for

operation on the Windows platform. Saber is advantageous for the user of high power

switching devices since it has received more attention in the creation of electro-thermal

models. Saber however has a disadvantage to the power electronics application engineer

because it is generally unavailable to small and medium sized businesses.

2.2.3. SPICE

SPICE Simulation Program with Integrated Circuit Emphasis, has been available for

nearly 40 years [5,6,7]. The first version of SPICE was Fortran based and went by the

name of CANCER. CANCER was written for use on a CDC 6400 using punch cards for

data input. In 1972 the program became SPICE1 and was for the first time distributed in

the public domain. Major improvements came in the form of an improved model for the

diode and new models for the JFET and MOSFET. SPICE2, finalized in 1975, continued

to be Fortran based and provided a new nodal analysis technique which added support for

voltage defined elements, and dynamic memory allocation techniques which was needed

to accommodate the growing sizes of integrated circuits. SPICE3 was first introduced in

1989, was written in C and added more sophisticated MOSFET and Berkeley Short

Channel IGFET Models (BSIM). Today SPICE is available from a number of third party

32

sources [8,9] which have supplied value added features such as schematic input, output

graphics and in some cases, proprietary device models [28,57].

Though SPICE has the capability of modeling temperature dependent component effects,

the temperature for the whole circuit is fixed for the duration of the simulation, though

individual parts can be assigned temperatures that are different from the simulation base

temperature. This is realistic for a low power integrated circuit that has an area no more

than a few millimeters square, but no so for a transistor that is switching 100 Amps at 1

kV. During a switching event, a 100 Amp, 1 kV switching device might instantaneously

dissipate the equivalent of 100 kW when used in an inductive hard switch circuit. The

transient thermal impedance of the junction will absorb much of that heat, but an

understanding of just how much is vital for a reliable system. There are relatively few

semiconductor models available for the SPICE platform with electro-thermal capabilities.

Not only are these models rare, the few that can be found are proprietary to only a few of

the SPICE derivative programs.

[39,58,59] which is functionally similar to MAST in Saber. This feature which is now

standard on SPICE and SPICE derivative platforms permits the user to build a descriptive

model ranging from simple to complex. Examples of ABM use in the literature range

33

from simple [51], which placed a controlled current source in parallel with a diode to

correct reverse current and temperature dependent forward voltage errors, to the

incredibly complex [48], which utilized as many as 26 ABM sources to assemble an

IGBT physics based model. ABM provides the application engineer a major advantage

through the ability to create high level description based models. This not only opens the

door to create models where none exist, it also provides the ability to describe a system in

ways that require reduced amounts of computer power, opening the possibility for shorter

simulation times.

A theme that is often seen in the literature relates the trade-off between the precision and

accuracy of a model with how long it takes to complete the computer analysis. The

computer power that is available today is indeed quite impressive compared to what was

available in the early days of SPICE. Even though computational speed has been

continuously increasing, model sophistication and system complexity have also been

increasing. In order to define areas where either model sophistication or accuracy can be

traded for decreased simulation time, a review of characteristics that are modeled is

performed. Examples of trading complexity for speed might include

34

In many cases, model accuracy can be traded for a reduction in simulation time.

Many of the papers that can be found on the subject of power semiconductor device

modeling describe means to improve the accuracy of the models. Examples include

reverse biased breakdown / avalanche modeling [35,60,61], accuracy of the quasisaturation region [36,40] and so forth. A goal of this research is to look into areas where

the accuracy of the model is of lesser concern to the power electronics system.

Specifically characteristics where accuracy is important, and characteristics where

detailed internal modeling is unimportant will be discussed. Areas where some device

characteristics can be omitted from the model with minimal reduction in accuracy will

also be suggested.

As previously seen in equation (2.1), the physics based diode equation uses the

independent variable junction voltage, to calculate the dependent variable diode current.

From the perspective of circuit response modeling, where VFWD is a function of IFWD, the

diodes response to forward current is found by taking the log of equation (2.1). Equation

(2.5) does model VFWD as a function of IFWD, but it doesnt characterize large signal

35

VD =

nkT I D

ln + 1

q

IS

(2.5)

conditions where the specific resistance [12,45] contributes a significant portion of the

forward voltage drop of a diode operating at or near rated current. This additional voltage

drop is summed to equation (2.5) where RS , called the specific resistance, is the total

VD =

nkT I D

ln + 1 + I D RS

q

IS

(2.6)

equivalent internal series resistance and is the summation of Drift, Substrate and Contact

resistances. An example of the importance of the RS contribution to the diode forward

voltage drop can be seen in figure 2.2 where the basic diode equation (2.5) is

(2.7)

compared to the large signal diode equation (2.6), hereafter called the logarithmic model.

From figure 2.2 it is clear that for all but the smallest current levels, the parasitic

resistance contributes an important portion of the total diode voltage drop.

36

20

18

Junction

Contribution

16

Resistance

Contribution

14

IFWD (A)

12

10

8

6

4

Small Signal Model

Large Signal Model

2

0

0.5

1.5

2.5

V FWD (V)

As a means to simplify circuit analysis, the diode forward voltage drop is often

considered ideal with zero forward voltage drop, or as the simple summation of a fixed

forward voltage drop and the I D RS drop [13]. If any reasonable accuracy is expected

when calculating the diodes forward conduction voltage drops contribution to

dissipation, the model must characterize some form of voltage drop plus

I D RS contribution to VFWD. When analyzing high power systems, the ideal diode concept

isnt appropriate since efficiency and power dissipation are essential system

considerations. A more to realistic approximation such as a simple resistive voltage drop

plus offset is in order. For example equation (2.8) is a mathematically simpler yet

VD = VOFFSET + I D RS

(2.8)

37

nkT I D

ln + 1 . Figure 2.3 is an illustration of VFWD Vs. IFWD for both a logarithmic and

q

IS

straight line diode model with the ordinate expanded to 1 Amp. It is clear that for any

1

Logarithmic Model

Straight Line Model

0.9

0.8

0.7

IFWD (A)

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0

0.5

0.55

0.6

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

V FWD (V)

0.85

0.9

0.95

Figure 2.3 Logarithmic and Straight Line Models at Low Forward Current

normal value of IFWD there is very little VFWD difference between the two models. With

the voltage levels that are typical of a high power system, the VFWD error that is seen in

figure 2.3 is of little consequence. The most important characteristic to model in a high

power system is dissipation. Figure 2.4a shows that the forward voltage drop of the

logarithmic and straight line models appear to be identical. Figure 2.4b confirms that the

dissipation of the two model types is nearly identical with the difference being much less

38

IFWD (A)

20

Logarithmic Diode

Straight Line Diode

10

(a)

0

0.5

1.5

2.5

1.5

2.5

1.5

2.5

60

Watts

40

20

0

(b)

0

Watts

0.4

0.5

0.2

0

(c)

0

0.5

1

V FWD (V)

than one Watt up to a forward current of 20 Amps as seen in figure 2.4c. It is clear that

the use of equation (2.8) to model the forward voltage drop, instead of equation (2.6),

results in a minimal loss of accuracy. The trade for reduced accuracy is shorter simulation

time, and it should be apparent that equation (2.8) will be easier to calculate than

equation (2.6). A SPICE simulation was performed on the very simple VFWD model that

is shown in figure 2.5. The purpose of this simulation was to determine how much

difference in the simulation time, if any, there would be between the logarithmic and

straight line diode equations that would be used to control the ABM that models the

voltage drop shown in figure 1.6. Figure 2.5 shows the simple schematic of the ABM

forward conduction model with straight line equation a and logarithmic equation b.

The SPICE simulation was setup with the following, conditions as the current source was

stepped from 0 to 20 Amps.

39

Run time = 1 mS

ton = 5S

TS = 10S

Tr = Tf = 100 nS

Step Time = 10 nS

The average simulation time for the straight line equation was 5.29 seconds and 9.48

seconds for the logarithmic model, indicating a clear advantage in simulation speed using

the straight line equation.

40

The reverse biased characteristics of the Schottky diode, IGBT or power MOSFET

devices should not be ignored, but with proper circuit design and an initial calculation of

the reverse biased dissipation, modeling the reverse bias leakage current and even

breakdown voltage can be found unnecessary for the power semiconductor device model.

Figure 2.6 is from the 1.2 kV rated CREE C2D20120D datasheet [18] and plots the

200

180

160

140

25oC

75oC

125oC

175oC

120

100

80

60

40

X: 1200

Y: 20.73

20

0

800

1000

1200

1400

V REV (V)

1600

1800

2000

leakage current vs. reverse voltage and temperature. Considering a truly worst case

situation of 1.2 kV at 175C, the expected leakage current of the C2D20120D would be

approximately 21 mA. From figure 2.1, the same diode will dissipate approximately 25

Watts with a 10 Amp IFWD at 175C. With a 1000:1 ratio between forward and reverse

bias dissipation, there really is little need to model the reverse biased leakage current let

41

alone see the effect of using the reverse dissipation value when calculating the junction

temperature.

Breakdown voltage has also been the subject of some of the reviewed modeling papers

[35,60,61]. Accurate modeling of a power device breakdown voltage involves many

factors, with many of them outside the fundamental physics equations domain or the

knowledge of the application engineer. Some of the factors that enter into breakdown

voltage calculations, in addition to the fundamental equations, include guard rings, defect

areas, doping profile and even temperature. With all of these factors making breakdown

voltage modeling difficult at best. This effort is better left to the power device designer

with access to multi-dimensional numerical simulation programs [44]. Good engineering

practice requires the stress values of all components to be less than their maximum rated

value. This is especially true of power devices which are typically derated to no more

than 60% to 70% of the maximum reverse voltage rating [62]. A properly derated power

device shouldnt even approach maximum rated voltage let alone anything that

approaches breakdown. When considering the need to model the breakdown voltage of a

power device, the better choice is to properly derate the device and design the circuit to

not exceed the derated values. This also applies to the IGBT and power MOSFET device

models as long as initial calculations confirm that reverse bias dissipation is less than the

users defined threshold.

42

2.3.3. MOSFET

The forward characteristics of a well driven power MOSFET is very close to a simple IR

drop with no offset voltage as seen in figure 2.7. This characteristic makes the power

MOSFET ideal for low voltage systems. The nearly straight line characteristic of RDS(on)

makes the forward drop model a relatively simple first order equation.

12

6.0 V

6.5 V

7.0 V

7.5 V

8.0 V

10 V

10

ID (A)

VGS

6

8

10

V DS (V)

12

14

16

18

Like the diode and IGBT the contribution that worst case leakage current provides to

overall dissipation, should first be calculated. The IXT12N120 datasheet is also without a

figure of the leakage current characteristic, but a worst case value of 3 mA, 1.2 kV at

125C is specified. That equates to 3.6 Watts clearly larger than the bipolar devices, but

still reasonable considering the forward dissipation could easily be 100 Watts or greater

as seen in figure 2.7. As with the previously discussed components, leakage current will

43

not be modeled since its contribution to overall dissipation is significantly below that of

the on-state losses.

2.3.4. IGBT

With sufficient gate drive, the forward characteristics of an IGBT are very similar to

those of a diode as seen in figure 2.8. The similarity can be understood in light of either

of the two ways that are often used to portray an IGBT [27,63], seen in figure 2.9. In

2.9(a), an equivalent circuit shows a MOSFET supplying base current to a PNP transistor

in a darlington configuration and 2.9(b) is another equivalent circuit of a an IGBT which

5.0 V

7.0 V

9.0 V

11 V

13 V

15 V

20

V GE

IC (A)

15

10

0

0.5

1.5

2.5

3

VCE (V)

3.5

4.5

44

depicts a MOSFET channel in series with a PIN diode. With the diode like forward

characteristics of an IGBT, replacing the logarithmic function of equation (2.6) with the

straight line plus offset equivalent of equation (2.8) applies to the IGBT as well. The

noticeable difference in the forward characteristics between a Schottky diode and a well

driven IGBT is the greater value knee voltage.

The leakage current of the IGBT and its impact on dissipation should be analyzed the

same as a diode before it can be omitted from the model. The IXG12N120A2 datasheet

does not have a leakage current vs. reverse voltage figure, but worst case data indicates a

maximum value of 275 A at 1.2 kV and 125C. With a worst case reverse dissipation of

330 mW compared to a possible forward dissipation of 60 W (20 A, 25C) makes it

unnecessary to model leakage current for this device.

45

It is the behavioral aspect of Circuit Response Modeling (CRM) that is proposed for use

in the development of SPICE models for the three basic power electronics switching

devices, Schottky diode, power MOSFET and IGBT. Using collected input data, models

that run on the SPICE platform for these power devices will be developed. These models

will be developed for the application engineer, who is more interested in the system as a

whole, not the underlying semiconductor physics and will display the power devices

outwardly visible response to circuit forces. By providing a means to behaviorally

characterize devices using collected input data, the application engineer is no longer

restricted by the limited availability of device models for the 10 kW to 100 kW range.

This section will briefly describe the concept of circuit response modeling with the use of

some basic examples of inductive circuits as are typically seen in hard switched power

electronic converters. These models are not intended to be used for all possible power

electronics topologies; instead the models are intended for applications the use hard

switching topologies such as buck boost and some bridge topologies.

2.4.1. Load-Lines

It is important to note that equations (2.5-6) calculate the diode current as a function of

numerous variables, predominantly the junction voltage. The diode model in SPICE

46

controls a current source, within the model, to the value calculated from either equation

(2.5), or equation (2.3) values [45]. This calculation is redundant, since the diode current

has already been defined by the circuit itself. In fact, in [42] the authors said of an IGBT

model since the current flowing through the device depends mainly on the load, an

(ideal) anti-parallel diode must be added to provide a path for balancing the current.

That is, when the diode is forward biased, the current that flows through the diode is

controlled by the circuits configuration and components, not the forward voltage. As an

example, figure 2.10 shows a buck converter, operating in the continuous conduction

mode. As switch S1 opens, current IL1 that was flowing through SW1 must now flow

through D1. IL1 defines the diode current, not the D1 junction voltage (VD1). Without the

complexity of determining which region VD is in just to calculate the value of ID, all that

needs to be calculated is the diodes VFWD, derived from collected input data. VFWD is not

only a function of current it is also a function of the junction temperature. If the diodes

47

VFWD characteristics are known at multiple temperatures, these additional data points can

be used to parameterize the equation that defines VFWD as a function of both current and

temperature. It should be clear by now that SPICE goes through quite a process just to

calculate the value of ID considering that circuit conditions have already defined ID.

Paths Traveled by D1 and S1 While Traversing the Il1 - Vd Plane (c)

A Circuit Response Model (CRM) approaches semiconductor device modeling from the

perspective of the circuit driven observable response. This philosophy is best understood

in view of the constant current characteristics of an inductive circuit. Figure 2.11a,b

illustrates the typical voltage current relationship of an inductive circuit such as figure

2.10. When SW1 is commanded on, it must first support the entire amplitude of IL1

before D1 can become reverse biased which then allows the voltage across SW1 to

collapse from Vd to zero. Figure 2.11c is a current voltage plane that illustrates the

paths traveled by SW1 and D1 during switching events. During SW1 turn-off, the voltage

48

across SW1 rises to the full value of Vd while traveling from corner 1 to 3, and then to

corner 4 as IL1 commutates from SW1 to D1. During that same interval, D1 traveled from

corner 4 to 2, and then 1. Conversely, during turn-on, SW1 travels from corner 4 to 3, and

then 1 while D1 concurrently travels from corner 1 to 2, and then 4. The CRM models

work on the principle that the switching devices follow these paths, which are

characteristic of an inductive circuit with the values of corners 1, 3 and 4 circuit defined.

The result of square load-line switching can be seen in figure 2.12 which is illustrating

that there is only a narrow range of interest in the diode forward voltage curve. That point

is the forward current point which is a relatively restricted portion of the curve as

determined by the inductor current. The importance of this point will become clear when

square load-line switching is discussed for the power MOSFET and IGBT.

20

18

Reference Diode

16

ABM (175oC)

14

ABM (25oC)

IFWD (A)

12

X: 2.016

Y: 9.878

10

8

6

25oC

4

75oC

125oC

175oC

0

0.5

1.5

2.5

V FWD (V)

3.5

4.5

49

As has been previously discussed, conventional diode models are non-linearly controlled

current sources with the junction voltage being the predominant controlling variable.

Using the concept of Circuit Response Modeling, the forward voltage characteristic of a

diode can be simply modeled as a voltage drop that is a function of current and

temperature. The voltage drop can be modeled with either a logarithmic or straight line

calculation as discussed in section 2.3.1. The SPICE circuit that supplies the voltage as a

function of current and temperature is seen in figure 2.13. Further details of the

parameters nomenclature and how they are derived will be discussed in further detail in

Chapter 3 and defined in Appendix A.

50

The output characteristics of both the power MOSFET and IGBT devices exhibit two

distinct regions which in this thesis will be called active and ohmic2. The following

description applies to a power MOSFET, however the description and impact of these

regions on Circuit Response Models is the same for both switching devices. During a

12

6.0 V

6.5 V

7.0 V

7.5 V

8.0 V

10 V

10

ID (A)

VGS

6

8

10

V DS (V)

12

14

16

18

switching event, as the device transitions along the current voltage plane (figure 2.11c)

from corners 4 to 3 to 1 (and back), the device is in the active region. This region exists

The actual terminology differs between the two devices and for power MOSFETs, even different authors

use different terminology for these regions. For this thesis, active will be used to define the constant

current region and ohmic will be used to describe the minimum voltage drop region of the output

characteristics curves. See section 3.3.2 for further explanation and details.

51

where the drain current as a function of gate voltage curves in figure 2.14 are horizontal.

During the transition from corner 3 to 1 of the current voltage plane, the drain current is

defined by circuit characteristics and the gate voltage is defined by the input admittance

of the device3. As the switching device completes the last few volts of the transition to

corner 1, the crossover from the active to the ohmic regions is not absolute as seen by the

rounded corners of the drain current curves in figure 2.14. This transitional region is often

termed quasi-saturation and has been discussed and modeled in previous work [36,40].

During those final few volts of transition (according to figure 2.14), for a given value of

gate voltage, the current that the device can support will decrease. However according to

the concept of Circuit Response Modeling, the current is determined by the circuit and

will remain constant so according to the input admittance, the gate voltage will rise (if the

gate voltage supply is greater than what is needed to support the drain current). The

actual value of the gate supply voltage is very important when high efficiency is desired.

Modern power devices have gate voltage limits of 20 V or greater. As shown in figures

2.15-6, a gate voltage as low as 10 V can keep the device in the ohmic region for currents

in excess of rated values. With appropriate gate supply voltages of 12 V and greater, the

actual gate voltage will quickly transition the device through quasi-saturation into the

ohmic region. Many authors have gone through rigorous investigations, and efforts to get

their models to accurately depict the transition from linear through quasi-saturation to

saturation regions which for square load-line switching is unnecessary.

The effects and influence of admittance is discussed in further detail in section 3.3.1

52

The difference between the CRM straight line model and the actual transistor output

characteristics can be seen in figures 2.15-6 which compare the straight line

approximation to the output characteristics from the collected input data. It is true that

there are small errors between the two curves in the quasi-saturation, but due to the

constant current characteristics of the inductive load, the error will be in the gate voltage

not the drain current. By accounting for the constant current characteristics of an

inductive circuit, the complexity of the CRM model can be reduced with minimal impact

on the accuracy of the results.

12

6.0 V

6.5 V

7.0 V

7.5 V

8.0 V

10 V

10

ID (A)

VGS (V)

6

8

VDS (V)

10

12

14

16

Figure 2.15 Power MOSFET Output Characteristics with 8 Amp Square Load Line

53

5V

7V

9V

11V

13V

15V

20

15

IC (A)

V GE (V)

10

10 A Square Load Line

5

0

0.5

1.5

2.5

3

VCE (V)

3.5

4.5

Figure 2.16 IGBT Output Characteristics with 10 Amp Square Load Line

54

Characteristics of high power switching devices were discussed in chapter 2 along with

issues related to availability and accuracy of device models for the SPICE platform.

Several types of models and simulation platforms were reviewed with discussions of

model applicability for the power electronics application engineer. This chapter will

detail the development of high power switching device SPICE Circuit Response Models

(CRM). Section 3.1 details the characteristics of the thermal model in addition to the

process of extracting the required SPICE parameter data, applicable to all model

characteristics, from either or both device measurements and datasheet figures hereafter

called collected input data. Section 3.2 covers the development of the model

characteristics for the Schottky diode. Sections 3.3 and 3.4 cover the same for the power

MOSFET and IGBT devices. In many cases, the three semiconductor device types share

common characteristics i.e. thermal modeling and leakage current for all three devices

and gate input characteristics for the power MOSFET and IGBT. In these cases, a full

discussion of the model derivation will occur at the first instance of the characteristic and

any device differences will be discussed in the appropriate section of subsequent devices.

The devices that will be used to characterize the three CRM model subcircuits are

55

These components were chosen to further explore their high power capabilities and to

compare the results of the CRM model to the vendor supplied SPICE models if available.

Electro-thermal modeling is not a new concept, but its availability to the SPICE platform

is very limited. The origins of SPICE which stands for Simulation Program with

Integrated Circuit Emphasis initiated this trend since integrated circuits as they existed in

the early days of SPICE were, by todays standards, small and would have had small

temperature gradients across the die. With that in mind the ability to set a single

temperature that remained static for the entire simulation made sense. Even though the

availability of SPICE electro-thermal models is limited, means and discussions to

implement the technique are ever present. Guerra et al. [51] proposed a Schottky diode

SPICE model that corrected for some of the SPICE inadequacies. They indicated that the

series resistance does not change with temperature and proposed placing a temperature

dependent resistor model in series with the diode model. Inaccuracies in temperature

dependent leakage current were solved by placing a Voltage Controlled Current Source

(VCCS) in parallel with the diode model and using the temperature dependent resistor as

the controlling element. Additionally a thermal model with 4 RC sections was thoroughly

calculated and included in the circuit file, but no connection was shown to the thermal

model for either sourcing a dissipation defined current nor was there a link between the

thermal voltage and either the above mentioned resistor model or the leakage current

56

model. Finally no mention was made about the temperature dependency of the junction

voltage or its impact on the forward voltage drop. In [50] Hefner acknowledges the

SPICE limitation of temperature characteristics that must remain constant at the

predetermined value during the simulation, and proposed a physics based dynamic

electro-thermal model for the Saber platform. In [64] Mantooth proposed a SPICE diode

model that uses relationships to adjust [the diode] model parameters and the physical

properties of silicon as a function of temperature. This technique was intended for both

fixed temperature, which requires one update at the beginning of a simulation, and

dynamic thermal modeling which requires parameter updates for each time step of the

simulation. Jankovic et al. [37] used equivalent lossy transmission lines describing

minority carrier transport through the arbitrarily doped silicon quasi-neutral regions

with the characteristics of the transmission lines exhibiting temperature dependence.

When using any platform to simulate power electronics systems operating at significant

power levels, a means to calculate the junction temperature of a power device and the

corresponding temperature dependent characteristics is warranted. The concept of

thermal resistance is analogous to electrical resistance with heat flow being represented

by current flow; thereby temperature rise is represented by a voltage rise across the

thermal circuit. The number of thermal stages is a function of how many physical layers

exist between the power device junction and the models thermal reference point, which

for the CRM is the modeled devices case. If the model is to provide an accurate

temperature rise measurement at each physical layer between the junction and the case,

the layer thickness, cross section area perpendicular to heat flow and material

57

characteristics needs to be known [51]. If the only purpose of the model is to provide the

temperature rise across the total thermal path, all that is needed is the instantaneous

power dissipation and the transient thermal impedance for the heat flow between the

device junction and case [65,66].

Transient thermal impedance (TTI) is a characteristic used to quantify the short term

junction temperature rise of a device as it experiences a short term high dissipation event

such as a short circuit or even the periodic high dissipation levels that occur during

switching events. This characteristic, which represents the junction-to-case thermal

impedance R JC as a function of time, is often given by the device manufacturer as a

10

-1

10

-2

10

C2D20120D

IXT12N120

IXG12N120A2

-3

10

-6

10

-4

10

-2

10

10

Seconds

58

datasheet figure [18,67,68] or in some cases actual values of RC pairs [66]. Figure 3.1 is

an example of the TTI for the Schottky diode, power MOSFET and IGBT devices that

will be characterized and modeled in this chapter. The impedance starts out orders of

magnitude lower than the final value, which is the specified steady-state R JC . The

differences between the three curves is due to differences in the size of the die, the

number and type of layers between the die and case such as heat spreaders and,

for some devices, electrical isolation materials. It is clear that the data in figure 3.1 have

different time ranges over which the data were taken. Even though they have different

time ranges, it is clear that they all exhibit similar characteristics shape indicating that

one equation can be scaled to model each part. The topology of the TTI model depends

on what level of detail is required of the model [65,69,70], figure 3.2 shows the three

most discussed RC network configurations for transient thermal modeling. The number

59

of RC networks determines how accurately very short term pulses can be modeled such

as short-circuit destructive modeling [71] which is beyond the scope of this work. The

three thermal network topologies in figure 3.2 are often debated as to which one properly

reflects the actual physical structure of the device and various layers between the junction

and the case. The need to properly reflect the physical structure exists only if the model is

intended to accurately predict the temperatures (node voltages) at the various layers

(nodes). When the only temperature of concern is the difference between the junction and

case nodes, all three models correctly describe the thermal behavior at the two terminals

of the black box [65,70].

The thermal model topology that is used in the CRM is that of figure 3.2a with the

number of RC pairs dependent on the length of the TTI time axis. The actual values of

the RC pairs in figure 3.2a are derived from collected input data which are copied onto

Excel worksheets as XY data columns. The information from a datasheet figure can be

converted into one or more sets of XY data using an application such as GETDATA [72].

With GETDATA, a TIF or JPG image of the figure, for example R JC vs. time, is viewed

within the application. By running the computer mouse along the image perimeter, the

axis limits are set, then after multiple steps of following the trace with periodic mouse

clicks, the XY data is collected and copied into an Excel worksheet. The parameter

values are calculated from the values of Rn and n for each of n RC pairs using equation

(3.1) with the collected input (XY) data being R (t ) . A MATLAB script reads the XY

60

t

R ( t ) = Rn 1 exp

1

n

(3.1)

data from an Excel worksheet and determines the maximum (steady-state) value of R JC

and the approximate of the first pole by finding the time of the R value that is

approximately 0.632* R JC . The remaining values of Rn and n are initialized according

to equations (3.2) and (3.3). After initialization, the MATLAB script uses simulated

Rn = R1 *0.5n

(3.2)

annealing techniques to randomly perturb the values of the n R pairs and compares the

n =

(.1 )

n

n 1

(3.3)

current iteration error to the best so far error. The error is calculated for each ( i ) time

step from the XY data as in equation (3.4). If the current iteration provides a smaller

error , this error value and the R pair values are stored as best so far, and subsequent

R (i ) R (i )best

error =

R (i )best

1

(3.4)

iterations perturb the values of the R pairs and use the stored error value as the new

goal to beat. This process is repeated until either the error goal is met, or the iteration

limit is reached. Figures 3.3-5 show the extracted model parameters where Cn =

n

Rn

and

the model error from the collected input data for the three modeled devices. In all three

cases, the error between the XY thermal data and the application of the model parameters

to equation (3.1) is less than 10% as shown in table 3.1. The MATLAB script also

produces a text output that contains one or more parameter statements [8,9] which are

61

used by SPICE for defining variables for models and/or controlled source equations.

These parameter values are uniquely named4 for their particular function and are copied

10

10

OOO Model Results

-1

10

TR1=1.979e-001

TC1=1.141e-001

TR2=7.750e-002

TC2=7.395e-002

TR3=1.591e-001

TC3=5.862e-003

TR4=2.304e-002

TC4=1.093e-003

TR5=5.195e-003

TC5=1.319e-004

-2

10

-3

10

% Error

-4

10

10

0

-10

-6

10

-5

10

-4

10

-3

10

Seconds

-2

10

-1

10

10

into the CRM subcircuit file for use by the simulator. During a simulation, the CRM

calculates the instantaneous power dissipation of a device and controls a current source,

scaled to one amp per Watt, as seen in figure 3.2. This current will flow into the thermal

model and the resulting voltage across the thermal model represents the instantaneous

junction-to-case temperature rise of the modeled device. The thermal model is referenced

to a voltage source that represents the heatsink temperature in Kelvin. That is if the

heatsink is at 27C, then the thermal model will be referenced to 300 Kelvin (Volts). Due

to the very long time constants of the thermal model, the CRM is initialized to the

62

expected average dissipation at the start of simulation according to equation (3.5). V(TA)

is set within the model to be zero at t0 while V(TB) is set to be one at t0 . V(TC) is

connected to a voltage source, external to the subcircuit, that the user sets to the expected

average dissipation at the scale of one volt per Watt. At t0 any forward dissipation is

G = V (TA) *VFWD * I FWD + (V (TB) *V (TC ) )

(3.5)

zeroed by V(TA) and the value of the expected average dissipation current flows into

the thermal network by V (TB)*V (TC ) thus initializing the network at the beginning of

the simulation. At 1 S into the simulation, V(TA) changes to 1 and V(TB) changes to 0

10

10

OOO Model Results

-1

10

TR1=1.688e-001

TC1=1.700e-001

TR2=6.017e-002

TC2=9.273e-002

TR3=2.065e-002

TC3=3.572e-002

-2

10

-3

10

% Error

-4

10

10

0

-10

-6

10

-5

10

-4

10

-3

10

Seconds

-2

10

-1

10

10

allowing the forward dissipation current to flow into the network for the remainder of

the simulation. The thermal models were verified by comparing SPICE simulation results

against the collected input data that was used to generate the models. The SPICE

63

verifying circuit was set to deliver a 1 amp pulse for one second and the output plot was

analyzed at specific time intervals from 10 S to 1 S as listed in table 3.1. The voltage

across the thermal model at the specified time intervals was compared to the collected

input data with good agreement for all three models.

10

10

OOO Model Results

-1

10

TR1=1.122e-001

TC1=2.388e+000

TR2=9.023e-001

TC2=1.194e-002

TR3=5.615e-001

TC3=3.075e-003

TR4=1.482e-001

TC4=7.557e-004

-2

10

-3

10

% Error

-4

10

10

0

-10

-6

10

-5

10

-4

10

-3

10

Seconds

-2

-1

10

10

10

C2D20120D

Pulse Width

1S

100mS

10mS

1mS

100uS

10uS

XY Data

0.475

0.454

0.327

0.151

0.047

0.015

CRM

0.463

0.460

0.322

0.154

0.046

0.015

% Error

-2.53

1.32

-1.53

1.99

-2.13

0.00

IXT12N120

XY Data

0.251

0.244

0.121

0.033

N/A

N/A

CRM

0.250

0.244

0.120

0.031

0.0043

0.00044

% Error

-0.40

0.00

-0.83

-6.06

N/A

N/A

IXG12N120A2

XY Data

1.70

1.66

1.26

0.482

0.134

N/A

CRM

1.72

1.65

1.26

0.475

0.127

0.017

% Error

1.18

-0.60

0.00

-1.45

-5.22

N/A

64

The Schottky diode has historically been type cast as a low voltage workhorse. Due not

only to its superior VFWD vs. IFWD characteristic in comparison to a PN junction, but also

due to the high reverse leakage current of silicon based devices which typically limits

their application to systems under 200 V [12]. With 1.2 kV SiC devices presently

available [18], 3 kV devices in development [23] and 4.9 kV devices in the laboratory

(1999) [20], The Schottky diode is becoming an ideal candidate for high power systems.

This section details the development and equations behind the CRM for a Schottky diode

which will model the following parameters.

A schematic representation of the complete Schottky diode model subcircuit can be seen

in figure 3.6. This subcircuit can be used within the users SPICE program the same as

any other subcircuit model. The various components of the model will be described

within the sections that describe the specific device characteristic.

65

There are many ways that VFWD can be modeled. In Guerra et al., [51] forward voltage

drop characteristics were improved by the addition of a series resistor that was modeled

using temperature coefficients to more accurately reflect the measured device

characteristics. The model was still limited by the fixed temperature characteristic of

SPICE. In Apeldorn et al. [73], a Boolean controlled voltage source in series with a fixed

resistor was utilized. If the diode was forward biased, the voltage source was zero. When

reverse biased, the voltage source was set negative to a value that was 107 times the

voltage drop across the resistor. The result was a nearly ideal diode that had no

temperature dependent characteristics. One of the simplest ways is to model the diodes

forward voltage characteristic (VFWD) is to use an Analog Behavioral Model (ABM)

66

controlled voltage source with an appropriate equation. The ABM is a very important

feature in SPICE which provides the SPICE user an opportunity to describe a system

response or component that is not already a part in the model library [39,58,59]. In order

to properly differentiate between forward and reverse bias conditions, the CRM forward

voltage drop model includes a fixed parameter reference diode in series with an ABM

controlled voltage source. Two of the reference diodes model parameters are set to

20

18

Reference Diode

16

ABM (175 C)

14

ABM (25oC)

IFWD (A)

12

X: 2.016

Y: 9.878

10

8

6

25oC

4

75oC

125oC

175oC

0

0.5

1.5

2.5

VFWD (V)

3.5

4.5

Figure 3.7 CRM Voltage Drop Contributions with Current-Voltage Plane Excursion

specific values such that it has nearly ideal characteristics. These parameters are N

which is set to 0.5 and TEMP which is set to 27C [8,9,45]. By setting the parameters

inside the CRM subcircuit, the reference diode is immune to circuit level changes to these

parameters. The remaining diode model parameters are unchanged from their default

values. The forward voltage drop of the reference diode is seen in figure 3.7 exhibiting an

almost constant, low voltage drop as a function of current. The remainder of the forward

67

voltage drop is provided by E4, a SPICE (ABM) Voltage Controlled Voltage Source

(VCVS), in series with the reference diode. The VCVS is controlled by an equation such

that it produces the voltage difference between the reference diode voltage drop and the

collected input data as seen in figure 3.7. A MATLAB script reads the XY data and

20

25oC

18

75oC

125oC

175oC

16

14

IFWD (A)

12

10

8

6

4

Input Data

CRM Model

2

0

0.5

1.5

2.5

VFWD (V)

3.5

4.5

closely matches the data for each temperature profile. As previously discussed in section

2.3.1, the forward voltage drop of a diode can be modeled as a logarithmic function of the

forward current plus the I D RS voltage drop or alternatively the logarithmic function can

be replaced with a DC offset. The user of CRM models has the ability to choose one over

the other as an opportunity to trade accuracy for speed, however figures 3.8-10 show that

the loss in accuracy of the straight line model is negligible. Equation (3.6) represents the

diode junction drop component of the logarithmic model which is changing the value of

68

component of the straight line model which is nothing more than a temperature

dependent voltage drop. In either case, the majority of the forward voltage drop is due to

I (V 2 )

2

V ( Log ) = log 14 + 1 *{DFL 20} + {DFL 21}*V (T ) + {DFL 22}*V (T ) *.0257 (3.6)

10

the temperature dependent specific resistance of the diode which is the sum of Drift

Substrate and Contact resistances [74]. The I D RS equation is the same for either model

and is shown with the straight line model parameter names in equation (3.8) where the

voltage at the top of the thermal model is V (T ) and represents the junction temperature

as discussed in section 3.1.1. The output of E4 is the combination of equations (3.7) and

V ( SL ) = {DFS10} + {DFS11}*V (T ) + {DFS12}*V (T ) 2

(3.7)

(3.8)

(3.8) for the straight line model and the combination of equations (3.6) and (3.8) using

DFL3x parameters for the logarithmic model. The straight line model representation of

VFWD vs. IFWD vs. temperature can be seen in figure 3.8 with the collected input data as

solid traces and the CRM results as the ++ traces. Figure 3.9 shows the percentage error

between the input data and logarithmic model data indicating very good model accuracy

for all currents down to 1 amp. The error between the input data and straight line model

data can be seen in figure 3.10 which looks nearly identical to the logarithmic model

error in figure 3.9.

69

25oC

5

0

-5

10

12

14

16

18

20

10

12

14

16

18

20

10

12

14

16

18

20

10

IFWD (A)

12

14

16

18

20

75oC

5

0

-5

125oC

5

0

-5

175oC

5

0

-5

Figure 3.9 Percentage Error Between Input Data and Logarithmic VFWD Model

25oC

5

0

-5

10

12

14

16

18

20

10

12

14

16

18

20

10

12

14

16

18

20

10

IFWD (A)

12

14

16

18

20

75oC

5

0

-5

125oC

5

0

-5

175oC

5

0

-5

Figure 3.10 Percentage Error Between Input Data and Straight Line VFWD Model

70

Modeling the reverse bias leakage current and breakdown voltage receives a lot of

attention in the literature including Mantooth et al. [34] where five additional reverse bias

effects were added to saturation current for a Saber platform diode model. In Maxim et

al. [61], semiconductor physics based models implemented with SPICE ABM blocks

were proposed including reverse bias leakage current and avalanche breakdown effects.

In [33] the authors categorized modeling requirements, by level, and included nondestructive avalanche breakdown for level 2 which was characterized as accurate for all

operating states within the rated current and voltage (within SOA). If the device is

operating within rated values and the SOA, does it need breakdown modeling?

Depending on the power converter voltage and power level, the effects of leakage current

and even breakdown voltage can be either important, or insignificant. Clearly, if any one

of these characteristics is insignificant the model can be simplified with a resulting

reduction in complexity and simulation time. Before the application engineer drops this

characteristic from the model, a quick calculation can help determine the leakage

currents contribution to dissipation. For example, figure 3.11 shows that the worst case

IREV of the C2D20120D is 21 A at 1.2 kV and 175C producing a maximum dissipation

of 25 mW. Referring back to figure 3.8, a worst case continuously forward biased

condition of 10 A at 175C results in a dissipation of about 25 W. This 1000:1 ratio of

forward bias to reverse bias dissipation suggests that the reverse bias dissipation is clearly

71

low enough to justify omitting the leakage current section of the model. When leakage

current is included in the model, an ABM current source G2 is controlled using the

200

180

160

140

25oC

75oC

125oC

175oC

120

100

80

60

40

X: 1200

Y: 20.73

20

0

800

1000

1200

1400

V REV (V)

1600

1800

2000

parameters shown on figure 3.12 to replicate the IREV curves shown on that figure.

Since the device should never be operated at potentials greater than 1.2 kV, the models

parameters were calculated from input data that was limited to potentials of no more than

1.4 kV as shown in figure 3.12.

breakdown [22,34] imposing an upper limit on the reverse bias of all semiconductor

devices. Once this limit has been reached, avalanche breakdown can occur with the

expectation that the device will be destroyed. There are formulae available for estimating

the voltage at which breakdown occurs however there are many manufacturing

72

80

70

Input Data

Model Data

DRI10=4.442e+000

DRI11=-1.894e-002

60

DRI12=2.642e-005

50

DRI20=2.737e+003

DRI21=-8.793e+000

40

DRI22=9.985e-003

30

DRI30=4.064e+001

DRI31=-1.616e-001

20

DRI32=1.922e-004

10

0

400

500

600

700

800

900 1000

V REV (V)

1100

1200

1300

1400

techniques, unknown to the modeler, that impact the ultimate breakdown voltage

potential. Device manufacturers specify maximum stress levels for all devices, and power

semiconductors are no exception. For the C2D20120D, the absolute maximum values of

reverse voltage and junction temperature are 1.2 kV and 175C respectively. If the

application engineer has properly derated the device to, for example, 900 V and 125C,

the device will be reliable [62]. When considering the need to model the breakdown

voltage of a power device, the better choice is to properly derate the device and design

the circuit not to exceed the derated values.

73

The high frequency advantage that the Schottky has over the PN junction doesnt mean

there arent switching characteristics to consider or model. The Schottky switching

characteristic is associated with reverse charge, which is typically characterized and

described as reverse capacitance. This capacitance must be charged and discharged by

circuit currents in order for the diode to transition from forward bias to reverse and back.

800

pF

600

(a)

400

200

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

-4

x 10

(b)

1/pF2

3

2

1

0

0

50

100

150

200

V REV (V)

250

300

350

400

Figure 3.13a is a plot of the reverse bias capacitance as a function of voltage from the

collected input data. The collected input data, from a datasheet figure, is limited to under

400 V so a means to extend the data to at least 1.2 kV is needed. The voltage scale of

figure 3.13 is linear so the data of figure 3.13a is clearly not a linear function of voltage.

The reverse capacitance of a diode is however a fairly linear function of voltage when

74

presented in the form of 1/ C 2 [22] and figure 3.13b shows that 1/ C 2 does indeed appear

linear with respect to voltage. The 1/ C 2 data of figure 3.13b can easily be extended by

applying the corresponding equation to the maximum reverse voltage of 1.2 kV. Figure

3.14 is the result of extending the data with the solid trace representing the collected input

data, and the O trace representing the extended data, converted back to C, over the

range of 1.2 V to 1.2 kV. The discrepancy at very low voltages is characteristic of a nonabrupt junction [22] and will have negligible effect on the model accuracy since charge

Q = CV , the parameter of interest for the CRM is very low in figure 3.15a.

800

Input Data

Extended Data

700

Capacitance pF

600

500

400

300

200

100

0

0

10

10

10

V REV (V)

10

10

The CRM models diode switching behavior as a function of charge, using the

relationships Q = CV and Q = it . The model integrates the charge that is applied to, or

extracted from, the device by injecting a replica of the charge/discharge current into a

75

fixed value capacitor with the resulting voltage proportional to charge. The Reverse

Charge Monitor components S1, G1, R1 and C1 in figure 3.6 provide the integration

function, while E2 and E3 translate the instantaneous calculated value of charge, V(D) in

50

Charge nC

40

(a)

30

20

Input Data

Model Data

10

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

200

400

600

V REV (V)

800

1000

1200

Percent Error

15

(b)

10

5

0

-5

Volts/nC, to the corresponding value of reverse voltage across E3. The rate at which the

reverse voltage can slew is a function of how quickly the circuit currents can charge or

discharge the reverse bias capacitance seen in figure 3.14. When viewed in the

perspective of charge, the diodes reverse bias characteristic is seen in figure 3.15a where

the solid trace is Q (VREV ) calculated from collected input data, and the o trace is the

models Q (VREV ) relationship. The error between those two traces is presented in figure

3.15b exhibiting good accuracy to low voltages with 1% error occurring at approximately

10 V.

76

Forward power dissipation is calculated as the product of the diodes forward junction

voltage and current. Referring to figure 3.6 for reference designators, the forward

dissipation is calculated according to equation (3.9) where V(TA), V(TB) and V(TC)

were previously discussed in section 3.1.1. In order to eliminate forward power errors,

G3 = V ( P) *V (TA) *V ( H , G ) * I (V 2) + (V (TB) *V (TC ))

(3.9)

when the device is reverse biased, the forward voltage detector output V(P) is included to

zero the output of equation (3.9) when the device is reverse biased. The forward and

reverse polarity detectors are mathematical voltage comparators that produce one volt if

true and zero volts if false. The product of equation (3.9) is the controlling function for

current source G3, which injects current into the thermal model at one amp per Watt.

Since reverse bias dissipation has a negligible impact on the overall dissipation, current

G 4 = V ( N )*V (G, H )* I (V 3)

(3.10)

source G4 is disabled in the final Schottky diode model. The reverse bias dissipation, if

used, is calculated as shown in equation (3.10) which is the controlling function of

current source G4. The two current sources could be combined into one, but were kept

separate for ease in separately observing the effects of reverse and forward dissipation

during model development.

77

A comparison between the Schottky diode Circuit Response Model and vendor supplied

SPICE model is presented. Both models were identically driven to

IFWD = 20 Amps

VREV = 1.2 kV

T = 10 S

100C Heatsink

Where no direct SPICE model results are available, the value was calculated from

available data and is labeled with an asterisk. VFWD was iteratively calculated to

determine the junction temperature rise and its affect on VFWD. Though the part should

never be operated at 1.2 kV, VREV was set to 1.2 kV in order to get readable IREV data

from the datasheet figure even then the calculated value is estimated as this is a crowded

region of the IREV datasheet figure. The CRM VFWD and PDIS (avg) results, shown in table

Table 3.2 Schottky Diode CRM Static Test Results 100C Heatsink

VFWD

PDIS (avg)

Tj rise

IREV (uA)

Calculated

CRM Model

SPICE Model

3.15 V

30.3 W

14.5C

<15

3.23 V

30.9 W

14.3C

8.4

1.96 V

18.8 W*

9.0C*

18

*calculated

78

3.2, are 2.5% and 2.0% higher respectively. The Tj rise result is 1.3% lower than

calculated, most of this error is attributable to the -2.5% error of the thermal model as

seen in table 3.1.

The IREV results are reasonable for both models since even at 1.2 kV, the input data IREV

value is subject to interpolation error due to crowding on the datasheet figure.

Nonetheless, as previously discussed, all of these values are simply too low to be of

concern for a circuit that has more than 30 Watts of average dissipation. A comparison of

simulation time with and without the IREV modeling reveals a striking improvement in

simulation time. The comparison simulation covered a span of 1 mS thus 100 cycles at

100 kHz. The average simulation time of five runs with the IREV model in circuit was 14.3

seconds, while the average simulation time without the IREV model was 8.2 seconds. At

first look the size of the IREV model is a small percentage of the overall model, but the

equation involves an exponential and four power functions, the most complex equation of

the entire model. All of the following simulation results will be with the IREV portion of

the CRM disabled.

The CRM dynamic characteristics were determined by injecting a current pulse that was

polarized to reverse bias the device. The accuracy of the reverse charge portion of the

model can be seen in figure 3.16. A 390 mA, 100 nS pulse produces the 39 nC charge

that was injected into each model. Extrapolating the datasheet capacitance figure out to

79

Dynamic Characteristics

Reverse Voltage

0.2K

-0.0K

-0.2K

-0.6K

898.5 V CRM Model

-0.8K

-1.0K

40

Charge nC

-0.4K

39 nC

30

20

10

0

100m

0

-100m

-200m

-300m

-400m

0.9u

390 mA

1.0u

1.1u

1.2u

TIME (s)

nC charge produced a reverse voltage of 899 V on the CRM model, but only 372 V on

the CREE model.

The Schottky diode Circuit Response Model shows good modeling accuracy of the CREE

C2D20120D diode with more features than the available SPICE model. With this model

and collected input data, the application engineer will be able to configure a Schottky

diode SPICE model with electro-thermal characteristics without the need of one provided

by the device manufacturer. Furthermore Circuit Response Models offer the application

engineer a choice between model complexity and simulation time as they provide the

option of choosing which characteristics are modeled.

80

The power MOSFET is most often used for low to medium voltage power electronics

applications and is particularly attractive in high speed circuits where switching losses

can dominate. Though the inherently high RDS(on) values of high voltage MOSFET

devices restrict their use in high power systems, a CRM model has been developed to

show its application with these devices. Many MOSFET and IGBT characteristics are

strikingly similar with the only outwardly visible differences being the on-state voltage

drop and turn-off characteristics; accordingly there will be many similarities between the

two models. Figure 3.17 is the MOSFET Circuit Response Model subcircuit diagram.

The subcircuit file that fully defines the model can be found in Appendix D2. Where

portions of this model are similar to those previously described, the reader is referred to

the section(s) where they were first introduced.

81

The power MOSFET behaves as a voltage controlled current source with the gate-tosource voltage (VGS) controlling the drain current (ID) as defined by input admittance,

shown in figure 3.18. This is modeled in the CRM by E3 (figure 3.17) which, with the

parameters on figure 3.18, produces the CRM Model results shown. The error of the

16

14

Input Data

Model Data

ID (A)

12 MAD10=-7.119e+001

MAD11=-2.878e-001

MAD12=8.209e-004

10

MAD20=8.821e+000

8 MAD21=5.493e-002

MAD22=-1.309e-004

6

125oC

25oC

6

V GS (V)

6.5

-40oC

4

2

0

4.5

5.5

7.5

Figure 3.18 Input Data and Straight Line Model Input Admittance

straight line model might seem excessive to low values of ID however the difference is

only a few tenths of a volt between the input data and the straight line input admittance

model VGS values. The error that results from this approximation is turn-on delay. If the

model has a VTH that is greater than the actual device, it will take more time for VGE to

82

reach VTH and then to a lesser degree ID. This timing error would impact feedback loop

analysis, the domain of average modeling [75], but have little impact on dissipation.

Straight Line Model SPICE Results

16

12

Id (A)

125C

25C

-40C

0

4.5

5.0

5.5

6.0

6.5

7.0

7.5

Vgs (V)

The parameters on figure 3.18 that define the straight line equation as a function of both

VGS and temperature control E3 in figure 3.17, with the SPICE model result seen in

figure 3.19 which is the E3 voltage V(K) (labeled as current) as a function of gate voltage

V(A1,J). The rounded edges towards the bottom of figure 3.19 are the result of a SPICE

feature and not part of the controlling equation. E3 is defined as a Table Source [8,9]

which like a Value Source provides an output that is a function of the controlling

equation and input variables, however the Table Source also allows the user to set

boundaries on the output. In the case of E3, the output is limited to the range of zero to

100 V therefore bounding the current of this particular model from zero to 100 Amps.

Placing boundaries on the output of a controlled source could result in sharp changes at

83

minimize the possibility of a convergence error, SPICE adds a smoothing function

(GSMOOTH) to the Table Source which rounds boundary edges to minimize possible

convergence problems caused by discontinuities in the derivatives. In this particular

instance, the smoothing function partially corrects for the errors that were introduced by

using a straight line model. No attempts will be made to define the GSMOOTH

parameter as a means to help the straight line model more accurately model the

measurement data as this could defeat the purpose of GSMOOTH and increase the

possibility of convergence errors.

The gate capacitance of a power MOSFET can be significant, especially for large area,

high current devices. The Ciss and Crss capacitances are dynamic with respect to the

voltage between the drain and source terminals (VDS) as shown in figure 3.20. The Ciss,

Coss and Crss capacitance values in figure 3.20 are related to gate, drain and source

terminal pairs by equation (3.11) [76] and shown in figure 3.21. For high voltage devices,

essentially the full VDS potential is across the gate to drain capacitance (CGD) and gate

current is required to charge or discharge CGD during VDS excursions, making VDS rise

and fall times highly dependent on how much gate current is available. Due to the

constant current characteristics of an inductive load, ID remains essentially constant

during a switching event which holds VGS constant following the previously discussed

84

10

Ciss

Capacitance pF

10

Coss

10

Crss

Input Data

Spline Data

10

10

15

20

VDS (V)

25

30

35

40

CGD = Crss

CDS = Coss Crss

CGS = Ciss Crss

(3.11)

input admittance relationship between ID and VGS. During a switching event the

amplitude of VGS in figure 3.22 can be divided into three distinct regions, each specific to

unique phases of the switching event [13,76]. The turn-on delay and drain current rise

from zero to ID occur during the first phase (0 to 35 nC) with the second phase exhibiting

constant VGS taking place as VDS is changing. The gate voltage is held constant during

this phase due to CGD and the Miller effect. As VDS is falling and with VGS remaining

constant, all of the current from the gate drive circuit is flowing into (discharging) CGD.

The third region (65 nC and above) occurs when VDS has settled into the ohmic region,

and drive current can once again charge CGS and CGD, which is now in parallel to the full

gate drive voltage. Often, the slope of region three is less than that of region one owing to

85

10

MIC1 =1.767e+003

MIC2 =8.280e+001

MIC3 =3.507e+003

MIC4 =1.398e+002

MIC5 =4.000e+001

Capacitance pF

10

10

Ciss

CGS

CGD

10

10

15

20

V DS (V)

25

30

35

40

the fact that the gate current is charging CGS and CGD which according to figure 3.19 is

much larger than when VDS was 40 V or greater. In the case of the IXT12N120, CGS

becomes smaller as CDS increases with this nearly perfect cancelation indicated by the flat

line Ciss which from equation (3.11) is the sum of CGS and CGD hence the similar slope of

regions one and three for this transistor.

The CRM models the MOSFET dynamic capacitance characteristics with three capacitors

and two controlled voltage sources. Referring to figure 3.17, C2 is CGD assigned the value

{MIC2} which is CGD at the highest voltage of the capacitance figure (40 V). C3 is CGS

86

10

9

8

7

V GS-Volts

6

5

4

3

2

Q CGD

Q CGS

Q CGS+CGD

1

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Gate Charge-nC

70

80

90

100

assigned the value {MIC3} which is CGS at the same potential as CGD. C1 is assigned the

value {MIC1} which is CGD when VDS is zero. E1, controlled by E2, tracks VGS when

VDS is greater than {MIC5} which places zero volts across C1. As VDS falls below the

value of {MIC5}, the value of E1 is lowered towards zero volts which charges C1

diverting gate current from discharging C2 when VDS has fully collapsed. The value of

CDS is modeled as the value of Coss Crss at the highest value of VDS in figure 3.17 using

the {MIC4} parameter.

The MOSFET exhibits distinct forward conduction regions called saturation and

linear/non-linear by some authors [22] and active and ohmic by others [13]. Bipolar

transistors and IGBT devices use the term saturation to describe when the device is

87

conducting with a minimum VCE drop. For the MOSFET, saturation is often used to

describe when VGS is greater than the threshold voltage (VTH), but is insufficient for the

amount of ID available from the circuit resulting in the device operating in a current

limiting mode. In order to avoid confusion with the different interpretations of the term

saturation, active and ohmic will be used in the following discussions of MOSFET

characteristics.

When VGS is at some value greater than VTH, the device is capable of supporting a value

of ID defined by equation (3.12), the previously discussed iD f (vGS ) input admittance

relationship, where K is a constant that depends on device geometry [13]. If the amount

of ID that is available from the circuit is greater than or equal to the value of equation

iD = K (vGS VGS (th ) ) 2

(3.12)

(3.12), the device is in the active region. However when VGS is a value that can support

more current than the value of ID, the device is in the ohmic region. The ohmic region is

the preferred operating region for a switch mode converter and is characterized by a

minimum VDS voltage drop which in the ohmic region, is the product of ID and RDS(on).

RDS(on) is the summation of several resistance sources with the most significant

contribution coming from the epitaxial region for devices with VDS values of 500 V and

88

12

6.0 V

6.5 V

7.0 V

7.5 V

8.0 V

10 V

10

ID (A)

VGS

6

8

10

V DS (V)

12

14

16

18

greater [76]. Minimum RDS(on) values only exist when VGS is much greater than what is

required to support ID. Both the ohmic and active regions can be seen in figures 3.23-24

with the active region indicated where the iD f (vGS ) curves are horizontal. The ohmic

region exists where the iD f (vGS ) curves are mostly straight with the slope indicating the

value of RDS(on) by equation (3.13). The drain-source voltage drop portion of the

RDS ( on ) =

VDS

I DS

(3.13)

MOSFET CRM model is divided into two sections with the first section modeling the

active regions response to insufficient VGS and the second section modeling the ohmic

regions response to ample values of VGS.

89

12

5.0 V

5.5 V

6.0 V

6.5 V

7.0 V

8.0 V

10 V

10

ID (A)

VGS

6

10

15

20

V DS (V)

25

30

35

40

The schematic representation of the MOSFET CRM model is seen in figure 3.17 with E4

and E5 providing the response to the ohmic and active regions respectively under the

control of the VGS and input admittance controlled output of E3 (node K), E5 is an error

amplifier that produces a drain to source voltage drop which limits ID to the value

determined by the input admittance model E3 as shown in equation (3.14), where Iadm is

VE 3 = Gain( I D I adm )

(3.14)

the VGS and temperature dependent value of maximum drain current that the device can

support. E5 is also a Table Source with its output bounded between zero and 20% more

than the maximum rated VDS (1.44 kV). This simple current limiter circuit produces fairly

sharp corners (limited by GSMOOTH) thereby omitting what is often called the quasisaturation or non-linear region [22,40]. For hard switched inductive applications, for

which the CRM was developed, the MOSFET follows the current-voltage plane traveling

to and from corner (3) in figure 3.25c, with the supply voltage Vd and the circuit defined

90

current Il1 from L1 in figure 2.10. At MOSFET turn-on, when VGS exceeds VTH, the drain

current will rise from zero to the circuit defined level IL1 (corner 4 to 3) and then VDS will

fall from Vd to the ohmic region parallel to the constant current lines of

Paths taken by D1 and SW1 while Traversing the Vd Il1 Plane (c)

figures 3.23-24, VDS will have traveled several hundred volts from Vd to the ohmic region

along the ID constant current line only to approach the quasi-saturation discrepancy for

the last five to ten volts of the VDS travel along the current-voltage plane. During those

last few volts as VDS approaches the ohmic region, the CRM will exhibit a constant value

of VGS where a quasi-saturation enabled model will exhibit a slight increase in VGS to

compensate for the reduced gain in this region. Hard switched MOSFETs should have a

VGE source that is greater than 12 V that will quickly transition the device from the active

region well into the ohmic region, making attempts to model the quasi-saturation regions

add more complexity than value.

91

12

25oC

10

10.0 V

8.0 V

V GS=7.5 V

125oC

10.0 V

8.0 V

VGS=7.0 V

ID (A)

10

15

20

V DS (V)

25

30

35

40

the value of RDS(on) with increasingly larger values of VGS as seen in figures 3.23-24.

Figure 3.26 shows the upper three RDS(on) f (VGS ) curves from figure 3.23 (25C) and

figure 3.24 (125C) where it is clear that with sufficient gate drive, preferably 12 V or

more, temperature has a far greater impact on the value of RDS(on) than does VGS. As a

means to reduce complexity with minimal effect on accuracy, the CRM models RDS(on) as

a function of only temperature. The RDS(on) temperature dependency is modeled by E2

using the VGS=10 V at 25C and 125C gate drive curves shown in figure 3.27 to control

the ohmic region voltage drop as a function of both current and temperature. In a hard

switched application, the device should always be driven with VGS values greater than 10

V, but the available VGS data of the IXT12N120 goes no higher than 10 V, additional

data would show a slight, but not appreciable reduction in the value of RDS(on).

92

12

25oC

10

125oC

ID (A)

MRD10=1.074e-001

MRD11=-6.248e-005

MRD20=-2.932e+000

MRD21=1.338e-002

MRD30=-6.894e-002

MRD31=3.060e-004

2

10

15

20

VDS (V)

25

30

35

40

Figure 3.27 IXT12N120 CRM RDS(on) Model Data (+) and Parameters

The IXT12N120 datasheet (rev. Apr. 2004) does not have a figure that illustrates the offstate leakage current characteristics. There is however an absolute maximum value of 3

mA specified for 125C and 1.2 kV which results in a maximum dissipation of 3.6 W.

There is a second, lower temperature specification of 25 A @ 25C, 1.2 kV which adds

only 30 mW to the overall device dissipation. From the model results section, forward

conduction dissipation values of 100 W are recorded, suggesting that the inclusion of a

forward blocking leakage current section to the model would, like the Schottky diode

model, add more complexity than value. If a situation should arise where there is a need

to model the forward blocking leakage current, the methods and limitations that were first

introduced for the Schottky diode leakage current model would be applicable.

93

During system testing, a characteristic of the power MOSFET model was found that

results in what appears to be a leakage current in the tens of mA. The source of this error

is E5 which models the active region characteristics should the device have a value of

VGS that is greater than VTH, yet not great enough to assure operation in the ohmic region.

Equation (3.14) which is used for controlling E5 is that of a feedback amplifier which

always requires some error in order to provide correction. When VGS is below the value

of VTH, the equation in E5 is commanded that ID should be limited to zero, if ID is in fact

zero, there will be no output of E5 to drive ID to zero. Increased gain will of course drive

the error closer to zero, but it also brings the potential for convergence errors. In the

system connected devices section 4.1, this error will be accounted for in the overall

system calculations. A solution to this problem should be the subject of future work. A

possible solution would include a generic reference MOSFET, in series with E4 and

E5, similar to the reference diode in the Schottky diode model. This was the original

intent of the model, but a tangent to model the active region of the MOSFET took the

model to where it is today.

Calculating the forward conduction power dissipation is similar to the Schottky diode

using equation (3.15) and the applicable reference designators from figure 3.17 with IG3,

94

which represents the instantaneous dissipation, sourcing current to the thermal network at

the scale of 1 Amp/Watt. The thermal characteristics of the IXT12N120 were previously

I G 3 = V ( P) *V (TA) *V (Y ) + (V (TB) *V (TC ))

(3.15)

discussed in section 3.1.1 but as a reminder, the steady state thermal impedance is

0.25C/W. The previously discussed initialization of the thermal network in section 3.1.1

is carried out by voltages TA, TB and TC in figure 3.17, and V(Y) is a 2nS lowpass

filtered version of the instantaneous forward dissipation. No attempt is made to calculate

forward biased leakage current due to the lack of sufficient data and low worst case

dissipation.

The CRM power MOSFET model was tested with a diode clamped inductor in series

with the drain and VD as in figure 3.28. This circuit, with a current source in place of an

inductor is often used to illustrate how a power transistor responds to an inductive circuit.

With the voltages and currents that are typical of a high power converter, dissipation is of

prime concern to the application engineer. To that end, the areas of interest to validate the

capabilities of the CRM power MOSFET model relate to dissipation which will be

broken down into static and dynamic losses. The model validation test was configured to

obtain combined static and dynamic losses under the following conditions:

I1 = 8 Amps

Vd = 900 V

95

ton = 5 S

T = 10 S

100C Heatsink

A SPICE model of the IXYS IXT12N120 is available and is used to compare both the

static and dynamic characteristics. Table 3.3 shows the VFWD drop when the device is on

and the average power dissipation, which is the combination of switching and

conduction. Where no direct SPICE model results are available, the value was calculated

from available data and is labeled with an asterisk.

96

Table 3.3 Power MOSFET CRM Switching Test Results 100C Heatsink

VFWD

PDIS (avg)

Tj rise

Calculated

CRM Model

SPICE Model

22.2 V

104 W

26C

22.8 V

104 W

25.5C

10.5 V

57 W*

14.3C*

The simulation results of the CRM are very close to the calculated values with a VFWD

error of +2.7% and Tj rise error of -1.9%. The SPICE model indicates a forward

conduction voltage drop of 10.5 V regardless of the simulation temperature. This forward

Turn-On Pulse - 100C Heatsink

16

V(G,S)

12

8

18 nS

4

0

I Drain

-4

10

8

6

4

2

0

-2

1.0K

V(D,S)

0.8K

0.6K

0.4K

0.2K

0

24.9u

25.0u

25.1u

25.2u

TIME (s)

Solid-Trace CRM Model Dotted Trace SPICE Model

1.4 maximum. Figure 3.29 illustrates the turn-on waveforms of both the CRM and

SPICE models which are almost indistinguishable given the resolution of figure 3.29.

97

Figure 3.30 illustrates the turn-off waveforms where the CRM model appears a little

slower than the SPICE model with 4 nS of additional delay and 6 nS of additional VDS

rise.

The power MOSFET Circuit Response Model shows good modeling accuracy with more

features and better conduction loss accuracy than the available SPICE model. With this

model and collected input data, the application engineer will be able to configure a power

MOSFET SPICE model with electro-thermal characteristics without the need of one

provided by the device manufacturer.

Turn-Off Pulse - 100C Heatsink

16

V(G,S)

12

33 nS

8

4

0

I Drain

-4

10

8

6

4

2

0

-2

1.0K

V(D,S)

0.8K

0.6K

0.4K

0.2K

0

19.9u

20.0u

20.1u

20.2u

TIME (s)

Solid-Trace CRM Model Dotted Trace SPICE Model

98

Many of the IGBTs outwardly visible characteristics are similar to those of the

MOSFET, allowing similar modeling philosophies to be shared between the two device

models. These similarities correspond to the gate input, thermal and leakage current

characteristics. The forward conduction voltage drop exhibits an offset plus ohmic drop

characteristic resembling that of the Schottky diode, therefore the IGBT forward voltage

drop will be similarly modeled. Unique to the IGBT is the turn-off characteristic which

will be discussed in detail in section 3.4.4 Turn-Off Current Tail. Figure 3.31 is the

subcircuit diagram of the IGBT Circuit Response model, which along with the

corresponding circuit file located in Appendix E2, provide a complete technical

description of the model.

99

The IGBT input circuitry is MOSFET based so the terminal capacitances are

characteristically the same between the two devices. Since the IGBT can have current

densities 20 times that of a MOSFET [11], fewer cells are required for a given current

rating resulting in different capacitance value ranges between comparably rated devices.

Evidence of this difference can be seen comparing the capacitance figures 3.20 and 3.32

of the two comparably rated devices used in this research. This 6.4:1 ratio of the

MOSFET 3400 pF Ciss and the IGBT 530 pF Cies is an example of the difference.

Components C1, C2, C3, E1 and E2 in figure 3.31 are used in the same configuration as

10

Cies

Capacitance pF

10

Coes

10

Cres

Input Data

Spline Data

10

10

15

20

V CE (V)

25

30

35

40

100

the MOSFET gate input. Further details of how the components are valued and used can

be reviewed in section 3.3.1. The IGBT gate capacitance terminology is somewhat

different from that of the MOSFET due to the different terminal names. Equation 3.11 is

repeated below with the different element names for reference.

CGC = Cres

CCE = Coes Cres

CGE = Cies Cres

(3.16)

10

IIC1 =8.756e+001

IIC2 =2.311e+000

IIC3 =5.371e+002

IIC4 =2.108e+001

IIC5 =4.000e+001

Capacitance pF

10

10

Cies

CGE

CGC

10

10

15

20

V CE (V)

25

30

35

40

The input admittance of the IGBT is modeled similar to that of the MOSFET. Figure 3.34

compares the input data with the model results and shows the resulting parameters that

are used by E3 to determine the instantaneous value of current that the device can support

as a function of VGE and temperature. During model testing, errors between the CRM

model results and input data were observed. Of particular concern were contradictions

101

between the gate charge, gate capacitance input data in addition to the rise fall time

input data and corresponding model results. Possible explanations of these contradictions

and their impact on the models results are discussed in section 3.4.6.

-40oC

25oC

IAD10=-1.068e+002

IAD11=2.856e-001

IAD12=-2.667e-004

20

125oC

IAD20=1.623e+001

IAD21=-3.777e-002

IAD22=3.436e-005

IC (A)

15

10

5

Input Data

Model Data

0

4.5

5.5

6.5

V GE (V)

7.5

8.5

As previously discussed, the IGBT forward conduction voltage drop has characteristics

similar to that of the Schottky diode. Dissipation is of prime importance to the power

electronics system engineer, accordingly errors in the models will be related to power

since a volt error at 20 Amps has a far greater impact than a volt error at one amp. The

forward voltage characteristics of the CRM are straight line approximations as discussed

in section 2.3.1 for the forward biased diode, and can be seen in figures 3.35-36 for a

102

25

IVFD110=3.703e-001

IVFD111=1.384e-001

IVFD112=-4.845e-003

20

IVFD120=3.207e-001

IVFD121=-2.995e-002

IVFD122=9.250e-004

VGE=15V

15

IC (A)

13V

11V

10

5

Input Data

Model Data

0

0.5

1.5

2.5

3.5

V CE (V)

junction temperature of 25C and figures 3.37-38 for a junction temperature of 125C.

Accuracy of the model for currents that are within the input data range is shown in figure

3.36 for 25C and again in figure 3.38 for 125C. These figures show the difference in the

Watts

-1

VGE=11

0

10

15

20

10

15

20

10

15

20

Watts

-1

VGE=13

0

Watts

-1

VGE=15

0

IC (A)

103

calculated dissipation, as a function of collector current, between the input data and the

model data. Unlike the MOSFET, VGE is equally as important as temperature when

modeling the forward conduction voltage drop requiring the model to take on the

function VCE f ( I C , VGE , T ) . The CRM calculates this multidimensional function with E5A

25

IVFD210=4.492e-001

IVFD211=9.723e-002

IVFD212=-2.784e-003

20

IVFD220=4.107e-001

IVFD221=-3.572e-002

IVFD222=1.036e-003

VGE=15V

15

IC (A)

13V

11V

10

5

Input Data

Model Data

0

0.5

1.5

2.5

3

V CE (V)

3.5

4.5

calculating the voltage drop as a function of VGE and IC at 25C and E5B providing the

same for 125C. These two voltages are linearly interpolated as a function of temperature

by E5 which supplies the three dimensional voltage drop (minus the PNP drop). Since the

104

Watts

-1

VGE=11

0

10

15

20

10

15

20

10

15

20

Watts

-1

VGE=13

0

Watts

-1

VGE=15

0

IC (A)

input data consists of only two points, 25C and 125C, linear interpolation is appropriate.

If additional data points are available a more complex interpolation could be used if the

additional accuracy offsets the complexity.

Similar to the IXT12N120 power MOSFET, as described in section 3.2.2, the datasheet

for the IXG12N120A2 gives limited data for leakage current by specifying a maximum

of 275 A at a junction temperature of 125C. This minimal impact on the overall device

dissipation implies that modeling leakage current would add unnecessary complexity to

the model.

105

A very important characteristic of the IGBT relates to its turn-off characteristic, often

referred to as a current tail. A quick explanation of the underlying cause of this effect is

described while referring back to the IGBT equivalent circuit in figure 2.9a which shows

the concept of a MOSFET supplying the base current to a PNP transistor. In order for the

PNP transistor to hold off the full value of VCE, it must have a large base width [27]

which results in a very low beta [11,13]. In this configuration a significant portion,

sometimes as much as half, of the total collector current must flow through the MOSFET

channel. When the IGBT is turned off, the current that flows through the MOSFET

channel abruptly stops, at MOSFET speeds, shutting off not only a portion of the

collector current but the PNP base current as well. The initial fall of the collector current

is attributed to the cessation of the MOSFET channel current and the following

exponential fall is due to the recombination time of the PNP base stored charge [27]. The

CRM models this characteristic by controlling the base current source G1 control voltage

decay using S1 to mimic a two-valued voltage controlled resistor. When VGE has fallen

below the level needed to support the flow of collector current, the resistance of S1

increases to a value such that the time constant with C5 sets the exponential decay of the

collector current. Figure 3.41 (section 3.4.6 Model Results) shows the IGBT turn-off

sequence which starts with the slew of VCE where the collector current remains at the

steady state value of 12 Amps, then dropping to 8 Amps when the value of VGE drops

below the value that supports the full collector current at the end of the VGE plateau.

106

Following this event, the collector current exponentially falls to 10% of the initial

collector current value in 1.7 S.

Calculation of the IGBT forward conduction power dissipation is similar to both the

Schottky diode and power MOSFET using equation (3.17), with the applicable reference

designators from figure 3.31, and IG3 sourcing current to the thermal network at the scale

I G 3 = V ( P) *V (TA) *V (Y ) + (V (TB) *V (TC ))

(3.17)

of 1 Amp/Watt. The thermal network initialization and lowpass filtering are similar to

that of the MOSFET model as described in section 3.3.4. The thermal characteristics of

the IXG12N120A2 were previously discussed in section 3.1 but as a reminder, the steady

state thermal impedance is 1.66C/W. No attempt is made to calculate forward

conduction leakage current due to the lack of sufficient data and minimal impact on the

total device dissipation.

The CRM IGBT model was tested with a diode clamped inductor in series with the

collector and Vd similar to the MOSFET configuration seen in figure 3.28. The circuit

values were set to the following values with the heatsink limited to 50C to keep the

junction temperature within the temperature range of the available data (125C).

107

I1 = 12 Amps

Vd = 960 V

ton = 200 S

T = 400 S

50C Heatsink

Initial test results showed good agreement between the input data and model results for

steady-state characteristics (VCE drop, dissipation, etc,) but not for switching behavior.

The switching times, and therefore the turn-on and turn-off energy loss results, were less

than the datasheet values by more than one half. A review of the input capacitance and

gate charge input data revealed a discrepancy that can account for the incorrect dynamic

behavior, which now provides results that are more inline with the datasheet values.

According to figure 3.39, the 12 Amp, gate charge plateau occurs at a VGE of 8 V and

exists for a period of about 7 nC, for a VCE of 600 V. According to the input admittance

data, the value of VGE that will support 12 Amps at 25C is 7.16 V (first discrepancy) and

according to figure 3.33, the value of CGC for values of VCE greater than 40 V is 2.3 pF.

Since this plateau region signifies when VCE is changing, and with VGE constant, all of

the gate current will flow through CGC to either charge or discharge CGC. Hence gate

current and the value of CGC determine the dynamic behavior of VCE. The charge of 560

V and 2.3 pF is 1.29 nC well below the value of 7 nC from the gate charge data

108

16

14

12

VGE (V)

10

8

6

4

7 nC

2

0

10

15

Gate Charge (nC)

20

(second discrepancy). Even if the VCE sat value of CGC (~20 pF) is assumed for the

entirety of the additional 37 V, the total charge would only be raised to 2.03 nC. Clearly

the gate charge data doesnt agree with the capacitance data. Based on this apparent

3.45:1 discrepancy in the charge of CGC between the two sets of data and the faster than

datasheet values of rise and fall times, a common multiplier (the final value is 3.0) was

added to the subcircuit statements for C1, C2, C3 and C7 increasing the value of all four

capacitor parameters in figure 3.31 by the amount of the multiplier. Table 3.4 shows the

results of VCE saturation and switching loss as compared with the calculated data. There

are no SPICE models of the IXG12N120A2 available for comparison with the CRM

leaving only sparse datasheet information available to compare with the CRM results.

109

VFWD

PDIS (avg)

Tj rise

Calculated

CRM Model

SPICE Model

2.63 V

35.6 W

59.1C

2.65 V

38.3 W

64.2C

N/A

N/A

N/A

The simulation results of the CRM, shown in table 3.4, are very close to the calculated

values with a VFWD error of +0.7%, PDIS error of 6.2%, and Tj rise error of 8.6%. The PDIS

error can be contributed to higher than specified switching losses. The application

engineer could fine tune the model by adjusting (downward) the parameters GMUX for

turn-on losses and TAU for turn-off losses. Figure 3.40 illustrates the turn-on waveforms

of the CRM model with figure 3.41 illustrating the turn-off waveforms.

Watts

Vgate (V)

Ic (A)

VCE (V)

1.0K

0.8K

0.6K

0.4K

0.2K

0

15

12

9

6

3

0

-3

16

12

8

4

0

-4

16K

12K

Collector Voltage

70 nS

Collector Current

4 nS

Gate Drive

Gate Voltage

Instantaneous Dissipation

8K

4K

0

4.95u

0.9 mJ

5.05u

5.15u

5.25u

5.35u

5.45u

TIME (s)

110

Dissipation (W)

V Gate (V)

Ic (A)

VCE (V)

1.0K

0.8K

0.6K

0.4K

0.2K

0

15

12

9

6

3

0

-3

16

12

8

4

0

-4

16K

12K

Collector Voltage

190 nS

Collector Current

1.7 uS

Gate Voltage

Gate Drive

Instantaneous Dissipation

8.17 mJ

4K

0

204.0u 204.5u 205.0u 205.5u 206.0u 206.5u 207.0u 207.5u 208.0u 208.5u 209.0u 209.5u 210.0u

8K

TIME (s)

In this chapter, the circuit response models for the Schottky diode, power MOSFET and

IGBT along with their corresponding thermal networks were developed and tested.

Model testing shows good agreement between the input data and CRM model results of

all three devices for the static response as a function of junction temperature. For the

cases where a vendor supplied SPICE model was available, side-by-side testing of the

CRM and SPICE models provides clear evidence of the thermal shortcomings typical of

SPICE models.

In at least one case, the IXG12N120A2 IGBT, there appears to be conflicting data within

the vendors datasheet. The first indication of possible discrepancies was the turn-on and

111

turn-off times of the CRM IGBT model was faster than published data by more than a

factor of two. Theoretically speaking, the VCE rise / fall times of the IGBT are functions

of the CGC which though dynamic, is essentially constant for 95% of the 900 V transition

signifying that the rapid increase in CGC during the last 5% of the transition does not

influence the rise / fall time which is specified for the 10% to 90% interval. Region II of

the gate charge curve (figure 3.22) is related to CGC, does not agree with the CV product

of Cres. A solution to this problem adds a parameter defined multiplier to the calculated

capacitance parameters {IIC1-4}. This solution adds an extra degree of freedom to the

application engineer by allowing the turn-on and turn-off times to be fine tuned to

further match the model output to observed data.

The results of the individual device tests indicate that power semiconductor devices can

be modeled based solely on observed data, a major advance for the system engineer that

is unable to find vendor supplied SPICE models for his selected devices. Chapter 4 will

continue the test and characterization of the CRM models by operating a switching

device alongside the Schottky diode in a buck converter that is operating in the

continuous conduction mode, a very common topology in voltage regulator systems.

112

Power MOSFET, IGBT and Schottky diode CRM models will undergo system level

testing to demonstrate their ability to properly model the switching devices response to

circuit characteristics. CRM model results will be compared to calculated values and, if

available, vendor supplied SPICE model results. A continuous conduction mode5 (CCM)

buck converter is chosen for these tests, based not only on its widespread utilization, but

additionally the waveforms and component stresses of this topology are typical of many

power electronics converters.

source to a load by periodically storing and releasing energy in (ideally) lossless

components such as inductors and capacitors. Typically this periodic transfer of energy

requires two or more switching components acting in unison. There are many power

electronic converter topologies that can process this energy transfer, with each one

having its own set of application dependent advantages and disadvantages. A commonly

Continuous conduction mode exists when the inductor current does not reach zero during any portion of

the switching period. If the inductor current does reach zero, the converter is in the discontinuous

conduction mode [13].

113

used and simple to implement power converter topology is the buck converter [13],

illustrated in figure 4.1. The buck converter, as its name implies, produces an output

ton

toff

ISW1

ID1

toff

ton

Voltage

VD1

ID1

ISW1

Current

IL1

T

SW1

Vin

VD1

L1

Vout

D1

voltage that is less than the input voltage. The input to output voltage ratio of a buck

converter that is operating in the continuous conduction mode is determined by the duty

cycle (D) as shown in equation (4.1) with D being a function of on and off times as in

equation (4.2). Voltage regulation is a common application of the buck converter

topology where Vout is compared to a reference voltage with the resulting error signal

controlling the value of D to maintain a constant Vout amongst changing values of load

Vout = D *Vin

D=

ton

t

= on

ton + toff

T

(4.1)

(4.2)

114

and Vin . The waveforms of a buck converter are shown in figure 4.1 which illustrates the

voltage / current waveforms and simplified circuit schematic.

efficiently as possible, not only for energy conservation, but also to minimize heat that is

generated within the converter. This lost energy requires additional volume and resources

to transfer the heat away from the converter. In its simplest form, efficiency is the ratio

between the converters output power and input power as in equation (4.3). Prior to

building a power electronics converter, the expected efficiency needs to be calculated in

order to properly allocate additional resources needed to extract the heat from the system.

In a power electronics converter, the switching device conduction and switching losses

Pout

P

= out

Pout + Ploss Pin

(4.3)

are major sources of the overall losses. In addition to the switching device losses, other

losses need to be considered at the system level such as the non-ideal inductor and

capacitor which have both DC and AC loss components. For the purpose of evaluating

the CRM models, only the switching device losses will be considered. The power

dissipation of both the switch or diode elements can be approximated by equation (4.4)

where Ploss is the total device dissipation. Pon in equation (4.5) is the forward conduction

loss, where Von is the voltage drop, I o is the load current and ton represents the time that

Ploss = Pon + Psw

(4.4)

115

Pon = Von I o

Psw = 0.5*Vin I o

ton

T

(4.5)

t( on ) + t( off )

T

(4.6)

the device is conducting. Psw in equation (4.6) is the switching loss with t(on) and t(off)

representing the turn-on and turn-off times respectively [13], where Vin is the supply rail

voltage and I o is the output current. Equation (4.6) is an approximation since the current

flowing through the switching elements (figure 4.1 IL1) contains ripple components

superimposed across the average value Io. It is assumed that the inductance of L1 is large

enough that the peak ripple of the current is less than 10% allowing the use of Io.

Equation (4.6) is also based on the assumption that the switching waveforms rise and fall

times have constant slope giving the instantaneous dissipation waveform a triangular

shape during the switching event. The IGBT turn-off current tail does not have a constant

slope which would introduce an error to equation (4.6). In order to adequately specify

IGBT switching losses, turn-on and turn-off energy loss [21,63] are often specified by the

manufacturer. Using energy to calculate IGBT switching loss, equation (4.7) is used in

Psw = (eon + eoff ) f sw

(4.7)

place of equation (4.6). These formulae will be used in the following sections to calculate

the expected switching device losses for comparison with the CRM models power

dissipation results.

116

In order to incorporate the CRM subcircuits into a schematic based SPICE simulation

platform, symbols which identify the input and output pins as well as the subcircuit file

name need to be created. Each schematic based SPICE platform is unique so the user will

need to create the three symbols conforming to their particular platforms requirements.

The symbol creation is a one time event for each of the CRM models, as the subcircuit

name is what uniquely identifies that symbol to a part. Figure 4.2 is the simplified test

circuit schematic for both the MOSFET and IGBT / Schottky diode model tests. The

device subcircuit symbols have the usual three or two connection nodes for the MOSFET

117

and Schottky diode respectively. The three additional connection pins are used to

initialize the thermal network, set the heatsink temperature and monitor the junction

temperature as was discussed in section 3.1.1. A circuit similar to figure 4.2 was

simultaneously simulated using vendor supplied SPICE models of the IXT12N120

MOSFET and C2D20120D Schottky devices as a means to compare model results. This

makes it possible to provide the overlaid switching waveform comparisons seen later in

this section. The MOSFET / Schottky diode model combination was tested to the

following operating conditions.

Io = 10 Amps

Vd = 900 V

ton = 9 S

T = 10 S

60C Heatsink

The modeled heatsink temperature was set to 60C to keep the MOSFET junction

temperature below 125C which is the highest temperature of input data available. If the

application engineer has access to temperature data greater than 125C, that additional

data can be used with the MATLAB script to calculate parameters that cover the

extended temperature range. The biggest difference between the SPICE and CRM model

results is the temperature dependent forward conduction voltage drop. This difference is

due to the previously discussed non-thermal characteristics of SPICE models for both the

MOSFET and Schottky parts that are being evaluated. Evidence of this difference can be

seen by comparing figures 4.4-5 which show that the SPICE model forward conduction

118

voltage drop (dashed line) is the same with a SPICE .TEMP statement of both 25C and

60C. In order to ease the comparison of switching waveforms, the Vd values of both

modeling circuits were individually set to obtain identical 800 VDC outputs. The reason

for the otherwise different output voltages is due largely to the different forward

conduction voltage drop of the CRM and SPICE models.

Table 4.1 lists the calculations that were used to estimate the switching device power

losses based on equations (4.4-6). The calculated results indicate that the MOSFET will

clearly dissipate more power than the Schottky diode. This is due not only to the large

25C

System D

Component D

Vd

Von

Io

Ton (S)

Tper (S)

t(on) (S)

t(off) (S)

Pon

Psw

Ptotal

MOSFET

0.90

0.90

900

21.5

10

9

10

0.025

0.017

193

19

212

Diode

0.10

900

1.55

10

1

10

0.025

0.017

1.55

0

1.55

60C

System D

Component D

Vd

Von

Io

Ton (S)

Tper (S)

t(on) (S)

t(off) (S)

Pon

Psw

Ptotal

MOSFET

0.90

0.90

900

30.6

10

9

10

0.025

0.017

275

19

294

Diode

0.10

900

1.69

10

1

10

0.025

0.017

1.69

0

1.69

forward conduction voltage drop that is characteristic of a high voltage power MOSFET,

but also since the duty cycle is 90% with the MOSFET conducting IO 90% of the time.

The 60C simulation results are shown in table 4.2 and show good agreement between

119

the CRM model and calculated values with the exception of the MOSFET switching loss.

The calculated switching loss does not take into consideration the current that is charging

and discharging the reverse bias capacitance of the Schottky diode which as revealed by

the CRM model (figure 4.3) is significant.

MOSFET

CALC CRM SPICE

Von

30.6 30.7

13.0

Pon

275

274

NA

Psw

19

41

NA

Ptotal

294

315

NA

Tj Rise 73.5 73.4

NA

Diode

CALC CRM SPICE

Von

1.69 1.68

1.46

Pon

1.69 1.68

NA

Psw

0

0

NA

Ptotal

1.69 1.68

NA

Tj Rise 0.81 0.72

NA

20

16

Id (A)

12

-4

39.60u

39.85u

40.10u

40.35u

40.60u

TIME (s)

120

Model Comparison

CRM - Solid

SPICE - Dashed

40

35

V(D,S)

30

25

23.3

21.2

20

13.5

12.5

15

10

5

0

10.4

Inductor Current

10.2

10.0

9.8

9.6

9.4

39u

40u

41u

42u

43u

44u

45u

46u

47u

48u

49u

50u

TIME (s)

Figure 4.4 MOSFET On VDS Comparison with Inductor Current 25C (1S/div)

Figures 4.4-5 show the MOSFET forward conduction voltage drop waveforms of the

CRM (solid) and SPICE (dashed) models. Note the voltage drop of the CRM model

increases with temperature while the SPICE model results remain unchanged.

CRM - Solid SPICE - Dashed

40

35

V(D,S)

30

25

29.2

32.0

12.5

13.5

20

15

10

Inductor Current

5

0

10.4

10.2

10.0

9.8

9.6

9.4

39u

40u

41u

42u

43u

44u

45u

46u

47u

48u

49u

50u

TIME (s)

Figure 4.5 MOSFET On VDS Comparison with Inductor Current 60C (1S/div)

121

Model Comparison

CRM - Solid

SPICE - Dashed

5

3

V(A,C)

1.59

1.57

1

-1

-3

-5

10.4

Inductor Current

10.2

10.0

9.8

9.6

9.4

38.75u

39.00u

39.25u

39.50u

39.75u

40.00u

40.25u

40.50u

TIME (s)

Figure 4.6 Diode On VAC Comparison with Inductor Current 25C (250nS/div)

The junction temperature rise of the CRM Schottky diode model is less than one degree

thus requiring an elevated heatsink temperature in order to see the different forward

conduction voltage drops.

CRM - Solid

SPICE - Dashed

5

3

V(A,C)

1.71

1

1.64

1.48

1.44

-1

-3

-5

10.4

{I(RLA)}

10.2

10.0

9.8

9.6

9.4

38.75u

39.00u

39.25u

39.50u

39.75u

40.00u

40.25u

40.50u

TIME (s)

Figure 4.7 Diode On VAC Comparison with Inductor Current 60C (250nS/div)

122

CRM - Solid

SPICE - Dashed

1.0K

0.8K

V(D,S)

0.6K

0.4K

0.2K

I Drain

0

-0.2K

20

16

12

8

4

0

-4

16

V(G,S)

12

8

4

0

-4

39.0u

39.2u

39.4u

39.6u

39.8u

40.0u

40.2u

TIME (s)

Figure 4.8 1S Off Full Pulse With Overlaid Traces 60C (200nS/div)

CRM - Solid

SPICE - Dashed

1.0K

0.8K

V(D,S)

0.6K

0.4K

0.2K

I Drain

0

-0.2K

20

16

12

8

4

0

-4

16

V(G,S)

12

8

4

0

-4

39.1u

39.125u

39.15u

39.175u

39.2u

TIME (s)

123

CRM - Solid

SPICE - Dashed

1.0K

0.8K

V(D,S)

0.6K

0.4K

0.2K

I Drain

0

-0.2K

20

16

12

8

4

0

-4

16

V(G,S)

12

8

4

0

-4

40.075u

40.1u

40.125u

40.15u

40.175u

TIME (s)

0.061

0.062

0.064

0.065

4.56

2.48

1.50

0.907

50

100

60

60

74.1

80.3

140.3 0.265 0.066 3.24

0.265

0.265

0.267

0.267

81.5

85.3

99.4

137.6

On Energy (mJ)

56.5

60.3

74.4

112.6

Junction Temperature

25

25

25

25

Heat Sink T

50

100

200

500

Frequency (kHz)

Temperature Rise

4.23

2.15

1.17

0.58

16.3

32.7

66.2

166.0

211.7

215.3

233.8

287.5

228.0

248.0

300.0

453.5

5.65

2.91

16.5

33.1

282.5 299.0

290.9 324.0

An analysis of performance vs. frequency for the power MOSFET, shown in table 4.3,

verifies constant values of turn-on and turn-off energy confirming that switching loss is

124

This is due to the increased switching loss raising the junction temperature and

consequently RDS(ON). The elevated junction temperatures at 500 kHz / 25C and all of

the 60C runs indicate that the IXT12N120 should not be subjected to these operating

conditions. Since conduction is the majority of the overall loss, either a lower value of

output current or duty cycle would quickly lower the junction temperature.

The CRM modeling concept is shown to accurately represent the response that a power

MOSFET transistor and Schottky diode would exhibit to circuit characteristics while

connected in a buck converter configuration. The rise and fall times are comparable to the

SPICE model results; actual hardware tests would reveal which model is closest to

reality. The forward conduction voltage drop of the CRM is slightly higher than the

calculated value at 25C and accurate to the calculated value at 60C. The calculated

junction temperature rise of the MOSFET at 60C is 8% less than the calculated value

where the thermal model itself was calculated to be 1.6% low in section 3.1.1. The reason

for this discrepancy is not known at this time, though it is likely an initialization error

since the calculated and CRM model dissipation results agree.

The IGBT CRM model is tested in a buck converter topology along side the Schottky

diode CRM model in a fashion similar to the power MOSFET / Schottky diode test. The

125

test schematic is identical to that of figure 4.2 with the exception of the part name of the

switching device (IXG12N120A2) and the three device terminal designators are C, G and

E corresponding to those of the IGBT. The IGBT is initially tested at 2.5 kHz as opposed

to 100 kHz for the power MOSFET, therefore the value of the lowpass filter L1 and C1

will be increased in value 40 times from that of the MOSFET test circuit.

Io = 10 Amps

Vd = 900 V

ton = 360 S

T = 400 S

60C Heatsink

A SPICE model of the IXG12N120A2 is not available for comparison with the CRM

model. Therefore a simultaneous SPICE simulation output comparison both numerical

and waveforms are not available. The metric for accuracy of the IGBT CRM model will

be dissipation as this is a most important characteristic to the high power application

engineer. The initial power calculations in table 4.4 are similar in methodology to the

power MOSFET with the exception of using turn-on and turn-off energy in place of rise

and fall times to calculate switching losses as in equation (4.6).

126

25C

IGBT

System D

0.50

Diode

60C

IGBT

System D

0.50

Diode

Component D 0.50

0.50

0.50

0.50

0.50

Vd

900

900

Vd

900

900

Von

2.36

1.55

Von

2.46

1.69

Io

10

10

Io

10

10

Ton S

360

40

Ton S

360

40

Tper S

400

10

Tper S

400

400

E(on) t(on)

0.5

0.025

E(on) t(on)

0.5

0.025

E(off) t(off)

5.4

0.017

E(off) t(off)

7.7

0.017

Pon

21.2

1.55

Pon

22.1

1.69

Psw

14.8

Psw

20.5

0.0

Ptotal

36

1.55

Ptotal

42.6

1.69

The 60C simulation results are shown in table 4.5 and show good agreement between

the CRM model and calculated values.

IGBT

Diode

Von

2.46

2.46

NA

Von

1.69

1.68

NA

Pon

22.1

21.8

NA

Pon

1.69

1.67

NA

Psw

20.5

17.7

NA

Psw

0.0

0.0

NA

Ptotal

42.6

39.5

NA

Ptotal

1.69

1.67

NA

Tj Rise

59.8

66.4

NA

Tj Rise

0.81

0.75

NA

Figures 4.11-12 show the MOSFET forward conduction voltage drop waveform of the

CRM IGBT model. Note in figure 4.12 that the voltage drop of the CRM model increases

with temperature though not nearly as much as was seen in the power MOSFET model.

127

Waveforms of the Schottky diode forward voltage drop have been omitted as they are,

except for the time base, the same as seen in figures 4.6-7.

Circuit Response Model

5

V(C,E)

4

3

2.41

2.34

2

1

0

10.6

Inductor Current

10.4

10.2

10.0

9.8

9.6

9.4

3.525m

3.775m

4.025m

TIME (s)

Circuit Response Model

5

V(C,E)

4

3

2.41

2.49

2

1

0

10.6

Inductor Current

10.4

10.2

10.0

9.8

9.6

9.4

3.525m

3.775m

4.025m

TIME (s)

128

86.8

73.5

67.1

64.7

0.599

0.643

0.654

0.661

5.91

6.01

5.75

5.97

15.04

23.28

39.48

72.94

8.53

16.63

33.08

66.31

16.3

8.3

4.0

2.1

21.3

20.8

20.7

20.7

37.6

29.1

24.7

22.8

2.5

1.25

0.625

0.313

60

60

60

60

62.8

49.4

43.5

40.9

122.8

109.4

103.5

100.9

0.641

0.645

0.650

0.650

5.97

5.96

5.94

6.02

15.33

23.77

40.99

75.21

8.72

17.17

34.40

68.54

16.5

8.3

4.1

2.1

21.8

21.5

21.5

21.4

38.3

29.7

25.6

23.5

61.8

48.5

42.1

39.7

On Energy (mJ)

Junction Temperature

25

25

25

25

Heat Sink T

2.5

1.25

0.625

0.313

Frequency (kHz)

Temperature Rise

An analysis of performance vs. frequency for the IGBT verifies constant values of turnon and turn-off energy confirming that switching loss is proportional to frequency. The

switching loss however does not increase with temperature which requires further study.

Unlike the power MOSFET, junction temperatures indicate that the IXG12N120A2 is

fully capable of the selected operating conditions.

The CRM modeling concept is shown to accurately represent the response that a power

IGBT and Schottky diode would exhibit to circuit characteristics while connected in a

buck converter configuration. Without a SPICE model to compare the rise and fall times,

turn-on and turn-off energy losses are comparable to the datasheet values. The forward

conduction voltage drop of the CRM is slightly higher than the calculated value at 25C

and accurate to the calculated value at 60C. The calculated junction temperature rise of

129

the MOSFET at 60C is 8% less than the calculated value where the thermal model itself

was calculated to be 1.6% low in section 3.1.1. The reason for this discrepancy is not

known at this time, though it is likely an initialization error since the calculated and CRM

model dissipation results agree.

130

5.1. Conclusions

In this work, the concept of modeling a power semiconductor device based strictly on

observable and or measured behavior was presented. Circuit Response Models were

developed and tested for the Schottky diode, power MOSFET and IGBT devices. The

results of individual and system level tests of these behavioral models show that key

power semiconductor characteristics such as power loss caused by forward conduction

voltage drop and state switching can be modeled based on observable behavior and

measurable characteristics. These models provide the application engineer an opportunity

to model power electronic converters even when SPICE models for the chosen

components are unavailable. In the cases where SPICE models are available, this work

has shown that the CRM models more accurately predict temperature dependent forward

voltage drop and the resulting device dissipation, both being important characteristics of

high power systems.

The Schottky diode, power MOSFET and IGBT switching devices that were selected for

this study, are high power devices, however truly high power conversion is often the

131

domain of thyristors and gate turn off thyristors (GTO). The thyristor, classified as semicontrollable because its turn-off mechanism is strictly under the control of circuit

conditions, is a prime candidate for Circuit Response Modeling. Like the high power

IGBT devices, the thyristor and GTO are prime candidates for CRM models due to

limited SPICE model availability. Adapting CRM model concepts to the thyristor and

GTO is a natural direction for the continuation of this work.

inappropriately large quantity of off-state leakage current by the subcircuit that functions

to limit the drain current as a function of gate voltage and temperature when the device is

in the active region. As was discussed in section 3.3.3, a solution to this problem would

be the placement of a generic MOSFET model in series with ABMs E4 and E5, which in

combination replicate the power MOSFET output characteristics as defined by the

collected input data. Follow on work to determine a replacement to the feedback stage E5

that is currently in use in the model could improve the models performance and possibly

even improve the simulation time by eliminating a portion of the existing model circuitry.

The construction of a power MOSFET results in an inherent diode that will be forward

biased whenever the polarity of VDS is reversed. This is an unlikely situation in a buck

converter that is operating in CCM, which along with very limited data on the

characteristics of this diode resulted in the decision to omit characterizing this effect in

the CRM models. As an aid to reduce the possibilities of convergence errors, a SPICE

model diode with the default parameters is in place in the models. Expansion of this

132

modeling concept into resonant and bridge topologies will require additional

characterization of this diode. Many of the techniques that were used to characterize the

Schottky diode could be used in this effort.

Depending on the construction of the device, IGBT devices are inherently capable of

holding off large values or reverse voltage. In many cases, a diode is packaged along side

the IGBT as a means to provide reverse VCE clamping. Therefore the IGBT is also a

candidate for expansion of the model to include characterization of this clamping diode

within the model.

The MATLAB scripts were written to process the XY collected input data as stand

alone processes even though they operate within the same directory and read data from

the same Excel file. As a means to partially automate the process of data processing, a

Graphical User Interface (GUI) can be written to simplify data entry such as part number,

profile temperatures and data limits (i.e. the reverse leakage current of the Schottky diode

that was limited to 1.4 kV even though the available data went as high as 1.8 kV). The

addition of a GUI would ease the task of data processing, but not the collection of input

data. The data collection phase is without a doubt the most time consuming step of the

model characterization process. A means to automate the process of accessing the XY

input data from datasheet figures into the Excel worksheets would be helpful if a number

of different parts are being modeled.

133

A reoccurring goal through out this project has been to trade-off model accuracy for

simulation speed. These trade-offs were made with the consideration of power dissipation

being of paramount concern to the system engineer. Clearly there are cases where these

trade-offs are not appropriate, examples of such cases may include but are not limited to,

turn-on and turn-off delay times which are affected by the straight line approximations of

the Input Admittance section of the power MOSFET and IGBT models. By increasing the

complexity of the Input Admittance equation, a more accurate portrayal of the input data

can be realized. Persons considering changes to this portion of the device models will

need to account for the changes that the SPICE GSMOOTH parameter would bring to the

output of the controlled source that executes the Input Admittance function. Once the

effects of GSMOOTH are understood, they can be subtracted out of the ABM goal

similar to the way the native diode voltage drop contribution was subtracted from the

input data response as previously seen in figure 3.7.

A significant way to simplify the CRM models, as discussed in sections 2 and 3, was to

completely omit one or more device characteristics from the model, for example reverse

leakage currents and breakdown voltage. Though the argument was made that a properly

designed system will not operate in regions that would warrant modeling these

characteristics, they can be added if the user so chooses. Since the models are constructed

in a modular fashion, the addition of sections to model these and other device

characteristics can be added to the models SPICE subcircuit with minimal impact on the

existing model sections. Future work to add these or other device characteristics to the

134

existing model subcircuits would allow the application engineer to control model

complexity by choosing what to model and what to omit.

A desired outcome of any device model is the ability to predict the outcome of an event

within a desired level of accuracy. The CRM concept is capable of providing predictive

modeling if the application engineer is knowledgeable of the data profiles that

characterize the device and how the models interpret this data. As an example, for both

25C and 125C, the amount of input data to determine the power MOSFET RDS(ON)

(figure 3.27) is clearly sufficient to capture the non-linear characteristics of this function.

What isnt certain is how accurately the model will predict RDS(ON) for temperatures

between and even outside the range of these two temperatures. With only two sets of

temperature data, the only way of predicting what will occur between these two data

points is linear interpolation. There are at least two ways to reduce this uncertainty; the

first is to dive into semiconductor physics equations to determine the RDS(ON) vs.

temperature transfer function and apply it to the models. The second way, which follows

the philosophy of CRM modeling, is to provide input data at additional temperatures.

With these additional data points, possibly over a wider range of temperatures, the model

can more accurately predict the results of a simulation that lies between any two

temperature data points.

135

List of References

1 I.M. Gottlieb, Power Supplies, Switching Regulators, Inverters, and converters, 2nd

edition, McGraw-Hill, 1994.

2 M. Bhatnagar, B.J. Baliga, Analysis of Silicon Carbide Power Device Performance,

Proceedings of the 3rd International Symposium on Power Semiconductor Devices and

ICs, Nov. 1991, pp. 176-180.

3 J.L. Hudgins, G.S. Simin, E. Santi, et al, An Assessment of Wide Bandgap

Semiconductors for Power Devices, IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 18,

issue 3, May 2003, pp. 907-914.

4 B. Ozpineci, L.M. Tolbert, Comparison of Wide-Bandgap Semiconductors for Power

Electronics Applications, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Dec. 2003.

5 L.W.Nagel, D.O.Pederson, SPICE (Simulation Program with Integrated Circuit

Emphasis), University of California, Berkeley, ERL Memo No. ERL-M382, Apr. 1973.

6 A. Vladimirescu, SPICE The Third Decade, Proceedings of the 1990 IEEE Bipolar

Circuits and Technology Meeting, Sep. 1990, pp. 96-101.

7 A. Vladimirescu, SPICE The Fourth Decade Analog and Mixed-Signal Simulation

A State of the Art, Proceedings of the 1999 International Semiconductor Conference,

vol. 1, Oct. 1999, pp. 39-44.

8 The Design Center; Analysis Users Guide / Reference Manual, Version 5.1, Microsim

Corporation, Jan. 1992.

9 TopSPICE Users Guide / Simulator Reference, Rev. 11a, Penzar Development,

Canoga Park, CA.

10 A. Sangswang Uncertainty Modeling of Power Electronics Converter Dynamics,

Ph.D. Thesis, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA 2003.

11 B.J. Baliga, Modern Power Devices, John Wiley, 1987.

12 B.J. Baliga, Power Semiconductor Devices, PWS Publishing, 1995.

136

Applications, and Design, 3rd Edition, John Wiley & Sons, 2003.

14 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_semiconductor_device.

15 B.A. Weaver, A New, High Efficiency, Digital, Modulation Technique for AM or

SSB Sound Broadcasting Applications, IEEE Transactions on Broadcasting, vol. 38,

issue 1, Mar. 1992, pp. 38-42.

16 J.W. Palmour, R. Singh, R.C. Glass, et al., Silicon Carbide for Power Devices, 1997

IEEE International Symposium on Power Semiconductor Devices and ICs, May 1997,

pp. 25-32.

17 A. Elasser, T. P. Chow, Silicon Carbide Benefits and Advantages for Power

Electronics Circuits and Systems, Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 90, issue 6, June 2002,

pp. 969-986.

18 C2D20120D Schottky Diode Datasheet, Rev. F, Cree.

19 CMF20120D Power MOSFET Datasheet, Rev. A, Cree.

20 F. Ren, J.C. Zolper, Wide Energy Bandgap Electronic Devices, World Scientific,

2003.

21 B.J. Baliga, Fundamentals of Power Semiconductor Devices, Springer Science +

Business Media, 2008.

22 S.M. Sze, Kwok K. NG, Physics of Semiconductor Devices, 3rd Edition,WileyInterscience, 2007.

23 Y. Sugawara, D. Takayama, K. Asano, et al. 3 kV 600 A 4H-SiC High Temperature

Diode Module,14th International Symposium on Power Semiconductor Devices and ICs

Symposium, June 2002, pp. 245-248.

24 M. Latif, P.R. Bryant, Multiple Equilibrium Points and Their Significance in the

Second Breakdown of Bipolar Transistors, IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits, vol. 16,

issue 1, pp. 8-15, Feb. 1981.

25 W.P. Bennett, R.A. Kumbatovic, Power and Energy Limitations of Bipolar

Transistors Imposed by Thermal-Mode and Current-Mode Second-Breakdown

Mechanisms, IEEE Transactions on Electron Devices, vol. 28, issue 10, Oct. 1981, pp.

1154-1162.

26 B.J. Baliga, Evolution of MOS-Bipolar Power Semiconductor Technology,

Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 76, issue 4, Apr. 1988, pp. 409-418.

137

Electron Device Letters, vol. 6, issue 2, Feb. 1985, pp. 74-77.

28 A. Hefner, Modeling Power Semiconductor Devices for Realistic Simulation, IEEE

4th Workshop on Computers in Power Electronics, Aug. 1994, pp. 11-44.

29 Advanced Power Factor Correction, On Semiconductor, Tutorial TND344/D, Oct.

2008.

30 IEEE Std. 519-1992, IEEE Recommended Practices and Requirements for

Harmonics Control in Electrical Power Systems, June 1992.

31 N. Beck, et al., How Low Can You Go? A White Paper on Cutting Edge Efficiency

in Commercial Desktop Computers, Electric Power Research Institute, Mar. 2008.

32 K. Sheng, B.W. Williams, S.J. Finney, A Review of IGBT Models, IEEE

Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 15, issue 6, Nov. 2000, pp. 1250-1266.

33 I.K. Budihardjo, P.O. Lauritzen, H.A. Mantooth, Performance Requirements for

Power MOSFET Models, IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 12, issue 1, Jan.

1997, pp. 36-45.

34 H.A. Mantooth, J.L. Duliere, A Unified Diode Model for Circuit Simulation, IEEE

Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 12, issue 5, Sep. 1997, pp. 816-823.

35 R. Kraus, H.J. Mattausch, Status and Trends of Power Semiconductor Device Models

for Circuit Simulation, IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 13, issue 3, May

1998, pp. 452-465.

36 H. Goebel, A Unified Method for Modeling Semiconductor Power Devices, IEEE

Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 9, issue 5, Sep. 1994, pp. 497-505.

37 N. Jankovic, T. Ueta, K. Hamada, et al., Unified Approach in Electro-Thermal

Modelling of IGBTs and Power Pin Diodes, 19th International Symposium on Power

Semiconductor Devices and ICs Symposium, May 2007, pp. 165-168.

38 R. Kraus, P. Turkes, J. Sigg, Physics-Based Models of Power Semiconductor

Devices for the Circuit Simulator SPICE, IEEE Power Electronics Specialists

Conference, vol. 2, May 1998, pp. 1726-1731.

39 M. Cotorogea, Using Analog Behavioral Modeling in PSpice for the Implementation

of Subcircuit-Models of Power Devices, IEEE International Power Electronics

Congress, Oct. 1998, pp. 158-163.

138

and Quasi Saturation Effect, Canadian Conference on Electrical and Computer

Engineering, vol. 4, May 2004, pp. 1839-1843.

41 H.P. Yee, P.O. Lauritzen, SPICE Models for Power MOSFETs: An Update, IEEE

Applied Power Electronics Conference and Exposition, Feb. 1988, pp. 281-289.

42 Y.Y. Tzou, and L.J. Hsu, A Practical SPICE Macro Model for the IGBT,

International Conference on Industrial Electronics, Control, and Instrumentation, vol. 2,

Nov. 1993, pp. 762-766.

43 A.F. Petrie, C. Hymowitz, A SPICE model for IGBTs, IEEE Applied Power

Electronics Conference, vol. 1, Mar. 1995, pp. 147-152.

44 J.S. Yuan, J.J. Liou Semiconductor Device Physics and Simulation Plenum Press,

1998.

45 G. Massobrio, P. Antognetti, Semiconductor Device Modeling with SPICE, 2nd

edition, McGraw Hill, 1993.

46 K. Sheng, S.J. Finney, B.W. Williams, Fast and Accurate IGBT Model for PSpice,

IET Electronics Letters, vol. 32, issue 25, Dec. 1996, pp. 2294-2295.

47 K. Asparuhova, T. Grigorova, IGBT Behavioral PSPICE Model, 25th International

Conference of Microelectronics, July 2006, pp. 203-206.

48 A. Maxim, G. Maxim, A Novel Analog Behavioral IGBT SPICE Macromodel,

IEEE Power Electronics Specialists Conference, vol. 1, Aug. 1999, pp. 364-369.

49 H.J. Boenig, J.W. Schwartzenberg, L.J. Willinger, et al., Design and Testing of High

Power Repetitively Pulsed, Solid-State Closing Switches, Conference Record of the

1997 IEEE Industry Applications Conference, vol. 2, Oct. 1997, pp. 1022-1028.

50 A.R. Hefner, D.L. Blackburn, Simulating the Dynamic Electrothermal Behavior of

Power Electronic Circuits and Systems, IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 8,

issue 4, Oct. 1993, pp. 376-385.

51 A. Guerra, F. Vallone, Electro-Thermal SPICE Schottky Diode Model Suitable Both

at Room Temperature and at High Temperature, International Rectifier, Dec. 1999.

52 www.silvaco.com.

53 www.synopsys.com/TOOLS/TCAD/DEVICESIMULATION.

139

Simulation with SABER and Verilog, Hewlett Packard Journal, Apr. 1997.

55 www.synopsys.com/Systems/Saber/Pages/MAST.aspx.

56 www.synopsys.com/Systems/Saber/Pages/default.aspx

57 G. T. Oziemkiewicz, Implementation and Development of the NIST IGBT Model in

a SPICE Based Commercial Circuit Simulator, Masters Thesis, University of Florida,

1996

58 I.M. Wilson, Analog Behavioral Modeling Using PSpice, Proceedings of the 32nd

Midwest Symposium on Circuits and Systems, vol. 2, Aug. 1989, pp. 981-984.

59 K.F. McDonald, Dependent Source Modeling for SPICE, IEEE International Pulsed

Power Conference, June 1991, pp. 365-368.

60 I. Budihardjo, P.O. Lauritzen, K.Y. Wong, et al., Defining Standard Performance

Levels for Power Semiconductor Devices, Conference Record of the 1995 IEEE

Industry Applications Conference, vol. 2, Oct. 1995, pp. 1084-1090.

61 A. Maxim, D. Andreu, J. Boucher, A Unified High Accuracy SPICE Library for the

Power Semiconductor Devices Built with the Analog Behavioral Macromodeling

Technique, 12th International Symposium on Power Semiconductor Devices and ICs,

May 2000, pp. 189-192.

62 RADC Reliability Engineers Toolkit, Rome Air Development Center, July 1988.

63 V.K. Khanna, The Insulated Gate Bipolar Transistor - IGBT Theory and Design,

Wiley-Interscience, 2003.

64 H.A. Mantooth, A Unified Diode Model with Self-Heating Effects, Proceedings of

the 1995 IEEE Bipolar/BiCMOS Circuits and Technology Meeting, Oct. 1995, pp. 62-65.

65 Basic Thermal Properties of Semiconductors, On Semiconductor, HBD856/D, June

2009.

66 K.L. Pandya, W. McDaniel, A Simplified Method of Generating Thermal Models for

Power MOSFETs, 18th Annual IEEE Symposium on Semiconductor Thermal

Measurement and Management, Mar. 2002, pp. 83-87.

67 IXG12N120A2, IGBT Datasheet, Apr. 2008, IXYS

68 IXT12N120 MOSFET Datasheet, Apr. 2004, IXYS

140

AN2008-03, June 2008.

70 M. Marz, P. Nance, Thermal Modeling of Power Electronic Systems, Fraunhofer

Institute, Apr. 2000.

71 A. Ammous, B. Allard, H. Morel, Transient Temperature Measurements and

Modeling of IGBTs Under Short Circuit, IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol.

13, issue 1, Jan. 1998, pp. 12-25.

72 www.getdata-graph-digitizer.com

73 O. Apeldoorn, S. Schroder, R.W. DeDoncker, A New Method for Power Electronics

System Simulation with PSpice, Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on

Industrial Electronics, vol. 2, July 1997, pp. 217-222.

74 J. Lou, et al. Temperature Dependence of Ronsp in Silicon Carbide and GaAs

Schottky Diode, Reliability Physics Symposium, Apr. 2002.

75 V. Vorperian, Simplified Analysis of PWM Converters Using Model of PWM

Switch, IEEE Transactions on Aerospace & Electronic Systems, vol. 26 issue 3, May

1990

76 V. Barkhordarian, Power MOSFET Basics, International Rectifier, Application

Note AN-1084.

141

Thermal Model

TR1: Thermal Model R1* (*the number of thermal pole pairs is device dependent)

TC1: Thermal Model C1*

DRQ10: Diode Reverse Charge: a0

DRQ11: Diode Reverse Charge: a1*(Charge)

DRQ12: Diode Reverse Charge: a2*(Charge2)

DFS10: Diode Forward Straight Line: a0

DFS11: Diode Forward Straight Line: a1*(T)

DFS12: Diode Forward Straight Line: a2*(T2)

DFS20: Diode Forward Straight Line: b0*(IFWD)

DFS21: Diode Forward Straight Line: b1*(T)*(IFWD)

DFS22: Diode Forward Straight Line: b2*(T2)*(IFWD)

DFL20: Diode Forward Logarithmic: a0

DFL21: Diode Forward Logarithmic: a1*(T)

DFL22: Diode Forward Logarithmic: a2*(T2)

DFL30: Diode Forward Logarithmic: b0*(IFWD)

DFL31: Diode Forward Logarithmic: b1*(T)*(IFWD)

DFL32: Diode Forward Logarithmic: b2*(T2)*(IFWD)

DRI10: Diode Reverse Current: a0

DRI11: Diode Reverse Current: a1*(T)

DRI12: Diode Reverse Current: a2*(T2)

DRI20: Diode Reverse Current: b0

DRI21: Diode Reverse Current: b1*(T)

DRI22: Diode Reverse Current: b2*(T2)

DRI30: Diode Reverse Current: c0

DRI31: Diode Reverse Current: c1*(T)

DRI32: Diode Reverse Current: c2*(T2)

142

GMUX: Gate Capacitance Scale Factor

MIC1: MOSFET Input Capacitance 1 (C)

MIC2: MOSFET Input Capacitance 2 (C)

MIC3: MOSFET Input Capacitance 3 (C)

MIC4: MOSFET Input Capacitance 4 (C)

MIC5: MOSFET Input Capacitance 5 (C)

MAD10: MOSFET Input Admittance: a0

MAD11: MOSFET Input Admittance: a1*(T)

MAD12: MOSFET Input Admittance: a2*(T2)

MAD20: MOSFET Input Admittance: b0*(VGS)

MAD21: MOSFET Input Admittance: b1*(T)*(VGS)

MAD22: MOSFET Input Admittance: b2*(T2)*(VGS)

MRD10: MOSFET RDS(ON): a0

MRD11: MOSFET RDS(ON): a1*(T)

MRD20: MOSFET RDS(ON): b0*(ID)

MRD21: MOSFET RDS(ON): b1*(T)*(ID)

MRD30: MOSFET RDS(ON): c0*(ID2)

MRD31: MOSFET RDS(ON): c1*(T)*(ID2)

143

IGBT Model

GMUX: Gate Capacitance Scale Factor

IIC1: IGBT Input Capacitance 1 (C)

IIC2: IGBT Input Capacitance 2 (C)

IIC3: IGBT Input Capacitance 3 (C)

IIC4: IGBT Input Capacitance 4 (C)

IIC5: IGBT Input Capacitance 5 (C)

IAD10: IGBT Input Admittance: a0

IAD11: IGBT Input Admittance: a1*(T)

IAD12: IGBT Input Admittance: a2*(T2)

IAD20: IGBT Input Admittance: b0*(VGE)

IAD21: IGBT Input Admittance: b1*(T)*(VGE)

IAD22: IGBT Input Admittance: b2*(T2)*(VGE)

IVFD110: IGBT Forward Voltage Drop 25C: a0

IVFD111: IGBT Forward Voltage Drop 25C: a1*(VGE)

IVFD112: IGBT Forward Voltage Drop 25C: a2*(VGE2)

IVFD120: IGBT Forward Voltage Drop 25C: b0*(IC)

IVFD121: IGBT Forward Voltage Drop 25C: b1*(VGE)*(IC)

IVFD122: IGBT Forward Voltage Drop 25C: b2*(VGE2)*(IC)

IVFD210: IGBT Forward Voltage Drop 125C: a0

IVFD211: IGBT Forward Voltage Drop 125C: a1*(VGE)

IVFD212: IGBT Forward Voltage Drop 125C: a2*(VGE2)

IVFD220: IGBT Forward Voltage Drop 125C: b0*(IC)

IVFD221: IGBT Forward Voltage Drop 125C: b1*(VGE)*(IC)

IVFD222: IGBT Forward Voltage Drop 125C: b2*(VGE2)*(IC)

144

%Thermal_B.m

%An M-File to read Transient Thermal Impedance XY Data

%and calculate RC pairs using Simulated Annealing

clc

clear all

close all

%%%

%Part Number and name of Excel file that contains the input data

%PN='C2D20120D';

PN='IXG12N120A2';

%PN='IXT12N120';

n='4'; % Number of thermal time constants (user entry)

N=str2double(n);

hold=xlsread('ThrmData' , (PN)); % read input data from 'ThrmData'

sheet

len=length(hold(:,1)); %number of rows in column 1

A=zeros(len,6); %creating the working matrix

A(:,1)=hold(:,1);% X (time) input data

A(:,2)=hold(:,2);% Y (thermal impedance) input data

%A(:,3) current iteration thermal impedance

%A(:,4) error between current and best iteration

%A(:,5) best iteration thermal impedance

%A(:,6) error between input data and best iteration thermal impedance

Res=A(len,2); %steady state thermal impedance (last row, column 2)

tau=.001; %sets initial guess of first pole time constant

count=1; %sets register

err1=0; %sets register

err2=0; %sets register

scale=0.1; %maximum deviation of RES TAU pairs during simulated

annealing

scale2=0; %initializes variable scale value

WGT=1; %emphasizes accuracy of DC/long pulse thermal impedance (zero to

disable)

for i=1:len; %calculating the appx location of first pole

if A(i,2) <(.632*Res);

count=count+1;

else

tau=A(count,2);

end

end

%calculating appx RC values of the N poles

B=zeros(N,4);

for i=1:N;

B(i,1)=Res*(0.5^(i));

B(i,2)=(tau/N)*(.1^(i-1));

end

145

A(i,3)=0;

for k=1:N;

A(i,3)=A(i,3)+(B(k,1)*(1-exp(-A(i,1)/B(k,2))));

end

end

for i=1:len %calculating initial error value

A(i,4)=((A(i,3)-A(i,2))/A(i,2))^2; %square of normalized difference

err1=err1+(A(i,4)*(1+(WGT*i/len)));

end

err1=err1*(100/len); %gives all plots equal weighting regardless of

data length

iter=6000;

for j=1:iter;

if err1<0.025

break

else

end

scale1=scale*((iter-j)/iter);% linear from 100% towards zero

if err1>2 %all N*2 variables are randomly perturbed

rand=random('uniform',-1,1,N,2);

else % progressively fewer variables are randomly perturbed

scale2=(1+((N)*(j/iter)));

rand=random('uniform',-(scale2),(scale2),N,2);

for i=1:N;

if abs(rand(i,1))>1

rand(i,1)=0;

else

end

if abs(rand(i,2))>1

rand(i,2)=0;

else

end

end

end

for i=1:N;

B(i,3)=B(i,1)+(B(i,1)*rand(i,1)*scale1); %modifies RES

B(i,4)=B(i,2)+(B(i,2)*rand(i,2)*scale1); %modifies TAU

end

for i=1:len; %calculates TTI from modified RES TAU pairs

A(i,3)=0;

for k=1:N;

A(i,3)=A(i,3)+(B(k,3)*(1-exp(-A(i,1)/B(k,4))));

end

end

err2=0;

for i=1:len; %calculating error of the current iteration

A(i,4)=(((A(i,3)-A(i,2))/A(i,2))^2); %A(i,2)

err2=err2+(A(i,4)*(1+(WGT*i/len)));

end

err2=err2*(100/len); %gives all plots equal weighting regardless of

data length

if err2<err1;

err1=err2;

for i=1:len;

146

A(i,5)=A(i,3);

end

for i=1:N;

B(i,1)=B(i,3);

B(i,2)=B(i,4);

end

else

end

figure(1) %plots calculation results in real time

loglog(A(:,1),A(:,2),A(:,1),A(:,3),'+',A(:,1),A(:,5),'o')

axis([10^-7 1 10^-4 10])

str1=num2str(err1,3);

str2=num2str(err2,3);

str3=num2str(j);

str4=num2str(scale1,3);

text(10^-6,3.16,(strcat('Err1= ',str1)));

text(10^-6,1,(strcat('Err2= ',str2)));

text(10^-6,3.16e-1,(strcat('iter= ',str3)));

text(10^-6,1e-1,(strcat('Scale= ',str4)));

drawnow;

%pause(.1);

end

A(:,6)=100*((A(:,5)-A(:,2))./A(:,2)); %pct error of input data to final

results

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

figure(2)

subplot(6,1,6)

semilogx(A(:,1),A(:,6),'k+'),axis([10^-6 1 -10 10])

xlabel('Seconds')

ylabel('% Error')

subplot(6,1,1:5)

loglog(A(:,1),A(:,2),'k',A(:,1),A(:,5),'ko')

axis([10^-6 1 10^-4 10])

set(gca,'XTicklabel',[])

title(strcat((PN),' Thermal Impedance'))

%xlabel('Seconds')

ylabel('Thermal Impedance { ^o}C/W')

text(3e-6,1,'--- Input Data')

text(3e-6,.5,'OOO Model Results')

text(.5e-3,.02,'Thermal Model Parameters')

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

C=zeros(N,2);

%Calculating the "C" values from RES and TAU

for i=1:N

C(i,1)=B(i,1);

C(i,2)=B(i,2)/B(i,1);

end

%Places the calculated R and C values on the figure

for i=1:N

RD=strcat('TR', num2str(i));

CD=strcat('TC', num2str(i));

RVAL=sprintf('%0.3e',C(i,1));

CVAL=sprintf('%0.3e',C(i,2));

strcat((RD),'=',(RVAL));

147

strcat((CD),'=',(CVAL));

text(2*10^-4,10^-(1.75+(0.25*(i))),strcat((RD),'=',(RVAL)));

text(2*10^-2,10^-(1.75+(0.25*(i))),strcat((CD),'=',(CVAL)));

end

subplot(6,1,6)

xlabel('Seconds')

ylabel('% Error')

%Writes the model parameter data to a text file

fid = fopen(strcat((PN),'_thermal.txt'), 'w');

fprintf(fid,'\r\n%s','*Thermal Model Parameter Data');

fprintf(fid,'\r\n%s',strcat('*',(PN)));

for i=1:N %Formats the .param statement for each (N) pole pair

RD=strcat(' TR', num2str(i));

CD=strcat(' TC', num2str(i));

RVAL=sprintf('%0.3e',C(i,1));

CVAL=sprintf('%0.3e',C(i,2));

param=strcat('.param',(RD),'=',(RVAL),(CD),'=',(CVAL));

disp(param)

fprintf(fid, '\r\n%s',param);

end

fclose(fid);

148

149

150

151

******************************************************************

*CRM C2D20120D 1200V 10A Schottky Diode

*Schottky Diode Circuit Response Model

*5-Time Constant Thermal Model

*

(A) Anode

*

| (C) Cathode

*

| | (Qrev) Reverse Charge Monitor

*

| | | (Ttop) Thermal Top (Junction Temp)

*

| | | | (Ths) Thermal Bottom (Heatsink Temp)

*

| | | | | (Pavg) Average Dissipation Input

.SUBCKT CRM20D120 A C E T T5 TC

*

**Schottky Diode Circuit Response Model

**Reverse Charge**

S1 D 0 N 0 Reset

G1 0 D Table {V(N)*I(V1)} (-8,-8) (8,8)

R1 D E 1

R2 I J .1

C1 E 0 1n

E2 F 0 Table {V(E)} (-1,-1) (60,60)

V1 G I 0 ; zero volt current monitor

C2 J K 10n

E3 K H Value {V(F)*(DRQ10+(DRQ11*V(F))+(DRQ12*V(F)^2))}

C3 G H 10p

*

**Forward Voltage and Parasitics**

R3 G C .001

V2 L G 0

*Straight Line Forward Voltage Drop*

*E4 M L Value {({DFS10}+({DFS11}*V(T))+({DFS12}*V(T)^2))

*+

+(({DFS20}+({DFS21}*V(T))+({DFS22}*V(T)^2))*I(V2))}

*Logarithmic Forward Voltage Drop*

E4 M L Value {(14*log(I(V2)+1)

+

*({DFL20}+({DFL21}*V(T))+({DFL22}*V(T)^2))*.0257)

+

+(({DFL30}+({DFL31}*V(T))+({DFL32}*V(T)^2))*I(V2))}

D1 H M Reference TEMP=27

L1 A H .015n

152

*

**Reverse Current**

*V3 G Q 0

*G2 Q H Value {1e-6*V(N)*(DRI10+(DRI11*V(T))+(DRI12*V(T)^2))

*+

*exp((V(A)^2.1/(DRI20+(DRI21*V(T))+(DRI22*V(T)^2)))

*+

^(DRI30+(DRI31*V(T))+(DRI32*V(T)^2)))}

*

**Polarity Detectors**

E5 P 0 Table {V(H,G)} (0,0) (.2,1) GSMOOTH=.05 ;Forward Bias

E6 N 0 Table {V(G,H)} (0,0) (.2,1) GSMOOTH=.05 ;Reverse Bias

*

**Dissipation**

VTA TA 0 pwl (0,0) (1e-6,1)

VTB TB 0 pwl (0,1) (1e-6,0) ;(2e-6,0)

G3 0 T Value {(V(TA)*V(P)*V(H,G)*I(V2))+(V(TB)*V(TC))} ;Forward

*G4 0 T Value {V(N)*V(G,H)*I(V3)} ;Reverse

*

**Thermal Circuit**

RT1 T T1 {TR1}

CT1 T T1 {TC1}

RT2 T1 T2 {TR2}

CT2 T1 T2 {TC2}

RT3 T2 T3 {TR3}

CT3 T2 T3 {TC3}

RT4 T3 T4 {TR4}

CT4 T3 T4 {TC4}

RT5 T4 T5 {TR5}

CT5 T4 T5 {TC5}

*

**Models and Parameters**

.model Reference D (IS=1E-14 RS=0 N=0.5)

.model Reset Vswitch (Ron=.1 Roff=1e6 Voff=1 Von=0)

*

**Reverse Charge Parameters

.param DRQ10=-6.658e-002 DRQ11=8.592e-001 DRQ12=-6.884e-003

*

**Straight Line Forward Voltage Parameters

.param DFS10=4.811e-001 DFS11=9.732e-004 DFS12=-3.104e-006

.param DFS20=2.333e-001 DFS21=-1.463e-003 DFS22=2.982e-006

**Logaritmic Forward Voltage Parameters

.param DFL10=1.000e-014 DFL11=1.603e-031 DFL12=-2.230e-034

.param DFL20=8.415e-001 DFL21=-5.510e-004 DFL22=-1.095e-006

.param DFL30=2.103e-001 DFL31=-1.337e-003 DFL32=2.799e-006

*

153

.param DRI10=4.442e+000 DRI11=-1.894e-002 DRI12=2.642e-005

.param DRI20=2.737e+003 DRI21=-8.793e+000 DRI22=9.985e-003

.param DRI30=4.064e+001 DRI31=-1.616e-001 DRI32=1.922e-004

*

**Thermal Model Parameters

.param TR1=1.979e-001 TC1=1.141e-001

.param TR2=7.750e-002 TC2=7.395e-002

.param TR3=1.591e-001 TC3=5.862e-003

.param TR4=2.304e-002 TC4=1.093e-003

.param TR5=5.195e-003 TC5=1.319e-004

*

.ENDS CRM20D120

******************************************************************

154

%DFWD_LOG_A.m

%An M-File to read and process datasheet values from Excel files

%Each Excel worksheet will contain 2 columns of XY data

%This particular application will calculate the SPICE parameters

%for the equation that describes the temperature dependent

%forward voltage drop of a Schottky junction

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

%This model is Logarithmic Drop plus Specific Resistance Slope

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

clc

clear all

close all

%%%

PN='C2D20120D'; %part number and name of Excel file that contains the

input data

file=('C2D20120D'); %name of xls file (in same directory)

n=4; %number of temperature profiles

T=[25 75 125 175]; %Data temperature in Celsius

S1='VF25';

S2='VF75';

S3='VF125';

S4='VF175';

S={S1; S2; S3; S4};

dep=1; %column that contains the voltage "dependent" data

ind=2; %column that contains the current "independent" data

B=zeros(3,2); %contains current and best equation values

C=zeros(3,n); %contains final equation values for each temperature

profile

%%SPICE model parameters of reference diode

Is=1E-14;%Ref diode Is value

N=.5;

%Ref diode N value

Rs=0;

%Ref diode Rs value

B(1,1)=1E-14; %initial Is value of ABM equation

B(2,1)=.5;

%initial N value of ABM equation

B(3,1)=.06;

%initial Rs value of ABM equation

err1=0; %initialize error value

err2=0; %initialize error value

%A1 = Independent input data

%A2 = Dependent input data

%A3 = Dependent data minus reference diode (VCVS Goal)

%A4 = Current random guess of goal

%A5 = Current run error value

%A6 = Current best approximation of goal

155

for i=1:n

data=xlsread(file, char(S(i))); %reads data

x=(data(:,ind)); %extracts the independent column

y=(data(:,dep)); %extracts the dependent column

x(isnan(x))=[]; %removes NAN from the x column

y(isnan(y))=[]; %removes NAN from the y column

lenx=length(x); %determine length of vector x

A=zeros(lenx,6); %Working vectors

%From this point on, the first column will be the (x)independent

variable

A(:,1)=x; %Independent input data (forward current)

A(:,2)=y; %Dependent input data (forward voltage)

%Dependent data minus reference diode (VCVS Goal)

A(:,3)=A(:,2)-(log(A(:,1)/Is)*N*.0257);

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

%Calculate SPICE Parameters using Simulated Annealing

for k=1:lenx

A(k,4)=(log(A(k,1)/B(1,1))*B(2,1)*.0257)+(A(k,1)*B(3,1));%first/best

A(k,5)=((A(k,4)-A(k,3))/A(k,3))^2; %square of normalized difference

if

A(k,1)>0.5; %ignores error values of low current data points

A(k,5)=A(k,5);

else A(k,5)=0;

end

err1=err1+A(k,5);

end

%equal error value weight regardless of number of data points

err1=err1*(100/lenx);

iter=500; %iteration limit

for j=1:iter

if err1<0.02 %sets minimum error goal

break

else

end

scale=(iter-j)/iter;

if

err1<10;

scale=.125*scale;

else

end

rand=random('uniform',-0.5,0.5,3,1);

B(1,2)=B(1,1)+(B(1,1)*rand(1,1)*0*scale); %modifies Is (not

used)

B(2,2)=B(2,1)+(B(2,1)*rand(2,1)*1*scale); %modifies N

B(3,2)=B(3,1)+(B(3,1)*rand(3,1)*1*scale); %modifies Rs

err2=0;

for k=1:lenx

%Calculate current random guess of goal

A(k,4)=log(A(k,1)/B(1,2))*B(2,2)*.0257+(A(k,1)*B(3,2));

A(k,5)=((A(k,4)-A(k,3))/A(k,3))^2; %square of normalized

difference

if

A(k,1)>0.5; %ignores error values of low current data

points

A(k,5)=A(k,5);

156

else A(k,5)=0;

end

err2=err2+A(k,5);

end

%equal error value weight regardless of number of data points

err2=err2*(100/lenx);

if

err2<err1;

err1=err2;

for l=1:lenx;

A(l,6)=A(l,4); %Current best approximation of goal

end

for m=1:3;

B(m,1)=B(m,2); %transfer current result to best result

end

else

end

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

figure(i)

plot(A(:,3),A(:,1),A(:,4),A(:,1),A(:,6),A(:,1))

axis([0, 5, 0, 20])

text(3.5,16,'Is')

text(4,16,num2str(B(1,1)));

text(3.5,14,'N')

text(4,14,num2str(B(2,1)));

text(3.5,12,'Rs')

text(4,12,num2str(B(3,1)));

text(3.5,10,'err1')

text(4,10,num2str(err1));

text(3.5,8,'err2')

text(4,8,num2str(err2));

text(3.2,6,'iteration')

text(4,6,num2str(j));

drawnow;

%pause(.01);

%hold on

end

C(1,i)=B(1,1); %move final Is value to temp column

C(2,i)=B(2,1); %move final N value to temp column

C(3,i)=B(3,1); %move final Rs value to temp column

end

%%%

%Calculate temperature dependency of Is, N and Rs

deg=2; %degree of polynomial that describes temperature dependancy

D=zeros(3,(deg+1)); %row vectors for polyfit results

E=zeros(3,(length(T)));

for o=1:3;

D(o,:)=polyfit((T+273),C(o,:),deg);%row vectors containing polyfit

results

E(o,:)=polyval(D(o,:),(T+273));%row vectors containing polyval

results

end

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

figure(n+1)

subplot(3,1,1)

plot(T,C(1,:),'o',T,E(1,:),'+')%H = SUBPLOT(m,n,p)

157

subplot(3,1,2)

plot(T,C(2,:),'o',T,E(2,:),'+')%H = SUBPLOT(m,n,p)

subplot(3,1,3)

plot(T,C(3,:),'o',T,E(3,:),'+')

%%%Compare model equations to input data%%%

for i=1:n %number of temperature profiles

data=xlsread(file, char(S(i))); %reads data

x=(data(:,ind)); %extracts the independent column

y=(data(:,dep)); %extracts the dependent column

x(isnan(x))=[]; %removes NAN from the x column

y(isnan(y))=[]; %removes NAN from the y column

lenx=length(x); %determine length of vector x

F=zeros(lenx,4); %Working row vectors

%From this point on, the first column will be the (x)independent

variable

F(:,1)=x; %Independent input data (forward current)

F(:,2)=y; %Dependent input data (forward voltage)

F(:,3)=(log(F(:,1)/Is)*N*.0257)...

+(log(F(:,1)/B(1,1))*polyval(D(2,:),(T(1,i)+273))*.0257)...

+F(:,1)*polyval(D(3,:),(T(1,i)+273));

%pct error of difference between equation and input data

F(:,4)=100*((F(:,3)-F(:,2))./F(:,2));

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

figure(n+2)

plot(F(:,2),F(:,1),'k',F(:,3),F(:,1),'k+');

axis([0, 5, 0, 20])

hold on

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

figure (n+3)

subplot (4,1,(i))

plot(F(:,1),F(:,4),'k+')

axis([0, 20, -5, 5])

%legend('Logarithmic Diode','Straight Line Diode')

%text(.1,40,'Power Dissipation (Both Diodes)');

end

%%%%%%%%%%%adding labels to existing figure

figure (n+2)

title 'C2D20120D Logarithmic V_{FWD} Model'

xlabel 'V_{FWD} (V)'

ylabel 'I_{FWD} (A)'

text (1.6,18, '25^{o}C')

text (2.6,18, '75^{o}C')

text (3.2,18, '125^{o}C')

text (4.1,18, '175^{o}C')

%%%%%%%%%%adding labels to existing figure

figure (n+3)

subplot(4,1,1)

title 'C2D20120D Logarithmic V_{FWD} Model'

ylabel '25^{o}C'

subplot(4,1,2)

ylabel '75^{o}C'

subplot (4,1,3)

ylabel '125^{o}C'

subplot(4,1,4)

ylabel '175^{o}C'

158

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

%print SPICE parameter data to text file

p=fliplr(D); %Places Polyval constant values in the first column

fid = fopen(strcat((PN),' DFV_LOG.txt'), 'w');

fprintf(fid, '\r\n%s',strcat('*',(PN)));

fprintf(fid, '\r\n%s','*Diode Forward Voltage Drop Model Parameters');

fprintf(fid, '\r\n%s','');

m=3; %number of calculated parameters

C=cell(m,(deg+2));

for i=1:m

for j=1:(deg+1);

C{i,j}=strcat(' DFL',num2str(i),num2str(j-1),...

'=', sprintf('%0.3e',p(i,j)));

end

C{i,(deg+2)}=strcat(C{i,1:(deg+1)});

end

for k=1:m

fprintf(fid, '\r\n%s',strcat('.param',C{k,(deg+2)}));

end

fclose(fid);

159

%DFWD_SL_C.m

%An M-File to read and process input data from Excel worksheet columns

%There will be multiple data columns

%This particular application will calculate the SPICE parameters

%of the temperature dependent diode forward voltage drop

%of a Schottky junction

%%%%%%%%

%This model is Voltage Drop plus Specific Resistance Slope

%%%%%%%%

clc

clear all

close all

%%%%%%%%

PN='C2D20120D'; %part number and name of Excel file that contains the

input data

file=('C2D20120D'); %name of xls file (in same directory)

n=4; %number of temperature profiles

T=[25 75 125 175]; %data temperature in Celsius

S1='VF25';

S2='VF75';

S3='VF125';

S4='VF175';

S={S1; S2; S3; S4};

dep=1; %column that contains the voltage "dependent" data

ind=2; %column that contains the current "independent" data

B=zeros(3,2); %contains current and best equation values

C=zeros(3,n); %contains final equation values for each temperature

profile

%SPICE model parameters of reference diode

Is=1E-14;%ref diode Is value

N=.5;

%ref diode N value

Rs=0;

%ref diode Rs value

B(1,1)=0.75; %initial V knee value of ABM equation

B(2,1)=.1;

%initial R value of ABM equation

B(3,1)=0;

%not used

err1=0; %initialize error value

err2=0; %initialize error value

%A1 = Independent input data

%A2 = Dependent input data

%A3 = Dependent data minus reference diode (VCVS Goal)

%A4 = Current random guess of goal

%A5 = Current run error value

%A6 = Current best approximation of goal

for i=1:n %read input data from Excel worksheets

data=xlsread(file, char(S(i))); %reads data

x=(data(:,ind)); %extracts the independent column

y=(data(:,dep)); %extracts the dependent column

x(isnan(x))=[]; %removes NAN from the x column

y(isnan(y))=[]; %removes NAN from the y column

lenx=length(x); %determine length of vector x

A=zeros(lenx,6); %working vectors

%From this point on, the odd column will be the (x)independent

variable

160

A(:,2)=y; %dependent input data (forward voltage)

A(:,3)=A(:,2)-(log(A(:,1)/Is)*N*.0257); %dependent minus reference

diode (VCVS Goal)

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

%Calculate SPICE Parameters using Simulated Annealing

%Initial error value

%B(1,1)=0.75; %initial V knee value of ABM equation

%B(2,1)=.1;

%initial R value of ABM equation

%B(3,1)=0;

%not used

for k=1:lenx

A(k,4)=B(1,1)+(A(k,1)*B(2,1));%first/best

A(k,5)=((A(k,4)-A(k,3))/A(k,3))^2; %difference squared error

if

A(k,1)>0.5; %ignores low current error values

A(k,5)=A(k,5);

else A(k,5)=0;

end

err1=err1+A(k,5);

end %equal error value weight regardless of the number of data points

err1=err1*(100/lenx);

iter=500; %iteration limit

for j=1:iter

if err1<0.001 %sets minimum error goal

break

else

end

scale=(iter-j)/iter;

if

err1<10;

scale=.125*scale;

else

end

rand=random('uniform',-1,1,3,1);

B(1,2)=B(1,1)+(B(1,1)*rand(1,1)*.5*scale); %modifies V knee

B(2,2)=B(2,1)+(B(2,1)*rand(2,1)*.5*scale); %modifies Rs

B(3,2)=B(3,1)+(B(3,1)*rand(3,1)*0*scale); %not used

err2=0;

for k=1:lenx

A(k,4)=B(1,2)+(A(k,1)*B(2,2));%current random guess of goal

A(k,5)=((A(k,4)-A(k,3))/A(k,3))^2; %current run error value

if

A(k,3)>1; %ignores low current results

A(k,5)=A(k,5);

else A(k,5)=0;

end

err2=err2+A(k,5);

end %equal error value weight regardless of the number of data points

err2=err2*(100/lenx);

if

err2<err1;

err1=err2;

for l=1:lenx;

A(l,6)=A(l,4); %current best approximation of goal

end

for m=1:3;

B(m,1)=B(m,2); %transfer current result to best result

end

161

else

end

%%%%%%%%

figure(i)

plot(A(:,3),A(:,1),A(:,4),A(:,1),A(:,6),A(:,1))

axis([0, 5, 0, 20])

text(4,14,num2str(B(2,1)));

text(4,12,num2str(B(3,1)));

text(4,10,num2str(err1));

text(4,8,num2str(err2));

text(4,6,num2str(j));

drawnow;

%pause(.01);

%hold on

end

C(1,i)=B(1,1); %move final V knee(T) value to temperature column

C(2,i)=B(2,1); %move final Rs(T) value to temperature column

C(3,i)=B(3,1); %Not used

end

%Calculate temperature dependency of V knee and Rs

deg=2; %degree of polynomial to be calculated for temperature

dependancy

D=zeros(3,(deg+1)); %row vectors for polyfit results

E=zeros(3,(length(T)));

for o=1:3;

D(o,:)=polyfit((T+273),C(o,:),deg);%row vectors containing polyfit

results

E(o,:)=polyval(D(o,:),(T+273));%row vectors containing polyval

results

end

%%%%%%%%

figure(n+1)

subplot(3,1,1)

plot(T,C(1,:),'o',T,E(1,:),'+')%H = SUBPLOT(m,n,p)

subplot(3,1,2)

plot(T,C(2,:),'o',T,E(2,:),'+')%H = SUBPLOT(m,n,p)

subplot(3,1,3)

plot(T,C(3,:),'o',T,E(3,:),'+')

for i=1:n %number of temperature profiles

data=xlsread(file, char(S(i))); %reads data

x=(data(:,ind)); %extracts the independent column

y=(data(:,dep)); %extracts the dependent column

x(isnan(x))=[]; %removes NAN from the x column

y(isnan(y))=[]; %removes NAN from the y column

lenx=length(x); %determine length of vector x

F=zeros(lenx,4); %working row vectors

%From this point on, the odd column will be the (x)independent

variable

F(:,1)=x; %independent input data

F(:,2)=y; %dependent input data

F(:,3)=(log(F(:,1)/Is)*N*.0257)...

+polyval(D(1,:),(T(1,i)+273))...

+F(:,1)*polyval(D(2,:),(T(1,i)+273)); %CRM model result

%pct error of difference between equation and input data

F(:,4)=100*(F(:,3)-F(:,2))./F(:,2);

162

%%%%%%%%

figure(n+2)

plot(F(:,2),F(:,1),'k',F(:,3),F(:,1),'k+');

axis([0, 5, 0, 20])

hold on

%%%%%%%%

figure (n+3)

subplot (4,1,(i))

plot(F(:,1),F(:,4),'k+')

axis([0, 20, -5, 5])

%legend('Logarithmic Diode','Straight Line Diode')

%text(.1,40,'Power Dissipation (Both Diodes)');

end

%%adding labels to existing figures

figure (n+2)

title 'C2D20120D Straight Line V_{FWD} Model'

xlabel 'V_{FWD} (V)'

ylabel 'I_{FWD} (A)'

legend('Input Data', 'CRM Model',4)

text (1.6,18, '25^{o}C')

text (2.6,18, '75^{o}C')

text (3.2,18, '125^{o}C')

text (4.1,18, '175^{o}C')

%%%%%%%%

figure (n+3)

subplot(4,1,1)

title 'C2D20120D Straight Line V_{FWD} Model'

ylabel '25^{o}C'

subplot(4,1,2)

ylabel '75^{o}C'

subplot (4,1,3)

ylabel '125^{o}C'

subplot(4,1,4)

ylabel '175^{o}C'

xlabel 'I_{FWD} (A)'

%place SPICE parameter data on figure

d=fliplr(D); %places polyval constant values in the first column

figure(2)

for i=1:length(d)

text(.7,(.9-(i*.1)),(strcat('IIC',num2str(i),' = ',...

sprintf('%0.3e',d(i,1)))),'units','normalized');

end

%print SPICE parameter data to text file

fid = fopen(strcat((PN),' DFV_SL.txt'), 'w');

fprintf(fid, '\r\n%s',strcat('*',(PN)));

fprintf(fid, '\r\n%s','*Diode Forward Voltage Drop Model Parameters');

fprintf(fid, '\r\n%s','');

m=3; %number of calculated parameters

C=cell(m,(deg+2));

for i=1:m

for j=1:(deg+1);

C{i,j}=strcat(' DFS',num2str(i),num2str(j-1),'=',...

sprintf('%0.3e',d(i,j)));

end

C{i,(deg+2)}=strcat(C{i,1:(deg+1)});

163

end

for k=1:m

fprintf(fid, '\r\n%s',strcat('.param',C{k,(deg+2)}));

end

fclose(fid);

164

%DrevI_D.m

%An M-File to read and process input datas from Excel worksheet columns

%There will be multiple temperature dependent data columns

%This particular application calculates the SPICE parameters

%of the temperature dependent diode reverse biased leakage current

%of a Schottky junction

%%%%%%%%

%Limited reverse voltage range (line 61)

%%%%%%%%

clc

clear all

close all

%%%%%%%%

PN=('C2D20120D'); %part number and name of Excel file that contains the

input data

n=4; %number of temperature profiles

T=[25 75 125 175; 298 348 398 448]; %data temperatures in C and K

S1='IR25';

%Sheet name of T(1,1) data

S2='IR75';

%Sheet name of T(1,2) data

S3='IR125';

%Sheet name of T(1,3) data

S4='IR175';

%Sheet name of T(1,4) data

S={S1; S2; S3; S4};

dep=2; %column that contains the dependent (current) data

ind=1; %column that contains the independent (voltage) data

B=zeros(3,2); %contains current and best equation values

C=zeros(3,n); %contains final equation values for each temperature

B(1,1)=1; %initial scale value of equation

B(2,1)=1000; %initial divisor value of equation

B(3,1)=5; %initial power value of equation

err0=0; %initialize error value

err1=0; %initialize error value

err2=0; %initialize error value

%A1 = Independent input data

%A2 = Dependent input data

%A3 = Dependent data minus reference diode (goal)

%A4 = Current random guess of goal

%A5 = Current run error value

%A6 = Current best approximation of goal

for i=1:n

data=xlsread(PN, char(S(i))); %reads data

x=(data(:,ind)); %extracts the independent column

y=(data(:,dep)); %extracts the dependent column

x(isnan(x))=[]; %removes NAN from the x column

y(isnan(y))=[]; %removes NAN from the y column

lenx=length(x); %determine length of vector x

A=zeros(lenx,6); %working vectors

%From this point on, the odd column will be the (x)independent

variable

A(:,1)=x; %independent input data

A(:,2)=y; %dependent input data

A(:,3)=y; %dependent input data duplicate

%%%%%%%%

%Calculate SPICE Parameters using Simulated Annealing

165

for k=1:lenx

A(k,4)=B(1,1)*(A(k,1)/B(2,1))^B(3,1);

A(k,6)=A(k,4);

A(k,5)=((A(k,4)-A(k,3))/A(k,3))^2; %normalized difference squared

error

if

A(k,1)<1500; %ignores Vreverse above this value

A(k,5)=A(k,5);

else A(k,5)=0;

end

err1=err1+A(k,5);

end %equal error value weighting regardless of the number of data

points

err1=err1*(100/lenx);

iter=3000; %iteration limit

for j=1:iter

if err1<.5 %sets minimum error goal

break

else

end

%scale=1*(err1/100)^.67;

scale=.1*(iter-j)/iter;

if

scale>.99;

scale=1;

else

end

rand=random('uniform',-1,1,3,1);

B(1,2)=B(1,1)+(B(1,1)*rand(1,1)*.5*scale); %modifies scale

B(2,2)=B(2,1)+(B(2,1)*rand(2,1)*.25*scale); %modifies divisor

B(3,2)=B(3,1)+(B(3,1)*rand(3,1)*.5*scale); %modifies power

err2=0;

for k=1:lenx

A(k,4)=B(1,2)*(A(k,1)/B(2,2))^B(3,2);

A(k,5)=((A(k,4)-A(k,3))/A(k,3))^2; %current run error value

if

A(k,1)<1500; %ignores Vrev greater than value

A(k,5)=A(k,5);

else A(k,5)=0;

end

err2=err2+A(k,5);

end %equal error value weighting regardless of the number of data

points

err2=err2*(100/lenx);

if

err2<err1;

err1=err2;

for l=1:lenx;

A(l,6)=A(l,4); %current best approximation of goal

end

for m=1:3;

B(m,1)=B(m,2);

end

else

end

%%%%%%%%

figure(i)

plot(A(:,1),A(:,3),A(:,1),A(:,4),'+',A(:,1),A(:,6))

166

text(400,80,strcat('iter= ',num2str(j)));

text(400,70,strcat('err1= ',num2str(err1)));

text(400,60,strcat('err2= ',num2str(err2)));

text(400,50,strcat('Scale= ',num2str(B(1,1))));

text(400,40,strcat('Div= ',num2str(B(2,1))));

text(400,30,strcat('Pwr= ',num2str(B(3,1))));

text(400,20,strcat('scale= ',num2str(scale)));

drawnow;

%pause(.01);

end

C(1,i)=B(1,1); %move final scale value for T(i) to temperature

column

C(2,i)=B(2,1); %move final divisor value for T(i) to temperature

column

C(3,i)=B(3,1); %move final power value for T(i) to temperature

column

disp(C)

end

%Calculate the temperature dependency of scale, divisor and power

deg=2; %degree of polynomial to be calculated for temperature

dependancy

D=zeros(3,(deg+1)); %row vectors for polyfit results

E=zeros(3,(length(T))); %row vectors for polyval results

for o=1:3;

D(o,:)=polyfit(T(2,:),C(o,:),deg); %POLYFIT<X,Y,N>

%Row vectors containing polyfit results (Kelvin)

E(o,:)=polyval(D(o,:),T(2,:));

%POLYVAL<P,X)

%Row vectors containing polyval results (Kelvin)

end

figure(n+1)

subplot(3,1,1)

plot(T(1,:),C(1,:),'o',T(1,:),E(1,:),'+')%H = SUBPLOT(m,n,p)

subplot(3,1,2)

plot(T(1,:),C(2,:),'o',T(1,:),E(2,:),'+')

subplot(3,1,3)

plot(T(1,:),C(3,:),'o',T(1,:),E(3,:),'+')

for i=1:n %number of temperature profiles

data=xlsread(PN, char(S(i))); %reads data

x=(data(:,ind)); %extracts the independent column

y=(data(:,dep)); %extracts the dependent column

x(isnan(x))=[]; %removes NAN from the x column

y(isnan(y))=[]; %removes NAN from the y column

lenx=length(x); %determine length of vector x

F=zeros(lenx,4); %working row vectors

%From this point on, the odd column will be the (x) independent

variable

F(:,1)=x; %independent input data

F(:,2)=y; %dependent input data

F(:,3)=polyval(D(1,:),T(2,i))*(F(:,1)/polyval(D(2,:),T(2,i)))...

.^polyval(D(3,:),T(2,i));

F(:,4)=100*(F(:,3)-F(:,2))./F(:,2);

%%%%%%%%

figure(n+2)

plot(F(:,1),F(:,2),'k-',F(:,1),F(:,3),'k+');

167

hold on

%%%%%%%%

figure(n+3)

subplot(4,1,i)

plot(F(:,1),F(:,4),'k');

axis([0, 1400, -50, 50])

hold on

end

%%%%%%%%

%Routine that writes .param to figure, and creates .param statements

d=fliplr(D);

m=3; %number of model variables

figure(n+2)

title('C2D20120D Reverse Bias Leakage Current')

ylabel('Leakage Current (uA)')

xlabel('V_{REV} (V)')

legend('Input Data', 'Model Data', 1)

for i=1:m;

for j=1:(deg+1);

text(500,(95-(20*i)-(5*j)),strcat('DRI',num2str(i),num2str(j1),...

'=',sprintf('%0.3e',d(i,j))));

end

end

P=cell(m,(deg+2));

fid = fopen(strcat((PN),' DRI.txt'), 'w');

fprintf(fid, '\r\n%s','*Diode Reverse Leakage Current Model');

fprintf(fid, '\r\n%s',strcat('*',(PN)));

fprintf(fid, '\r\n%s','');

for i=1:m

for j=1:(deg+1);

P{i,j}=strcat(' DRI',num2str(i),num2str(j-1),'=',...

sprintf('%0.3e',d(i,j)));

end

P{i,(deg+2)}=strcat(P{i,1:(deg+1)});

end

for k=1:m

fprintf(fid, '\r\n%s',strcat('.param',P{k,(deg+2)}));

end

fclose(fid);

168

%DrevI_D.m

%An M-File to read and process input datas from Excel worksheet columns

%There will be multiple temperature dependent data columns

%This particular application calculates the SPICE parameters

%of the temperature dependent diode reverse biased leakage current

%of a Schottky junction

%%%%%%%%

%Limited reverse voltage range (line 61)

%%%%%%%%

clc

clear all

close all

%%%%%%%%

PN=('C2D20120D'); %part number and name of Excel file that contains the

input data

n=4; %number of temperature profiles

T=[25 75 125 175; 298 348 398 448]; %data temperatures in C and K

S1='IR25';

%Sheet name of T(1,1) data

S2='IR75';

%Sheet name of T(1,2) data

S3='IR125';

%Sheet name of T(1,3) data

S4='IR175';

%Sheet name of T(1,4) data

S={S1; S2; S3; S4};

dep=2; %column that contains the dependent (current) data

ind=1; %column that contains the independent (voltage) data

B=zeros(3,2); %contains current and best equation values

C=zeros(3,n); %contains final equation values for each temperature

B(1,1)=1; %initial scale value of equation

B(2,1)=1000; %initial divisor value of equation

B(3,1)=5; %initial power value of equation

err0=0; %initialize error value

err1=0; %initialize error value

err2=0; %initialize error value

%A1 = Independent input data

%A2 = Dependent input data

%A3 = Dependent data minus reference diode (goal)

%A4 = Current random guess of goal

%A5 = Current run error value

%A6 = Current best approximation of goal

for i=1:n

data=xlsread(PN, char(S(i))); %reads data

x=(data(:,ind)); %extracts the independent column

y=(data(:,dep)); %extracts the dependent column

x(isnan(x))=[]; %removes NAN from the x column

y(isnan(y))=[]; %removes NAN from the y column

lenx=length(x); %determine length of vector x

A=zeros(lenx,6); %working vectors

%From this point on, the odd column will be the (x)independent

variable

A(:,1)=x; %independent input data

A(:,2)=y; %dependent input data

A(:,3)=y; %dependent input data duplicate

%%%%%%%%

%Calculate SPICE Parameters using Simulated Annealing

169

for k=1:lenx

A(k,4)=B(1,1)*(A(k,1)/B(2,1))^B(3,1);

A(k,6)=A(k,4);

A(k,5)=((A(k,4)-A(k,3))/A(k,3))^2; %normalized difference squared

error

if

A(k,1)<1500; %ignores Vreverse above this value

A(k,5)=A(k,5);

else A(k,5)=0;

end

err1=err1+A(k,5);

end %equal error value weighting regardless of the number of data

points

err1=err1*(100/lenx);

iter=3000; %iteration limit

for j=1:iter

if err1<.5 %sets minimum error goal

break

else

end

%scale=1*(err1/100)^.67;

scale=.1*(iter-j)/iter;

if

scale>.99;

scale=1;

else

end

rand=random('uniform',-1,1,3,1);

B(1,2)=B(1,1)+(B(1,1)*rand(1,1)*.5*scale); %modifies scale

B(2,2)=B(2,1)+(B(2,1)*rand(2,1)*.25*scale); %modifies divisor

B(3,2)=B(3,1)+(B(3,1)*rand(3,1)*.5*scale); %modifies power

err2=0;

for k=1:lenx

A(k,4)=B(1,2)*(A(k,1)/B(2,2))^B(3,2);

A(k,5)=((A(k,4)-A(k,3))/A(k,3))^2; %current run error value

if

A(k,1)<1500; %ignores Vrev greater than value

A(k,5)=A(k,5);

else A(k,5)=0;

end

err2=err2+A(k,5);

end %equal error value weighting regardless of the number of data

points

err2=err2*(100/lenx);

if

err2<err1;

err1=err2;

for l=1:lenx;

A(l,6)=A(l,4); %current best approximation of goal

end

for m=1:3;

B(m,1)=B(m,2);

end

else

end

%%%%%%%%

figure(i)

plot(A(:,1),A(:,3),A(:,1),A(:,4),'+',A(:,1),A(:,6))

170

text(400,80,strcat('iter= ',num2str(j)));

text(400,70,strcat('err1= ',num2str(err1)));

text(400,60,strcat('err2= ',num2str(err2)));

text(400,50,strcat('Scale= ',num2str(B(1,1))));

text(400,40,strcat('Div= ',num2str(B(2,1))));

text(400,30,strcat('Pwr= ',num2str(B(3,1))));

text(400,20,strcat('scale= ',num2str(scale)));

drawnow;

%pause(.01);

end

C(1,i)=B(1,1); %move final scale value for T(i) to temperature

column

C(2,i)=B(2,1); %move final divisor value for T(i) to temperature

column

C(3,i)=B(3,1); %move final power value for T(i) to temperature

column

disp(C)

end

%Calculate the temperature dependency of scale, divisor and power

deg=2; %degree of polynomial to be calculated for temperature

dependancy

D=zeros(3,(deg+1)); %row vectors for polyfit results

E=zeros(3,(length(T))); %row vectors for polyval results

for o=1:3;

D(o,:)=polyfit(T(2,:),C(o,:),deg); %POLYFIT<X,Y,N>

%Row vectors containing polyfit results (Kelvin)

E(o,:)=polyval(D(o,:),T(2,:));

%POLYVAL<P,X)

%Row vectors containing polyval results (Kelvin)

end

figure(n+1)

subplot(3,1,1)

plot(T(1,:),C(1,:),'o',T(1,:),E(1,:),'+')%H = SUBPLOT(m,n,p)

subplot(3,1,2)

plot(T(1,:),C(2,:),'o',T(1,:),E(2,:),'+')

subplot(3,1,3)

plot(T(1,:),C(3,:),'o',T(1,:),E(3,:),'+')

for i=1:n %number of temperature profiles

data=xlsread(PN, char(S(i))); %reads data

x=(data(:,ind)); %extracts the independent column

y=(data(:,dep)); %extracts the dependent column

x(isnan(x))=[]; %removes NAN from the x column

y(isnan(y))=[]; %removes NAN from the y column

lenx=length(x); %determine length of vector x

F=zeros(lenx,4); %working row vectors

%From this point on, the odd column will be the (x) independent

variable

F(:,1)=x; %independent input data

F(:,2)=y; %dependent input data

F(:,3)=polyval(D(1,:),T(2,i))*(F(:,1)/polyval(D(2,:),T(2,i)))...

.^polyval(D(3,:),T(2,i));

F(:,4)=100*(F(:,3)-F(:,2))./F(:,2);

%%%%%%%%

figure(n+2)

plot(F(:,1),F(:,2),'k-',F(:,1),F(:,3),'k+');

171

hold on

%%%%%%%%

figure(n+3)

subplot(4,1,i)

plot(F(:,1),F(:,4),'k');

axis([0, 1400, -50, 50])

hold on

end

%%%%%%%%

%Routine that writes .param to figure, and creates .param statements

d=fliplr(D);

m=3; %number of model variables

figure(n+2)

title('C2D20120D Reverse Bias Leakage Current')

ylabel('Leakage Current (uA)')

xlabel('V_{REV} (V)')

legend('Input Data', 'Model Data', 1)

for i=1:m;

for j=1:(deg+1);

text(500,(95-(20*i)-(5*j)),strcat('DRI',num2str(i),num2str(j1),...

'=',sprintf('%0.3e',d(i,j))));

end

end

P=cell(m,(deg+2));

fid = fopen(strcat((PN),' DRI.txt'), 'w');

fprintf(fid, '\r\n%s','*Diode Reverse Leakage Current Model');

fprintf(fid, '\r\n%s',strcat('*',(PN)));

fprintf(fid, '\r\n%s','');

for i=1:m

for j=1:(deg+1);

P{i,j}=strcat(' DRI',num2str(i),num2str(j-1),'=',...

sprintf('%0.3e',d(i,j)));

end

P{i,(deg+2)}=strcat(P{i,1:(deg+1)});

end

for k=1:m

fprintf(fid, '\r\n%s',strcat('.param',P{k,(deg+2)}));

end

fclose(fid);

172

173

174

175

176

******************************************************************

*IXT12N120 1200V 12A Power MOSFET

*

**********************************

*Power MOSFET Circuit Response Model

*3-Time Constant Thermal Model

*

(G) Gate

*

| (D) Drain

*

| | (S) Source

*

| | | (Ttop) Thermal Top (Junction Temp)

*

| | | | (Ths) Thermal Bottom (Heatsink Temp)

*

| | | | | (Pavg) Average Dissipation Input

.SUBCKT CRM12N120 G D S T T3 TC

**Power MOSFET Circuit Response Model

**Gate Input Characteristics**

R1 G A 1 ; internal gate resistance

C1 A B {GMUX*MIC1*10^-12}

C2 E A {GMUX*MIC2*10^-12}

C3 A J {GMUX*MIC3*10^-12}

E1 B J Value={V(A1,J)*V(C,J)}

E2 C J Table={V(F1,J)} 0,0 {MIC5},1 GSMOOTH=.05

R2 A J 1e6 ; DC path to internal source

R4 E F 1

R3 A A1 1k ; Vge lowpass filter

C4 A1 J 2p ; Vge lowpass filter ; changed from 1p

*

**Input Admittance**

E3 K J Table={({MAD10}+({MAD11}*V(T))+({MAD12}*V(T)^2))

+

+(({MAD20}+({MAD21}*V(T))+({MAD22}*V(T)^2))*V(A1,J))}

+

0,0 100,100 GSMOOTH=.2

*

**Drain Source Channel and Parasitics**

R5 D F .001

V1 F H 0 ; 0 volt current monitor

E4 H I Table={V(P)*(({MRD10}+({MRD11}*V(T)))

+

+(({MRD20}+({MRD21}*V(T)))*I(V1))

+

+(({MRD30}+({MRD31}*V(T)))*I(V1)^2))}

177

+

0,0 40,40

E5 I J Table={10k*(I(V1)-V(K,J))} 0,0 1400,1400 GSMOOTH=.02 ;Active region

R7 F J1 1 ; Cds ESR

C6 J1 J {MIC4*10^-12} ; Cds

R6 F F1 1k ; Vds lowpass filter

C5 F1 J 2p ; Vds lowpass filter changed from 1p

L1 J S .15n

RL1 J S .001

*

**Clamp Diode**

D1 J F Rclamp

*

**Reverse Current**

**Not Used - Pdiss worst case = 3.3W

*G2 E J Value={0}

*RFJ F J 1e6

*

**State Detectors**

E7 P 0 Table {V(F1,J)} (.1,0) (.2,1) ;On-State

*

**Dissipation**

VTA TA 0 pwl (0,0) (1e-6,0) (2e-6,1)

VTB TB 0 pwl (0,1) (1e-6,1) (2e-6,0)

E6 Z 0 Value={V(F1,J)*I(V1)} ; filtered Pdiss

R8 Z Y 2k ; Pdiss lowpass filter

C7 Y 0 2p ; Pdiss lowpass filter ; changed from 1p

G3 0 T Value={V(P)*V(TA)*V(Y)+(V(TB)*V(TC))} ; forward dissipation

*

**Thermal Circuit**

RT1 T T1 {TR1}

CT1 T T1 {TC1}

RT2 T1 T2 {TR2}

CT2 T1 T2 {TC2}

RT3 T2 T3 {TR3}

CT3 T2 T3 {TC3}

*

**Models and Parameters**

.model RClamp D RS=1.4

*

**Gate Input Parameters**

.param MIC1=1.757e+003 MIC2=8.280e+001 MIC3=3.507e+003 MIC4=120 MIC5=40

.param GMUX=1

*

**Forward Volage Parameters RDS(on)**

.param MRD10=1.074e-001 MRD11=-6.248e-005

178

.param MRD30=-6.894e-002 MRD31=3.060e-004

*

**Input Admittance**

.param MAD10=-1.935e+002 MAD11=5.994e-001 MAD12=-6.613e-004

.param MAD20=2.677e+001 MAD21=-7.508e-002 MAD22=8.652e-005

*

**Reverse Current Parameters**

* Not Used

*

**Thermal Model Parameters**

.param TR1=1.688e-001 TC1=1.700e-001

.param TR2=6.017e-002 TC2=9.273e-002

.param TR3=2.065e-002 TC3=3.572e-002

*

.ENDS CRM12N120

******************************************************************

179

Input Capacitance

%MOSFET_CAP_B.m

%An M-File to read and process input data from Excel worksheet columns

%There will be a pair of XY columns across multiple worksheets

%This particular application will calculate the

%MOSFET interelectrode capacitance

%%%%%%%%

%

%%%%%%%%

clc

clear all

close all

%%%%%%%%

PN='IXT12N120'; %part number and name of Excel file that contains the

input data

n=3; %number of profiles

S1='CISS'; %worksheet name

S2='COSS'; %worksheet name

S3='CRSS'; %worksheet name

S={S1; S2; S3}; %profile vector

ind=1; %column that contains the "independent" data

dep=2; %column that contains the "dependent" data

xx=linspace(.1,40,49); %x-axis for spline interpolation of input data

C=zeros(length(xx),10); %x-axis for spline interpolation of input data

C(:,1)=xx; %x-axis for spline interpolation of input data

for i=1:n

data=xlsread(PN, char(S(i))); %reads data

x=(data(:,ind)); %extracts the independent column

y=(data(:,dep)); %extracts the dependent column

lenx=length(x); %determine length of vector x

A=zeros(lenx,2); %working vectors

A(:,1)=x; %independent input data

A(:,2)=y; %dependent input data

C(:,(i+1))=spline(A(:,1),A(:,2),C(:,1));

figure(1)

semilogy(A(:,1),A(:,2),'k',C(:,1),C(:,(i+1)),'ko')

hold on

end

%%%working vectors

%C1=VDS (X-axis)

%C2=CISS

%C3=COSS

%C4=CRSS

C(:,5)=C(:,2)-C(:,4); %CGS (CISS-CRSS)

180

C(:,7)=C(:,3)-C(:,4); %CCS (COSS-CRSS)

C(:,8)=C(:,1).*C(:,6)*10^-12;

D(1,1)=C(1,6); %model's C1 in parallel with C3 during low Vce

conditions

D(2,1)=C(length(xx),6); %model's C2 Cgd

D(3,1)=C(length(xx),5); %model's C3 Cgs

D(4,1)=C(length(xx),3)-C(length(xx),4);

D(5,1)=C(length(xx),1);

C(:,9)=C(:,1).*D(2,1)*10^-12;

C(:,10)=C(:,8)-C(:,9);

%%%ploting results%%%

figure(1)

axis([0,40,10,10000])

title(strcat(PN,' Gate Characteristics - Capacitance'))

xlabel('V_{DS} (V)')

ylabel('Capacitance pF')

legend('Input Data','Spline Data',3)

gtext('C_{iss}')

gtext('C_{oss}')

gtext('C_{rss}')

%%%

figure(2)

semilogy(C(:,1),C(:,2),'k-',C(:,1),C(:,5),'ko',C(:,1),C(:,6),'k+')

axis([0,40,10,10000])

title(strcat(PN,' Gate Characteristics - Parameters'))

xlabel('V_{DS} (V)')

ylabel('Capacitance pF')

legend('C_{iss}','C_{GS}','C_{GD}',3)

%%%

figure (3)

semilogy(C(:,1),C(:,8),C(:,1),C(:,9),C(:,1),C(:,10))

%%%place SPICE parameter data on existing figure

figure(2)

for i=1:length(D)

text(.7,(.80-(i*.05)),(strcat('MIC',num2str(i),' = ',...

sprintf('%0.3e',D(i,1)))),'units','normalized');

end

%%%print SPICE parameter data to text file%%%

fid = fopen(strcat((PN),' MOSFET_CAP.txt'), 'w');

fprintf(fid, '\r\n%s',strcat('*',(PN)));

fprintf(fid, '\r\n%s','*MOSFET Input Capacitance - Model Parameters');

fprintf(fid, '\r\n%s','');

m=length(D); %number of calculated parameters

C=cell(m,1);

for i=1:m

for j=1:1;

C{i,j}=strcat(' MIC',num2str(i),'=', sprintf('%0.3e',D(i,j)));

end

%C{i,(deg+2)}=strcat(C{i,1:(deg+1)});

end

for k=1:m

fprintf(fid, '\r\n%s',strcat('.param',C{k,1}));

end

fclose(fid);

181

%MOSFET_ADM_SL_B.m

%An M-File to read and process input data from Excel worksheet columns

%There will be a pair of XY columns across multiple worksheets

%This particular application will calculate the IGBT junction,

%Vge and temperature dependent input admittance SPICE parameters

%%%%%%%%

%This model is y=mx+b as determined by polyfit

%%%%%%%%

clc

clear all

close all

%%%%%%%%

PN='IXT12N120'; %part number and name of Excel file that contains the

input data

n=3; %number of temperature profiles

T=[-40 25 125]; %temperaature

S1='ADMN40'; %worksheet name

S2='ADM25'; %worksheet name

S3='ADM125'; %worksheet name

S={S1; S2; S3};

%%%input admittance as a function of Vge and temp%%%

dep=2; %column that contains the "dependent" data

ind=1; %column that contains the "independent" data

poly1=1; %order of polynomial that will characterize input admittance

vge=[6.9, 7.4; 6.8, 7.3; 6.3, 6.8]; %sets boundaries for polyfit

lenb=30; %size of vge vector for spline interpolation of input data

B=zeros(lenb,(2*n)); %spline interpolation of input data

C=zeros(n,(poly1+1)); %input admittance polyfit results

for i=1:n

B(:,i)=linspace(vge(i,1),vge(i,2),lenb);

data=xlsread(PN, char(S(i))); %reads data

x=(data(:,ind)); %extracts the independent column

y=(data(:,dep)); %extracts the dependent column

A=zeros(length(x),5); %working vectors

A(:,1)=x; %independent input data

A(:,2)=y; %dependent input data

B(:,(i+n))=spline(A(:,1),A(:,2),B(:,i));

C(i,:)=polyfit(B(:,i),B(:,(i+n)),poly1);

A(:,3)=polyval(C(i,:),A(:,1)); %polynomial replica of input data

A(:,4)=100*((A(:,3)-A(:,2))./A(:,2)); %pct error between model and

input data

A(:,5)=A(:,3)-A(:,2); %Vge error between model and input data

%%%%%%%%

figure(1)

plot(A(:,1),A(:,2),'k',A(:,1),A(:,3),'k+')

hold on

%%%%%%%%

figure(2)

subplot(n,1,i)

plot(A(:,2),A(:,5),'k+')

axis([0,36,-5,5])

182

end

%%%add labels etc to existing figure%%%

figure(1)

title (strcat(PN,' Input Admittance Straight Line Model'))

xlabel 'V_{GS} (V)'

ylabel 'I_D (A)'

legend('Input Data', 'Model Data',2)

axis([4.5,7.5,0,16])

gtext('-40^oC')

gtext('25^oC')

gtext('125^oC')

%%%add labels etc to existing figure%%%

figure(2)

subplot(3,1,1)

title (strcat(PN,' Input Admittance Straight Line Model'))

ylabel 'Volts'

legend('-40^oC',2)

axis([0, 16, -5, 5])

subplot(3,1,2)

ylabel 'Volts'

legend('25^oC',2)

axis([0, 16, -5, 5])

subplot(3,1,3)

xlabel 'I_C (A)'

ylabel 'Volts'

legend('125^oC',2)

axis([0, 16, -5, 5])

%Calculate temperature dependency of input admittance curves

poly2=2; %degree of temperature dependency polynomial

D=zeros((poly1+1),(poly2+1)); %row vectors for polyfit results

E=zeros((poly1+1),(length(T)));

c=transpose(C);

for o=1:(poly1+1);

D(o,:)=polyfit((T+273),c(o,:),poly2);%row vectors containing

polyfit results

E(o,:)=polyval(D(o,:),(T+273));%row vectors containing polyval

results

end

figure(3)

for i=1:(poly1+1)

subplot((poly1+1),1,i)

plot(T,c(i,:),'o',T,E(i,:),'+')

end

subplot((poly1+1),1,1)

title (strcat(PN,' Input Admittance Straight Line Model'))

subplot((poly1+1),1,(poly1+1))

xlabel 'V_{GE} Volts'

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

%Routine that writes .param to figure and .param statements to text

file

p=flipud(fliplr(D)); %Polyval constants in the first column and top row

m=(poly1+1); %number of model variables

figure(1)

for i=1:m;

for j=1:(poly2+1);

183

text(0.02,(1-(0.2*i)(0.05*j)),strcat('MAD',num2str(i),num2str(j-1),...

'=',sprintf('%0.3e',p(i,j))),'units', 'normalized');

end

end

fid = fopen(strcat((PN),' MOSFETADM_SL.txt'), 'w');

fprintf(fid, '\r\n%s',strcat('*',(PN)));

fprintf(fid, '\r\n%s','*MOSFET Input Admittance Model Parameters');

fprintf(fid, '\r\n%s','');

m=poly1+1; %number of calculated parameters

C=cell(m,(poly2+2));

for i=1:m

for j=1:(poly2+1);

C{i,j}=strcat(' MAD',num2str(i),num2str(j-1),'=',

sprintf('%0.3e',p(i,j)));

end

C{i,(poly2+2)}=strcat(C{i,1:(poly2+1)});

end

for k=1:m

fprintf(fid, '\r\n%s',strcat('.param',C{k,(poly2+2)}));

end

fclose(fid);

184

%MOS_RDS_POLY_A.m

%An M-File to read and process input data from Excel worksheet columns

%There will be multiple data columns

%This particular application will calculate the SPICE parameters

%of the MOSFET RDS(on) as a function of temperature for Vgs=10V

%%%%%%%%

%This model is a first order polynomial function of temperature

%%%%%%%%

clc

clear all

close all

%%%%%%%%

PN='IXT12N120'; %part number and name of Excel file that contains the

input data

n=2; %number of Temperature profiles that are used to calculate RDS(on)

T=[25 125]; %temperature profiles in celsius

S1='25FWD100'; %worksheet name

S2='125FWD100'; %worksheet name

S={S1; S2};

%%%RDS(on) as a function of temperature%%%

dep=1; %column that contains the "dependent" data

ind=2; %column that contains the "independent" data

deg=2; %polynomial that will calculate RDS(on) as a function of current

B=zeros(n,(deg+1));

%%%Read and display the input data, find the equations%%%

for i=1:n

data=xlsread(PN, char(S(i))); %reads data

x=(data(:,ind)); %extracts the independent column

y=(data(:,dep)); %extracts the dependent column

lenx=length(x); %determine length of vector x

A=zeros(lenx,2); %working vectors

%From this point on, the first column will be the (x) independent

variable

A(:,1)=x; %independent input data

A(:,2)=y; %dependent input data

B(i,:)=polyfit(A(:,1),A(:,2),deg);

figure(1)

plot(A(:,2),A(:,1),'k') %plot input data

hold on

end

%compare the polyfit results to the input data

c=linspace(.5, 12, 23);

C=zeros(length(c),3);

C(:,1)=c;

C(:,2)=polyval(B(1,:),C(:,1));

C(:,3)=polyval(B(2,:),C(:,1));

%%%add polyfit data to input data figure%%%

figure(1)

plot(C(:,2),C(:,1),'k+') %plot temperature profile 1

plot(C(:,3),C(:,1),'k+') %plot temperature profile 2

title(strcat((PN), ' R_{DS(on)} Temperature Characterisitcs'))

text(9, 10, '25^{o}C')

text(24, 10, '125^{o}C')

185

xlabel('V_{DS} (V)')

ylabel('I_D (A)')

%%%calculate temperature dependence of RDS(on)%%%

deg2=1;

D=zeros(2,(deg2+1));

E=zeros(2,length(T));

b=transpose(B);

for j=1:(deg+1)

D(j,:)=polyfit((T+273),b(j,:),deg2);%row vectors containing polyfit

results

E(j,:)=polyval(D(j,:),(T+273));%row vectors containing polyval

results

end

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

%Routine that writes .param to figure and creates .param statements

p=flipud(fliplr(D)); %Polyval constants in the first column and top row

m=3; %number of model variables

figure(1)

for i=1:m;

for j=1:(deg2+1);

text(25,(8-(1.5*i)-(.5*j)),strcat('MRD',num2str(i),num2str(j1),...

'=',sprintf('%0.3e',p(i,j))));

end

end

fid = fopen(strcat((PN),' RDSon.txt'), 'w');

fprintf(fid, '\r\n%s',strcat('*',(PN)));

fprintf(fid, '\r\n%s','*MOSFET RDS(on) Model Parameters');

fprintf(fid, '\r\n%s','');

m=3; %number of calculated parameters

C=cell(m,(deg2+2));

for i=1:m

for j=1:(deg2+1);

C{i,j}=strcat(' MRD',num2str(i),num2str(j-1),'=',

sprintf('%0.3e',p(i,j)));

end

C{i,(deg+2)}=strcat(C{i,1:(deg+1)});

end

for k=1:m

fprintf(fid, '\r\n%s',strcat('.param',C{k,(deg+2)}));

end

fclose(fid);

186

187

188

189

190

191

******************************************************************

*IXG12N120A2 1200V 12A IGBT

*Circuit Response Model

**********************************

*IGBT Circuit Response Model

*4-Time Constant Thermal Model

*

(G) Gate

*

| (C) Collector

*

| | (E) Emitter

*

| | | (Ttop) Thermal Top (Junction Temp)

*

| | | | (Ths) Thermal Bottom (Heatsink Temp)

*

| | | | | (Pavg) Average Dissipation Input

.SUBCKT CRG12N120A2 G C E T T4 TC

**IGBT Circuit Response Model

**Gate Input Characteristics**

R1 G A 1 ; internal gate resistance

C1 A B {GMUX*IIC1*10^-12}

C2 F A {GMUX*IIC2*10^-12}

C3 A D {GMUX*IIC3*10^-12}

E1 B D Value={V(A1,D)*V(H,D)}

E2 H D Table={V(K1,D)} 0,0 {IIC5},1 GSMOOTH 0.01

R2 A D 1e6 ; DC path to ground

R3 A A1 1000

C4 A1 D 1p

R4 F K 1

*

**Input Admittance and Base Current**

E3 IA D Table={(({IAD10}+({IAD11}*V(T))+({IAD12}*V(T)^2))

+

+(({IAD20}+({IAD21}*V(T))+({IAD22}*V(T)^2))*V(A1,D)))}

+

0,0 100,100 GSMOOTH=.2

S1 IA I P D Tail

C5 I D 1n

G1 J D Value={0.01*V(I,D)}

R5 J L 1

*

**Forward Voltage and Parasitics**

R6 C K .001

192

Q1 N L M QIGBT Temp=27

V1 K M 0 ; zero volt current sensor

**25C Characterisitcs

E5A 5A D Table={({IVFD110}+({IVFD111}*V(A1,D))+({IVFD112}*V(A1,D)^2))

+

+({IVFD120}+({IVFD121}*V(A1,D))+({IVFD122}*V(A1,D)^2))*I(V1)}

+

0,0 10,10

**125C Characteristics

E5B 5B D Table={({IVFD210}+({IVFD211}*V(A1,D))+({IVFD212}*V(A1,D)^2))

+

+({IVFD220}+({IVFD221}*V(A1,D))+({IVFD222}*V(A1,D)^2))*I(V1)}

+

0,0 10,10

**Temperature Dependent Characteristics

E5 N D Table={V(5A,D)+(V(5B,D)-V(5A,D))*((V(T)-298)/100)}

+

0,0 10,10

*L1 D E 1.5n

RDE D E .001

R7 K K1 1k

C6 K1 D 1p

R8 K D1 1

C7 D1 D {GMUX*IIC4*10^-12}

*

**Clamp Diode**

*D1 D K Rclamp

*

**Reverse Current**

*Not Used - Pdiss worst case = 3.3W

*V2 K Q 0 ; Reverse current sense

*G2 Q D Value={0} ;Reverse current source

*

**Tail Detector**

E4 P D Table={10*(V(A1,D)-(6))} (0,0) (1,1)

*

**Dissipation**

V3 TA 0 PWL (0,0) (1e-6,0) (1.2e-6,1)

V4 TB 0 PWL (0,1) (1e-6,1) (1.2e-6,0)

E6 Z 0 Value={V(K1,D)*I(V1)}

R9 Z Y 2k

C8 Y 0 1p

G3 0 T Value {(V(TA)*V(Y))+(V(TB)*V(TC))} ;Forward

*

**Thermal Circuit**

RT1 T T1 {TR1}

CT1 T T1 {TC1}

RT2 T1 T2 {TR2}

CT2 T1 T2 {TC2}

RT3 T2 T3 {TR3}

193

CT3 T2 T3 {TC3}

RT4 T3 T4 {TR4}

CT4 T3 T4 {TC4}

*

**Models and Parameters**

.model QIGBT PNP BF=100

.model RClamp D RS=1.4

.model Tail VSWITCH (RON=1 ROFF=800 VON=1 VOFF=0)

*

**Gate Parameters**

.param IIC1=8.756e+001

.param IIC2=2.311e+000

.param IIC3=5.371e+002

.param IIC4=1.371e+002

.param IIC5=40

.param GMUX=3

*

**Forward Voltage Parameters**

*25

.param IVFD110=3.703e-001 IVFD111=1.384e-001 IVFD112=-4.845e-003

.param IVFD120=3.207e-001 IVFD121=-2.995e-002 IVFD122=9.250e-004

*125

.param IVFD210=4.492e-001 IVFD211=9.723e-002 IVFD212=-2.784e-003

.param IVFD220=4.107e-001 IVFD221=-3.572e-002 IVFD222=1.036e-003

*

**Input Admittance**

.param IAD10=-1.020e+002 IAD11=2.518e-001 IAD12=-2.264e-004

.param IAD20=1.737e+001 IAD21=-3.892e-002 IAD22=3.616e-005

*

**Reverse Current Parameters**

* Not Used

*

**Thermal Model Parameters**

.param TR1=1.122e-001 TC1=2.388e+000

.param TR2=9.023e-001 TC2=1.194e-002

.param TR3=5.615e-001 TC3=3.075e-003

.param TR4=1.482e-001 TC4=7.557e-004

*

.ENDS CRG12N120A2

******************************************************************

194

%IGBT_CAP_B.m

%An M-File to read and process input data from Excel worksheet columns

%There will be a pair of XY columns across multiple worksheets

%This particular application will calculate the

%IGBT interelectrode capacitance

%%%%%%%%

clc

clear all

close all

%%%%%%%%

PN='IXG12N120A2'; %part number and name of Excel file that contains the

input data

n=3; %number of profiles

S1='CIES'; %worksheet name

S2='COES'; %worksheet name

S3='CRES'; %worksheet name

S={S1; S2; S3}; %profile vector

ind=1; %column that contains the "independent" data

dep=2; %column that contains the "dependent" data

xx=linspace(.1,40,49); %x-axis for spline interpolation of input data

C=zeros(length(xx),10); %x-axis for spline interpolation of input data

C(:,1)=xx; %x-axis for spline interpolation of input data

%%%read and process input data%%%

for i=1:n

data=xlsread(PN, char(S(i))); %reads data

x=(data(:,ind)); %extracts the independent column

y=(data(:,dep)); %extracts the dependent column

lenx=length(x); %determine length of vector x

A=zeros(lenx,2); %working vectors

A(:,1)=x; %independent input data

A(:,2)=y; %dependent input data

C(:,(i+1))=spline(A(:,1),A(:,2),C(:,1));

figure(1)

semilogy(A(:,1),A(:,2),'k',C(:,1),C(:,(i+1)),'ko')

hold on

end

%%%working vectors%%%

%C1=Vce (X-axis)

%C2=CIES

%C3=COES

%C4=CRES

C(:,5)=C(:,2)-C(:,4); %CGE (CIES-CRES)

C(:,6)=C(:,4); %CGC (CRES)

195

C(:,8)=C(:,1).*C(:,6)*10^-12;

D(1,1)=C(1,6); %model's CA in parallel with CC during low Vce

conditions

D(2,1)=C(length(xx),6); %model's CB Cgc

D(3,1)=C(length(xx),5); %model's CC Cge

D(4,1)=C(length(xx),3)-C(length(xx),4);

D(5,1)=C(length(xx),1);

C(:,9)=C(:,1).*D(2,1)*10^-12;

C(:,10)=C(:,8)-C(:,9);

C(:,11)=C(:,1).*C(:,4);

%%%add labels etc to existing figure%%%

figure(1)

axis([0,40,1,1000])

title(strcat(PN,' Gate Characteristics - Capacitance'))

xlabel('V_{CE} (V)')

ylabel('Capacitance pF')

legend('Input Data','Spline Data',3)

gtext('C_{ies}')

gtext('C_{oes}')

gtext('C_{res}')

%%%add labels etc to existing figure%%%

figure(2)

semilogy(C(:,1),C(:,2),'k-',C(:,1),C(:,5),'ko',C(:,1),C(:,6),'k+')

axis([0,40,1,1000])

title(strcat(PN,' Gate Characteristics - Parameters'))

xlabel('V_{CE} (V)')

ylabel('Capacitance pF')

legend('C_{ies}','C_{GE}','C_{GC}',3)

%%%add labels etc to existing figure%%%

figure (3)

semilogy(C(:,1),C(:,11))

%%%routine that writes .param data to figures and creates .param

statement

figure(2)

for i=1:length(D)

text(.7,(.9-(i*.05)),(strcat('IIC',num2str(i),' = ',...

sprintf('%0.3e',D(i,1)))),'units','normalized');

end

fid = fopen(strcat((PN),' IGBTINPUT.txt'), 'w');

fprintf(fid, '\r\n%s',strcat('*',(PN)));

fprintf(fid, '\r\n%s','*IGBT Input Characteristics Model Parameters');

fprintf(fid, '\r\n%s','');

m=length(D); %number of calculated parameters

C=cell(m,1);

for i=1:m

for j=1:1;

C{i,j}=strcat(' IIC',num2str(i),'=', sprintf('%0.3e',D(i,j)));

end

%C{i,(deg+2)}=strcat(C{i,1:(deg+1)});

end

for k=1:m

fprintf(fid, '\r\n%s',strcat('.param',C{k,1}));

end

fclose(fid);

196

%IGBT_ADM_SL_B.m

%An M-File to read and process input data from Excel worksheet columns

%There will be a pair of XY columns across multiple worksheets

%This particular application will calculate the IGBT junction,

%Vge and temperature dependent input admittance SPICE parameters

%%%%%%%%

%This model is y=mx+b as determined by polyfit

%%%%%%%%

clc

clear all

close all

%%%%%%%%

PN='IXG12N120A2'; %part number and name of Excel file that contains the

input data

n=3; %number of temperature profiles

T=[-40 25 125]; %temperature

S1='ADMN40'; %worksheet name

S2='ADM25'; %worksheet name

S3='ADM125'; %worksheet name

S={S1; S2; S3};

%%%input admittance as a function of Vge and temp

dep=2; %column that contains the "dependent" data

ind=1; %column that contains the "independent" data

lowVge=6.5;% lowest value of Vge used for polyfit

highVge=8.3;% highest value of Vge used for polyfit

poly1=1; %order of polynomial that will characterize input admittance

xx=linspace(lowVge,highVge,30);

B=zeros(length(xx),(n+1)); %spline results

B(:,1)=xx; % Vge for spline interpolation

C=zeros(n,(poly1+1)); %input admittance polyfit results

for i=1:n

data=xlsread(PN, char(S(i))); %reads data

x=(data(:,ind)); %extracts the independent column (Vge)

y=(data(:,dep)); %extracts the dependent column (Id)

A=zeros(length(x),5); %working vectors

A(:,1)=x; %independent input data

A(:,2)=y; %dependent input data

B(:,(i+1))=spline(A(:,1),A(:,2),B(:,1));

C(i,:)=polyfit(B(:,1),B(:,(i+1)),poly1);

A(:,3)=polyval(C(i,:),A(:,1)); %polynomial replica of input data

A(:,4)=100*((A(:,3)-A(:,2))./A(:,2)); %pct error between model and

input data

A(:,5)=A(:,3)-A(:,2); %Vge error between input data and model

figure(1)

plot(A(:,1),A(:,2),'k',A(:,1),A(:,3),'k+')

hold on

figure(2)

subplot(n,1,i)

plot(A(:,1),A(:,5),'k+')

axis([4,9,-5,5])

end

%%%add labels etc to existing figure%%%

figure(1)

197

xlabel 'V_{GE} (V)'

ylabel 'I_C (A)'

legend('Input Data', 'Model Data',4)

axis([4,9,0,24])

gtext('-40^oC')

gtext('25^oC')

gtext('125^oC')

%%%add labels etc to existing figure%%%

figure(2)

subplot(3,1,1)

title (strcat(PN,' Input Admittance Straight Line Model'))

ylabel 'Error (A)'

legend('-40^oC',2)

subplot(3,1,2)

ylabel 'Error (A)'

legend('25^oC',2)

subplot(3,1,3)

xlabel 'V_{GS} (V)'

ylabel 'Error (V)'

legend('125^oC',2)

%Calculate temperature dependency of input admittance curves

poly2=2; %degree of temperature dependency polynomial

D=zeros((poly1+1),(poly2+1)); %row vectors for polyfit results

E=zeros((poly1+1),(length(T)));

c=transpose(C);

for o=1:(poly1+1);

D(o,:)=polyfit((T+273),c(o,:),poly2);%row vectors containing

polyfit results

E(o,:)=polyval(D(o,:),(T+273));%row vectors containing polyval

results

end

figure(3)

for i=1:(poly1+1)

subplot((poly1+1),1,i)

plot(T,c(i,:),'o',T,E(i,:),'+')

end

subplot((poly1+1),1,1)

title (strcat(PN,' Input Admittance Straight Line Model'))

subplot((poly1+1),1,(poly1+1))

xlabel 'V_{GE} (V)'

%Routine that writes .param to figure and creates .param statements

p=flipud(fliplr(D)); %Polyval constants in the first column and top row

m=(poly1+1); %number of model variables

figure(1)

for i=1:m;

for j=1:(poly2+1);

text(.1,(.9-((i-1)*.2)(.05*j)),strcat('IAD',num2str(i),num2str(j-1),...

'=',sprintf('%0.3e',p(i,j))),'units','normalized');

end

end

fid = fopen(strcat((PN),' IGBTADM_SL.txt'), 'w');

fprintf(fid, '\r\n%s',strcat('*',(PN)));

fprintf(fid, '\r\n%s','*IGBT Input Admittance Model Parameters');

198

fprintf(fid, '\r\n%s','');

m=poly1+1; %number of calculated parameters

C=cell(m,(poly2+2));

for i=1:m

for j=1:(poly2+1);

C{i,j}=strcat(' IAD',num2str(i),num2str(j-1),'=',

sprintf('%0.3e',p(i,j)));

end

C{i,(poly2+2)}=strcat(C{i,1:(poly2+1)});

end

for k=1:m

fprintf(fid, '\r\n%s',strcat('.param',C{k,(poly2+2)}));

end

fclose(fid);

199

%IGBTFWD_PLY_E.m

%An M-File to read and process input data from Excel worksheet columns

%There will be multiple XY columns on multiple worksheets

%This particular application calculates the IGBT juntion

%Vge, Ic and temperature dependent forward voltage drop SPICE

parameters

%%%%%%%%

%This model is y=mx+b as determined by polyfit

%This model calculates parameters for two temperature profiles

%Subcircuit component E5A provides interpolation between the two

temperatures

%%%%%%%%

clc

clear all

close all

%%%%%%%%

PN='IXG12N120A2'; %part number and name of Excel file that contains the

input data

n=3; %number of Vge profiles

tp=2; %working temperature profile, 1 for 25C 2 for 125C

vge=[11 13 15; 11 13 15]; %Vge

S11='25FWD110'; S21='125FWD110';

S12='25FWD130'; S22='125FWD130';

S13='25FWD150'; S23='125FWD150';

S={S11 S21; S12 S22; S13 S23};

%%%voltage drop is a function of Ic and Vge%%%

dep=1; %column that contains the voltage "dependent" data

ind=2; %column that contains the current "independent" data

lowlimit=5; %minimum current for polyfit, set this based on input data

highlimit=24; %maximum current for polyfit, set this based on input

data

poly1=1; %degree of polynomial for Vce f(Ic)

xx=linspace(lowlimit,highlimit,40); %independent variable for spline

interpolation

B=zeros(length(xx),5); %working matrix for spline interpolation

B(:,1)=xx; %independent variable for spline interpolation

C=zeros(n,poly1+1); %working matrix for polyfit of interpolated input

data

%%%read input data, spline interpolate, calculate offset and slope,

plot%%%

for i=1:n

data=xlsread(PN, char(S(i,tp))); %reads data

x=(data(:,ind)); %extracts the independent column

y=(data(:,dep)); %extracts the dependent column

x(isnan(x))=[]; %removes NAN from the x column

y(isnan(y))=[]; %removes NAN from the y column

lenx=length(x); %determine length of vector x

A=zeros(lenx,6); %working vectors

A(:,1)=x; %independent input data (Ic)

A(:,2)=y; %dependent input data (Vce)

A(:,3)=(-.00012*A(:,1).^2)+(.0066*A(:,1))+.024; %PNP drop

A(:,4)=A(:,2)-A(:,3); %dependent data minus PNP drop (ABM goal)

200

ABM goal

C(i,:)=polyfit(B(:,1),B(:,(i+1)),poly1);%polyfit of ABM goal

A(:,5)=polyval(C(i,:),A(:,1)); %ABM goal from polyfit coefficiencts

A(:,6)=A(:,5)+A(:,3); %model output (ABM goal plus PNP drop)

A(:,7)=((A(:,6)-A(:,2)).*A(:,1)); %dissipation error of model

output vs. input data

%%%model output vs. input data%%

figure(1)

plot(A(:,2),A(:,1),'k',A(:,6),A(:,1),'k+')

hold on

%%%%dissipation error of model output vs. input data

figure(2)

subplot(n,1,i)

plot(A(:,1),A(:,7),'k')

axis([0,24,-1,1])

tf2=strcat('V_{GE}=',(num2str(vge(i)))); %"tf2" = "text figure 2"

text(.025,.15,(tf2),'units','normalized')

ylabel 'Watts'

hold on

end

%%%Calculate Vge dependency of polynomial coefficients%%%

poly2=2; %degree of vge dependency polynomial

D=zeros((poly1+1),(poly2+1)); %row vectors for polyfit results

E=zeros((poly1+1),(length(vge(tp,:)))); %row vectors for polyval check

c=transpose(C);

for o=1:(poly1+1);

D(o,:)=polyfit((vge(tp,:)),c(o,:),poly2);%row vectors of polyfit

results

E(o,:)=polyval(D(o,:),(vge(tp,:)));%row vectors containing polyval

results

end

figure(3)

%a comparison of (polyfit of ABM goal)

for i=1:(poly1+1)

%to (Vge dependency of polynomial coefficients)

subplot((poly1+1),1,i)

plot(vge(1,:),c(i,:),'o',vge(tp,:),E(i,:),'+')

end

%%%add labels etc to existing figure%%%

figure(1)

title (strcat(PN,' Forward Conduction Voltage Drop Model'))

xlabel 'V_{CE} (V)'

ylabel 'I_C (A)'

legend ('Input Data', 'Model Data',4)

text(.8,.6,'V_{GE}=15V','units', 'normalized')

text(.87,.55,'13V','units', 'normalized')

text(.87,.5,'11V','units', 'normalized')

%%%add labels etc to figure(2)%%%

figure(2)

subplot(n,1,1)

title (strcat(PN,' Forward Conduction Dissipation Error Vs. Collector

Current'))

subplot(n,1,n)

xlabel 'I_C (A)'

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

%Routine that writes .param to figure and creates .param statements

201

m=(poly1+1); %number of model variables

figure(1)

for i=1:m;

for j=1:(poly2+1);

text(.05,(1.2-(i*.2)(.05*j)),strcat('IVFD',num2str(tp),num2str(i),...

num2str(j-1),'=',sprintf('%0.3e',p(i,j))),'units', 'normalized');

end

end

fid = fopen(strcat((PN),' IGBTVFD',num2str(tp),'_PLY.txt'), 'w');

fprintf(fid, '\r\n%s',strcat('*',(PN)));

fprintf(fid, '\r\n%s','*IGBT Forward Conduction Voltage Drop Model

Parameters');

fprintf(fid, '\r\n%s','');

m=poly1+1; %number of calculated parameters

C=cell(m,(poly2+2));

for i=1:m

for j=1:(poly2+1);

C{i,j}=strcat(' IVFD',num2str(tp),num2str(i),num2str(j1),'=',...

sprintf('%0.3e',p(i,j)));

end

C{i,(poly2+2)}=strcat(C{i,1:(poly2+1)});

end

for k=1:m

fprintf(fid, '\r\n%s',strcat('.param',C{k,(poly2+2)}));

end

fclose(fid);

202

203

204

205

206

Vita

Bryan A. Weaver, born and raised in Indianapolis, Indiana, USA, has been working with

high power electronics and RF power amplifier systems for more than 35 years. Having

received the Advanced Class amateur and FCC First Class Radio Telephone licenses in

1974 he started working at local radio stations prior to graduating from high school in

1976. His interest in broadcast transmitters progressed to the development of modulated

power supplies for high power AM broadcast transmitters, solidifying his interest in

power electronics systems. He is currently president of High Power Solutions LLC, a

consulting service that specializes in power electronics, analog design and RF power

systems. In this capacity he supports the wide ranged needs of military, scientific,

industrial and commercial clients. He is a Senior Member of IEEE and member of the

Beta Alpha Chapter of Eta Kappa Nu.

MS Electrical Engineering Electrophysics, Drexel University

Ph.D. Electrical and Computer Engineering Drexel University

(expected completion in September 2011)

B.A. Weaver, A New, High Efficiency, Digital, Modulation Technique for AM or SSB

Sound Broadcasting Applications, IEEE Transactions on Broadcasting, vol. 38, issue 1,

Mar. 1992, pp. 38-42.

- mosfetbasicsUploaded byJoaquim Piirainen
- Electric Railway Systems in Common UseUploaded by曾乙申
- CMOS Transistor Layout KungFuUploaded bydientuvietnam
- Cadence TutorialUploaded bysanjeemax
- Application Note Pvt v4Uploaded byammayi9845_930467904
- How To Select a VFDUploaded byty14344
- Gate Resistors – Principles and Applications _ PowerGuru - Power Electronics Information PortalUploaded bynani233
- EtoUploaded byNisa El
- m902Uploaded byAn Hoa
- Characterization of Optical MISFETUploaded byseventhsensegroup
- DESIGN OF DIFFERENT DIGITAL CIRCUITS USING SINGLE ELECTRON DEVICESUploaded bymsejjournal
- Product CatalogUploaded bySella Kumar
- 7mbr20sc060 FujiUploaded byozmeen
- Bsnl Placement Papers 2008 2026Uploaded byAnonymous U8awvgZ3pD
- power semiconductor devices posterUploaded bySai Pranahita Kulithalai
- part_1Uploaded byFadhil A. Hasan
- Set Review 1 PresentationUploaded byRaveen Kumar
- Lec_2 Power ElectronicsUploaded byShivanshu Trivedi
- mis6Uploaded byapi-3761679
- EDC notes.docxUploaded bySudershan Dolli
- Semikonduktor 3Uploaded byMuhamad Salim
- 07516504.pdfUploaded byDev Paul
- Multi-output PDP Scan Driver ICUploaded bydan geo
- Discussion 9Uploaded byAlessandra Lattuca
- Avago Application Note 1335 - Main Applications and Selection of Gate Driver Optocouplers.pdfUploaded byFabiano Tonn
- SUB154440.pdfUploaded byRoland Vladutescu
- FetUploaded byDhaval Khairnar
- FALLSEM2012-13_CP0991_03-Aug-2012_RM01Uploaded byAnkit Bhatt
- Electronics and Communication Engineering _ece_- Syllabus for GateUploaded bymain2510
- Logic Families 2Uploaded byvivek

- 0313328579Uploaded byAdolfo Contreras
- Book1Uploaded bytoanproanh
- lecture_1_nano-macro-buehler.pdfUploaded bytoanproanh
- 85762Uploaded bytoanproanh
- Weiss Washington 0250O 13644Uploaded bytoanproanh
- Technological Aspects in the Development of a Mobile Bricklaying RobotUploaded bytoanproanh
- SM_808850r0Uploaded bytoanproanh
- The Quintessential Pic MicrocontrollerUploaded bytoanproanh
- Linux - Embedded - RTOS - The Concise Handbook of Linux for Embedded Real-Time SystemsUploaded byJuan Carlos Trujillo
- The Pic Microcontroller_BookUploaded byapi-19922252
- Brd.klee-Ort Pneumatisk OvUploaded bytoanproanh
- P-1100-WCUploaded bytoanproanh
- Jessy Cusack Thesis FinalUploaded bytoanproanh
- Full Text 01Uploaded bytoanproanh
- tidu544aUploaded bytoanproanh
- L-01(SM)(IA&C) ((EE)NPTEL)Uploaded byMarvin Bayanay
- plasnator.pdfUploaded byfelipeatuesta
- 07. PCB LayoutUploaded byMuhammad Arsalan
- Report Led November 2002a 1Uploaded bytoanproanh
- Localization and Cutting-plane Methods-2003Uploaded bytoanproanh
- Rhinitis2008 Treatment GuidelinesUploaded bydarkreign86
- Custom Latex ClassUploaded byEpic Win
- SchmidtUploaded bytoanproanh
- Latex Command SummaryUploaded byVu Thanh Nhan
- hefferonUploaded byEpic Win
- Rolling your own Document Class: Using LaTeX to keep away from the Dark SideUploaded byJeff Pratt
- Cls GuideUploaded bytoanproanh
- ElectroCraftHandbookforHigh-PerformanceBrushlessServoSystemsUploaded bytoanproanh
- TMHP51 Hydraulic Servo Systems Rydberg 2008Uploaded bysherisha

- SRAM Cell Low Power Dissipation UsingUploaded bySiddharth Singh
- PUT NEC 302 2015-16Uploaded bySakshi Upadhyay
- Application Note Power Supply and Power Management SG3525 AN250Uploaded byCarlos Iba
- Unit 2 CMOS InvertersUploaded bywhitecollar2013
- MOSFET+Worksheet+R2.pdfUploaded byvladan.izbm
- PE2Uploaded bymnamky
- STPA001Uploaded byMima
- 2SK2003-01MR.pdfUploaded bywilmerk_159990
- SyllabusUploaded byPuneet Patil
- ir2125Uploaded byFebin Paul
- Chapter 7 Sequential Circuit DesignUploaded byPradeep Tambatkar
- Buck Converter Reference Design-TIUploaded byCata
- MRF6V4300NUploaded byBaruch Zilbershatz
- Mosfet RQWUploaded byHelen Calva Fernández
- TABELA VISHAY.pdfUploaded byJose Miguel Marques
- EDC Courseplan 14Uploaded bySreeSirivella
- Chapter05-2UP(2_25_03)Uploaded bym1cr0sp1ce
- IRF150 Power Mosfet for Pwm RegulationUploaded byOjo Rojo
- APW7302BUploaded byhskv20025525
- Chapter 4Uploaded byHuu Nguyen
- lm3488Uploaded bysoft4gsm
- Infineon-DesignGuide Quasi Resonant CoolSET Generation5-ATI-V01 00-EnUploaded byH
- 01-02 SD 2018Uploaded byKHairul Qalam Hakim
- 1 Comparative Analysis of Variable N-T Sram CellsUploaded byEkambaramMuniyandi
- vlsidesignmosfet-130103055520-phpapp02.pptUploaded byBasheer V.P
- MOSFET Based 500 Watt PWM INVERTER With Solar Battery Charger Controller (My bUploaded bybazoka fransiskus
- Microsemi 2014Uploaded byVinsen Teubun Letsoin
- 10.1.1.100Uploaded byarushi_somani
- GATE EE 2005 With SolutionsUploaded byAbhishek Mohan
- Transistors and AmplifiersUploaded byCris Diane G. Datingginoo