0 Bewertungen0% fanden dieses Dokument nützlich (0 Abstimmungen)

3 Ansichten11 Seitenvery good

Nov 22, 2016

© © All Rights Reserved

PDF, TXT oder online auf Scribd lesen

very good

© All Rights Reserved

Als PDF, TXT **herunterladen** oder online auf Scribd lesen

0 Bewertungen0% fanden dieses Dokument nützlich (0 Abstimmungen)

3 Ansichten11 Seitenvery good

© All Rights Reserved

Als PDF, TXT **herunterladen** oder online auf Scribd lesen

Sie sind auf Seite 1von 11

Electronica

THE EVALUATION

OF GEOMETRICAL EFFECTS

IN FOUR POINT PROBE MEASUREMENTS

M. A. GREEN and M. W. GUNN

Electrical Engineering Department, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia

(Received 2 December

1970; in revisedform

22 February

197 1)

Abstract-An

accurate numerical approach is presented for the evaluation of geometrical effects in

four point probe resistivity measurements upon semiconductors. The accuracy of the approach is

illustrated by comparing results obtained with correction factors tabulated for probe measurements

upon circular and rectangular geometries. Correction factors are presented for measurements with a

square probe array upon rectangular specimens.

The effect of increasing thickness for specimens of bounded geometry is also investigated. The

method allows four point probe measurements to be made not only with an arbitrary probe configuration but also upon thin specimens of an arbitrary geometry.

RCsmnC- On presente une approche numerique precise de Ievaluation des effets geomitriques dans

les prises de mesures de resistance specifique par sonde a quatre points sur les semi-conducteurs.

On demontre la precision de cette approche en comparant les resultats obtenus avec des facteurs de

correction catalog&

pour les mesures par sonde sur des geometries circulaires ou rectangulaires.

On presente des facteurs de correction pour les prises de mesures avec une serie de sondes carrtes

sur des Cchantillons rectangulaires. On examine aussi Ieffet dune augmentation depaisseur sur des

echantillons de geometric limitee. Cette methode permet deffectuer des prises de mesures a la

sonde a quatre points avec une configuration arbitraire de sonde ainsi que sur des Cchantillons de

geometric arbitraire.

Zusammenfassung- Fur Viersondenmessungen an Halbleitern werden genaue numerische Naherungen

zur Auswertung der Geometrieeffekte angegeben. Die Genauigkeit wird erlautert durch Vergleich

der mit den Korrekturfaktoren erzielten Ergebnisse mit denjenigen, die man mit tabellierten Faktoren

fur kreisformige und rechteckige Proben erhalt. Die Korrekturfaktoren zur Messung an rechteckigen

Proben mit einer quadratischen Sondenanordnung werden angegeben.

Der EinfluR zunehmender Probendicke bei fester Probengeometrie wird ebenfalls untersucht.

Die Methode ermiiglicht die Vierpunktmessung nicht nur fur eine beliebige Sondenanordnung sondern

such fur diinne Proben beliebiger Geometrie.

1. INTRODUCTION

THE

FOUR

point

probe

technique

presented

by

evaluation of semiconductor

resistivity. Minimal

sample preparation is required and the method is

suitable for measurements upon diffused, epitaxially

grown and thin film layers. The probe configurations which have proved important are the linear

(Fig. 1) and the square probe arrays (Fig. 2).

Two limiting specimen geometries allow resistivity to be simply evaluated from the ratio of the

voltage measured between the voltage probes to

the current passing through the current probes. The

first is that realised by specimens in the form of thin

sheets such as slices from large crystals, or

epitaxial layers grown over large areas. The second

is that realised

by specimens

large in all three

dimensions

such as large bulk crystals. These

and 3 dimensional respectively.

For specimens of lateral dimensions less than

about ten probe spacings, four point probe measurements are influenced by the sample geometry and

the probe location on this geometry. Thickness

effects become important for specimens between

one half and two probe spacings thick which constitutes the dividing region between 2 dimensional

and 3 dimensional geometries.

Aspects of these effects have been investigated

for 2 dimensional specimens by Smits [2], Vaughan

[3], Mircea[4], and Logan[5], and for 3 dimensional

specimens by Valdes [l], Uhlir[6], and Hansen

1167

M. A. GREEN

1168

a nd M. W. GUNN

obtaining

a numerical

solution of the differential

equation

governing

the

potential

distribution

throughout

the semiconductor

specimen

using a

digital computer. This flexible technique has distinct

advantages

in its simplicity,

and in the fact that

arbitrary

probe configurations

and locations

can

be accommodated.

In addition,

this technique

allows four point probe measurements

to be made

upon specimens

of arbitrary

geometry,

thereby

providing an alternate method to the van der Pauw

peripheral

contact

method[9]

for

resistivity

measurements

upon such specimens.

Fig. 1. Linear

2. FINITE

2. I Potrntiul

DIFFERENCE

distribution

APPROACH

rend boundmy

conditions

throughout

an isotropic

conductor

of resistivity.

p. where there is no charge accumulation

is[lO]

v.

!kC/i

P

-0

(I)

If the conductor

is isotropic and homogeneous,

p is constant

throughout

the conductor.

and this

relation reduces to Laplaces equation

[7]. Extensive

tables have been prepared by Swartzendruber [8] and Logan [5] for measurements

upon

circular

and rectangular

2 dimensional

geometries

respectively.

The technique

used by the above workers has

been based in general upon the method of current

images. This method introduces

elliptic functions

for the conformal

transformation

of rectangular

geometries

to more suitable planes. The work of

Hansen[7].

however,

was based on calculating

the potential distribution

throughout

the geometry

of interest by solving Laplaces equation using the

separation

of variables

technique.

Solutions

obtained

by this technique

were in the form of

slowly convergent

infinite series.

This paper presents

an attractive

technique

for

the evaluation

of these geometrical

effects

by

further.

In addition. only samples surrounded

by insulating

material are considered,

although

the method

is

easily extended

to cases where the sample is in

contact with conducting

material [I I].

For the specimens under consideration. Laplace\

equation governs the potential distribution

throughout the specimen

except at the points where the

current carrying

probes contact the surface.

For

analysis

purposes.

these contact

points can be

replaced

by internal

boundaries

held at fixed

potentials.

The radius of these boundaries

approaches an infinitely small value (Fig. 3).

As no current

flows through

any remaining

portion of the specimen boundary.

the relation to

he satisfied at the sample extremity is

boundary.

perpendicular

to the

FOUR

\/

/\

POINT

PROBE

LJ

superimposed square mesh.

1169

MEASUREMENTS

effects of sample geometry, the probe positioning

on the sample, and the probe array employed.

As shown by Smits [2] and Uhlir [6] K approaches

maximum values of n/in 2 for a linear array and

2a/in 2 for a square array as w approaches zero

and the lateral dimensions of the specimen become

large, which corresponds to the two dimensional

geometry case. Correction

factors for regular

specimens of both two dimensional

and three

dimensional geometries and for thin specimens of

arbitrary geometries are calculated in the following

sections.

3. TWO DIMENSIONAL GEOMETRIES

appropriate boundary conditions can be solved by

finite difference techniques[l2]

using a digital

computer. Solutions have been obtained for regular

specimens of both two dimensional and three dimensional geometries, and for thin specimens of an

arbitrary geometry. These solutions are described

in Sections 3,4 and 5 respectively.

The method of solution is indicated in Fig. 3

which shows a thin rectangular specimen with a

four point probe in an arbitrary configuration on its

surface. The specimen is divided by a square mesh

with the current probe contacts lying on nodes,

where a node corresponds to the intersection of two

mesh lines. The voltages at the current probe

contact boundaries are specified arbitrarily.

If the voltage at every remaining node can be

expressed in terms of the voltages at the surrounding nodes using the appropriate finite difference

formulae, a set of simultaneous equations can be

obtained. Solution of this set gives the voltage at

every node point on the mesh. The current required

to maintain this voltage distribution can be calculated thus allowing the ratio of voltage measured

between the voltage probes to the current passing

between the current probes to be found.

The specimen geometries considered in this

paper are bounded and of uniform thickness, w.

The most convenient expression for the specimen

resistivity. p, in terms of the voltage measured

between the voltage probes, V, and the current

passing between the current probes, I, is

(4)

Consider a node as shown in Fig. 4(a) within a

region convered by a square mesh of mesh interval.

h. A relationship between the voltage at node point

0 and the surrounding nodes is the 5 point formula

expression about the node 0 [ 121. For regions where

Laplaces equation is satisfied this reduces to the

finite difference approximation.

v,+v,+v,+v,-41/,=0

(6)

(b)

(a)

;--+-$

I

12

t--

lo

14

L7-_

IF

1170

M. A. GREEN

Another relationship

and

M. W. GUNN

(15)

-g=pJ,

+6h*Vl+O(hX)

(7)

approximation with an error proportional to a higher

power of the mesh interval.

Boundary nodes differ from the above interior

nodes in that some of their surrounding nodes lie

outside the specimen geometry. Two distinct

types, edge and corner nodes. are also given in

Fig. 4. Using a Taylor series approximation,

it

can be shown that

(8)

If the boundary condition

can be approximated by

given by equation

v, + I:,

pJ,

-g=

(16)

the current crossing a path such as AB (Fig. 5). If

p and h are set equal to unity, this is approximated

by the sum of the x component of current density

at points marked with crosses in Fig. 5. The x

component is found by a finite difference approximation to equation ( 15 ).

Current can be calculated similarly for polar

meshes, but the cross section where current is

calculated cannot pass through the origin.

(3)

(9)

v,+2v,+li,-44v

Similarly the corresponding

+ 0

(IO)

9 point formula is

4(l,+21/,+l,)+2l;+21i,-20l,,

+ 0 (1 I)

X

I

6

Fig. S. Method

2l~+2l~--4l,,

+ 0

and

sv, + sv, + 4v, - 2ov,, - 0

(13)

similarly.

Since, as shown above, the voltage at every node

can be expressed in terms of the voltages at surrounding nodes within the specimen geometry,

the resulting set of simultaneous equations can be

solved. The current flowing between the current

probes to maintain this calculated voltage distribution can be found using Ohms law.

E=pJ

of current

calculation

(12)

(14)

The set of finite difference equations obtained

from the relationship at each node may be solved

by direct or iterative methods using a digital computer. The method used in the present work uas

Gauss-Seidel

iteration with over-relaxation [ 121.

This method converged for all geometries treated

in this paper and is briefly described below.

A simple voltage distribution

was initially

assumed throughout

the geometry. Consider a

point such as 0 in Fig. 4(a). The voltage relation

between it and the surrounding

nodes will in

general not be satisfied.

In general, for a 5 point formula, this can be

expressed as

FOUR

R=f(V,+V*+V,+v~)-vV,

(17)

the voltage at the node 0 where

I; = L,,+ZR

(18)

this relaxation procedure in a systematic manner

throughout all the nodes of the mesh a number of

times, the sum of the magnitude of the residues

decreases and the voltage distribution converges

to the required solution. The rate of convergence

is strongly dependent on the value assigned to Z.

One pass through the mesh was termed an iteration cycle and a number of such cycles were grouped

to form a batch. After each batch, the current was

calculated from the present state of the voltage

distribution.

This allowed the correction factor

to be calculated and compared with that obtained

from the previous batch. Once the solution had

stabilised to the desired number of significant

figures, the process was halted.

3.3 Accuracy of solutions

The accuracy of the finite difference solutions

was strongly dependent on the coarseness of the

dividing mesh. The correction factors obtained for

a linear probe located symmetrically on square and

circular specimens, are compared with previously

published results in Table 1. Located symmetrically

is defined as the probe array positioned such that

the centre of the probe array coincides with the

centre of the specimen, with the lines joining

adjacent probes parallel to the specimen sides for

rectangular specimens as indicated in Fig. 1 for an

in line array and Fig. 2 for a square array.

The results for rectangular

geometries were

obtained using 9 point formulae. Table 1 shows

that these finite difference results converge to the

correct solution at a rate inversely proportional

to the fourth power of the number of mesh intervals

between nodes. The results for circular specimens,

obtained using 5 point formulae and a polar mesh,

converged at a rate inversely proportional to this

quantity to the second power. Knowledge of the

convergence rate can be used to extrapolate to

more accurate results.

For both geometries, the accuracy obtained using

the coarser meshes was greater than that required

for physical measurements.

Use of extrapolation

compilation of tables.

1171

results

suitable

for the

To illustrate the usefulness of the finite difference

approach, resistivity correction factors were calculated for measurements with a square probe array

upon thin rectangular specimens. Factors for such

an array on circular[8] and square [4] specimens

have previously been published, but do not appear

to have been treated for the above configuration.

The work of Buehler and Pearson[ 131 suggests a

square array may prove more useful than the currently popular linear array, since it enables Hall

effect measurements to be obtained.

Table 2 lists the value of correction factor K

[equation (l)] obtained for rectangular geometries

with the probe array symmetrically located. Those

for a circular specimen are listed for completeness.

Using this table, resistivity measurements can be

made upon thin semiconductor

layers or slices

using a four point probe in a square array, provided

the specimen geometry is approximately circular

or rectangular. Measurements upon more arbitrary

geometries are treated in Section 5.

4. THREE DIMENSIONAL GEOMETRIES

4.1 Outline of method

Using a method analogous to that used in two

dimensions, the following basic 7 point formula

is obtained for a three dimensional cubical mesh

of mesh interval h [Fig. 6(a)].

~,+~,+~,+~,+~,+~,=6~~+hh2V*V+O(h4)

(19)

in the two dimensional case by using a 9 point

formulae instead of the basic 5 point formulae,

a similar improvement is desirable in three dimensions. There exist two separate sets of nodes

surrounding the central node capable of reducing

the error associated with the finite different approximation to equation (19). These two sets are called

the 8 point and the 12 point sets and are illustrated

in Figs. 6(b) and (c) respectively.

Designating

S6 = Il+Iz+I~+I~+I~+I~

S8 = sum of the 8 nodes (0) in Fig. 7(b)

S 12 = sum of the 12 nodes (0) in Fig. 7(c)

4.2209

3.36248

10

Extrapolated

result

3.5098

(3.50975)

(Those in brackets computed using Hansens

Circular solution due to Swartzendruber[X].

Circular

specimen

Square

specimen

Analytical

solution?

(K).for

3.1134

(3.11343)

Probe spacing

fclctors

Side length

or diameter

Tuble 1. Correction

method[7]).

3.36244

3.35514

3.36074

3.36169

/,,

1.2 X 10-E

2.2 X 10-l

5.2 x 1lF

2.4 x 10-2

4

8

12

2

4

10

12

2

4

8

12

3.2 x lo-*

negligible

2.6 x 10-l

1.6 x lo-

9.0 x IO-1

negligible

3.11342

3.11343

3.5008

3.50918

3.50972

3.90975

3.1 x 10-l

2.1 x lo-

2

4

4.2080

4.2200

geometries

Mesh intervals

between probes

2.5 x 10-L

2.9 x lo-

% Error

3.11296

3.11334

Computed

by this method

111

421

931

121

441

441

625

36

121

441

963

25

81

total no.

of nodes

,/

120

120

270

80

210

1.50

120

80

100

150

400

100

100

No. of

iterations

IO--

lo-

10-6

IO-6

10-S

lo-

2x 10-7

9x 10-j

2 x lo-s

8 x 10ms

3 x 10-6

2x

6x

3x

3x

1x

1x

4x 10-e

6 x IO-

Sum of

residues

.3

5

Z

c!

Z

Z

p:

Z

FOUR

Table 2. Correction

factors

POINT

PROBE

geometries (rectangular and circular)

Rectangular

Probe spacing

= 4

s

1173

MEASUREMENTS

Circular

specimen

1.0

1.25

1.5

1.75

2.0

2.5

3.0

4.0

5.0

7.0

10.0

-00

a/d=

1.0

4.5324

4.5477

4.6508

4.8526

5.1168

5.7028

6.25 16

7.0969

7.6504

8.2581

86434

9.0647

4.5437

4.6778

49052

5.4593

6.0052

6.8803

7.4739

8.1442

8.5795

9.0647

a/d = 1.2

2.8667

3.3358

3.7832

4.2321

4.6701

54677

6.1273

7.0662

76495

8.2694

8.6528

9.0647

located

specimen

a/d=

1.5

2.0936

2.7101

3.3044

3.8710

4.3988

5.3127

6.0373

7.0350

7.6392

8.26%

8.655 1

9.0647

on 2 dimensional

(Fig. 2)

a/d = 2.0

a/d = 4.0

1.7822

24454

3.0939

3.7070

4.2716

5.2358

5.98%

7.0156

7.6306

8.2680

8.6550

9.0647

1.7076

2.3810

3.0418

36658

4.2391

5.2157

5.9773

7.0102

7.6281

8.2673

8.6549

9.0647

070

I

025

I

05

I

0.75

I

125

I.0

\\

I.5

175

20

U/8

(24)] for linear probe

symmetrically

located

on rectangular

specimen

d/a = 2.0 (Fig. 1).

array

with

14S6+3S12+SS

(b)

(cl

then

node configuration;

(b) Eight

(c)Twelve

point set.

set:

2S6+Sl2

8S6+S8

Combining

SSEVol.

point

14.No.

II-H

= 24f,+6hVV+O(ha)

(20)

= 56V,+ 12hZV2f+O(hS)

(21)

produces

an

= 12W0+O(hs)

(22)

(22) were termed the 15 point and 27 point

formulae respectively. These formulae are computationally more efficient than that given by equation (19), and also require fewer node point values

to be stored to obtain a given accuracy. Results

obtained from them are compared in Table 3.

Extrapolation based on a convergence

rate

inversely proportional to the fourth power of the

mesh intervals between the probe nodes gave

results in excellent agreement with those derived

M. A. GREEN

1174

and M. W. GUNN

Table 3. Correction factors (K) for linear probe array on square specimens

Side length

6

Probe spacing = s

Mesh intervals

between probes

48

245

700

1521

Extrapolated

5

Total no.

of nodes

results

I08

605

Extrapolated results

tobtained

15 Point result

2 2402

2.2471

2.2479

2.2484

3.1804

X2835

3.291

of thickness w = s (Fig. I )

27 Point result

Analytical

solution?

2.2222

2.2465

2.2480

2.2484

3.2644

2.2483

3.2922

analytically.

The boundary nodes and the solution

of the finite difference

equations

are treated

analogously

to the two dimensional

problems.

4.2 The effect qfsample thickness

The effect of increasing sample thickness on the

accuracy

of four point probe correction

factors

has been investigated

previously

for the case of

infinite

sheets

of uniform

thickness.

Smits[2]

expressed

the resistivity

of an infinite sheet of

uniform thickness,

IQ. for a linear probe in the form

(23)

where s is the probe spacing, and F(w/s) is a thickness factor which approaches

unity as nlapproaches

zero.

Smits suggested

as an approximation

to the

more complex case of a geometry

bounded in all

three dimensions.

the expression

factor for the corresponding

2 dimensional

geometry,

and F(w/s) is

the thickness

factor for an infinite geometry

as

mentioned

above.

Using the method

of finite

difference,

the validity of this approximation

was

investigated

for specimens

in the form of rectangular bars. Typical results are shown in Fig. 7.

For a linear probe array symmetrically

located

on such a specimen,

with the current probes away

from the sample edge, the term F(w/s) was smaller

than the value required

to make equation

(24)

correct. As the lateral dimensions

of the specimen

became

large compared

with the probe spacing,

the approximation

improved.

This result would be

expected

to hold for other three dimensional

geometries

of uniform

thickness.

In general,

the

approximation

given by Smits would yield a value

of resistivity

lower than the theoretically

correct

value.

5. SPECIMENS OF ARBITRARY GEOMETRY

As it was found difficult to fit the basic linear or

square probe army to a polar mesh when the array

was located arbitrarily, the use of a square mesh for

a curved body was investigated

for two dimensional

geometries.

The simplest approach is to cover the

geometry

of interest

by a square mesh and to

approximate

the specimen

boundary

by mesh

lines and mesh diagonals.

This linear approximation to the specimen

boundary

produced

results

better than a few percent

accurate

for circular

specimens.

However

a more elegant technique

developed

by Viswanathan

[ 151 produced

results

at least an order of magnitude

more accurate for

the same mesh size. This method

is outlined

below.

An arbitrary geometry covered by a square mesh

produces nodes mostly surrounded

by nodes within

the boundary

(Fig. 8). These were called interior

modes and can be treated

by the usual finite

difference

techniques.

The classes of nodes with

only 3 node and 2 nodes within one mesh interval

lying inside the boundary

were labelled edge and

corner nodes respectively.

Consider

a typical

edge node (Fig. 9). The

approach

used by Viswanathan

produces

a finite

difference formula for this node in the form

FOUR

POINT

PROBE

(aj

117.5

MEASUREMENTS

(b)

external nodes.

where

1+m*

A = l-m+2el_mZ+ep,

h mq(l

+m*)

l-m

distance between nodes replaced by hl ti.

Replacing h by h/V? wherever h occurs in the

edge node formula gives

z4V,+BV,+cV,-DV;

=o

(26)

>

But since 0 is surrounded

c=

I+m+2rw&~y(:+mm2)

PA

by 0,3,7,4,

we have

v; =I(v,+v,+v,+v,)

(27)

D = 4 1 +e~+e;~!m;))

(

(4A-D)V3+(4B-D)V,+(4C-D)V,

pA = radius of curvature

A (Fig. 9).

E, h, a are defined in Fig. 9.

m= tana

The points 3, 7, 4,O are in the same configuration

-DV,=O

(28)

Although bulky from the point of view of hand

computation, these formulae were readily evaluated

by digital computer. The coefficients, A, B, etc.,

M. A. GREEN

1176

and

were calculated

from geometrical

input data and

stored in a matrix form, the relevant

set being

brought into the iteration scheme when a boundary

node was reached by the relaxation process [ 141.

This method

required

the recording

of the

quantities,

p, E, and OLin addition to a basic mesh

description

as required

by the mesh line and

diagonal approximation.

To illustrate the accuracy

of this approach,

results obtained

for both linear

and square probe array measurements

upon circular

specimens

using the technique

are presented

in

Table 4. By comparison

with those obtained for

circular specimens

using a polar mesh (Table I),

it can be seen that this method produces results at

least as accurate

as the previous

technique

for a

given number of nodes, and has the advantage that

both arbitrary

geometries

and arbitrary

probe

locations

on these

geometries

can be accommodated.

6. DISCUSSION

The techniques

discussed

in this paper were

incorporated

into programmes

written in FORTRAN IV. Using a PDP 10 digital computer, computation time was approximately

20 set for typical

problems

involving

about 400 node points,

although efficiency was improved for larger problems

using mesh halving techniques.

The optimum value

of relaxation factor, 2 [equation (18)] was found to

be 1.86 for rectangular

specimens.

In some cases,

it was possible to take advantage

of problem symmetry to reduce the number of nodes required as

was possible in preparing the results of Table I.

In the application

of numerical techniques

to the

four point probe problem, the particular technique

chosen

was appealing

because

of the simplicity

Table

4. Correction

Probe

array

factor

Diameter

Probe spacing

(K)

d

= s

for

*Advantage

circular specimens

geometries

Computed

solution

by this

method

4

5

2.9289

3.3625

10

2

5

4.1716

49052

7.4739

to the fact that 3 dimensional

specimens

and specimens

of arbitrary

geometry

could be accommodated

without altering the basic

algorithm.

It was found that 9 point formulae in 2 dimensions and corresponding

formulae in 3 dimensions

were superior to the commonly

used 5 point and

7 point formulae because they handled the current

probe signularities

without

the complication

of

special

singularity

formulae.

Although

these

formulae

(the 5 point formula

excepted)

lack

Youngs

property

A[ 121, no difficulty was encountered

in obtaining

convergence

using point

successive

overrelaxation.

Thus block iterative

methods were not mandatory but optional.

As demonstrated

by the results given in Tables

I and 4, accuracy

adequate

for experimental

use

was obtained using small numbers of mesh points.

Refinements

such as incorporating

special singularity formulae [ 161 and using energy methods [ 171 to

obtain bounds on the solution would be helpful

for the efficient compilation

of tables.

A paper by Chawla and Gummel [ 181 has been

brought

to the authors attention

by a reviewer.

That paper describes a method of solving Laplaces

equation

numerically

by transforming

singular

boundary

points and assuming

a linear potential

distribution

between other points on the boundary.

Cauchys

integral formula is then used to derive

relations between the potentials at boundary points

and the values of a suitably chosen stream function.

Solutions are obtained by the direct inversion of a

matrix of order approximately

equal to the number

of boundary

points

chosen,

offering

increased

efficiency

over conventional

techniques [ 191 for

Analytical

Linear

array

Square

array

M. W. GUNN

2.9292

3.3591

3.3641

3.3637

4.1730

4.8997

7.4777

obtained

using

programme

Mesh intervals

between probes

for

arbitrury

Approx. no

of nodes

% Error

I.0 x

1.0 x

4.8 x

3.6 x

3.4 x

1.1 x

5.1 x

10-z

IO-

IO-

lOmy

IF

10-l

I@

10

4

4

8

4

10

4

330 f

220

85 .

330.

330-F

330

330

FOUR

POlNT

PROBE

the solution of Laplaces equation over 2 dimensional regions with Dirichlet or Neumann (or a

combination of both) types of boundary conditions.

In the present context, this method would

possibly increase efficiency for 2 dimensional

problems (regular and arbitrary geometries) with

the sacrifice of the simple algorithm described, but

the number of boundary nodes required to describe

3 dimensional specimens would be excessive. More

importantly for the more general boundary conditions which arise when obtaining Hall effect

measurements using the four point probe[ 131, the

finite difference technique described in this paper

can be used with negligible change in solution

algorithm [ 141.

7. CONCLUSION

calculation of geometrical effects in four point

probe resistivity

measurements.

The method,

based on a finite difference solution of Laplaces

equation, has been tested by comparison of results

with those previously

published.

Using this

approach, results have been obtained for resistivity

measurements

with a square probe array on rectangular specimens which do not appear to have

been previously reported.

The effect of specimen thickness on the accuracy

of resistivity measurement has also been investigated. For the solution of Laplaces equation over a

three dimensional

region divided by a cubical

mesh, it has been shown that formulae based on

more than the usual six surrounding nodes have

advantages in computing efficiency and storage

requirements.

The numerical technique used is particularly

powerful compared with analytical methods in

that it is suitable for geometries of an arbitrary

A

1177

MEASUREMENTS

Pauw peripheral contact method of resistivity

measurement

upon such specimens. Additional

advantages claimed for the technique are its basic

simplicity, its ability to handle arbitrary probe

configurations and locations, and the fact that it

can be extended to cases of non uniform resistivity

distribution. It is particularly suited for use with

high speed digital computers.

REFERENCES

1. L. B. Valdes.

Proc. Instn. Radio Enyrs.

42. 420

(1954).

2. F.M.Smits,BellSyst.tech.J.37,711

(1958).

3. D.E.Vau~han,Br.J.a~~I.Ph~s.12,414(1961).

4. A. MircearJ.

Sci. In&&41,679

(1964).

5. M. A. Logan, BellSyst.

tech. J. 46.2277 (1967).

6. A. Uhlir,BellSysr.

tech./. 34, 105 (1955).

7. E. B. Hansen,A&

Sci. Res. 8,93 (1960).

8. L. J. Swartzendruber,

Correction

Factor Tables for

Four-Point

Probe

Resistivity

Measurements

on

Thin, Circular Semicondacfor

Samples,

Nat. Bur.

Stand., Tech. Note 199, U.S. Gvt. Printing Office

(1964).

9. L. J. van der Pauw, Philips Tech. Rev. 20,220 (1959).

10. W. R. Smythe,

Static and Dynamic

Elecwicity,

McGraw-Hill,

New York, p. 23 1 (1950).

11. .I. P. Newsome, Proc. IEE, 110,653 (1963).

12. G. E. Forsythe

and W. R. Wasow, Finite Difference

Methods

for Partial Differential

Equations,

John

Wilev, New York (1960).

13. M. 6. Buehler and G. L. Pearson. Solid-St. Electron.

9,395 (1966).

14. M. A. Green, B.E. Thesis, University

of Queensland,

1969.

15. R. V. Viswanathan.

Math.

Table Aids Comput.

11,67 (1957).

16. D. H. Sinnot.

IEEE

Trans. MTT,

MTT-17.

20

(1969).

17. C. T. Carson

and G. K. Cambrell,

IEEE Trans.

MTT, Ml-T-14,497

(1966).

18. B. R. Chawla and H. K. Gummel,

IEEE Trans.

Electron Devices, ED-17,9 15 (1970).

19. A. Wexler, IEEE Trans. MTT,MTT-17,416

(1%9).

## Viel mehr als nur Dokumente.

Entdecken, was Scribd alles zu bieten hat, inklusive Bücher und Hörbücher von großen Verlagen.

Jederzeit kündbar.