1 / 15

IBIC analysis of gallium arsenide Schottky diodes

IBIC analysis of gallium arsenide Schottky diodes C.Manfredotti 1,2 , E.Vittone 1,2 ,F.Fizzotti 1,2 , A.LoGiudice 1,2 , F.Nava 3 1 Dip. Fisica Sperim., Università di Torino, INFN-Sez. di Torino, via P.Giuria 1, 10125 Torino (I)

makani
Download Presentation

IBIC analysis of gallium arsenide Schottky diodes

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. IBIC analysis of gallium arsenide Schottky diodes C.Manfredotti1,2, E.Vittone1,2,F.Fizzotti1,2, A.LoGiudice1,2, F.Nava3 1Dip. Fisica Sperim., Università di Torino, INFN-Sez. di Torino, via P.Giuria 1, 10125 Torino (I) 2INFM- Unità di Torino Università, via P.Giuria 1, 10125 Torino (I) 3 Dip. di Fisica, Universitá di Modena, Via Campi 213/A, 41100 Modena, Italy

  2. Summary • IBIC ( ION BEAM INDUCED CHARGE ) PRESENTED AS A POWERFUL METHOD IN ORDER TO INVESTIGATE ELECTRICAL FIELD DEPTH PROFILE AND ELECTRICAL HOMOGENEITY OF DEVICES • FRONTAL IBICC : RESULTS ON ELECTRICAL HOMOGENEITY OF CARBON DOPED n- TYPE SAMPLES • LATERAL IBICC : ANALYSIS OF RESULTS OBTAINED FROM A STANDARD SI SAMPLE IN COMPARISON WITH THEORETICAL MODELS

  3. 2 mm 1 cm (frontal irradiation) 2 MeV proton microbeam pre-amplifier Schottky contact GaAs m lateral IBIC m 1 . 2.4 MeV proton microbeam active region 0 sample holder ohmic contact (back irradiation) 2 MeV proton microbeam

  4. IBIC Set up Ion beam frontal lateral

  5. FRONTAL IBIC • 2 MeV protons ( range in SiC 34 mm ) • microbeam diameter 2 mm • scan area up to 2 x 2 mm2 • event-by-event data collection mode • “ historical “ check of possible effects of radiation damage

  6. Effect of carbon doping on charge collection efficiency uniformity Frontal IBIC GaAs carbon doping effects ( Freiberger ): - lowering of dark current - compensation of EL2 traps ( ? ) - lowering of charge collection efficiency 2 samples L12 C conc. 3 1014 cm-3 A15 C conc. 8 1014 cm-3

  7. FRBBL12 C = 3x1014 cm-3

  8. FRBAn15 C = 8x1014 cm-3

  9. LATERAL IBIC • 2 MeV protons • polished cross section surfaces • no surface effect : penetration depth 34 mm and 2/3 of energy released at the end of the range ( Bragg’s peak ) • the electric field keeps apart the generated carriers : no plasma recombination • charge collection efficiency values ( cce ) are obtained by comparison with a Si surface barrier detector • cce profiles may be obtained from different regions of the scanned area by averaging over different rows or columns • by fitting data by using an equation for cce obtained on the basis of Ramo’s theorem ) it is possible to check with different possible electrical field profiles

  10. LATERAL IBICC 2.4 MeV protons

  11. IBICC collection efficiency profiles 200 m ) m 100 90 Depletion width ( 80 70 60 Slope 0.89 50 40 30 20 20 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 100 200 Bias voltage ( V )

  12. te=1.4 ns te=1.3 ns W=65 mm te=1.5 ns te=1.5 ns W=65 mm te=1.3 ns te=1.3 ns W=45 mm te=1.8 ns te=1.5 ns W=47 mm

  13. CONCLUSIONS Frontal IBIC: Compensation with C : • increases the homogeneity of the response, • worsens energy resolution, but • lowers the charge collection efficiency.

  14. CONCLUSIONS Lateral IBIC • Results are in perfect agreement with the model based on electrical field activated compensation of donors by EL2 centers • The depletion layer width increases almost linearly with bias voltage. • Different kinds of approximation of electrical field profile give very similar results concerning electron and hole lifetimes, but different depletion layer widths. • It may not be appropriate to use Hecht’s relationship in order to interpret the results, because in the presence of space charge Ramo’s theorem is no more valid: the extended Ramo’s theorem or better Gunn’s principle are needed.

More Related