scaling of high frequency iii-v transistors rodwell@ece.ucsb.edu 805-893-3244, 805-893-5705 fax...
Post on 16-Jan-2016
215 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Scaling of High Frequency III-V Transistors
rodwell@ece.ucsb.edu 805-893-3244, 805-893-5705 fax
Short Course, 2009 Conference on InP and Related Materials, Newport Beach, CA, May 10-14
Mark Rodwell University of California, Santa Barbara
THz Transistors
Transistor bandwidths are increasing rapidly.
Si MOSFETs will soon reach 500+ GHz cutoff frequencies.
It is now clear III-V bipolar transistors can reach ~2-3 THz cutoff frequencies.
III-V FETs have comparable potential, but the prospects and analysis are less clear.
The limits to transistor bandwidth are:contact resistivities
gate dielectric capacitance densities.device and IC power density & thermal resistance.
challenges in reliably fabricating small devices.
WhyTHz Transistors ?
Why Build THz Transistors ?
THz amplifiers→ THz radios→ imaging, sensing, communications
precision analog design at microwave frequencies→ high-performance receivers
500 GHz digital logic→ fiber optics
Higher-Resolution Microwave ADCs, DACs, DDSs
PerformanceFigures of Merit
Transistor figures of Merit / Cutoff Frequencies
H21=short-circuit current gain
gain
s, d
B
MAG = maximum available power gain:impedance-matched
U= unilateral power gain:feedback nulled, impedance-matched
fmax
power-gaincutoff frequency
fcurrent-gaincutoff frequency
What Determines Gate Delay ?
cexLOGIC
LOGIC
Ccb
becbi
becbC
LOGIC
IRq
kTV
V
IR
CCR
CCI
V
4
leastat bemust swing logic The
resistance base the through
charge stored
collector base Supplying
resistance base the through
charging ecapacitanc on Depleti
swing logic the through
charging ecapacitanc on Depleti
:by ermined Delay DetGate
bb
depletion,bb
depletion,
JVR
v
T
A
A
V
V
I
VC
T)V(VvεJ
CI
CCIV
f
ex
electron
C
CE
LOGIC
C
LOGICcb
cceceelectronKirk
cbC
becbCLOGIC
cb
highat low for low very bemust
22
/2
objective. design key HBTa is / High
total.of 80%-55% is
withcorrelated not well Delay
delay; totalof 25%-10y typicall)(
logic
emitter
collector
min,
2depletion full,operating ,max,
depl,
HBT Design For Digital & Mixed-Signal Performance
from charge-control analysis:
)./5.05.0(
)/5.05.05.0(
)/5.05.0)(/(
)66)(/(
LCfcbijebb
LCfcbicbxex
LCfcbicbxjeC
fcbicbxjeCLgate
VICCR
VICCR
VICCCqIkT
CCCIVT
analog ICs have similar bandwidth constraints...
High-FrequencyElectron Device
Design
Simple Device Physics: Resistance
Good approximation for contactwidths less than 2 transfer lengths.
A
TR bulk
bulk resistance
AR contact
contact resistance-perpendicular
L
W
AR sheet
contact
3
'
contact resistance- parallel
Simple Device Physics: Depletion Layers
capacitance
T
AC
transit time
v
T
2
space-chargelimited current
2
22
max depletionapplied VVT
v
A
I
2 where
max
depletionapplied VVI
C
T
VCI
Simple Device Physics: Thermal Resistance
Exact
L
W
WK
W
L
LKR
th
thth
1
1
sinh1
sinh1
Carslaw & Jaeger 1959
LKW
L
LKR
ththth
1ln
1
junctionnear
flowheat lcylindrica
Long, Narrow StripeHBT Emitter, FET Gate
junction fromfar
flowheat spherical
LKLKR
ththth
1
4
1
surfacenear
flowheat planar
Square ( L by L ) IC on heat sink
surface fromfar
flowheat spherical
Simple Device Physics: Fringing Capacitance
5.1T
W
L
C
wiring capacitance
plate-parallel fringing
)3 to(1
/ and / of
function varying-slowly
21 GWGWL
C
FET parasitic capacitances
LC / ~/ LCparasitic
VLSI power-delay limits FET scaling constraints
Electron Plasma Resonance: Not a Dominant Limit
*2kinetic
1
nmqA
TL
T
AC
ntdisplaceme
m
dielecic L
Rf
2
1
2
1
frequency scattering
kinetic
bulk
mnmqA
TR
*2bulk
1
2
1
2/1
frequency relaxation dielectric
bulkntdisplaceme
RC
fdielecicntdisplacemekinetic
2/1
frequencyplasma
CLf plasma
THz 800 THz 7 THz 74319 cm/105.3
InGaAs-
n
319 cm/107
InGaAs-
pTHz 80 THz 12 THz 13
Electron Plasma Resonance: Not a Dominant Limit
*2kinetic
1
nmqA
TL
T
AC
ntdisplaceme
m
dielecic L
Rf
2
1
2
1
frequency scattering
kinetic
bulk
mnmqA
TR
*2bulk
1
2
1
2/1
frequency relaxation dielectric
bulkntdisplaceme
RC
fdielecicntdisplacemekinetic
2/1
frequencyplasma
CLf plasma
THz 800 THz 7 THz 74319 cm/105.3
InGaAs-
n
319 cm/107
InGaAs-
pTHz 80 THz 12 THz 13
Electron Plasma Resonance: Not a Dominant Limit
*2kinetic
1
nmqA
TL
T
AC
ntdisplaceme
m
dielecic L
Rf
2
1
2
1
frequency scattering
kinetic
bulk
mnmqA
TR
*2bulk
1
2
1
2/1
frequency relaxation dielectric
bulkntdisplaceme
RC
fdielecicntdisplacemekinetic
2/1
frequencyplasma
CLf plasma
THz 800 THz 7 THz 74319 cm/105.3
InGaAs-
n
319 cm/107
InGaAs-
pTHz 80 THz 12 THz 13
Electron Plasma Resonance: Not a Dominant Limit
*2kinetic
1
nmqA
TL
T
AC
ntdisplaceme
m
dielecic L
Rf
2
1
2
1
frequency scattering
kinetic
bulk
mnmqA
TR
*2bulk
1
2
1
2/1
frequency relaxation dielectric
bulkntdisplaceme
RC
fdielecicntdisplacemekinetic
2/1
frequencyplasma
CLf plasma
THz 800 THz 7 THz 74319 cm/105.3
InGaAs-
n
319 cm/107
InGaAs-
pTHz 80 THz 12 THz 13
Frequency Limitsand Scaling Laws of (most) Electron Devices
width
lengthlog
length
power
thicknessarea /
length
width
4area
area/
thickness/area
thickness
2limit-charge-space max,
T
I
R
R
C
sheetcontactbottom
contacttop
To double bandwidth, reduce thicknesses 2:1 Improve contacts 4:1reduce width 4:1, keep constant lengthincrease current density 4:1
topR
bottomR
PIN photodiode
parameter change
collector depletion layer thickness decrease 2:1
base thickness decrease 1.414:1
emitter junction width decrease 4:1
collector junction width decrease 4:1
emitter contact resistance decrease 4:1
current density increase 4:1
base contact resistivity decrease 4:1
Changes required to double transistor bandwidth:
Linewidths scale as the inverse square of bandwidth because thermal constraints dominate.
eW
bcWcTbT
ELlength emitter
Bipolar Transistor Scaling Laws
parameter change
gate length decrease 2:1
gate dielectric capacitance density increase 2:1
gate dielectric equivalent thickness decrease 2:1
channel electron density increase 2:1
source & drain contact resistance decrease 4:1
current density (mA/m) increase 2:1
Changes required to double transistor bandwidth:
Linewidths scale as the inverse of bandwidth because fringing capacitance does not scale.
FET Scaling Laws
GW widthgate
GL
THz & nm Transistors: it's all about the interfaces
Metal-semiconductor interfaces (Ohmic contacts): very low resistivity
Dielectric-semiconductor interfaces (Gate dielectrics): very high capacitance density
Transistor & IC thermal resistivity.
BipolarTransistors
Indium Phosphide Heterojunction Bipolar Transistors
Z. GriffithE. Lind
Bipolar Transistor Operation
cI
beV ceV
voltagecollector with little varies
it through pass base reaching electrons allAlmost
)/exp(
al)(exponenti thermalison distributienergy emitter Because
c
bec
I
kTqVI
Transistor Hybrid-Pi equivalent circuit model
nkTqIg Em /
)( cbmjebe gCC
mbe gR /
Cutoff frequencies in HBTs
collex
Ebc
Ejecollectorbase RR
qI
kTC
qI
kTC
f
2
1
nbbase DT 22 effccollector vT 2
cbibbCR
ff
8max
Epitaxial Layer Structure
emitter
emittercap
gradedbase
collector
subcollector
Epitaxy: InP Emitter, InGaAs Base, InP Collector, Both Junctions GradedKey Features:
N++ InGaAs emitter contact layer
InP emitter
InGaAs/InAlAs superlattice e/b grade
InGaAs graded basebandgap or doping grade
BC setback layer
InGaAs/InAlAs superlattice b/c grade
InP collector
InGaAs etch-stop layerthin for heat conduction
InP subcollector
Layer Material Doping Thickness (nm)
Emitter cap In0.53Ga0.47As 8 1019 cm-3: Si 25
N+ emitter InP 8 1019 cm-3: Si 50
N- emitter InP 1 1018 cm-3: Si 20
Emitter-base grade In0.53Ga0.47As / In0.52Al0.48As,
1.6 nm period N: 1 1017 cm-3: Si
24
Emitter-base grade In0.53Ga0.47As / In0.52Al0.48As,
1.5 nm period P: 8 1017 cm-3: C 1
Base In0.53Ga0.47As P: 7-4 1019 cm-3: C 24.5
Setback In0.53Ga0.47As N: 9 1016 cm-3: Si 4.5
Base-collector grade
In0.53Ga0.47As / In0.52Al0.48As, 1.6 nm period
N: 9 1016 cm-3: Si 15
Pulse doping InP 6 1018 cm-3: Si 3
Collector InP N: 2 1016 cm-3: Si 82
etch-stop In0.53Ga0.47As N: 8 1019 cm-3: Si 5
Subcollector InP N: 8 1019 cm-3: Si ~200
M. DahlstromZ. Griffith UCSB
M. UrteagaTSC
emitter
emittercap
gradedbase
collector
subcollector
Epitaxy with Abrupt BE Junction
Similar design
Abrupt E/B junction (no e/b grade)
Advantages:ease of stopping emitter etch on base→ good base contacts
Disadvantages:Increased Vbe .Cannot make e/b ledge.
Layer Material Doping Thickness (nm)
Emitter cap In0.53Ga0.47As 8 1019 cm-3: Si 25
N+ emitter InP 8 1019 cm-3: Si 50
N- emitter InP 1 1018 cm-3: Si 20
N- emitter InP N: 1 1017 cm-3: Si 24
Emitter-base grade In0.53Ga0.47As / In0.52Al0.48As,
1.5 nm period P: 8 1017 cm-3: C 1
Base In0.53Ga0.47As P: 7-4 1019 cm-3: C 24.5
Setback In0.53Ga0.47As N: 9 1016 cm-3: Si 4.5
Base-collector grade
In0.53Ga0.47As / In0.52Al0.48As, 1.6 nm period
N: 9 1016 cm-3: Si 15
Pulse doping InP 6 1018 cm-3: Si 3
Collector InP N: 2 1016 cm-3: Si 82
etch-stop In0.53Ga0.47As N: 8 1019 cm-3: Si 5
Subcollector InP N: 8 1019 cm-3: Si ~200
M. DahlstromZ. GriffithE. Lind
Alternative Grades for Thinner Epitaxy
Common Grade in LiteratureInGaAs/InAlAs 18 nm thick, 1.5 nm period
Sub-monolayer Grade0.15 nm InAlAs, (0.15 to 0.165 nm InGaAs)10.8 nm thick
Strained InxGa1-xAs Grade
InGaAs/GaAs 6 nm
E . LindZ. Griffith
Other Methods of Grading the Junctions
IEDM 2001
InGaAs/InGaAsP/InP grade InP/GaAsSb/InP DHBT
-suitable for MOCVD growth
- excellent results
- does not need B/C grading
- E/B band alignment through GaAsSb alloy ratio (strain)
or InAlAs emitter
Transport Analysis
Approximate Carrier Transit Times eW
bcWcTbT
exitbnbb vTDT 22
satcc vT 2
ELlength emitter
TimeTransit Base
TimeTransit Collector
Base Transit Time with Graded Base
gbg
g
LWsatgngngbb
EkTWL
L
evLDLDLW gb
/
:length grading theis where
1/// /2
fs 35/
ifcorrect modeldiffusion -Drift* kTmDτ nmb
cm/s 103
secV/cm 40
:Assumes
7
2
exit
N
v
D
Dino Mensa
Base Transit Time: Grading Approaches Dino MensaMiguel UrteagaMattias Dahlström
Compositional grading: strained graded InGaAs base
Doping grading unstrained In0.53Ga0.47As base
(strained) AsGaIn AsGaIn
:drop potential meV 52
0.470.530.5450.455
/cm105~ to/cm108~
:from varieddoping Carbon319319
V=0
TcTc/2
-
-+ +
V=0
Tc/4
+ +
-
-
+ +
-
-
-
-
+
+
Collector Transit TimeT. Ishibashi
base.near velocity tosensitive more is
2)(
)/1(
sketch) (refer to ticselectrosta elementary From
c
0
c
CT
eff
cc
v
Tdx
xv
Tx
.scattering L- todue decreasesthen
high, is velocity initial as ,Fortuitous
layers nm 200-70~for cm/s103.5 :InP
:voltagecollector .density vscurrent Kirk fromor ata,d RF fit tobest From7
Space-Charge Limited Current Density → Ccb charging time
Collector Field Collapse (Kirk Effect)
Collector Depletion Layer Collapse
)2/)(/( 2 cdsatcb TqNvJV
)2/)(( 2min, cTqNV dcb
eff
C
CECE
LOGICCLOGICcCLOGICcb v
T
A
A
VV
VIVTAIVC
2/
emitter
collector
min,
collector
2
min,max /)2(2 ccbcbeff TVVvJ
cecbbe VVV )( hence , that Note
Collector capacitance charging time scales linearly with collector thickness if J = Jmax
Space-Charge-Limited Current (Kirk effect) in DHBTs
ceV
Jff
increased with
increases esholdeffect thr-Kirk
highat and in Decrease max
CEEeffective
effectivesat
c
c
ce
satce
TWLA
Av
TR
dI
dV
JV
2
is areaflux current
collector effective thewhere
2
increased with in Increase2
chargespace
,
2min,
2min,max
/)(2
/)2(2
ccecesat
ccbcbsat
TVVv
TVVvJ
100
200
300
400
500
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
f (
GH
z)
Je (mA/um2)
f, -0.3 V
cb
0.0 Vcb
-0.2 Vcb
0.2 Vcb
0.6 Vcb
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.50
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
J e (m
A/
m2 )
Vce
(V)
Ajbe
= 0.6 x 4.3 m2
Ib step
= 180 uA
Vcb
= 0 V
Ic (mA
)
Peak ft, f
max
Current-induced Collector Velocity Overshoot
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
tau e
c, ps
inverse current density, 1/J,m2/mA
J=0
J= 8 mA/um2
300 Å InGaAs base
2000 Å InP collector
280 GHz peak f
bias. with of variation todue and),/ asnot vary does often (1/current bias hfactor witideality emitter in modulation toduepart in also is variationnonlinear observed :CAUTION ec jeEexm CqInkTRg
not
is metransit ticollector of definitioncorrect
toalproportionexactly not is )(
)/1(
metransit ticollector reduced
collector ofpart early in )( increases
,scattering L- reducescurrent Increased
cc
0
c
base
c
base
c
T
ccbase
I
Q
I
Q
Idxxv
TxIQ
xv
C
Nakajima, H. "A generalized expression for collector transit time of HBTstaking account of electron velocity modulation," Japanese Journal ofApplied Physics, vo. 36, Feb. 1997, pp. 667-668
T. Ishibashi
Transit time Modulation Causes Ccb Modulation
),(//1)(constant0 cbccbc
T
celectronsbase
holesbase VIfTAVdxTxAxqnQQ c
cb
f
c
cb
c
holesbasef
cb
holesbasecb VI
C
I
Q
V
QC
Camnitz and Moll, Betser & Ritter, D. Root holesbaseb ΔQI ,
E
drift collectorbase
-
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
--
-
-
-2
-1
0
1
2
0 100 200 300 400
eV
nm
L
-2
-1
0
1
2
0 100 200 300 400
eV
nm
0 0 ccbcbf ICV
:Modulation Velocity Collector
0 0 ccbcbf ICV
: Effect Kirk
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
0 2.5 5 7.5 10 12.5
Ccb
/Ae (
fF/
m2 )
Je (mA/m2)
-0.2 V
0.0 V
0.2 V
Vcb
= 0.6 V
cbb
cb
Vτ
C
by of modulation and-
collector into pushout base-
both to due is in Increase
100
200
300
400
500
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
f (
GH
z)
Je (mA/um2)
f, -0.3 V
cb
0.0 Vcb
-0.2 Vcb
0.2 Vcb
0.6 Vcb
DHBTs InP in effect weak-
SHBTs InGaAs in effect strong-
reduced with in Increase cbcbc CVτ
Emitter-Base Junction Effects
Electron degeneracy contributes 1 - μm2
equivalent series resistance
10-3
10-2
10-1
100
101
102
-0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2
J(m
A/u
m^2
)
Vbe
-
Fermi-Dirac
Equivalent series resistance approximation
Boltzmann
)(
)(
xnq
J
x
xE
n
fn
Space-charge storage
need thin layer to avoid substantial charge storage delays
Voltage drops in depletion region
need thin layer &high electron density ).08.0/(emitter InPfor
eV 1.0m
mA130
2
)(*
limit degenerateHighly
0*
2
2
32
2
mm
EE
EEqmJ
cf
cf
RodwellLundstrom.
RC parasitics
Simple Device Physics: Resistance
Good approximation for contactwidths less than 2 transfer lengths.
A
TR bulk
bulk resistance
AR contact
contact resistance-perpendicular
L
W
AR sheet
contact
3
'
contact resistance- parallel
HBT RC Parasitics
base contact width < 2 transfer lengths
→ simple analysis
Limiting case of Pulfrey / Vaidyanathanfmax model.
HBT RC Parasitics
emitteremittercontactex AR /,
Eesspread LWR 12/ ELlength emitter
Egapsgap LWR 4/
Ebcscontactspread LWR 6/,
contactsbasebcbasecontactcontact AWR _, /
cemitterecb TAC /,
cgapgapcb TAC /,
ccontactsbasecontactcb TAC /_,
Base-Collector Time Constant & Fmax.
where8max
cbibbCR
ff
)(
)2/(
,,
,,
,
spreadgapcontactspreadcontactecb
gapcontactspreadcontactgapcb
contactcontactcbcbibbcb
RRRRC
RRRC
RCCR
Relationship to Equivalent Circuit Model
contactspreadcontactgapspreadbb RRRRR ,
contactcbgapcbecbcbicbx CCCCC ,,,
)(
)2/(
,,
,,,
spreadgapcontactspreadcontactecb
gapcontactspreadcontactgapcbcontactcontactcbcbibb
RRRRC
RRRCRCCR
Device Design
Device Scaling
Simple Device Physics: Thermal Resistance
Exact
L
W
WK
W
L
LKR
th
thth
1
1
sinh1
sinh1
Carslaw & Jaeger 1959
LKW
L
LKR
ththth
1ln
1
junctionnear
flowheat lcylindrica
Long, Narrow StripeHBT Emitter, FET Gate
junction fromfar
flowheat spherical
LKLKR
ththth
1
4
1
surfacenear
flowheat planar
Square ( L by L ) IC on heat sink
surface fromfar
flowheat spherical
Bipolar Transistor Design eW
bcWcTbT
nbb DT 22
satcc vT 2
ELlength emitter
eex AR /contact
2through-punchce,operatingce,max cesatc TVVAvI /)(,
contacts
contactsheet 612 AL
W
L
WR
e
bc
e
ebb
e
e
E W
L
L
PT ln1
cccb /TAC
Bipolar Transistor Design: Scaling eW
bcWcTbT
nbb DT 22
satcc vT 2
ELlength emitter cccb /TAC
eex AR /contact
2through-punchce,operatingce,max cesatc TVVAvI /)(,
contacts
contactsheet 612 AL
W
L
WR
e
bc
e
ebb
e
e
E W
L
L
PT ln1
parameter change
collector depletion layer thickness decrease 2:1
base thickness decrease 1.414:1
emitter junction width decrease 4:1
collector junction width decrease 4:1
emitter contact resistance decrease 4:1
current density increase 4:1
base contact resistivity decrease 4:1
Changes required to double transistor bandwidth:
Linewidths scale as the inverse square of bandwidth because thermal constraints dominate.
eW
bcWcTbT
ELlength emitter
Bipolar Transistor Scaling Laws
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
100 200 300 400 500 600 700
jun
ctio
n t
em
pe
ratu
re r
ise
, K
elv
in
master-slave D-Flip-Flop clock frequency, GHz
substrate: cylindrical+spherical regions
substrate: planar region
package
total
Thermal Resistance Scaling : Transistor, Substrate, Package
2substrate
2/11ln
D
DT
K
P
DLK
P
W
L
LK
PT sub
InPEInPe
e
EInP
junctionnear
flowheat lcylindrica
eLr for
flow spherical
2/for
flowplanar
HBTDr
callylogarithmi
increases
variation
antinsignificconstant is if
lly quadratica increases
subT
.)(bandwidth
as scales
density,Power
h.1/bandwidt
as scale
lenghts Wiring
2
chipCu
chippackage WK
PT
1
4
1
)/GHz 150( m 40 clocksub fT
IC CML HBT-2000
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
100 200 300 400 500 600 700
jun
ctio
n t
em
pe
ratu
re r
ise
, K
elv
in
master-slave D-Flip-Flop clock frequency, GHz
substrate: cylindrical+spherical regions
substrate: planar region
package
total
Thermal Resistance Scaling : Transistor, Substrate, Package
2substrate
2/11ln
D
DT
K
P
DLK
P
W
L
LK
PT sub
InPEInPe
e
EInP
junctionnear
flowheat lcylindrica
eLr for
flow spherical
2/for
flowplanar
HBTDr
callylogarithmi
increases
variation
antinsignificconstant is if
lly quadratica increases
subT
.)(bandwidth
as scales
density,Power
h.1/bandwidt
as scale
lenghts Wiring
2
chipCu
chippackage WK
PT
1
4
1
)/GHz 150( m 40 clocksub fT
IC CML HBT-2000Probable best solution: Thermal Vias ~500 nm below InP subcollector...over full active IC area.
InP Bipolar Transistor Scaling Roadmap
emitter 512 256 128 64 32 nm width16 8 4 2 1 m2 access
base 300 175 120 60 30 nm contact width, 20 10 5 2.5 1.25 m2 contact
collector 150 106 75 53 37.5 nm thick, 4.5 9 18 36 72 mA/m2 current density4.9 4 3.3 2.75 2-2.5 V, breakdown
f 370 520 730 1000 1400 GHzfmax 490 850 1300 2000 2800 GHz
power amplifiers 245 430 660 1000 1400 GHz digital 2:1 divider 150 240 330 480 660 GHz
industry university→industry
university2007-8
appearsfeasible
maybe
eW
bcWcTbT
Can we make a 1 THz SiGe Bipolar Transistor ?
InP SiGeemitter 64 18 nm width
2 1.2 m2 access
base 64 56 nm contact width, 2.5 1.4 m2 contact
collector 53 15 nm thick 36 125 mA/m2 2.75 ??? V, breakdown
f 1000 1000 GHzfmax 2000 2000 GHz
PAs 1000 1000 GHz digital 480 480 GHz(2:1 static divider metric)Assumes collector junction 3:1 wider than emitter.Assumes SiGe contacts 2:1 wider than junctions
Simple physics clearly drives scaling transit times, Ccb/Ic → thinner layers, higher current density high power density → narrow junctions small junctions→ low resistance contacts
Key challenge: Breakdown 15 nm collector → very low breakdown
(also need better Ohmic contacts)
HBT Design For Digital & Mixed-Signal Performance
from charge-control analysis:
)./5.05.0(
)/5.05.05.0(
)/5.05.0)(/(
)66)(/(
LCfcbijebb
LCfcbicbxex
LCfcbicbxjeC
fcbicbxjeCLgate
VICCR
VICCR
VICCCqIkT
CCCIVT
InP HBT: Status
0
200
400
600
800
1000
0 200 400 600 800 1000
Teledyne DBHT
UIUC DHBT
NTT DBHT
ETHZ DHBT
UIUC SHBT
UCSB DHBT
NGST DHBT
HRL DHBT
IBM SiGe
Vitesse DHBT
f ma
x (G
Hz)
ft (GHz)
600 GHz
500GHz maxff
Updated Sept. 2008
800 GHz
900 GHz
700 GHz
400GHz
InP DHBTs: September 2008
)(
),/(
),/(
),/(
hence ,
:digital
gain, associated ,F
:amplifiers noise low
mW/
gain, associated PAE,
:amplifierspower
)11(
2/) (
alone or
min
1max
max
max
max
cb
cbb
cex
ccb
clock
ττ
VIR
VIR
IVC
f
m
ff
ff
ff
ff
:metrics better much
:metrics popular
250 nm
600nm
350 nm
250 nm
125 nm
512 nm InP DHBT
Production
DDS IC: 4500 HBTs 20-40 GHz op-amps
500 nm mesa HBT 150 GHz M/S latches 175 GHz amplifiers
LaboratoryTechnology
Teledyne / BAE Teledyne / UCSB
UCSB UCSB / Teledyne / GCS
500 nm sidewall HBT
f = 405 GHz
fmax = 392 GHz
Vbr, ceo = 4 V
Teledyne
20 GHz clock53-56 dBm OIP3 @ 2 GHzwith 1 W dissipation
( Teledyne )
Z. GriffithM. UrteagaP. RowellD. PiersonB. BrarV. Paidi
256 nm GenerationInP DHBT
0
10
20
30
109 1010 1011 1012
109
101
0
101
1
1012
dB
Hz
f = 560 GHz
fmax
= 560 GHz
U
H21
0
10
20
30
40
109 1010 1011 1012
dB
Hz
UH21
f = 424 GHz
fmax
= 780 GHz
0
5
10
15
20
0 1 2 3 4V
ce
mA
/m
20
10
20
30
40
109 1010 1011 1012
dB
Hz
U
H21
ft = 660 GHz
fmax
= 218 GHz
0
10
20
30
0 1 2 3
mA
/m
2
Vce
150 nm thick collector
70 nm thick collector
60 nm thick collector
200 GHz master-slavelatch design
Z. Griffith, E. Lind
J. Hacker, M. Jones
324 GHzAmplifier
324 GHz Medium Power Amplifiers in 256 nm HBT
ICs designed by Jon Hacker / Teledyne
Teledyne 256 nm process flow-
Hacker et al, 2008 IEEE MTT-S
~2 mW saturated output power
0
10
20
30
40
Cu
rre
nt,
mA
-20
-10
0
10
20
Gai
n (
dB
), P
ow
er
(dB
m),
PA
E (
%)
-20 -15 -10 -5 0 5
Input Power (dBm)
O utput Pow er (dBm )
G ain (dB)
D ra in C urrent (m A )
P AE (% )
128 / 64 / 32 nm HBT Technologies
Conventional ex-situ contacts are a mess
textbook contact with surface oxide
Interface barrier → resistance
Further intermixing during high-current operation → degradation
with metal penetration
THz transistor bandwidths: very low-resistivity contacts are required
Improvements in Ohmic Contacts
128 nm generation requires ~ 4 - μm2 emitter & base resistivities
64 nm generation requires ~ 2 - μm2
Contacts to N-InGaAs*:Mo MBE in-situ 2.2 (+/- 0.5) - μm2
TiW ex-situ / NH4 pre-clean ~2.2 - μm2
variable between process runs
Contacts to P-InGaAs:Mo MBE in-situ below 2.5 - μm2
Pd/Ti... ex-situ ~4 - μm2
...far better contacts coming...
*measured emitter resistance remains higher than that of contacts.
A.. CrookV. JainA. BaraksharM. WisteyU. Singisetti
S. Bank
Mo Emitter Contacts: Robust Integration into Process Flow
Proposed Process Integration:M. WisteyA. BaraksharU. SingisetttiV. Jain
Process Must Change Greatly for 128 / 64 / 32 nm Nodes
Undercutting of emitter ends
control undercut→ thinner emitter thinner emitter
→ thinner base metalthinner base metal→ excess base metal resistance
{101}A planes: fast
{111}A planes: slow
128 nm Emitter Process: Dry Etched Metal & Semiconductor
SiO2
TiW
InGaAs n++
InGaAs p++ Base
InP n
CrSF6/Ar ICP Cl2/N2 ICPSiNx sidewall
Wet Etch
HCl:H3PO4BHF
Ti
a b c d e
InGaAs p++ Base InGaAs p++ Base InGaAs p++ Base InGaAs p++ Base
InP n
InGaAs n++ InGaAs n++
Litho patternmetal
sidewall dry etch wet etch
0
10
20
30
109 1010 1011 1012
10
9
10
10
101
1
10
12
dB
Hz
f = 560 GHz
fmax
= 560 GHz
U
H21
0
5
10
15
20
0 1 2 3 4V
cem
A/
m2
results @ c.a. 200 nm emitter metal width
E. Lind
Planarization E/B Processes for 64 & 32 nm
Planarization boundary
E; LobisserV. JainG. Burek
III-V FET Scaling
Simple FET ScalingGoal double transistor bandwidth when used in any circuit → reduce 2:1 all capacitances and all transport delays
→ keep constant all resistances, voltages, currents
All lengths, widths, thicknesses reduced 2:1
S/D contact resistivity reduced 4:1
oxgm TvWg /~/
oxgggs TLWC /~/
~/, gfgs WC
subcgsb TLWC /~/
If Tox cannot scale with gate length,
Cparasitic / Cgs increases,
gm / Wg does not increase
hence Cparasitic /gm does not scale
~/ ggd WC
FET scaling: Output Conductance & DIBL effects) D.O.S.neglects expression ( gsC
gchd WC ~
dschdgsgsd VCVCQQI where/
/~ oxgggs TLWC
transconductance
→ Keep Lg / Tox constant as we scale Lg
output conductance
parameter change
gate length decrease 2:1
gate dielectric capacitance density increase 2:1
gate dielectric equivalent thickness decrease 2:1
channel electron density increase 2:1
source & drain contact resistance decrease 4:1
current density (mA/m) increase 2:1
Changes required to double transistor bandwidth:
FET Scaling Laws
GW widthgate
GL
III-V MOSFETs for VLSI
What is it ?MOSFET with an InGaAs channel
What are the problems ?low electron effective mass→ constraints on scaling !must grow high-K on InGaAs, must grow InGaAs on Si
Our focus today is III-V FET scaling generally
Why do it ?low electron effective mass→ higher electron velocitymore current, less charge at a given insulator thickness & gate lengthvery low access resistance
Low Effective Mass Impairs Vertical Scaling
Shallow electron distribution needed for high gm / Gds ratio.
./ 2*2wellTmL
Only one vertical state in well. Minimum ~ 5 nm well thickness.→ constrains gate length scaling.
For thin wells, only 1st state can be populated.For very thin wells, 1st state approaches L-valley.
Energy of Lth well state
Density-Of-States Capacitance
Two implications:
- With Ns >1013/cm2, electrons populate satellite valleys - Transconductance limited by finite state density
and n is the # of band minima
)//( 2* nmnEE swellf
2*2 / where nmqcdos
dosswellf cVV /
Fischetti et al, IEDM2007
Solomon & Laux , IEDM2001
motion) nalbidirectio(
Drive Current in the Ballistic & Degenerate Limits
2/3*
,
2/1*2/3
)/()/(1 where,
V 1m
mA84
ooxodos
othgs
mmncc
mmnK
VVKJ
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.01 0.1 1
K
m*/mo
1.0 nm, n=1
0.8 nm, n=1
0.7 nm, n=6 0.4 nm, n=6
EOT includes wavefunction depth (0.5 nm for 3.5 nm InGaAs well)
n = # band minimacdos,o = density of states capacitance for m*=mo & n=1
Error bars on Si data points correct for (Ef-Ec)>> kT approximation
HEMT Scaling Challenge: Low Gate Barrier
Tunneling through barrier→ sets minimum thickness
Source DrainGate
Ec
Ewell-
EF
Ec
Ewell-
EF
Gate barrier is low: ~0.6 eV
Emission over barrier→ limits 2D carrier density
K Shinohara
eV 6.0~)( ,cm/10At 213cfs EEN
Ec
Ewell-
EF
N+ caplayer
HEMT Scaling Challenge: High Access Resistance
low leakage: need high barrier under gate
Source DrainGate
Ec
Ewell-
EF
Gate barrier also lies under source / drain contacts
low resistance: need low barrier under contacts
widegap barrier layer
N+ layer
K Shinohara
THz III-V FET Scaling: What Must Be Done
As gate length is reduced...
channel thickness should be reduced...
barrier thickness should be reduced...
target gm/Wg and Id/Wg
should be increased...
source and drain access resistivity should be reduced...
We face serious difficulties in doing these.
parameter change
gate length decrease 2:1
gate dielectric capacitance density increase 2:1
gate dielectric equivalent thickness decrease 2:1
channel electron density increase 2:1
source & drain contact resistance decrease 4:1
current density (mA/m) increase 2:1
Changes required to double transistor bandwidth:
FET Scaling Laws
GW widthgate
GL
substrate
barrier
sidewall
metal gate
quantum well / channel
gate dielectric
N+ source N+ drain
source contact drain contact
A MOSFET Might Scale Better than a HEMT
no gate barrier under S/D contacts
high-K gatebarrier
Overlap between gateand N+ source/drain
Interconnects
kz
Parasitic slot mode
-V 0V +V
0V
Coplanar WaveguideNo ground viasNo need (???) to thin substrate
Parasitic microstrip mode
+V +V +V
0V
Hard to ground IC to package
substrate mode coupling or substrate losses
ground plane breaks → loss of ground integrity
Repairing ground plane with ground straps is effective only in simple ICsIn more complex CPW ICs, ground plane rapidly vanishes → common-lead inductance → strong circuit-circuit coupling
40 Gb/s differential TWA modulator drivernote CPW lines, fragmented ground plane
35 GHz master-slave latch in CPWnote fragmented ground plane
175 GHz tuned amplifier in CPWnote fragmented ground plane
poor ground integrity
loss of impedance control
ground bounce
coupling, EMI, oscillation
III-V:semi-insulating substrate→ substrate mode coupling
Siliconconducting substrate→ substrate conductivity losses
kz
Classic Substrate Microstrip
Strong coupling when substrate approaches ~d / 4 thickness
H
W Thick Substrate → low skin loss
Hrskin 2/1
1
Zero ground inductance in package
a
Brass carrier andassembly ground
interconnectsubstrate
IC with backsideground plane & vias
near-zeroground-groundinductance
IC viaseliminateon-wafergroundloops
High via inductance
12 pH for 100 m substrate -- 7.5 @ 100 GHz
TM substrate mode coupling
Line spacings must be ~3*(substrate thickness)
lines must be widely spaced
ground vias must be widely spaced
all factors require very thin substrates for >100 GHz ICs→ lapping to ~50 m substrate thickness typical for 100+ GHz
No ground planebreaks in IC
fewer breaks in ground plane than CPW
III-V MIMIC Interconnects -- Thin-Film Microstrip
narrow line spacing → IC density
... but ground breaks at device placements
still have problem with package grounding
thin dielectrics → narrow lines → high line losses → low current capability → no high-Zo lines
H
W
HW
HZ
r
oo 2/1
~
...need to flip-chip bond
no substrate radiation, no substrate losses
InP mm-wave PA (Rockwell)
No breaks in ground plane
III-V MIMIC Interconnects -- Inverted Thin-Film Microstrip
narrow line spacing → IC density
... no ground breaks at device placements
still have problem with package grounding
thin dielectrics → narrow lines → high line losses → low current capability → no high-Zo lines
...need to flip-chip bond
Some substrate radiation / substrate losses
InP 150 GHz master-slave latch
InP 8 GHz clock rate delta-sigma ADC
No clean ground return ? → interconnects can't be modeled !
35 GHz static divider interconnects have no clear local ground return interconnect inductance is non-local interconnect inductance has no compact model
InP 8 GHz clock rate delta-sigma ADC
8 GHz clock-rate delta-sigma ADC thin-film microstrip wiring every interconnect can be modeled as microstrip some interconnects are terminated in their Zo some interconnects are not terminated ...but ALL are precisely modeled
VLSI Interconnects with Ground Integrity & Controlled Zo
negligible breaks in ground plane
narrow line spacing → IC density
negligible ground breaks @ device placements
still have problem with package grounding
thin dielectrics → narrow lines → high line losses → low current capability → no high-Zo lines
...need to flip-chip bond
no substrate radiation, no substrate losses
Conclusions
Few-THz Transistors
Scaling limits: contact resistivities, device and IC thermal resistances.
Few-THz InP Bipolar Transistors: can it be done ?
62 nm (1 THz f, 1.5 THz fmax ) scaling generation is feasible.700 GHz amplifiers, 450 GHz digital logic
Is the 32 nm (1 THz amplifiers) generation feasible ?
Few-THz InP Field-Effect Transistors: can it be done?
challenges are gate barrier, vertical scaling,source/drain access resistance, increased gm and drive current.
2DEG carrier concentrations must increase.
S/D regrowth offers a path to lower access resistance.
Solutions needed for gate barrier: maybe even MOSFET ?
What Would We Do With Them ?
THz amplifiers→ THz radios→ imaging, sensing, communications
precision analog design at microwave frequencies→ high-performance receivers
500 GHz digital logic→ fiber optics
Higher-Resolution Microwave ADCs, DACs, DDSs
top related