-
In this paper, graphene field effect transistors (GFET) with the top-gate structure are taken as the research object. Conducted electrical stress reliability studies under different bias voltage conditions. The electrical pressure conditions are Gate Electrical Stress (VG=-10V, VD=0V, VS=0V), drain electric stress (VG=0V, VD=-10V, VS=0V), and Electrical stresses applied simultaneously by gate and drain voltages (VG=-10V, VD= -10V, VS=0V). Using a semiconductor parameter analyzer, the transfer characteristic curves of GFETs before and after electrical stress are obtained. At the same time, the carrier migration and the Dirac voltage VDirac degradation are extracted from the transfer characteristic curves. The test results show that under different electrical pressure conditions, the carrier mobility of GFETs degrades continuously with the increase of electric stress time. Different electrical pressure conditions affect the drift direction and degradation of VDirac differently: Gate electrical stress and drain electrical stress cause VDirac drift of the device in opposite directions, and the gate electrical stress is greater than the electrical stress applied by both gate and drain voltages leading to VDirac degradation of GFETs. An analysis of the causes suggests that different electrical stress conditions produce different electric field directions in the device, which can affect the carrier concentration and direction of movement. Electrons and holes in the channel are induced to tunnel into the oxide layer and are captured by trap charge in the oxide layer and at the graphene\oxide interface, forming oxide trap charges and interface trap charges. This is the main reason for the reduced carrier mobility of GFETs. Different electric field directions under different electric stress conditions produce positively charged and negatively charged trap charges. The difference in the type of trap charge banding is the main reason for the different directions of VDiracdrift in GFETs. When both trap charges are present at the same time, they have a canceling effect on the amount of VDiracdrift of the GFETs. Finally, the paper combines TCAD simulation, further revealing the simulation model of the impact of electrical stress induced trap charge on the VDiracgeneration of GFETs. The result demonstrates that differences in the type of trap charge banding have different degradation effects on the VDirac of GFETs. The related research provides data and theoretical support for the practical application of graphene devices.
-
Keywords:
- graphene field effect transistors /
- Electrical stress /
- VDirac /
- Carrier mobility
-
[1] Novoselov K S, Geim A K, Morozov S V, Jiang D, Zhang Y, Dubonos S V, Grigorieva I V, Firsov A A 2004Science 306 666
[2] Chen Z, Wang Z O, Li Y Q, Li Y Z, Mao L F 2012MICROELECTRONICS & COMPUTER 29 154（in Chinese）[陈智, 王子欧, 李亦清, 李有忠, 毛凌锋2012微电子学与计算机29154]
[3] Radsar T, Khalesi H, Ghods V 2021Superlattices Microstruct. 153 106869
[4] Zhang Q W 2018Ph.D.Dissertation（Cheng Du：University of Electronic Science and Technology of China）（in Chinese）张庆伟2018博士学位论文(成都：电子科技大学)
[5] Xu J, Gu Z, Yang W, Wang Q, Zhang X 2018 Nanoscale Res. Lett. 13 311
[6] Yavari F, Kritzinger C, Gaire C, Song L, Gulapalli H, Borca-Tasciuc T, Ajayan P M, Koratkar N 2010Small 6 2535
[7] Docherty C J, Lin C T, Joyce H J, Nicholas R J, Herz L M, Li L J, Johnston M B 2012Nat. Commun. 3 1228
[8] Wang R, Wang S, Zhang D, Li Z, Fang Y, Qiu X 2011 ACS Nano 5 408
[9] Feng T, Xie D, Li G, Xu J, Zhao H, Ren T, Zhu H 2014Carbon 78 250
[10] Zhang Q W, Li P, Wang G, Zeng R Z, Wang H, Zhou J H 2017MICROELECTRONICS & COMPUTER 34 36（in Chinese）[张庆伟, 李平, 王刚, 曾荣周, 王恒, 周金浩2017微电子学与计算机34 36]
[11] Ghosh S, Arroyo M 2013J. Mech. Phys. Solids 61 235
[12] Zhao P, Chauhan J, Guo J 2009Nano Lett. 9 684
[13] （in Chinese）陈卫2017博士学位论文(长沙：国防科技大学)
Cheng W 2017Ph.D.Dissertation (Chang Sha：National University of Defense Technology)
[14] Liu P, Wei Y, Jiang K, Sun Q, Zhang X, Fan S, Zhang S, Ning C, Deng J 2006Phys. Rev. B 73 235412
[15] Li J, Zhang Z H, Wang D, Zhu Z, Fan Z Q, Tang G P, Deng X Q 2014Carbon 69 142
[16] Chiu H Y, Perebeinos V, Lin Y M, Avouris P 2010Nano Lett. 10 4634
[17] Li J F, Guo H X, Ma W Y, Song H J, Zhong X L, Li Y F, Bai R X, Lu X J, Zhang F Q 2024Acta Phys. Sin. 73 058501（in Chinese）[李济芳, 郭红霞, 马武英, 宋宏甲, 钟向丽, 李洋帆, 白如雪, 卢小杰, 张凤祁2024 . 73 058501]
[18] Zhang Y, Peng S, Wang Y, Guo L, Zhang X, Huang H, Su S, Wang X, Xue J 2022J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 13 10722
[19] Esqueda I S, Cress C D, Anderson T J, Ahlbin J R, Bajura M, Fritze M, Moon J S 2013Electronics 2 234
[20] Kang C G, Lee Y G, Lee S K, Park E, Cho C, Lim S K, Hwang H J, Lee B H 2013Carbon 53 182
[21] Petrosjanc K O, Adonin A S, Kharitonov I A, Sicheva M V 1994 Proceedings of 1994IEEE International Conference on Microelectronic Test Structures1994-03 pp126–129
[22] Galloway K F, Gaitan M, Russell T J 1984IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science 31 1497
[23] Jain S, Shinde V, Gajarushi A, Gupta A, Rao V R 20182018 IEEE 13TH NANOTECHNOLOGY MATERIALS AND DEVICES CONFERENCE (NMDC) New York 2018 pp353–356
[24] Gu W P, Hao Y, Zhang J C, Wang C, Feng Q, Ma X H 2009Acta Phys. Sin. 58 511（in Chinese）[谷文萍, 郝跃, 张进城, 王冲, 冯倩, 马晓华2009 58 511]
[25] Childres I, Jauregui L A, Foxe M, Tian J, Jalilian R, Jovanovic I, Chen Y P 2010Appl. Phys. Lett. 97 173109
[26] Ismail M A, Zaini K M M, Syono M I 2019TELKOMNIKA (Telecommunication Computing Electronics and Control) 17 1845
[27] Jeppson K 2023IEEE Trans. Electron Devices 70 1393
Metrics
- Abstract views: 171
- PDF Downloads: 9
- Cited By: 0
下载:
