5.1.3 Comparisons with Experimental Data



next up previous contents index
Next: 5.2 Avalanche Model Calibration Up: 5.1 Mobility Model Calibration Previous: 5.1.2 Parameters Extraction

5.1.3 Comparisons with Experimental Data

Using the experimental input values and two-dimensional doping profiles and   the calibrated mobility model parameters, MINIMOS simulation   accurately reproduce experimental I-V and C-V characteristics over a wide range of biases and devices. In this section, the width of all the simulated and measured devices is m, and the oxide thickness () is . The polysilicon gate doping concentration   () is equal to cm as determined from gate capacitance measurement with the device biased in the inversion region.

Fig. 5.2 shows measured and simulated results for the linear     region currents for three gate lengths. Reasonable good agreement is found in all regions of bias for all three lengths. Fig. 6 shows a comparison of measured and simulated results for the device with = 0.45 m. Note that a good agreement was also obtained for longer devices (not shown).

It is expected that by using accurate inputs and properly calibrated mobility model parameters, two-dimensional device simulation should also be     capable of achieving good agreement of intrinsic gate capacitances between measurements and simulations without any further adjustments [56]. Indeed this is the case as shown in Fig. 5.4 and Fig. 5.5 which compare gate-to-source () and gate-to-drain () capacitances for two-lengths of P-channel MOSFETs. Excellent agreement is obtained for both bias-dependent intrinsic and overlap capacitances in all regions of device operation (the accumulation, linear and saturation regions).

 
Figure 5.2: Comparison of measured (symbols) and simulated (lines) I-V characteristics in the linear region ( mV) for three gate lengths ( = 0.45, 0.9 and 1.84 m).  

 
Figure 5.3: Comparison of measured (symbols) and simulated (lines) I-V results in the linear and saturation regions for devices with .  

 
Figure 5.4: Comparison of measured (symbols) (lower 3 curves) and (upper 3 curves) capacitances with simulated results (lines) as a function of and for device with m.  

 
Figure 5.5: Comparison of measured (symbols) (lower 3 curves) and (upper 3 curves) capacitances with simulated results (lines) as a function of and for device with m.  



next up previous contents index
Next: 5.2 Avalanche Model Calibration Up: 5.1 Mobility Model Calibration Previous: 5.1.2 Parameters Extraction



Martin Stiftinger
Tue Aug 1 19:07:20 MET DST 1995