Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T07:30:42.456Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Role of Interface-States in the Reverse Bias Aging of GaAs Schottky Barriers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 February 2011

K. A. Christianson
K. A. Christianson*
Affiliation:
Electrical Engineering Department University of Maine, Orono, ME 04469
Get access

Abstract

Forward bias capacitance has been used to examine the Au/W/GaAs and Au/Pt/Ti/GaAs Schottky barriers present in power microwave MESFET devices to see if interface-state generation plays any role in the previously reported reverse bias barrier height aging process. If a constant carrier capture cross-section is assumed, forward bias capacitance has shown that for samples strongly susceptible to aging (i.e. the Au/W/GaAs samples in this study) interface-state generation is taking place during the aging process. The validity of the constant capture cross section assumption has been tested by examining the I–V properties. For those samples whose reverse I–V properties were not dominated by thermionic-field emission, similar increases in interface-state densities were evaluated from the I–V characteristics for the degraded samples.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 184: Symposium F – Degradation Mechanisms in III-V Compound Semiconductor Devices and Structures , 1990 , 219
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1990

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Miret, A., Newman, N., Weber, E.R., Lilientiel-Weber, Z., Washburn, J., and Spicer, W.E., J. Appl. Phys. 63, 2206 (1988).10.1063/1.341178Google Scholar
2. Christianson, K.A., in Proceedings of the 27th Annual International Reliability Physics Symposium, p. 65 (IEEE Press, 1989).Google Scholar
3. Wu, X. and Yang, E., J. Appl. Phys. 65, 3560 (1989).10.1063/1.342631Google Scholar
4. Zs. Horvath, J., J. Appl. Phys. 63, 976 (1988).10.1063/1.340048Google Scholar
5. Wu, X., Evans, H.L, and Yang, E.S., Solid State Elect. 31, 167 (1988).10.1016/0038-1101(88)90125-6Google Scholar
6. “Interface-State Measurements of GaAs Schottky Barriers Using Admittance Techniques: Relationship to Barrier Height Instability,” final report for RADC task number N-9-5940 (Sept. 15, 1989).Google Scholar
7. Wu, C.Y., J. Appl. Phys. 51, 3786 (1980).10.1063/1.328115Google Scholar
8. Horvath, Z. J., Appl. Phys. Lett. 54, 931 (1989).10.1063/1.101351Google Scholar
9. Vuillaume, D., Bouchakour, R., Jourdain, M., and Bourgoin, J.C., Appl. Phys. Lett. 55. 153 (1989).10.1063/1.102397Google Scholar
10. Pruniaux, B.R. and Adams, A.C., J. Appl. Phys. 43, 1980 (1972).10.1063/1.1661426Google Scholar
11. Calleja, E. and Piqueras, J., Electron. Lett. 17, 37 (1981).10.1049/el:19810028Google Scholar
12. Padovani, F.A. and Stratton, R., Solid State Elect. 9, 695 (1966).10.1016/0038-1101(66)90097-9Google Scholar
13. Zs. Horvath, J., J. Appl. Phys. 64, 6780 (1988).10.1063/1.342012Google Scholar