Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T02:04:41.805Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of Electrical Stress and High-Energy Electron Irradiation on the InGaP/GaAs Heterojunction Phototransistor

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2015

Phuc Hong Than ,
Kazuo Uchida ,
Takahiro Makino ,
Takeshi Ohshima  and
Shinji Nozaki
Phuc Hong Than
Affiliation:
Graduate School of Informatics and Engineering, The University of Electro-Communications, Chofu-shi, Tokyo 182-8585, Japan
Kazuo Uchida
Affiliation:
Graduate School of Informatics and Engineering, The University of Electro-Communications, Chofu-shi, Tokyo 182-8585, Japan
Takahiro Makino
Affiliation:
Japan Atomic Energy Agency, 1233 Watanuki, Takasaki, Gunma 370-1292, Japan
Takeshi Ohshima
Affiliation:
Japan Atomic Energy Agency, 1233 Watanuki, Takasaki, Gunma 370-1292, Japan
Shinji Nozaki*
Affiliation:
Graduate School of Informatics and Engineering, The University of Electro-Communications, Chofu-shi, Tokyo 182-8585, Japan
*
*Phone/Fax: +81-42-489-4486, Email: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

In this paper, we discuss the characteristics of the InGaP/GaAs heterojunction phototransistors (HPTs) before and after the electrical stress at room temperature and assess the effectiveness of the emitter-ledge passivation. Although an electrical stress given to the phototransistors by keeping a collector current density of 37 A/cm2 for 1 hour at room temperature was too small to affect the room-temperature common-emitter current gain and photocurrent of both HPTs with and without the emitter-ledge passivation, they showed a significant decrease at 420 K due to the room-temperature electrical stress. Nevertheless, the room-temperature common-emitter current gain and photocurrent of the HPT with the emitter-ledge passivation were still higher than those of the HPT without the emitter-ledge passivation. The effectiveness of the emitter-ledge passivation against the electrical stress was more significant than that on the current gain in the dark. In addition to the electrical stress experiment, for a potential application of the InGaP/GaAs HPTs in space, we will irradiate the HPTs with 1-MeV electrons at the Japan Atomic Energy Agency. Both current gain and photocurrent decreased significantly after the electron irradiation. In contrast to the electrical stress, the damage due to the high-energy electron irradiation is a bulk-related phenomenon, and the emitter-ledge passivation does not seem to suppress the degradation.

Keywords

III-Velectron irradiationdefects
Type
Articles
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 1792: Symposium CC/FF – Defects and Materials Issues in Semiconductors—Relationship to Optoelectronic Properties and Device Reliability , 2015 , mrss15-2125479
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2015 

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

Chandrasekhar, S., IEEE Photon. Technol. Lett 5, 1316–1318 (1993).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kamitsuna, H., Matsuoka, Y., Yamahata, S., and Shigekawa, N., IEEE Trans. Microwave Theory Tech. 49, 1921–1925 (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ha, K. H., Lee, Y. H., Song, J. I., Caneau, C., Park, C. Y., and Park, K. H., Electronics Letters 31, 1386–1387 (1995).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Song, C-K., Lee, S-H., Kim, K-D., Park, J-H., Koo, B-W., Kim, D-H., Hong, C-H., Kim, Y-K., and Hwang, S-B., IEEE Electron Device Lett. 22, 315–317 (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tan, S-W., Chen, H-R., Chen, W-T., Hsu, M-K., Lin, A-H., and Lour, W-S., IEEE Trans. Electron Device 52, 204–210 (2005).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, W., Beam, E., Henderson, T., and Fan, S-K., IEEE Electron Device Lett. 14, 301–303 (1993).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ueda, O., Kawano, A., Takahashi, T., Tomioka, T., Fujii, T., and Sasa, S., Solid-State Electronics 41, 1605–1610 (1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rezazadeh, A. A., Bashar, S. A., Sheng, H., Amin, F. A., Cattani, L., and Liou, J. J., in Proc. IEEE 38th Annual International Reliability Physics Symposium, 250–257 (2000).Google Scholar
Adlerstein, M. G., and Gering, J. M., IEEE Trans. Electron Device 47, 434–439 (2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pan, N., Elliott, J., Knowles, M., Vu, D. P., Kishimoto, K., Twynam, J. K., Sato, H., Fresina, M. T., and Stillman, G. E., IEEE Electron Device Lett. 19, 115–117 (1998).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kurokawa, A., Jin, Z., Ono, H., Uchida, K., Nozaki, S., and Morisaki, H., IEICE Technical Report, ED2005–198, MW 2005–152 (2006).Google Scholar
Yang, F-Y., Nozaki, S., Uchida, K., and Koizumi, A., IEICE Technical Report, ED2007–217, MW 2007–148 (2008).Google Scholar
Song, C-K., Choi, P-J., Microelectronics Reliability 39, 1817–1822 (1999).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sarkar, A., Subramanian, S., and Goodnick, S. M., IEEE Trans. Electron Device 47, 2024–2030 (2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vuppala, S., Li, C., Zwicknagl, P., and Subramanian, S., IEEE Trans. Nuclear Science 50, 1846–1851 (2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar