Next Article in Journal
A Software Framework for Rapid Application-Specific Hybrid Photonic Network-on-Chip Synthesis
Next Article in Special Issue
GaN Monolithic Power Amplifiers for Microwave Backhaul Applications
Previous Article in Journal
Universal Safety Distance Alert Device for Road Vehicles
Previous Article in Special Issue
High-k Dielectric Passivation for GaN Diode with a Field Plate Termination
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Trapping Analysis of AlGaN/GaN Schottky Diodes via Current Transient Spectroscopy

Institute of Electronics and Photonics, Slovak University of Technology, SK-81219 Bratislava, Slovakia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Electronics 2016, 5(2), 20; https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics5020020
Submission received: 18 March 2016 / Revised: 4 May 2016 / Accepted: 5 May 2016 / Published: 10 May 2016
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Gallium Nitride Electronics)

Abstract

:
Trapping effects on two AlGaN/GaN Schottky diodes with a different composition of the AlGaN barrier layer were analyzed by current transient spectroscopy. The current transients were measured at a constant bias and at six different temperatures between 25 and 150 °C. Obtained data were fitted by only three superimposed exponentials, and good agreement between the experimental and fitted data was achieved. The activation energy of dominant traps in the investigated structures was found to be within 0.77–0.83 eV. This nearly identical activation energy was obtained from current transients measured at a reverse bias of −6 V as well as at a forward bias of+1 V. It indicates that the dominant traps might be attributed to defects mainly associated with dislocations connected predominantly with the GaN buffer near the AlGaN/GaN interface.

Graphical Abstract

1. Introduction

The GaN-based heterostructure field-effect transistors (HFETs) are promising devices for high-frequency and high-power applications. Although such devices are commercially produced, their reliability problems caused by trap-related effects are still under investigation [1,2]. The existence of defects can result from surface states, point defects, and threading dislocations in the AlGaN/GaN material structure. Such defects lead to a high leakage current [3], kink effects [4], a current collapse [5], or capacitance hysteresis [6]. They can all significantly influence the performance and reliability of the devices. Therefore, the trap-related processes are systematically studied.
Various methods are used to investigate trapping effects in semiconductors, especially in GaN-based devices. The most popular one is deep-level transient spectroscopy (DLTS), which can be performed in capacitance-mode (C-DLTS) [7,8,9] or current-mode (I-DLTS) [10,11,12]. However, capacitance or current transient measurement on real HFET devices can be limited to a degree because of their small dimensions. Resulting inaccuracy might be one of the reasons for a large number of energy levels being reported on GaN-based devices using DLTS methods (see Table I in Ref. [2]). To circumvent the limitation, experiments on large-area Schottky diodes (SDs) can be performed [13,14], provided different electric field distribution between HFETs and SDs are considered. Other commonly used methods are based on the measurement of frequency-dependent conductance [15], low-frequency noise [16], transconductance non-linearity [17], and capacitance–voltage characterization concerning hysteresis [18]. As an extension of the current-mode DLTS, current-transient analysis utilizing a multiexponential decay fitting was also proposed [19]. However, such a procedure has not been generally used at present due to the necessity of using a more complicated fitting technique. These studies are aimed at the identification of trap states energies and their origin. Trap states with energies between 0.43 and 0.50 eV (e.g., [14,17,20,21]) and between 0.71 and 0.82 eV (e.g., [1,9,19,22,23,24]) were the most commonly reported. Unfortunately, their origin remains ambiguous. As to the traps with the lower energy range, it is supposed that their source is related to the AlGaN barrier below the gate, surface states, and oxygen related defects in the bulk. However, the origin of those within the higher energy range is attributed to carbon, Fe, or surface-related defects as well as dislocations connected predominantly with the GaN buffer near the AlGaN/GaN interface. Some papers report only trap state energies, leaving their source unspecified.
This study reports on an analysis of trapping effects in two different AlGaN/GaN SD structures. They differ in the AlGaN barrier composition. The current transients at a constant bias were measured in a broad range at different temperatures. Data obtained were fitted by three superimposed exponentials, assuming that the trapping effects had an exponential decay with time. From the temperature-dependent time constants, corresponding to the larger amplitudes, an Arrhenius plot was constructed, and the activation energy of the dominant trap states was evaluated. Both samples exhibited nearly the same activation energy of 0.77–0.83 eV for forward and reverse bias. One can conclude that the associated trap states might be related to defects near the AlGaN/GaN interface.

2. Experimental

Two types of AlGaN/GaN heterostructure were used in this work. Both were grown by a metalorganic chemical vapor deposition technique on a 4H-SiC substrate. They differed in the composition of the AlGaN barrier layer. The structures consisted of an AlN nucleation layer, followed by a 1.7-µm GaN buffer layer doped by Fe away from the channel. Figure 1 shows that an AlGaN layer with an AlN mole fraction of 0.25 (Sample A) and 0.29 (Sample B) was grown on top of the buffer. Sample B contained a 1.25-nm AlN interlayer between GaN and AlGaN. The devices were prepared with conventional processing steps, which are typically used in the technology of GaN-based devices. Ohmic contacts were prepared by thermal evaporation of a multilayered Nb/Ti/Al/Ni/Au metal stack and subsequent rapid thermal annealing at 850 °C for 35 s in a N2 atmosphere. Mesa isolation was then formed by reactive ion etching in a CCl4/He plasma. Ni/Au gate electrodes were finally deposited and formed by a lift-off process. SDs with a contact area of 100 × 100 and 200 × 200 µm2 were prepared and used in our experiments. The current-voltage (IV) characteristics and the current transients in a time range of ~10−3 to ~104 s were measured using a semiconductor parameter analyzer Agilent 4155C and a microprobe station. Measurement was performed in a temperature range between 25 and 150 °C using a heated plate and an ATT Systems A150 temperature controller.

3. Results and Discussion

Figure 2 shows typical IV characteristics for SD Samples A and B measured at the lowest and highest temperature. Due to different AlGaN compositions, one example of which being a thin AlN interlayer, there is a considerable increase inserial resistance in forward I–V characteristics over 1 V, as visible for Sample B. In addition, the Schottky barrier height at room temperature was evaluated from the forward bias data using a procedure we have previously described [25]. Values of 1.25 eV (Sample A) and 1.34 eV (Sample B) were obtained. The Schottky barrier height influences the high temperature IV characteristics behavior by increasing the thermionic emission current. This effect is more visible for Sample A at 150 °C. Similarly, the reverse current at −6 V was found to be 3.3 × 10−9 A (Sample A) and 5 × 10−10 A (Sample B), which corresponds to the influence of the AlN interlayer in Sample B. A capacitance-voltage measurement was used to evaluate the sheet charge density in the channel, according to the equation ns = ∫C·dV. The measurement at 100 kHz yielded values of 1 × 1013 cm−2 and 7 × 1012 cm−2 for Samples A and B, respectively. The difference in AlGaN layer thickness and sheet charge density shifts the threshold voltage of the HFET structure, which is clearly visible in reverse I–V characteristic saturation at ~−2.2 V and ~−1 V for Samples A and B, respectively.
Time-dependent current transients were measured at a constant bias and temperature to evaluate trapping effects in the structures. After measurements, the sample illumination is needed to recover the device states. This was performed by commercial white LED (5000 mcd at 20 mA) illumination for one minute at a zero applied voltage after each transient measurement run. The time-dependent current transients were fitted by exponential functions, i.e., according to the following equation:
I f i t t e d = i = 1 n A i exp ( t / τ i ) + I ,
where Ai is the amplitude, and τi is the time constant which needs to be evaluated. It was assumed that the trapping effect had an exponential decay with time. An Ai = fi) diagram is usually constructed to show one or more peaks, indicating a trapping effect at a given time constant τpeak. An Arrhenius plot (τpeak·T2) vs. 1/kT is finally constructed from the current transients measured at different temperatures. This allows for the evaluation of the activation energy of dominant trap states. However, usually a large number of exponentials needs to be used to construct an Ai = fi) diagram, e.g., Joh and del Alamo used 100 exponentials [19], and Hu et al. as many as 400 [14]. As is shown below, we were able to fit our data satisfactorily with only three exponentials. A similar simple procedure was also used in Bisi et al. [2]. The activation energy of a dominant trap was obtained simply from evaluated τpeak data for maximal Ai values at different temperatures. This procedure makes the evaluation of such an experiment much simpler and faster without compromising accuracy.
The SD current transients were measured in a time range between ~10−3 s and ~104 s and at six values of temperature between 25 °C and 150 °C. Two different voltagesa reverse bias of −6 V, and a forward bias of 1 V—were used. A typical result of the current transients measured at −6 V at different temperatures for both samples used in this study is shown in Figure 3 and Figure 4. A decrease of the current with time was observed for both samples. The effect became more significant at an increased temperature. At room temperature, the current decreased to about 83% of its initial value for both samples at the end of the experiment (after ~40 min). An overall look at the data, mainly measured at higher temperatures, indicates that the curves consist of two to three superimposed exponentials. Therefore, the measured current transients were fitted by a sum of only three exponentials, according to the aforementioned equation. The resulting fitted curves are shown in Figure 3 and Figure 4 as full lines. Good agreement between the measured data and fitted curves was obtained for both samples. Similar current transients at various temperatures were measured on both samples at a forward bias of 1 V.
Figure 5 shows for comparison the result of current transients fitting for AlGaN/GaN Sample B using 70 exponentials. Unambiguous temperature-dependent peaks, which shifted to a shorter time with increased temperature, were identified. Other peaks with negative amplitude are nearly temperature-independent, i.e., they cannot be used for the activation energy evaluation. Results obtained from a simple fitting by a “three-exponential” procedure are also shown in Figure 5 (full square marks). Nearly identical τpeak data for maximal Ai values at different temperatures were obtained.
The τi data obtained for maximal Ai values at different temperatures were used to draw a (τpeak·T2) vs. 1/kT plot for both SD Samples A and B, and the activation energy of dominant trap states was evaluated. Other τi data show very low corresponding Ai values, or they did not change significantly with temperature (they were not useful for the evaluation of the activation energy). Figure 6 shows a summary of the obtained τpeak data at different temperatures, i.e., an (τpeak·T2) vs. 1/kT dependence. The activation energy 0.77–0.83 eV as the dominant trap state can be evaluated for investigated samples. It is of note that the activation energy for the SDs in Sample A, i.e., with a lower AlN content in the barrier, was evaluated in the lower part of the energy range 0.77–0.83 eV mentioned above and for the SDs in Sample B the energy was in the upper part. However, there was only a slight difference (∆x ≅ 0.04) in the barrier composition of the samples investigated. This indicates that nearly identical trap states are present in both SD Samples A and B. In comparison with published data, the traps with activation energies in the 0.6–0.8 eV range are usually found to be located in the GaN buffer near the AlGaN/GaN interface [24], and, in the 0.8–0.85 eV range, the dominant traps might be attributed to defects mainly associated with dislocations as commonly observed in MOCVD-grown of undoped and Fe-doped GaN layers [1]. From these results, one can assume that the trap states in the investigated SDs are connected predominantly with the GaN buffer near the AlGaN/GaN interface defects associated with dislocations.

4. Conclusions

In conclusion, trapping effects on AlGaN/GaN Schottky barrier diodes were studied by current transient analysis at different temperatures. Obtained data were fitted by three superimposed exponentials. Nearly the same activation energy of observed traps 0.77–0.83 eV was found in two samples with a slightly different AlGaN barrier composition. This energy range follows from measurements at forward (+1 V) and reverse (−6 V) bias voltages. This indicates that the observed trap states might be assigned to the GaN buffer near the AlGaN/GaN interface defects associated with dislocations.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Slovak Grant Agency VEGA (Grant Nos. 1/0491/15 and 1/0739/16). The authors would like to thank A. Chvála for the Schottky barrier evaluation.

Author Contributions

All authors participated equally in the creation of the text and in the presentation and discussion of the results.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Polyakov, J.A.Y.; Lee, I.H. Deep traps in GaN-based structures as affecting the performance of GaN devices. Mater. Sci. Engn. 2015, 94, 1–56. [Google Scholar]
  2. Bisi, D.; Meneghini, M.; de Santi, C.; Chini, A.; Dammann, M.; Brückner, P.; Mikulla, M.; Meneghesso, G.; Zanoni, E. Deep-level characterization in GaN HEMTs-Part I: Advantages and limitations of drain current transient measurements. IEEE Trans. Electron Devices 2013, 60, 3166–3175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Saadaoui, S.; Salem, M.M.B.; Fathallah, O.; Gassoumi, M.; Gaquière, C.; Maaref, H. Leakage current, capacitance hysteresis and deep traps in Al0.25Ga0.75N/GaN/SiC high-electron-mobility transistors. Phys. B: Condens. Matter 2013, 412, 126–129. [Google Scholar]
  4. Fu, L.; Lu, H.; Chen, D.; Zhang, R.; Zheng, Y.; Chen, T.; Wei, K.; Liu, X. Field-Dependent Carrier Trapping Induced Kink Effect in AlGaN/GaN High Electron Mobility Transistors. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2011, 98, 173508–173510. [Google Scholar]
  5. Tanaka, K.; Morita, T.; Umeda, H.; Kaneko, S.; Kuroda, M.; Ikoshi, A.; Yamagiwa, H.; Okita, H.; Hikita, M.; Yanagihara, M.; et al. Suppression of current collapse by hole injection from drain in a normally-off GaN-based hybrid-drain-embedded gate injection transistor. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2015, 107, 163502. [Google Scholar]
  6. Sang, L.; Yang, X.; Cheng, J.; Jia, L.; He, Z.; Guo, L.; Hu, A.; Xiang, Y.; Yu, T.; Wang, M.; et al. Hysteresis phenomena of the two dimensional electron gas density in lattice-matched InAlN/GaN heterostructures. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2015, 107, 052102. [Google Scholar]
  7. Harmatha, L.; Stuchlikova, L.; Racko, J.; Marek, J.; Priesol, J.; Benko, P.; Nemec, M.; Breza, J. Capacitance properties and simulation of the AlGaN/GaN Schottky heterostructure. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2014, 312, 102–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Kamyczek, P.; Placzek-Popko, E.; Zytkiewicz, Z.R.; Zielony, E.; Gumienny, Z. Deep traps in n-type GaN epilayers grown by plasma assisted molecular beam epitaxy. J. Appl. Phys. 2014, 115, 023102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Nguyen, X.S.; Lin, K.; Zhang, Z.; McSkimming, B.; Arehart, A.R.; Speck, J.S.; Ringel, S.A.; Fitzgerald, E.A.; Chua, S. Correlation of a generation-recombination center with a deep level trap in GaN. J. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2015, 106, 102101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Marso, M.; Wolter, M.; Javorka, P.; Kordoš, P.; Lüth, H. Investigation of buffer traps in an AlGaN/GaN/Si high electron mobility transistor by backgating current deep level transient spectroscopy. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2003, 82, 633. [Google Scholar]
  11. Elhaji, A.; Evans-Freeman, J.H.; El-Nahass, M.M.; Kappers, M.J.; Humpries, C.J. Electrical characterization and DLTS analysis of a gold/n-type gallium nitride Schottky diode. Mater. Sci. Semicond. Process. 2014, 17, 94–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Sasikumar, A.; Arehart, A.R.; Via, G.D.; Heller, E.; Ringel, S.A. Deep trap-induced dynamic on-resistance degradation in GaN-on-Si power MISHEMTs. Microel. Reliab. 2016, 56, 37–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Lee, J.-G.; Park, B.-R.; Cho, C.-H.; Seo, K.-S.; Cha, H.-Y. Low Turn-On Voltage AlGaN/GaN-on-Si Rectifier With Gated Ohmic Anode. IEEE Electron. Dev. Lett. 2013, 34, 214–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Hu, M.J.; Stoffels, S.; Lenci, S.; Bakeroot, B.; Venegas, R.; Groeseneken, G.; Decoutere, S. Current transient spectroscopy for trapping analysis on Au-free AlGaN/GaN Schottky barrier diode. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2015, 106, 083502. [Google Scholar]
  15. Stoklas, R.; Gregušova, D.; Novák, J.; Vescan, A.; Kordoš, P. Investigation of trapping effects in AlGaN/GaN/Si field-effect transistors by frequency dependent capacitance and conductance analysis. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2008, 93, 124103. [Google Scholar]
  16. Rao, H.; Bosman, G.J. Device reliability study of high gate electric field effects in AlGaN/GaN high electron mobility transistors using low frequency noise spectroscopy. J. Appl. Phys. 2010, 108, 053707. [Google Scholar]
  17. Du, J.; Chen, N.; Jiang, Z.; Bai, Z.; Liu, Y.; Yu, Q. Study on transconductance non-linearity of AlGaN/GaN HEMTs considering acceptor-like traps in barrier layer under the gate. Solid-St. Electron. 2016, 115, 60–64. [Google Scholar]
  18. Miczek, M.; Mizue, C.; Hashizume, T.; Adamowicz, B. Effects of interface states and temperature on the C-VC-V behavior of metal/insulator/AlGaN/GaN heterostructure capacitors. J. Appl. Phys. 2008, 103, 104510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Joh, J.; del Alamo, J.A. A Current-Transient Methodology for Trap Analysis for GaN High Electron Mobility Transistors. IEEE Trans. Electron. Dev. 2011, 58, 132–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Tapajna, M.; Simms, R.J.T.; Pei, Y.; Mishra, U.K.; Kuball, M. Integrated Optical and Electrical Analysis: Identifying Location and Properties of Traps in AlGaN/GaN HEMTs During Electrical Stress. IEEE Electron. Dev. Lett. 2010, 31, 662–664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Martin-Horcajo, S.; Wang, A.; Bosca, A.; Romero, M.F.; Tadjer, M.J.; Koehler, A.D.; Anderson, T.J.; Calle, F. Trapping phenomena in AlGaN and InAlN barrier HEMTs with different geometries. Semicond. Sci. Technol. 2015, 30, 035015. [Google Scholar]
  22. Huber, M.; Silvestri, M.; Knuuttila, L.; Pozzovivo, G.; Andreev, A.; Kadashchuk, A.; Bonanni, A.; Lundskog, A. Impact of residual carbon impurities and gallium vacancies on trapping effects in AlGaN/GaN metal insulator semiconductor high electron mobility transistors. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2015, 107, 032106. [Google Scholar]
  23. Meneghini, M.; Rossetto, I.; Bisi, D.; Stocco, A.; Chini, A.; Pantellini, A.; Lanzieri, C.; Nanni, A.; Meneghesso, G.; Zanoni, E. Buffer Traps in Fe-Doped AlGaN/GaN HEMTs: Investigation of the Physical Properties Based on Pulsed and Transient Measurements. IEEE Trans. Electron. Dev. 2014, 61, 4070–4077. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Kang, T.S.; Ren, F.; Gila, B.P.; Pearton, S.J.; Patrick, E.; Cheney, D.J.; Law, M.; Zhang, M.L. Investigation of traps in AlGaN/GaN high electron mobility transistors by sub-band gap optical pumping. J. Vacuum Sci. Technol. B 2015, 33, 061202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Donoval, D.; Chvála, A.; Šramatý, R.; Kováč, J.; Morvan, E.; Dua, C.; DiForte-Poisson, M.A.; Kordoš, P. Transport properties and barrier height evaluation in Ni/InAlN/GaN Schottky diodes. J. Appl. Phys. 2011, 109, 063711. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Schematic cross section description of used AlGaN/GaN heterostructures.
Figure 1. Schematic cross section description of used AlGaN/GaN heterostructures.
Electronics 05 00020 g001
Figure 2. Typical IV characteristics for SD structures A and B measured at 25 °C and 150 °C.
Figure 2. Typical IV characteristics for SD structures A and B measured at 25 °C and 150 °C.
Electronics 05 00020 g002
Figure 3. Current transients of the AlGaN/GaN. structure of Sample A measured at a reverse bias of −6 V at various temperatures. Full lines are fitting curves.
Figure 3. Current transients of the AlGaN/GaN. structure of Sample A measured at a reverse bias of −6 V at various temperatures. Full lines are fitting curves.
Electronics 05 00020 g003
Figure 4. Current transients of the AlGaN/GaN structure. Sample B measured at a reverse bias of −6 V at various temperatures. Full lines are fitting curves.
Figure 4. Current transients of the AlGaN/GaN structure. Sample B measured at a reverse bias of −6 V at various temperatures. Full lines are fitting curves.
Electronics 05 00020 g004
Figure 5. Time constant spectrum of an AlGaN/GaN SD structure (Sample B, V = −6 V) evaluated by a fitting of the current transients by 70 exponentials. For comparison, data of Ai vs. τi obtained from simple three-exponential fitting (full square marks) are also shown.
Figure 5. Time constant spectrum of an AlGaN/GaN SD structure (Sample B, V = −6 V) evaluated by a fitting of the current transients by 70 exponentials. For comparison, data of Ai vs. τi obtained from simple three-exponential fitting (full square marks) are also shown.
Electronics 05 00020 g005
Figure 6. Arrhenius plot of the time constant for AlGaN/GaN SDs (Samples A and B) measured at reverse bias −6 V (full marks) and forward bias +1 V (open marks). For comparison, data obtained by fitting with 80 exponentials are also shown (full stars). Dashed lines correspond to the energy of 0.77 and 0.83 eV.
Figure 6. Arrhenius plot of the time constant for AlGaN/GaN SDs (Samples A and B) measured at reverse bias −6 V (full marks) and forward bias +1 V (open marks). For comparison, data obtained by fitting with 80 exponentials are also shown (full stars). Dashed lines correspond to the energy of 0.77 and 0.83 eV.
Electronics 05 00020 g006

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Florovič, M.; Škriniarová, J.; Kováč, J.; Kordoš, P. Trapping Analysis of AlGaN/GaN Schottky Diodes via Current Transient Spectroscopy. Electronics 2016, 5, 20. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics5020020

AMA Style

Florovič M, Škriniarová J, Kováč J, Kordoš P. Trapping Analysis of AlGaN/GaN Schottky Diodes via Current Transient Spectroscopy. Electronics. 2016; 5(2):20. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics5020020

Chicago/Turabian Style

Florovič, Martin, Jaroslava Škriniarová, Jaroslav Kováč, and Peter Kordoš. 2016. "Trapping Analysis of AlGaN/GaN Schottky Diodes via Current Transient Spectroscopy" Electronics 5, no. 2: 20. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics5020020

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop