Effect of Metal Overhang on Electric Field for Pixel Sensors Kavita Lalwani, Geetika Jain, Ranjeet Dalal, Kirti Ranjan & Ashutosh Bhardwaj Department of.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Silicon Strip R&D Activity in Korea Introduction Sensor design and simulation Pre-results of 1 st mask performance Status of 2 nd mask design Summary B.G.

Advertisements

Study of Behaviour of Silicon Sensor Structures, Before and After Irradiation Y. Unno, S. Mitusi, Y. Ikegami, S. Terada (KEK) O. Jinnouchi, R. Nagai (Tokyo.

TCAD simulations for pixel detectors Summary: 1)Geometry layout: doping profiles for 3D geometry; 2) Results: electrostatic potential, electric field distribution;

Trapping in silicon detectors G. Kramberger Jožef Stefan Institute, Ljubljana Slovenia G. Kramberger, Trapping in silicon detectors, Aug , 2006,

D. Contarato Outline 12 November 2002, MAPS Meeting Introduction: issues and questions Simulated structure: geometry and parameters Simulation results:

Modeling and simulation of charge collection properties for 3D-Trench electrode detector Hao Ding a, Jianwei Chen a, Zheng Li a,b,c, *, Shaoan Yan a a.

Department of Physics VERTEX 2002 – Hawaii, 3-7 Nov Outline: Introduction ISE simulation of non-irradiated and irradiated devices Non-homogeneous.

1 Kimberly Manser Process Development for Double-Sided Fabrication of a Photodiode Process Development of a Double-Sided Photodiode (for application.

Test of Pixel Sensors for the CMS experiment Amitava Roy Purdue University.

Wide Bandgap Semiconductor Detectors for Harsh Radiation Environments

CONCEPTUAL COMPARISON BETWEEN LHC SILICON DETECTORS AND SILICON SOLAR CELLS Dr. Adnan Ali Department of Physics Government College University Faisalabad.

Semi-conductor Detectors HEP and Accelerators Geoffrey Taylor ARC Centre for Particle Physics at the Terascale (CoEPP) The University of Melbourne.

Study of Behaviour of n-in-p Silicon Sensor Structures Before and After Irradiation Y. Unno, S. Mitsui, Y. Ikegami, S. Terada, K. Nakamura (KEK), O. Jinnouchi,

TCAD Simulations of Radiation Damage Effects at High Fluences in Silicon Detectors with Sentaurus TCAD D. Passeri(1,2), F. Moscatelli(2,3), A. Morozzi(1,2),

Approach of JSI to field modeling Gregor Kramberger (more details 19 th RD50 CERN, Vertex 2012 proceedings)

The first results on cryogenic semiconductor detectors for advancing the LHC beam loss monitors Presented by Vladimir Eremin on behalf of Ioffe PTI (St.Petersburg)

SILICON DETECTORS PART I Characteristics on semiconductors.

Minni Singla & Sudeep Chatterji Goethe University, Frankfurt Development of radiation hard silicon microstrip detectors for the CBM experiment Special.

Trento, Feb.28, 2005 Workshop on p-type detectors 1 Comprehensive Radiation Damage Modeling of Silicon Detectors Petasecca M. 1,3, Moscatelli F. 1,2,3,

1 Development of radiation hard microstrip detectors for the CBM Experiment Sudeep Chatterji GSI Helmholtz Centre for Heavy Ion Research DPG Bonn 16 March,

Silicon detector processing and technology: Part II

MIT Lincoln Laboratory NU Status-1 JAB 11/20/2015 Advanced Photodiode Development 7 April, 2000 James A. Burns ll.mit.edu.

Heavy ion irradiation on silicon strip sensors for GLAST & Radiation hardening of silicon strip sensors S.Yoshida, K.Yamanaka, T.Ohsugi, H.Masuda T.Mizuno,

News on microstrip detector R&D —Quality assurance tests— Anton Lymanets, Johann Heuser 12 th CBM collaboration meeting Dubna, October

CERN, November 2005 Claudio Piemonte RD50 workshop Claudio Piemonte a, Maurizio Boscardin a, Alberto Pozza a, Sabina Ronchin a, Nicola Zorzi a, Gian-Franco.

Update on TCAD Simulation Mathieu Benoit. Introduction The Synopsis Sentaurus Simulation tool – Licenses at CERN – Integration in LXBatch vs Engineering.

Technology Overview or Challenges of Future High Energy Particle Detection Tomasz Hemperek

Overview of Activities at COMSATS Presented by: Team Leader: Hira KhanDr. Arshad S. Bhatti Sujjia Shaukat.

RD50 funding request Fabrication and testing of new AC coupled 3D stripixel detectors G. Pellegrini - CNM Barcelona Z. Li – BNL C. Garcia – IFIC R. Bates.

XYZ 1/7/2016 MIT Lincoln Laboratory APS-2 Diode Simulation First Look V. Suntharalingam 27 July 2007.

New research activity “Silicon detectors modeling in RD50”: goals, tasks and the first steps Vladimir Eremin Ioffe Phisical – technical institute St. Petresburg,

INFN and University of Perugia Characterization of radiation damage effects in silicon detectors at High Fluence HL-LHC D. Passeri (1,2), F. Moscatelli.

4H-SIC DMOSFET AND SILICON CARBIDE ACCUMULATION-MODE LATERALLY DIFFUSED MOSFET Archana N- 09MQ /10/2010 PSG COLLEGE OF TECHNOLOGY ME – Power Electronics.

TCT measurements with SCP slim edge strip detectors Igor Mandić 1, Vladimir Cindro 1, Andrej Gorišek 1, Gregor Kramberger 1, Marko Milovanović 1, Marko.

Simulations of Hadron Irradiation Effects for Si Sensors Using Effective Bulk Damage Model A. Bhardwaj 1, H. Neugebauer 2, R. Dalal 1, M. Moll 2, Geetika.

Ljubljiana, 29/02/2012 G.-F. Dalla Betta Surface effects in double-sided silicon 3D sensors fabricated at FBK at FBK Gian-Franco Dalla Betta a, M. Povoli.

Characterization of irradiated MOS-C with X-rays using CV-measurements and gated diode techniques Q. Wei, L. Andricek, H-G. Moser, R. H. Richter, Max-Planck-Institute.

Evaluation of novel n + -in-p pixel and strip sensors for very high radiation environment Y. Unno a, S. Mitsui a, R. Hori a, R. Nagai g, O. Jinnouchi g,

Suppression of Random Dopant-Induced Threshold Voltage Fluctuations in Sub-0.1μm MOSFET’s with Epitaxial and δ-Doped Channels A. Asenov and S. Saini, IEEE.

Maria Rita Coluccia Simon Kwan Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory

KIT – Universität des Landes Baden-Württemberg und nationales Forschungszentrum in der Helmholtz-Gemeinschaft Status Interstrip resistance.

Summary of Simulations from KIT Robert Eber, Martin Printz.

TCAD Simulation – Semiconductor Technology Computer-Aided Design (TCAD) tool ENEXSS 5.5, developed by SELETE in Japan Device simulation part: HyDeLEOS.

6th Trento Workshop on Advanced Silicon Radiation Detectors1/16 J.P. BalbuenaInstituto de Microelectrónica de Barcelona IMB-CNM (CSIC) J.P. Balbuena, G.

Simulation of new P-Type strip detectors 17th RD50 Workshop, CERN, Geneva 1/15 Centro Nacional de MicroelectrónicaInstituto de Microelectrónica de Barcelona.

1 Updates on Punch-through Protection H. F.–W. Sadrozinski with C. Betancourt, A. Bielecki, Z. Butko, A. Deran, V. Fadeyev, S. Lindgren, C. Parker, N.

P. Fernández-Martínez – Optimized LGAD PeripheryRESMDD14, Firenze 8-10 October Centro Nacional de MicroelectrónicaInstituto de Microelectrónica de.

How to design a good sensor? General sensor desing rules Avoid high electric fields Provide good interstrip isolation (high Rint) Avoid signal coupling.

Double Electric field Peak Simulation of Irradiated Detectors Using Silvaco Ashutosh Bhardwaj, Kirti Ranjan, Ranjeet Singh*, Ram K. Shivpuri Center for.

TCAD Simulation for SOI Pixel Detectors October 31, 2006 Hirokazu Hayashi, Hirotaka Komatsubara (Oki Elec. Ind. Co.), Masashi Hazumi (KEK) for the SOIPIX.

R. Bradford 3 February,  BNL offered to share 4” wafer. We purchased ¼ of the wafer with the remainder being used for silicon drift detectors for.

Boron and Phosphorus Implantation Induced Electrically Active Defects in p-type Silicon Jayantha Senawiratne 1,a, Jeffery S. Cites 1, James G. Couillard.

TCT measurements with strip detectors Igor Mandić 1, Vladimir Cindro 1, Andrej Gorišek 1, Gregor Kramberger 1, Marko Milovanović 1, Marko Mikuž 1,2, Marko.

9 th International conference “RD09, Italy” on 30 September-02 October 2009 A. Srivastava Numerical Modelling of Si Sensors for HEP Experiments and XFEL.

TCT measurements of HV-CMOS test structures irradiated with neutrons I. Mandić 1, G. Kramberger 1, V. Cindro 1, A. Gorišek 1, B. Hiti 1, M. Mikuž 1,2,

3D Simulation Studies of Irradiated BNL One-Sided Dual-column 3D Silicon Detector up to 1x1016 neq/cm2 Zheng Li1 and Tanja Palviainen2 1Brookhaven National.

Making Tracks at DØ Satish Desai – Fermilab. Making Tracks at D-Zero 2 What Does a Tracker Do? ● It finds tracks (well, duh!) ● Particle ID (e/ separation,

Solid State Devices EE 3311 SMU

Rint Simulations & Comparison with Measurements

Axel König, HEPHY Vienna

Simulation studies of isolation techniques for n-in-p silicon sensors

Cint of un-irr./irradiated 200μm devices

RD50 Workshop June 2016, Torino, Italy

HG-Cal Simulation using Silvaco TCAD tool at Delhi University Chakresh Jain, Geetika Jain, Ranjeet Dalal, Ashutosh Bhardwaj, Kirti Ranjan CMS simulation.

Modeling Vacancy-Interstitial Clusters and Their Effect on Carrier Transport in Silicon E. Žąsinas, J. Vaitkus, E. Gaubas, Vilnius University Institute.

Fab. Example: Piezoelectric Force Sensor (1)

TCAD Simulation of Geometry Variation under HPK campaign

TCAD Simulations of Silicon Detectors operating at High Fluences D

Metal overhang: an important ingredient against “micro-discharge”

Sung June Kim Chapter 18. NONIDEAL MOS Sung June Kim

Presentation transcript:

Effect of Metal Overhang on Electric Field for Pixel Sensors Kavita Lalwani, Geetika Jain, Ranjeet Dalal, Kirti Ranjan & Ashutosh Bhardwaj Department of Physics & Astrophysics, University of Delhi, INDIA SIMULATION GROUP MEETING 13 January, 2015 Delhi, India SIMULATION GROUP MEETING 13 January, 2015 Delhi, India Simulation Group Meeting, 23/1/2015 1

Simulated Structure for pixel sensor (three Pixel) D=200um 2 x  y  z=100  200  1 um 3 3 Pixel Structure Bulk Type = Boron Bulk Density = 2  cm -3 Bulk profile=constant Aluminium=0.55um Gate SiO2=0.25um Field SiO2 = 0.7um Areafactor = NIL 2 Contact Vias Parameters Used Frontside Implant Type = Phosphorus Frontside Implant Density = 1  cm -3 Frontside Implant Profile = Gaussian, y=1.5um, x=1.05um Backside Implant Type = Boron Backside Implant Density = 1  cm -3 Backside Implant Profile = Gaussian, y=1.5um, x=1.05um Pstop density = 1  cm -3 Pstop implant profie= Gaussian, y=1.0um, x= 0.7um Configuration-Pstop, implant wide Metal overhang = 0, 4um T=253K For Non Irradiated Pixels- Qf=1e11cm Nit traps [1] For Irradiated Pixels- Radiation Damage Model=2bulktraps + Qf +2Nit traps [2] Q f = 2e12cm -2 Fluence = 0 (Non irradiated case), 1e15, 2e15, 5e15, 1e16cm -2 References-[1] Dissertation, “X ray Radiation damage studies and Design of a silicon pixel sensors for science at the XFEL, by Jiaguo Zhang, [2] “Simulation of Irradiated Si Detectors”, Ranjeet Dalal et al, Proceeding of Vertex ]2]

2D Electric Field Profiles for Non Irradiated Pixel Sensors Configuration-Pstop, implant wide MO=0um MO=4um Maximum electric field is at the curvature of n+ strips 3 Applied reverse bias = 1000V Maximum electric field is under the MO It is expected that effect of MO would be significant for non irradiated pixel sensors N+ implant No Metal overhang P Bulk N+ implant Metal overhang P Bulk N+ implant

Cutline of 1um Cutline of 0.1 um Non irradiated pixel sensors MO has significant effect on maximum electric field for non-irradiated pixel sensors. There is decrease in maximum electric field for MO of 4um compared to structure without MO. Applied reverse bias = 1000V MO effect on Electric Field Gap bw pstop Implant edge Gap bw pstop implant pstop edge 4

2D Electric Field Profile for Irradiated Pixel Sensors Configuration-Pstop, implant wide MO = 4um MO = 0um Maximum electric field is at the curvature of n+ strips It is expected that effect of MO would not be very significant for irradiated pixel sensors 5 Applied reverse bias =1000V fluence = 2e15cm -2 Q f =2e12cm -2 No Metal overhang n+ implant P bulk fluence = 2e15cm -2 n+ implant P bulk Metal overhang fluence = 2e15cm -2 Q f =2e12cm -2

Irradiated Pixel sensors Electric Field for cut line of 1 um (Configuration: Pstop, Wide implant) T= 253K, D=200um, X=100um, Nb=2e12cm-3 Configuration-Pstop, implant wide 6 Applied reverse bias= 1000V MO effect on Electric Field MO does not have significant effect on maximum electric field at fluences of 1e15, 2e15 cm -2 for irradiated pixel sensors. There is small decrease in maximum electric field at fluence of 5e15 cm -2 for MO of 4um compared to structure without MO Similar results are observed for configuration pstop, normal implant small variation in max Efield at f=5e15cm -2 Cutline of 1um Q f =2e12cm -2 f=1e15cm -2 f=2e15cm -2 f=5e15cm -2

MO has small effect on maximum electric field at fluence of 1e16cm -2 7 Applied reverse bias =1000V Irradiated Pixel sensors small change in max Efield at f=1e16cm -2 implant pstop edge Gap bw pstop Implant edge Cutline of 1um 2D Electric Field Profile, MO=4um (fluence =1e16cm -2 ) Q f =2e12cm -2 fluence = 1e16cm -2 Metal overhang P bulk Q f =2e12cm -2 n+ implant

8 Fluences (cm -2 )MO=0umMO=4umMO=0umMO=4um f=0 (Non irradiated case) 1.72     10 4 f=1e   10 5 f=2e     10 5 f=5e     10 5 f=1e     10 5 Cutline=1um Configuration- Pstop, implant wide Cutline=0.1um Comparison of Maximum Electric Field (Non Irradiated vs Irradiated Pixel Sensors) Applied reverse bias = 1000V Electric field unit V/cm

9 Summary Electric field simulations are performed to study the effect of metal overhang for both non irradiated as well irradiated pixel sensors. -For Non irradiated pixel senors MO has a significant effect on maximum electric field - For irradiated pixel senors MO does not have significant effect on maximum electric field at fluences of 1e15, 2e15 cm -2 There is small decrease in maximum electric field at fluence of 5e15 cm -2 and 1e16cm -2 for MO of 4um compared to structure without MO Similar results are observed for configuration pstop, normal implant Future Plan Study the effect of various design parameters like pstop depth, pstop concentration, effective doping concentration etc on electric field profiles for non irradiated and irradiated pixel sensors Study the design optimization for the pixel structures- 1) X (width)=50um & depth =200um 2)X (width) = 25um & depth = 200um

10 Thank you

Back-up Slides 11

12 Electric Field in Bulk Irradiated pixel sensors at f=1e15cm-2 Non Irr Non Irradiated pixel sensors at QF=1e11cm-2 + interface trap

Conf-Pstop, Implant Wide (cutline of 1.0um) MO Effect on Electric Field at different fluences for Irradiated Strip sensors 13 Fluence = 1e15cm -2 Fluence = 2e15cm -2 Fluence = 5e15cm -2 Fluence = 1e16cm -2

14 MO Effect on Electric Field at different fluences for Irradiated Strip sensors Conf-Pstop, Implant Wide (cutline of 0.1um) f=1e15cm-2 2 f=2e15cm-2 2 f=5e15cm-2 2 f=1e16cm-2 2

15 Leakage Current Plot for irradiated sensors

16 Net Doping, f= 1e16, MO=4um

Non Irradiated Pixel Sensors QF=1e11cm-2 Incorporated following two interface traps Interface trap levels Density(cm-3)  (e) and  (h) 0.60eV (e-level)0.6e111e-15, 1e eV (h-level)0.4e111e-15, 1e-15 17

Irradiated Pixel Sensors 18  Fixed interface charge density (QF) =2e12cm-2  Incorporated following two interface traps Interface trap levels Density(cm-3)  (e) and  (h) 0.60eV (e-level)12e111e-15, 1e eV (h-level) 8e111e-15, 1e-15 trap levelsDensity(cm-3) at f=1e15,2e15,5e15cm-2  (e) and  (h) 0.51eV (e-level) 4e15, 8e15,2e162e-14, 2.6e eV (h-level) 3e15,6e15,1.5e162e-14, 2e-14  Bulk Damage Model