GaN-based high electron mobility transistors (HEMTs) are well suitable for the applications in power switching devices.[
Chinese Physics B, Volume. 29, Issue 8, (2020)
Comparative study on characteristics of Si-based AlGaN/GaN recessed MIS-HEMTs with HfO2 and Al2O3 gate insulators
Two types of enhancement-mode (E-mode) AlGaN/GaN metal–insulator–semiconductor high-electron-mobility transistors (MIS-HEMTs) with different gate insulators are fabricated on Si substrates. The HfO2 gate insulator and the Al2O3 gate insulator each with a thickness of 30 nm are grown by the plasma-enhanced atomic layer deposition (PEALD). The energy band diagrams of two types of dielectric MIS-HEMTs are compared. The breakdown voltage (VBR) of HfO2 dielectric layer and Al2O3 dielectric layer are 9.4 V and 15.9 V, respectively. With the same barrier thickness, the transconductance of MIS-HEMT with HfO2 is larger. The threshold voltage (Vth) of the HfO2 and Al2O3 MIS-HEMT are 2.0 V and 2.4 V, respectively, when the barrier layer thickness is 0 nm. The C–V characteristics are in good agreement with the Vth’s transfer characteristics. As the barrier layer becomes thinner, the drain current density decreases sharply. Due to the dielectric/AlGaN interface is very close to the channel, the scattering of interface states will lead the electron mobility to decrease. The current collapse and the Ron of Al2O3 MIS-HEMT are smaller at the maximum gate voltage. As Al2O3 has excellent thermal stability and chemical stability, the interface state density of Al2O3/AlGaN is less than that of HfO2/AlGaN.
1. Introduction
GaN-based high electron mobility transistors (HEMTs) are well suitable for the applications in power switching devices.[
Gate dielectric material is of vital importance for MIS-HEMTs.[
In this paper, two types of HEMTs are designed and fabricated, known as gate-recessed MIS-HEMTs with HfO2 and Al2O3 gate dielectric grown by plasma-enhanced atomic layer deposition (PEALD). There are three etching depths in the two types of MIS-HEMTs. The energy band diagrams of the two types of MIS-HEMTs are compared with each other. Moreover, the direct current (DC) characteristics and pulse characteristics are compared and analyzed.
2. Device fabrication
The AlGaN/GaN heterojunction structure used in this paper was grown on a silicon (111) substrate by the metal organic chemical vapor deposition (MOCVD) method. The wafer consisted of an AlN nucleation layer, an AlGaN gradient layer in which the Al percentage ranges from 8% to 0, a 2-μm-thick C-doped GaN layer, a 160-nm-thick undoped GaN channel, and a 25-nm-thick undoped AlGaN barrier layer. Room temperature hall measurements of the epi-wafer yielded an electron sheet density of 9.0 × 1012 cm−2 and an electron mobility of 2000 cm2/V⋅s.
The mesa area was formed by using BCl3/Cl2 plasma etching in an inductively coupled plasma (ICP) system followed by the drain/source ohmic contact formation by using Ti/Al/Ni/Au (30 nm/180 nm/40 nm/60 nm) annealed at 840 °C for 30 s. A 60-nm-thick Si3N4 layer was deposited on a surface by the plasma-enhanced chemical vapor deposition (PECVD), and the Si3N4 of the gate area was removed by CF4 plasma etching. The gate-recessed MIS-HEMT was etched by using BCl3 and Cl2. The barrier layer thickness values were 6 nm, 3 nm, and 0 nm, respectively. The next step was high temperature (300 °C) N2 plasma treatment in the recessed-gate region by using the plasma enhanced atomic layer deposition (PEALD) with the treatment power of 150 W for 10 min. Then, the HfO2 and Al2O3 dielectric layer were deposited separately to a thickness of 30 nm. Then, Ni/Au E-beam evaporation and lift off were carried out to form the gate electrode. Finally, post gate annealing (PGA) treatment of 400 °C in ambient N2 for 5 min was implemented for reducing the interface state density.[
Figure 1.Schematic cross-sectional structure of AlGaN/GaN gate-recessed MIS-HEMT.
Figure 2.Photomicrograph of (a) MIS-HEMT device and (b) FIB cross-sectional view of gate area.
3. Results and discussion
Due to the fact that the band gap of HfO2 and Al2O3 are different, the energy band diagrams of the two types of MIS-HEMTs are different as shown in Fig. 3. The band gap of Al2O3 is 8.8 eV, much larger than 6.0 eV of HfO2. However, the barrier height (ϕB) of Ni/Al2O3 is 3.5 eV, and the barrier height of Ni/HfO2 is 3.25 eV for the Ni/Au gate.[
Figure 3.Energy band diagram of AlGaN/GaN gate-recessed MIS-HEMT.
Figure 4.Molecular structure diagram of HfO2/AlGaN and Al2O3/AlGaN interfaces.
Figure 5.Curves of dielectric layer breakdown voltage of devices.
Figure 6.Curves of transfer characteristics of recessed MIS-HEMT with (a) 6-nm-thick barrier, (b) 3-nm-thick barrier, and (c) 0-nm-thick barrier, and (d) change trend comparison chart of
Figure 4 shows the molecular structure diagram of HfO2/AlGaN and Al2O3/AlGaN interfaces. As the Hf atom is much larger than the Ga atom and N atom, there will be many hanging bonds on the N atoms at the HfO2/AlGaN interface. On the other hand, the Al atoms are small and there are Al atoms in the AlGaN layer, so there are few hanging bonds on the N atoms at the HfO2/AlGaN interface. The interface state density of the Al2O3/AlGaN is smaller than that of the HfO2/AlGaN interface. This can be confirmed by the test results of current collapse in Fig. 9.
Figure 7.The
Figure 8.Plots of drift mobility
Figure 9.Pulsed output current curves of devices.
Figure 5 shows the curves of breakdown voltage (VBR) between gate and source of the two types of MIS-HEMTs. Each structure of the three devices is tested. The average VBR of HfO2 dielectric layer and Al2O3 dielectric layer are 9.4 V and 15.9 V, respectively. As the band gap of HfO2 and Al2O3 are 6.0 eV and 8.8 eV, respectively, the Al2O3 can withstand a larger gate voltage range. The gate voltage range of Al2O3 is closer to that of Si MOS device. The gate leakage of Al2O3 is smaller than that of HfO2. As Al2O3 has a higher energy-band offset on the AlGaN layer, holes are more difficult to cross the barrier of Al2O3 and a low gate leakage current can be formed by weakening Fowler–Nordheim (FN) tunneling.[
For the MIS-HEMT with HfO2, The drain current density and transconductance increase greatly after post-gate-annealing (PGA, 400 °C, 5 min) treatment.[
The C–V characteristics are shown in Fig. 7. The onset voltage (Vo) values of HfO2 MIS-HEMTs are 0.2 V, 1.4 V, 1.9 V respectively corresponding to the different barrier thicknesses, which is in good agreement with the Vth’s transfer characteristic. Similarly, the Vo values of Al2O3 MIS-HEMTs are 0.8 V, 2.5 V, 3.0 V, respectively. A second slop exists when the barrier thickness is 6 nm.[
In order to change the mobility values of the devices, the FAT-FETs are tested by measuring I–V and C–V characteristics. The gate width (WG) is 100 μm, the gate length (LG) is 50 μm, and the Vd is 0.1 V.[
A dual-pulse current collapse test is performed on each of the devices, and the results are shown in Fig. 9. In the test, the pulse width is 5 × 10−7 s, with 1-ms period and the rise time and the decline time are both 1.5 × 10−7 s. In the current collapse test, selected are two static operating points, i.e., the (Vgs, Vds) = (0, 0) state and the (Vgs, Vds) = (−8, 10) state. According to the measurement, the current collapses of 6-nm barrier MIS-HEMT are 7.3% and 6.7% for the HfO2 and Al2O3, respectively. Their current collapses increase to 29.7% and 20.8% when the barrier layer is 0 nm. The current collapse of HfO2 MIS-HEMT is larger than that of Al2O3 MIS-HEMT, for there are more interface states at the HfO2/AlGaN interface. When the barrier thickness is 0 nm, the trap state of HfO2/GaN interface directly affects the electrons in the channel. The process of trap charge and discharge greatly influence the output current, so the collapse of HfO2 MIS-HEMT reaches 29.7%. In addition, the specific on-resistance (Ron) can be obtained through the pulse output curve at (0, 0) state. The Ron values of the HfO2 MIS-HEMT are 4.3 Ω⋅mm, 6.5 Ω⋅mm, and 9.2Ω⋅mm, respectively, which are larger than those of Al2O3 MIS-HEMT. At the maximum gate voltage, the mobility of HfO2 MIS-HEMT is lower than that of Al2O3 MIS-HEMT, so the Ron of HfO2 MIS-HEMT is larger. Figure 10 shows the comparisons of change trend among the devices. At the same barrier layer thickness, the current collapses of Al2O3 MIS-HEMT are smaller mainly due to the better interface of Al2O3/AlGaN as Al2O3 has excellent thermal stability (amorphous up to at least 1000 °C) and chemical stability.[
Figure 10.Comparisons of change trend of
4. Conclusions
The AlGaN/GaN MIS-HEMTs with three different etching depths by using HfO2 and Al2O3 gate insulators are fabricated on Si substrates. The barrier layer thickness values are 6 nm, 3 nm, and 0 nm respectively. The energy band diagrams of two types of dielectric MIS-HEMTs are compared. The VBR of the HfO2 and Al2O3 gate are 9.4 V and 15.9 V, respectively. At the same barrier thickness, the transconductance of MIS-HEMT with HfO2 is larger. The Vth of the HfO2 and Al2O3 MIS-HEMTs are 2.0 V and 2.4 V, respectively, when the barrier thickness is 0 nm. The C–V characteristics are in good agreement with the Vth’s transfer characteristics. When the barrier layer is thinner, the drain current density decreases sharply. The current collapse and Ron of Al2O3 MIS-HEMT are smaller at the maximum gate voltage. The interface states of Al2O3/AlGaN are less than those of HfO2/AlGaN, for the Al2O3 has excellent thermal stability and chemical stability and the Al2O3 and AlGaN both contain the Al element.
[1] M Y Hua, J Wei, S Krishnamoorthy, Q L Bao, Z F Zhang, Z Y Zheng, J Chen Kevin. IEEE T. Electron. Dev, 39, 413(2018).
[2] I Nifa, C Leroux, A Torres, M Charles, G Reimbold, G Ghibaudo, E Bano. Microelectron. Eng, 215(2019).
[3] X X Fei, Y Wang, X Luo, F Cao, C H Yu. Superlattice Microst, 114, 314(2018).
[4] F Garcia, S Shamsir, S K Islam. Solid-State Electron, 151, 52(2019).
[5] Y J Shi, S Huang, Q L Bao, X H Wang, K Wei, H J Jiang, J F Li, C Zhao, S M Li, Y Zhou, H W Gao, Q Sun, H Yang, J H Zhang, W J Chen, Q Zhou, B Zhang, X Y Liu. IEEE T. Electron. Dev, 63, 614(2016).
[6] H Y Wang, J Y Wang, M J Li, Q R Cao, M Yu, Y D He, W G Wu. IEEE Electron Dev. Lett, 39, 1888(2018).
[7] S Liu, Y Cai, G Gu, J Wang, C Zeng, W Shi, Z Feng, H Qin, Z Cheng, K J Chen, B Zhang. IEEE Electron Dev. Lett, 33, 354(2012).
[8] J B He, M Y Hua, Z F Zhang, J K Chen. IEEE T. Electron. Dev, 65, 3185(2018).
[9] T Hashizume, K Nishiguchi, S Kaneki, J Kuzmik, Z Yatabe. Mater. Sci. Semicond. Proc, 78, 85(2018).
[10] R D Long, C M Jackson, J Yang, A Hazeghi, C Hitzman, S Majety, A R Arehart, Y Nishi, T P Ma, S A Ringel, P C Mclntyre. Appl. Phys. Lett, 103(2013).
[11] C Liu, E F Chor, L S Tan. Appl. Phys. Lett, 88(2006).
[12] M Kanamura, T Ohki, T Kikkawa, K Imanishi, T Imada, A Yamada, N Hara. IEEE Electron Dev. Lett, 31, 189(2010).
[13] S Huang, S Yang, J Roberts, K J Chen. Jpn. J. Appl. Phys, 50(2011).
[14] W Choi, O Seok, H Ryu, H Cha, K Seo. IEEE Electron Dev. Lett, 35, 175(2014).
[15] Y P Zhao, C Wang, X F Zheng, X H Ma, Y L He, K Liu, A Li, Y Peng, C F Zhang, Y Hao. Phys. Status Solidi A, 217(2020).
[16] M Tapajna, J Kuzmik. Appl. Phys. Lett, 100(2012).
[17] B Y Chou, W C Hsu, H Y Liu, C S Ho, C S Lee. Semicond. Sci. Technol, 28(2013).
[18] Y J Yoon, H S Kang, J H Seo, Y J Kim, J H Bae, J H Lee, I M Kang, S J Cho. J. Korean Phys. Soc, 65, 1579(2014).
[19] Y P Zhao, C Wang, X F Zheng, X H Ma, Y L He, K Liu, A Li, Y Peng, C F Zhang, Y Hao. Solid-State Electron, 163(2020).
[20] J J Zhu, X H Ma, Y Xie, B Hou, W W Chen, J C Zhang, Y Hao. IEEE T. Electron. Dev, 62, 512(2015).
[21] Y L He, H Gao, C Wang, Y P Zhao, X L Lu, C F Zhang, X F Zheng, L X Guo, X H Ma, Y Hao. Phys. Status Solidi A, 216(2019).
Get Citation
Copy Citation Text
Yao-Peng Zhao, Chong Wang, Xue-Feng Zheng, Xiao-Hua Ma, Kai Liu, Ang Li, Yun-Long He, Yue Hao. Comparative study on characteristics of Si-based AlGaN/GaN recessed MIS-HEMTs with HfO2 and Al2O3 gate insulators[J]. Chinese Physics B, 2020, 29(8):
Received: Mar. 18, 2020
Accepted: --
Published Online: Apr. 29, 2021
The Author Email: Chong Wang (xfzheng@mail.xidian.edu.cn)