12.12.2012 Views

characterization, modeling, and design of esd protection circuits

characterization, modeling, and design of esd protection circuits

characterization, modeling, and design of esd protection circuits

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

84 Chapter 3. Simulation: Methods <strong>and</strong> Applications<br />

robust device. This directly contradicts the statement made by Mayaram et al. [13] <strong>and</strong> a<br />

similar assumption made by Diaz et al. [24] that 2D ESD simulation overestimates the<br />

peak temperature in a device <strong>and</strong> therefore underestimates its robustness. Eq. (3.38) also<br />

may explain why Diaz found that 2D simulations overestimated the power to failure in<br />

MOSFETs for times greater than 20µs, although at such long times the high-temperature<br />

region has extended well beyond the drain junction depletion region, which means the<br />

assumptions <strong>of</strong> the thermal model no longer precisely hold.<br />

In the next chapter, we will see that in simulations <strong>of</strong> MOSFET <strong>protection</strong> devices the<br />

capability <strong>of</strong> 2D simulations to model power to failure for ESD stresses is not nearly as<br />

poor as suggested by Fig. 3.33. The ability to overcome the discrepancy between the 2D<br />

<strong>and</strong> 3D thermal models stems from the limitations <strong>of</strong> the assumptions made in the models<br />

when applied to real MOS structures. It was mentioned in Section 2.2.2 that the thermal<br />

box model is not completely accurate because the gate oxide at the top <strong>of</strong> the box acts like<br />

an insulator, not a conductor, so heat flow in this direction is greatly restricted <strong>and</strong> the<br />

peak temperature must be higher than predicted by the model. In an actual MOSFET, the<br />

reduction in failure power due to the insulating surface <strong>of</strong> the gate oxide is estimated to be<br />

significantly less than a factor <strong>of</strong> two [32]. By running a few 2D simulations with an<br />

insulating thermal boundary condition on one side <strong>of</strong> the b × c rectangle, it was<br />

determined that due to the insulating surface the peak temperature increases by a factor <strong>of</strong><br />

two when the sides <strong>of</strong> the rectangle are equal. For unequal sides, this factor <strong>of</strong> two is<br />

roughly multiplied by the ratio <strong>of</strong> b⁄ c,<br />

where b is the dimension <strong>of</strong> the side which is<br />

insulated. Since the side <strong>of</strong> the box along the gate is usually longer than the side equal to<br />

the drain junction depth, the increase in peak temperature due to the insulating gate may<br />

be proportionately greater in 2D MOSFET simulations than in actual structures, thereby<br />

reducing the 2D failure power to a level closer to the 3D case.<br />

The other major assumption <strong>of</strong> the thermal box model which is violated in MOSFET<br />

simulations as well as in real devices is that for longer ESD pulse times (greater than a few<br />

hundred nanoseconds), the semiconductor region outside the box is no longer fixed at<br />

300K <strong>and</strong> therefore cannot act as a perfect heat sink. As in the case for the gate oxide, the<br />

lack <strong>of</strong> an ideal heat sink implies that the peak temperature in the box will be greater than<br />

predicted by the model, which in turn implies that the power to failure will be lower than<br />

predicted. It is not obvious whether the actual boundary conditions surrounding the highfield<br />

region increase or decrease the disparity between real structures <strong>and</strong> 2D simulations.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!