22.01.2013 Views

3D Time-of-flight distance measurement with custom - Universität ...

3D Time-of-flight distance measurement with custom - Universität ...

3D Time-of-flight distance measurement with custom - Universität ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

68 CHAPTER 3<br />

difference <strong>of</strong> only 1 V between the gates <strong>of</strong> 10 µm length, this field is 10 5 V/m, a<br />

value at which the saturation velocity is not yet reached. The drift in such an electric<br />

field would take the electron only about 0.8 nanoseconds. For 30 µm gate length<br />

the traveling time would be 7 nanoseconds for the same potential difference. Also,<br />

for a fixed potential difference, the E-field drift time increases <strong>with</strong> the square <strong>of</strong> the<br />

drift length.<br />

In reality the process <strong>of</strong> carrier movement is a superposition <strong>of</strong> both cases<br />

discussed above. However, the real potential distribution is also a superposition <strong>of</strong><br />

both extreme cases sketched in Figure 3.14 (a+b), we do not have an abrupt<br />

potential step between two gates at different potential nor do we have a linearly<br />

falling potential distribution over the entire gate length. Generally, for typical doping<br />

concentrations, the horizontal electrical field in the semiconductor, caused by a<br />

potential gradient between two neighboring gates, the so-called fringing field, only<br />

extends to a relatively small area between the gates [BEY]. Therefore, for relatively<br />

long gates, the charge transport will be dominated by pure thermal diffusion and<br />

only for very short gates do the fringing fields have an influence. Figure 3.14 (c)<br />

shows a more realistic potential distribution.<br />

The estimation <strong>of</strong> the fringing field extension is relatively complex and also difficult<br />

to simulate, since it strongly depends on the semiconductor’s doping<br />

concentrations. Unfortunately semiconductor foundries keep these exact doping<br />

pr<strong>of</strong>iles secret. At least we know that there are additional impurities and implants,<br />

especially directly beneath the semiconductor surface (e.g. anti-punch through<br />

implants). Due to this lack <strong>of</strong> process-parameter knowledge and the complexity <strong>of</strong><br />

available simulation tools, it appears to be more practical, in the framework <strong>of</strong> this<br />

dissertation, to measure rather than to simulate the actual speed performance.<br />

3.1.4 Noise sources<br />

The performance <strong>of</strong> solid-state imagers is limited by several different noise sources.<br />

These can generally be divided into three classes: (1) photon shot noise,<br />

(2) photocharge conversion noise and (3) quantization noise.<br />

Shot noise (or quantum noise) describes the statistical Poisson-distributed nature <strong>of</strong><br />

the arrival process <strong>of</strong> photons and the generation process <strong>of</strong> electron-hole pairs.

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!