Date post: | 18-Dec-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | vincent-stokes |
View: | 215 times |
Download: | 1 times |
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering
((i.e.i.e., A brief history of sand), A brief history of sand)
M. Fischetti
October 2, 2009
A (partial, biased?) history of the MOSFET A (partial, biased?) history of the MOSFET from a physicist’s perspectivefrom a physicist’s perspective
2Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
This talk: Void where prohibited, limitations and restrictions applyThis talk: Void where prohibited, limitations and restrictions apply
Technology (i.e., how do we make them?) vs. electronic operation (i.e., how do they work and how do we make them better?)
Too much to cover Talk about what I know Major omissions (that is, a disclaimer*):
• Doping: Diffusion (theory and technology), ion implantation, high-doping effects• Lithography, possibly a “technology enabler”: Optical, contact, phase-shift, X-ray…• Metallization: Deposition/growth, DAMASCENE, electromigration• Etching: Wet vs. dry, RIE, plasma• Film growth: Epitaxy, CVD, PE-CVD, MBE, ALD,…• Contacts: Silicides, salicides, FUSI,…• Layout issues: Isolation (deep/shallow trenches), cross-talk, latch-up, design rules,
DRAM/SRAM design, power,…• …
3Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
History of the MOSFET? What’s that?History of the MOSFET? What’s that?
Thanks to Jiseok Kim for having put me on the spot…. It’s OK… I wish him good luck in getting his PhD wherever ELSE he may wish to get it….
I’m not sure what he meant by “history”… So, let’s start from the beginning….
4Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
The main character of our story: The MOSFETThe main character of our story: The MOSFET
No other human artifact has been fabricated in larger numbers (except perhaps nails?) “…some consider it one of the most important technological breakthroughs in human
history…” (Wikipedia, the source of all human knowledge)
5Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
Timeline ITimeline I
1925: Julius Edgar Lilienfeld’s MESFET patent1935: Oskar Heil’s MOSFET patent194?: Unpublished Bell Labs MESFET1947: Ge BJT (Bardeen, Brattain, Shockley, Bell Labs)1954: Si BJT (Teal, Bell Labs)1960: MOSFET (Atalla&Khang, Bell Labs)1961: Integrated circuit (Kilby, TI)1963: CMOS (Sah&Wanlass, Fairchild)1964: Commercial CMOS IC (RCA)1965: DRAM (Fairchild)1968: Poly-Si gate (Faggin&Klein, Fairchild)1968: 1-FET DRAM cell (Dennard, IBM)1971: UV EPROM (Frohman, Intel)1971: Full CPU in chip, Intel 8008 (Faggin, Intel)1974: Digital watch1974: Scaling theory (Gänsslen&Dennard, IBM)1978: Use of ion implanter1978: Flotox EEPROM (Perlegos, Intel)1980: Ion-implanted CMOS IC1980: Plasma etching1984: Scaling theory <0.25 μm (Baccarani, U. Bologna)1986: 0.1 μm Si MOSFET (Sai-Halasz, IBM)1991: CMOS replaces BJT also at high-end1993: DGFET scalable to 30 nm (theory, Frank et al.)2007: Non-SiO2 (HfO2–based) MOSFET (Intel)
1955: Si, Ge conduction band (Herring&Vogt) Deformation-potential, high-field (Bardeen&Shockley)1957: BTE in semiconductors – impurities (Luttinger&Kohn), phonons (Price, Argyles)1964: Band structure calculations (Hermann) Monte Carlo for semiconductors (Kurosawa) 1965: Linear-parabolic oxidation model (Deal&Grove)1966: Observations of 2DEG (Fowler, Fang, Stiles, Stern,..)1967: Conductance technique (Nicollian&Goetzberger)
1974: DDE device simulator (Cottrell&Buturla)1975: Quantum Hall Effect predicted (Ando)
1979: Quantum Hall Effect observed (von Klitzing)1981: Identification of native Nit: Pb-centers (Poindexter) Full-band MC (Shichijo&Hess) 1982: Fractional QHE observed (Störmer&Tsui, Laughlin)1988: Full-band MC device simulator (MVF&Laux)1992: NEGF device simulator (Lake, Klimeck, et al.)
Technology Physics/Technology Physics/SimulationsSimulations
6Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
Timeline IITimeline II
1975: 20 μm (tOX≈250 nm)
1980: 10 μm (tOX≈150 nm)
1985: 5 μm (tOX≈70 nm)
1990: 1 μm (tOX≈15 nm)
1995: 0.35 μm (tOX≈8 nm)
2000: 0.18 μm (tOX≈3 nm)
2005: 65 nm (tOX≈1.4 nm)
2010: 32 nm (tOX≈1.2 nm?)
SiO2 growth and instability: Ions, traps, interface
SiO2 instability during operation: electron trapping, NBTI
Hot electron effects: oxide trapping, VT shift, breakdown
Scaling: Short-channel effects (SCE), oxide, dopants
….life is good…
Scaling: SCE, insulatorLeakage: InsulatorPower: Alternative devices
Feature size Main ProblemsFeature size Main Problems
↑
↓
7Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
Timeline IIITimeline III
1975: 20 μm
1980: 10 μm
1985: 5 μm
1990: 1 μm
1995: 0.5 μm
2000: 0.25 μm
2005: 63 nm
2010: 32 nm
2015: 16 nm ?
Feature size Transport PhysicsFeature size Transport Physics
Drift-Diffusion
Hydrodynamic/Energy transport
Boltzmann
Quantum?
↓
↕
↓
8Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
Transistor prehistoryTransistor prehistory
1935 Heil’s patent 1947 First BJT 1960 Atalla’s MOSFET Bardeen, Shockley, Brattain (Bell Labs)
9Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
IC PrehistoryIC Prehistory
1961 Kilby’s first IC 1962 Fairchild IC 1964 First MOS IC (RCA)
10Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
Moore’s law prehistoryMoore’s law prehistory
Gordon Moore 1965: Cost vs time Moore’s law 1960-1975
11Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
Moore’s lawMoore’s law
Number of transistors/die & feature size vs time
12Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
Microprocessor prehistoryMicroprocessor prehistory
1965: Federico Faggin 1968: Fairchild 8-bit μP 1971: Intel 8080 μP
13Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
Memory prehistory: DRAM and EPROMMemory prehistory: DRAM and EPROM
Bob Dennard (1-FET DRAM cell, 1968; 1971 Frohman’s UV-erasable EPROM scaling theory with Fritz Gänsslen,1974) (written by avalanche injection)
14Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
More historical trendsMore historical trends
J. Armstrong (ca.1989)
15Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
Timeline II once moreTimeline II once more
1975: 20 μm (tOX≈250 nm)
1980: 10 μm (tOX≈150 nm)
1985: 5 μm (tOX≈70 nm)
1990: 1 μm (tOX≈15 nm)
1995: 0.35 μm (tOX≈8 nm)
2000: 0.18 μm (tOX≈3 nm)
2005: 65 nm (tOX≈1.4 nm)
2010: 32 nm (tOX≈1.2 nm?)
SiO2 growth and instability: Ions, traps, interface
SiO2 instability during operation: electron trapping, NBTI
Hot electron effects: oxide trapping, VT shift, breakdown
Scaling: Short-channel effects (SCE), oxide, dopants
….life is good…
Scaling: SCE, insulatorLeakage: InsulatorPower: Alternative devices
Feature size Main ProblemsFeature size Main Problems
↑
↓
16Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
SiOSiO22 growth and instability growth and instability
Ionic contamination (K, Na): Unrecognized source of early problems Fixed traps (oxygen vacancies?), especially near Si-SiO2 interface Growth kinetics: Deal & Grove model: linear (reaction-limited) and parabolic (diffusion-limited)
regions; dry and wet oxidation rates Interface-state passivation: Al (with H) Post Metallization Anneal (PMA, Peter Balk):
H2O → H+ + OH-
Si- + H+ → Si-H
Andrew Grove (left), Bruce Deal (center) and Ed Snow (left)
Ed Snow’s cartoon, ca. 1966 about SiO2 instabilities
17Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
SiOSiO22 growth and instability, as-grown and during operation growth and instability, as-grown and during operation
CV-plot instabilities (VFB or VT shifts): Ions (mainly Na+ and K+, contamination in chambers, handling, gases, etc…) Interface states generation (stretch-out, Lai, Feigl, Sandia group, Technion, Siemens,…) Electron and hole traps (DiMaria, Young, Feigl):
• Neutral: H2O-related (mainly OH-) in wet oxides, radiation induced in processing, σ ≈ 10-15 to 10-17 cm2
• Charged-attractive: Ionic contamination, σ ≈ 10-13 cm2 , field-dependent• Charged-repulsive: Radiation-induced, σ ≈ 10-19 cm2
18Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
SiOSiO22 instability during operation instability during operation
Anomalous Positive Charge (APC): Caused by electron injection (Avalanche, Fowler-Nordheim) and also hole injection Related to Hydrogen: Boron deactivation in p-type substrates (Sah) Related to hole back-injection from anode? Dependent on gate-metal workfunction -
Au vs. Al vs. Mg (MVF&Weinberg, Chenming Hu) Occurring at Si-SiO2 interface even under negative bias: Neutral species such as
solitons, H2 diffusion…? (Weinberg). Connected to wear-out and breakdown (DiMaria, Stathis) Strongly correlated to interface traps (Pb-centers, Lenahan, Poindexter) Oxygen deficiency (Revesz)? Broken Si-H bonds (Si-D experiment, Lyding&Hess)?
Negative Bias Temperature Instability (NBTI): No time to discuss, but big issue in high-κ dielectrics
19Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
Understanding SiOUnderstanding SiO22 degradation: Two approaches degradation: Two approaches
MVF and DiMaria, INFOS 1989
20Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
SiOSiO22 growth and instability: Injection techniques and damage generation growth and instability: Injection techniques and damage generation
21Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
SiOSiO22 growth and instability: Electronic transport in SiO growth and instability: Electronic transport in SiO22
Electrons: Long-standing problems of high-field electron transport in polar insulators
(Karel Thornber’s 1970 PhD Thesis with Richard Feynman) LO-phonon scattering run-away connected to dielectric breakdown Experimental observations do not show predicted run-away at 2-3 MV/cm Umklapp scattering with acoustic phonons keeps electron energy under
control (MVF, DiMaria, Theis, Kirtley, Brorson, 1985) Holes: Small polaron (self-trapping) transport (Bob Hughes’ 1977 time-of-flight
experiments explained by David Emin’s 1975 theory).MVF et al., PR B (1985)
22Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
Hot electron effects in constant-voltage-scaled MOSFETsHot electron effects in constant-voltage-scaled MOSFETs
Two problems: Understand origin/spectrum of hot carrier Understand nature/process of damage generation
Practical problems: Unnecessary and expensive burn-in Wall Street “big glitch” in 1994
Theory: Shockley’s “lucky-electron model” widespread in EE community in the ’80s
(publicized by Chenming Hu, UCB): Even the Gods can be wrong at times… Full-band models (Sam Shichijo & Karl Hess, MVF&Laux, then others) Basic physics of electron scattering, injection into SiO2, etc. The mid-1990s “pseudo-full-band” frenzy (Bologna, UNC, Udine, Lille, TU-
Vienna, Aachen,..): Gain without pain… didn’t work…
23Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
Electron injection into SiOElectron injection into SiO22
MVF, Laux, and Crabbé, JAP (1996)
24Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
Timeline III once moreTimeline III once more
1975: 20 μm
1980: 10 μm
1985: 5 μm
1990: 1 μm
1995: 0.5 μm
2000: 0.23 μm
2005: 63 nm
2010: 32 nm
2015: 16 nm ?
Feature size Transport PhysicsFeature size Transport Physics
Drift-Diffusion
Hydrodynamic/Energy transport
Boltzmann
Quantum?
↓
↕
↓
25Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
Electron transport in Si at 3 eV: A big headacheElectron transport in Si at 3 eV: A big headache
Effective-mass approximation valid only for E ≈ a few kBT Scattering rates at E ≥ {a few kBT} totally unknown Moments of the BTE (DDE, Hydrodynamic) not sufficiently accurate
26Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
Electron transport in Si at 3 eV ca. 1992: A depressing picture…Electron transport in Si at 3 eV ca. 1992: A depressing picture…
The state-of-the art circa 1992
27Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
A good example of experiments-theory feedbackA good example of experiments-theory feedback
XPS (McFeely, Cartier, Eklund at the Brookhaven IBM synchrotron line, 1993) Carrier separation (DiMaria, 1992)
Cartier et al. APL (1993)
28Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
Electron transport in Si at 3 eV ca. 1994: Much better…Electron transport in Si at 3 eV ca. 1994: Much better…
The state-of-the art circa 1994
MVF et al., JAP (1996)
29Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
1980 → 1985 → 1988 → 1991 → 1994 → 1999 → 2003 …LGATE = 10 μm 5 μm 2.5 μm 1.3 μm 0.63 μm 0.25 μm 130 nm …. 1980 → 1985 → 1988 → 1991 → 1994 → 1999 → 2003 …LGATE = 10 μm 5 μm 2.5 μm 1.3 μm 0.63 μm 0.25 μm 130 nm …. 1980 → 1985 → 1988 → 1991 → 1994 → 1999 → 2003 …LGATE = 10 μm 5 μm 2.5 μm 1.3 μm 0.63 μm 0.25 μm 130 nm …. 1980 → 1985 → 1988 → 1991 → 1994 → 1999 → 2003 …LGATE = 10 μm 5 μm 2.5 μm 1.3 μm 0.63 μm 0.25 μm 130 nm ….
1980 → 1985 → 1988 → 1991 → 1994 → 1999 → 2003 …LGATE = 10 μm 5 μm 2.5 μm 1.3 μm 0.63 μm 0.25 μm 130 nm …. 1980 → 1985 → 1988 → 1991 → 1994 → 1999 → 2003 …LGATE = 10 μm 5 μm 2.5 μm 1.3 μm 0.63 μm 0.25 μm 130 nm …. 1980 → 1985 → 1988 → 1991 → 1994 → 1999 → 2003 …LGATE = 10 μm 5 μm 2.5 μm 1.3 μm 0.63 μm 0.25 μm 130 nm ….
ScalingScaling
Shrink dimensions maintaining aspect-ratio Must shrink electrostatic features as well (depletion regions→ doping level and profiles)
↔1 μm
30Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
ScalingScaling
Electrostatic integrity (Well-tempered MOSFET, Antoniadis): SOI, DGFETs, FinFETs, NW-FETs Reduce power, an example: The tunnel FET n (tFET) Reduced leakage: High-κ gate-insulators Improve (or, at least, maintain) performance: Alternative channel materials?
31Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
Scaling – Electrostatic integrity: SOIScaling – Electrostatic integrity: SOI
22 nm strained-Si nFET: SOI to prevent punch- through, strained Si to improve performance (B. Doris, IBM, 2006)
32Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
Scaling – Electrostatic integrity: Double gate FETScaling – Electrostatic integrity: Double gate FET
AIST (2003)
33Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
Scaling – Electrostatic integrity: Multibridge FETs (TEM, SEM)Scaling – Electrostatic integrity: Multibridge FETs (TEM, SEM)
Samsung Electronics Ltd. (2005)
34Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
Multibridge FETs: Process flowMultibridge FETs: Process flow
Samsung Electronics Ltd. (2005)
35Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
Scaling – Electrostatic integrity: FinFETsScaling – Electrostatic integrity: FinFETs
Freescale Semiconductors
36Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
Scaling – Electrostatic integrity: Si Nanowire TransistorsScaling – Electrostatic integrity: Si Nanowire Transistors
KAIST (2007)
37Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
Scaling – Reduce power: The tunnel-FET (tFET)Scaling – Reduce power: The tunnel-FET (tFET)
InAs Tunnel-FET: structure (M. Haines, UMass 2009)
InAs Tunnel-FET: pair generation rate (M. Haines, UMass 2009)
Stand-by power dissipation approaching “on” power dissipation… Cannot continue like this!
60 mV/dec → ΔVG ≈ 250 mV for Ioff/Ion ≈ 10-4
VT + ΔVG ≥ 0.45 V at 300 K (nFETs) Must increase slope (i.e., go below 60 mV/dec) if
we want the `Green’ FET (term coined by C. Hu) Problem: Ion too low in all attempts (DARPA to
IBM, UCB, Stanford,…) so far
38Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
Scaling – Reduce leakageScaling – Reduce leakage
Off-leakage: Accepted value increasing: Ioff/Ion ≈ 10-4 for the 32 nm node (used to be 10-6 or lower!) Connected to electrostatic integrity (punch-through, junction leakage, gate leakage)
Gate leakage: C = εox/tox, so if tox has reached its limit (≈ 1nm, too aggressive so far), scale εox:
High-κ insulators such as HfO2, ZrO2, Al2O3, etc. Problem: Low mobility in high-κ MOS systems (scattering with interfacial optical phonons) Metals with different workfunction needed!
Hi-res TEM from Susanne Stemmer, UCSB MVF et al., JAP (2001)
39Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
Scaling – Reduce leakage: Gate oxide scaling at IntelScaling – Reduce leakage: Gate oxide scaling at Intel
C. Hu et al., IEDM (1996)
40Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
Scaling – Improve performanceScaling – Improve performance
Taken for granted early on (ca. 1986) Slow realization that early optimism was unjustified
MVF and S. Laux, EDL (1987)
41Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
Scaling – Improve performanceScaling – Improve performance
Look for high-velocity, low-effective mass semiconductors… or should we? Problems:
High-energy (≈ 0.5 eV ≈ 20 kBT) DOS and rates identical in most fcc semiconductors Low DOS → loss of transconductance Low DOS → smaller density in quasi-ballistic conditions → lower Ion
Low DOS → less scattering in source → source starvation
42Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
Scaling – Improve performance: DOS bottleneckScaling – Improve performance: DOS bottleneck
MVF and S. Laux, TED (1991)
43Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
Scaling – Improve performance: Strained SiScaling – Improve performance: Strained Si
MVF and S. Laux, JAP (1996)
44Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
Scaling – Improve performance: Strained SiScaling – Improve performance: Strained Si
IBM 32 nm strained (tensile) Si nFET on SiGe virtual substrate
Intel 45 nm strained (compressive) Si pFET with regrown SiGe S/D
45Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
Why are sub-40 nm devices getting slower?Why are sub-40 nm devices getting slower?
Power dissipation → reduce frequency or fry! Parasitics play a bigger role (Antoniadis, MIT) Higher oxide fields squeeze carriers against interface → increased scattering
(Antoniadis, MIT) Intrinsic Coulomb effects!
MVF and S. Laux, JAP (2001)
46Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
Why are sub-40 nm devices getting slower? The effect of e-e interactionsWhy are sub-40 nm devices getting slower? The effect of e-e interactions
47Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
Sub-32 nm Si CMOS devices: Where do we stand?Sub-32 nm Si CMOS devices: Where do we stand?
22 nm: Planar (Intel), SOIs (IBM), FinFETs doable but too expensive. 16 nm: Possibly FinFETs, still Si Below 16 nm:
Ge pFETs and III-V nFETs (IMEC)? A pipedream… Ge nFETs still lousy, improvements promised at Dec 2009 IEDM, we’ll see III-Vs in the works:
•MIT (del Alamo): Great HEMTs, but huge S/D-gate gap not easily scalable•SRC/UCSB MOSFETs: Wait and see…
48Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
The future and “post Si CMOS” devices: What do we need?The future and “post Si CMOS” devices: What do we need?
Three terminal devices (Josephson computers taught us something…!) At least some gain (preserving signal over billions of devices, beating kBT) At least a few devices must have high Ion to charge external loads On/off behavior (Landauer’s water faucet analogy) Low power, possibly non-charge-switching (spins, QCA,…). BUT: If we use ≈ kBT to
switch, the heat bath will switch for us even if we do not want to… Notable historic failures:
Josephson: Excessively strict tolerances (on insulators), complicated 2-terminal logic SETs: No output current (`a slight impedance matching issue’, as someone kindly put
it….) Optical computers: Photons are huge! Clumsy 3-terminal devices Resonant tunneling diodes and multi-state logic: Non off-off switches, impossible to
control manufacturing tolerances High hopes:
Nanowires: They are just thin and narrow FinFETs Long shots:
Spins and QCA: Low power but no gain CNT: No current in single tube, must use many in parallel III-Vs: Battle already lost in 1991 (DOS bottleneck),,, why bother again?
49Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
And by popular demand… The future of “post-Si CMOS” logic technologyAnd by popular demand… The future of “post-Si CMOS” logic technology
50Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
More slides about the lunatic fringe….More slides about the lunatic fringe….
51Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
The lunatic fringe: Exploratory devicesThe lunatic fringe: Exploratory devices
52Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
The lunatic fringe: Exploratory devicesThe lunatic fringe: Exploratory devices
53Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
The lunatic fringe: Exploratory devicesThe lunatic fringe: Exploratory devices
Carbon NanoTube (CNT) FETIFF-Jülich, Germany (2004)
54Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
CNT TransistorsCNT Transistors
IFF-Jülich, Germany (2004)
55Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering MVF October 2, 2009
CNT FET inverterCNT FET inverter
J. Appenzeller, IBM