nanoHUB.org will be intermittently unavailable Saturday, January 3, for scheduled maintenance. All tool sessions will be expired. We apologize for any inconvenience that may occur. close

Support

Support Options

Submit a Support Ticket

 

Questions and Answers

0 Like

Shaahin G Shirazi

Why is the conductance of CNTs so high in this tool?

The conductance of CNTs in the curves extracted after simulation process is around 1e+7 Siemens or higher. But we know that the conductance of a ballistic SWNT with perfect contacts is (4e^2)/h which is equal to 155 micro Siemens. Is there an acceptable reason for these high values?

Best Regards

Report abuse

Chosen Answer

  1. 0 Dislike

    Eric Pop

    Thanks for pointing this out. You have found a small bug in the code. The conductance is calculated as eq 1 in our paper, Y. Zhao, A. Liao, E. Pop, IEEE Elec. Device Lett. 30, 1078 (2009), but the units are incorrectly listed here. The “conductance” plot window is actually plotting just mu*n, but the total G=q*mu*n/L (where n is in units of electrons per unit length, 1/m). So the “conductance” plot needs to be multiplied by a constant factor of q/L ~ 4e-14 C/m here.

    As a small side note, the 4q2/h conductance is for 4 ballistic channels in a SWNT. If multiple subbands are involved (i.e. Fermi level is in 2nd subband or beyond) and all are ballistic then the conductance can be higher than 4q2/h.

    In any case, we will need to update the plot window to reflect the missing q/L pre-factor. Otherwise please check the “guts” (physics) of the model against our paper listed above, and let us know if anything else seems odd. Thanks again,

    Eric Pop Assistant Professor Electrical and Computer Engineering University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 2258 Micro and Nanotechnology Lab T: +1.217.244.2070 W: http://poplab.ece.illinois.edu

    Reply Report abuse

    Please login to answer the question.

0 Responses

No other responses made.

nanoHUB.org, a resource for nanoscience and nanotechnology, is supported by the National Science Foundation and other funding agencies. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.