Support

Support Options

Submit a Support Ticket

 

Tags: tool:pcpbt

Questions & Answers (1-13 of 13)

  1. Was wondering how one can plot two relationships on the same graph. Thank you.

    Closed | Responses: 0

    http://nanohub.org/answers/question/1241

  2. How is the k (horizontal location for green dots) calculated?

    Closed | Responses: 0

    I looked through the MATLAB code at https://nanohub.org/resources/9203 and it does not produce anything like the...

    http://nanohub.org/answers/question/986

  3. Is it working for triangular barrier?

    Closed | Responses: 0

    I tried to use 5 barriers simulations to simulate a single triangular barrier transmission. I set different barrier height for each barrier, and set the inter-barrier region witdh to be 0. Why...

    http://nanohub.org/answers/question/844

  4. what does the tool improvement of version 1.1.9 really mean?

    Open | Responses: 1

    1.1.9 – A problem pertaining to the geometry adjustment when a tight-binding calculation is called, has been corrected.

    i think a bit more description is really needed. Is the...

    http://nanohub.org/answers/question/260

  5. the lattice constant for tight binding should be really used in the generation of the heterostructure

    Open | Responses: 2

    Right now the lattice constant is set to the GaAs lattice constant of 0.56. That means that the barriers...

    http://nanohub.org/answers/question/257

  6. Effective mass variation in pcpbt is not working correctly for tight binding

    Open | Responses: 2

    For a double barrier structure doubling the barrier height or doubling the effective mass should roughly have the same effect (for low lying energy states, say when the barrier is already high...

    http://nanohub.org/answers/question/256

  7. the tight binding calculations do not yet allow for a change in effective masses

    Open | Responses: 3

    It would be great if the tool would also allow for changing effective masses along the device. Barrier materials have typically different effective masses from well materials. It would also be...

    http://nanohub.org/answers/question/222

  8. single barrier choice results in no output

    Open | Responses: 1

    I thought this had gotten fixed in the code, but again the tool does not create any outputs when a single barrier is chosen

    http://nanohub.org/answers/question/170

  9. compare a tight binding calculation to the analytical expansion methodin this tool

    Open | Responses: 2

    The tool solves the analytical expansions through transfer matrices to compute transmission coefficients. The RTD tool for example solves the similar problem in a single effective mass...

    http://nanohub.org/answers/question/164

  10. for 100 barriers the resonance finder has some problems

    Open | Responses: 1

    It appears that the resonance finder works quite well, but I have a feeling that the resonances themselves are not counted properly. For example at 100 barriers one can see that the second...

    http://nanohub.org/answers/question/163

  11. Feedback about the progress in the resonance finding would be great –

    Open | Responses: 1

    If the resonance refinement happens in various stages it would be good to report these stages as a progress meter in the calculation

    http://nanohub.org/answers/question/162

  12. transmission and reflection coefficients on exchanged axes

    Open | Responses: 1

    It would be convenient for educational purposes if the transmisison and reflection coefficients could also be plotted on interchanged axes where enegy is on the vertical axis , just like the...

    http://nanohub.org/answers/question/153

  13. the tool does not create transmission coefficients for a single barrier case

    Open | Responses: 1

    neither the band-edge diagram nor the transmission coefficient are shown. It seems like this tool should be able to handle a single barrier. Maybe there is a simple coding problem

    http://nanohub.org/answers/question/152

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.