-
compare a tight binding calculation to the analytical expansion methodin this tool
Q&A|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 approach....
https://nanohub.org/answers/question/164
-
Effective mass variation in pcpbt is not working correctly for tight binding
Q&A|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...
https://nanohub.org/answers/question/256
-
Feedback about the progress in the resonance finding would be great –
Q&A|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
https://nanohub.org/answers/question/162
-
for 100 barriers the resonance finder has some problems
Q&A|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 band...
https://nanohub.org/answers/question/163
-
How is the k (horizontal location for green dots) calculated?
Q&A|Closed | Responses: 0
I looked through the MATLAB code at https://nanohub.org/resources/9203 and it does not produce anything like the...
https://nanohub.org/answers/question/986
-
Is it working for triangular barrier?
Q&A|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...
https://nanohub.org/answers/question/844
-
single barrier choice results in no output
Q&A|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
https://nanohub.org/answers/question/170
-
the lattice constant for tight binding should be really used in the generation of the heterostructure
Q&A|Open | Responses: 2
Right now the lattice constant is set to the GaAs lattice constant of 0.56. That means that the barriers should...
https://nanohub.org/answers/question/257
-
the tight binding calculations do not yet allow for a change in effective masses
Q&A|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...
https://nanohub.org/answers/question/222
-
the tool does not create transmission coefficients for a single barrier case
Q&A|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
https://nanohub.org/answers/question/152
-
transmission and reflection coefficients on exchanged axes
Q&A|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...
https://nanohub.org/answers/question/153
-
Was wondering how one can plot two relationships on the same graph. Thank you.
Q&A|Closed | Responses: 0
https://nanohub.org/answers/question/1241
-
what does the tool improvement of version 1.1.9 really mean?
Q&A|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...
https://nanohub.org/answers/question/260
-
ABACUS—Introduction to Semiconductor Devices
When we hear the term semiconductor device, we may think first of the transistors in PCs or video game consoles, but transistors are the basic component in all of the electronic devices we use in...
https://nanohub.org/wiki/EduSemiconductor2
-
Benjamin P Haley
Ben received his B.S. in Physics from Purdue in 1998. He worked for Cummins Engine Co and Intel before attending graduate school at UC Davis. He received a Masters in Engineering Applied Science in...
https://nanohub.org/members/17286
-
Compare tight binding methods to Transfer Matrix methods
Q&A|Closed | Responses: 4
Actually, I am a new user here for PCPBT tools. I don't understand the difference between tight binding methods to Transfer Matrix methods. I have given input and received potential...
https://nanohub.org/answers/question/2591
-
How do I simulate the step potential well in Piece Wise Constant Tool?
Q&A|Closed | Responses: 1
For example x>a/2 V(x)= 0, x<a/2 V(x) = 0.3eV
https://nanohub.org/answers/question/2183
-
Piece-Wise Constant Potential Barriers Tool: First-Time User Guide
01 Jun 2009 | | Contributor(s):: Samarth Agarwal, Gerhard Klimeck
This supporting document for the Piece-Wise Constant Potential Barriers Tool serves as a first-time user guide. Some basic ideas about quantum mechanical tunneling are introduced in addition to how device geometry influences tunneling probability. The transfer matrix and tight-binding...
-
Samarth Agarwal
Samarth Agarwal got a PhD. in Physics from Purdue University in 2010. His work involved band-gap engineering for solar cells and exploring novel devices for reduction in power consumption of...
https://nanohub.org/members/10617