Version 3 (modified by kim568, 6 years ago) (diff)


We have established that the simulation results (I-V) for Si using nanowireclassic match experimental results very well, but the results for InAs differ by an order of magnitude.
To rectify this problem, we are doing the following:

  • Sriram is working with the material database in PROPHET. Si has a large number of parameters, while InAs has only a few. By adding some of the missing parameters to the dbase entry for InAs, using published InAs values, we hope to close the gap between experimental and theoretical results.
  • Kim is working with the equations in PROPHET, to see if any assumptions of Si or hardwired Si values exist. The Dessis manual provided by Abhijeet is very useful for the theoretical background.
  • TODO
    • Use GaAs parameters from PROPHET as a model for InAs parameters
    • Start with GaAs wire -- see if results are reasonable
  • Done

I (Sriram) ran some simulations for GaAs and have noticed that it provides us with an order of magnitude higher current values as compared to the same parameter values for InAs. There is clearly an effect of the well-defined GaAs database on the simulations. Whether these values correspond to experimental results we still have to see, but these results now take me to the next step of going into the GaAs material database and copying all the database entries in the GaAs database not in the InAs database to the InAs database. I will then run the simulations and see if it gives me results similar to the InAs experimental results provided to me by Thai. We will in the mean while check the accuracy of the GaAs simulations.