 Open Access
 Total Downloads : 225
 Authors : Sagar Karalkar, Kanti Prasad, Yu Zhu, Jerod Mason, Dylan Bartle
 Paper ID : IJERTV3IS110098
 Volume & Issue : Volume 03, Issue 11 (November 2014)
 Published (First Online): 06112014
 ISSN (Online) : 22780181
 Publisher Name : IJERT
 License: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Analytical vs Experimental Determination of Thermal Resistance with Scalable DC HEMT Model
Sagar Karalkar and Kanti Prasad Electrical & Computer Engineering University of Massachusetts Lowell Lowell, MA 01854, USA
Yu Zhu, Jerod Mason, and Dylan Bartle Skyworks Solutions Inc.
Woburn, MA 01801, USA
Abstract This paper presents a new approach for extracting thermal resistance analytically and comparing it with experi mental data along with scalable DC HEMT models for devices with varying Nf and Ugw. Analytical approach to predict the devices temperature increase distribution and calculate the thermal resistance with the help of that is shown. Temperature profile across the fingers with varying devices is carried out and compared with the experimental data. In this way, the analytical values for thermal resistance obtained with the temperature distribution and thermal values used for fitting the output, transfer characteristics are very close to each other and a very good fitting of each device have been achieved.
Index terms HEMTs, thermal resistance, optimization, tun ing, circuit simulation, equivalent circuit, semiconductor device modeling and switching application

INTRODUCTION
The thermal property of solid state devices has been very important in designing of the circuit. GaAs IC suffer even more from thermal effects since the thermal conductivity of GaAs is very less to that of silicon. HEMT is widely used in monolithic microwave integrated circuit (MMIC). In order to achieve the best circuit performance, device size needs to be optimized. An accurate scaling model will allow circuit de signers to get the desired performance by choosing the right size devices. With the increase in the power density of semi conductor devices, a scalable model with scalable thermal resistance becomes critical for predicting the thermal perfor mance of different sized devices in a broad, dynamic operat ing range. [1][3].
Many techniques have been reported for measuring the thermal resistance of the devices, which are IRM [4], and pulsed electrical method [5][7], liquid crystal thermography for determining the hot spot [8] and dc electrical method which is used for measuring the thermal resistance using temperature dependence of gate metal resistivity [9].
In this paper, a novel approach is proposed for determina tion of thermal resistance by analytical approach and compar ing it with the experimental data. The temperature increase is analytically solved with the rectangular heat source and the compared the experimental temperature increase of each de vice. The temperature behavior is seen across each finger of
the device. The thermal resistance value used to fit the output and transfer characteristics of all the devices are compared with the analytical approach.

EXPERIMENT
Pseudomorphic AlGaAs/InGaAs/GaAs HEMT with groundsignalground test pads were fabricated on semi insu lating GaAs substrates. The temperature increase of each de vice were measured with the help of QFI thermal imag ing..The transfer and output performances were measured via probe station. Ten devices with different geometry were measured and the data was recorded for individual devices. The ten devices with different geometries are shown below in Table I.
Nf
Ugw(Âµm)
Total Gate Width
5
143
.715mm
7
143
1mm
14
143
2mm
21
143
3mm
24
143
3.4mm
5
25
.125mm
5
50
.25mm
5
75
.375mm
5
100
.5mm
5
200
1mm
TABLE I: Device Geometry
In table I, Nf is the number of fingers and Ugw is the unit gate width. Five devices with Varying Nf and other five de vices with varying Ugw are shown above. The output per formance was measured in the bias range of Vg = 1 to 0V and Vd = 0 to 3 V, transfer performance was measured in the range of Vd = 1 to 3 V and Vg = 1 to 0.5V and Ig Vg (diode output) was measured in the range of Vg 3 to 1.2V with Vd constant. The device selfheating measurement of each device was carried from 1 to 3V.
Fig 1: Device 1mm (Varying Nf)
Device (mm)
Voltage (V)
Power (W)
Temp measured
Value (0C)
0.715
1
0.1
89.8
0.715
2
0.28
97.3
0.715
3
0.36
127
1
1
0.12
90.16
1
2
0.34
112.3
1
3
0.45
133.1
2
1
0.15
91.5
2
2
0.48
114.1
2
3
0.69
152.4
3
1
0.19
92.45
3
2
0.72
120.8
3
3
1.02
176.1
3.4
1
0.23
95.89
3.4
2
0.86
126.8
3.4
3
1.23
184.3
TABLE II: Measured Temperature (Devices with Varying Nf)
Fig 2: Device 1mm (Varying Ugw)
Device (mm)
Voltage (V)
Power (W)
Temp measured
Value (0C)
0.125
1
0.02
88.3
0.125
2
0.052
95.7
0.125
3
0.069
103.2
0.25
1
0.03
89.45
0.25
2
0.084
97.6
0.25
3
0.108
107.8
0.375
1
0.04
89.49
0.375
2
0.116
103.22
0.375
3
0.144
110.07
0.5
1
0.055
90.184
0.5
2
0.14
104.79
0.5
3
0.18
114.63
1
1
0.1
90.85
1
2
0.4
110.77
1
3
0.54
127.61
TABLE III: Mesured Temperature (Devices with Varying Ugw)

ANALYTICAL APPROACH
A rectangular heat source is located at some depth z, with corners of heat source are at (x1,y1,z),(x2,y1,z),(x1,y2,z) and (x2,y2,z). The elemental temperature increase (T) at point source (x,y,z) is given as [14]:
T QT
4. .k.r
dx' dy'
(a)
T(r)
QT b
x2 ,
y2 ,z
bx1,
y1,z
s
r (x x')2 ( y y')2 (z z )2
4. .k
– bx1,y2 ,z bx2 ,y1,z
Where r is the distance between the heat source and the temperature distribution in the infinite medium at (x,y,z). The temperature distribution T(r) is obtained by integrating equa tion (a) where QT is power per unit area
x2 y2 Q
Where QT is the power density per unit area, k is the thermal conductivity. Where QT is P / WL.
To check the temperature increase distribution for each de vice at the end of the substrate, we need to incorporate the boundary conditions [14] equation (e) for upper and (f) for
T(r) T
x y 4. .k.r
(b)
bottom surface of the substrate.
1 1
Q x2y2
d (x)d (y)
T (r)
T(r) T
4. .k x y
x2 y2 z2
(c)
0
z z0
(e)
1 1
Where x = x – x, y = y – y, z = z z, x1 = x x1, y1 = y y1, x2 = x x2, y2 = y y2Integrating equation (c)
T (r)(x, y, z d) 0
(f)
with respect to y
With the help of method of images [14] shown in the figure3
Q y2
d (y)
4. .k y
T(r) T
1
x2 y2 z2
T(r)
QT
4. .k
logy
x2 y2 z2 y2
Y1
(d)
Now integrating equation d with respect to x i.e without solving for the limit for previous relation [14].
Q x2
T
2 2 2
T(r)
4. .k
log y
x1
x y
z
d(x)
T(r)
QT
4. .k
a
b
y2 x2
y1 x1
a(x, z) ztan1 x x
z
b(x, y,z) xlog y

ylogx
x2 y2 z2
x2 y2 z2
Fig3: Method of Images for determining the temp distribution
1 xy
– ztan
z x2 y2 z2
The original heat source is located at some depth z, the mirror image is located the same z depth above the center line, which implies one is at + direction and the other one is at negative direction. In this study with the figure below, all
From above equation we can see that term a does not
have any y dependency so the whole term a can be neg lected and we are left with only term b. Therefore the tem perature distribution after integral value is given as
the heat sources above the center line are negative distances, whereas the heat sources located below the center line are positive distances. The overall heat source addition at the center is names as 0 which is the addition of both the sources to obtain the boundary condition to be satisfied at the
top surface. In order to satisfy the boundary condition at z = d where the temperature distribution tends to zero, 2 heat sources are added at distance 2d. The 2 heat sources (1) lo cated at distance 2d are negative heat sources so that they cancel with the heat sources located at center, to get the tem perature increase zero at distance d i.e. ( = 0 in figure). As a result of this the second boundary condition is satisfied, but due to this the first boundary condition is not satisfied. In order to satisfy the first boundary condition, we need to add two same negative heat sources at negative distance through mirror image. This procedure continues and is infinite long to satisfy both the conditions. Experiment was tried to carry out for varying n i.e. number of heat sources located at different distances. With n (no of heat sources) = 100 we can see it is as close to as zero at the bottom surface at z =d shown in the figures below. The temperature increase distribution shown is for horizontal axis i.e along the x axis in the infinite medium.
Fig 4: varying n, z=0.01*106
Fig 5: varying n, z=d=635*10^6
n
temp increase at bottom surface
0
1.2492
10
0.059611
20
0.030532
50
0.012394
70
0.0088782
80
0.0077753
100
0.006228
200
0.0031218
Table IV: temperature increase with varying n


MULTI DEVICE OPTIMIZATION
A number of DC IV has been proposed for modeling of GaAs Mesfets [10][12]. Figure 6 shows the equivalent cir cuit of HEMT used in this study. Modified Angelov model has been used to predict the dc behavior [13]
Fig 6: Equivalent circuit model for HEMT
The fivediode models each with varying nf and ugw are then extracted simultaneously by performing a multidevice optimization. Tentative scaling rules with unknown coeffi cients are assumed for each sizedependent model parameter. The model parameters can then be represented with the scal ing rules, and the same model parameters for different devic es are thus correlated. Instead of the model parameters, the unknown coefficients inside the scaling rules are now defined as the optimal variables. The error function now is the sum of the difference between the measurement and simulation for all of the devices. Multi device optimizations were carried out for all the devices with varying Nf and varying Ugw i.e each of them had five sets of devices. Each of the devices had around 39 parameters, so there were five times parameters for each multi device simulations. The thermal resistance value was compared to value obtained from the experimental mea surement of each device. The optimization technique used for multidevice optimization in this study is the random and gradient optimization. Study started with random optimiza tion to have the initial values for fitting, and after that gra dient optimization type has been used.
Fig 7: Output, transfer and IgVg characteristics for Gate Width 3.4mm (Multi Device Optimization varying Nf)
Fig 8: Output, transfer and IgVg characteristics for Gate Width 0.5mm (Multi Device Optimization varying Ugw)
As shown in Figs 7 and 8, excellent matches between the measurement and simulation have been achieved for output, transfer and IgVg characteristics. The blue line is the measured data and the red one is the simulated result.
Gate Width (mm)
Rth (ohms)
Rs(ohms)
Rg (ohms)
0.125
0.70
2.99
302.24
4.94
11.21
0.25
0.70
2.99
195.01
2.78
11.32
0.375
0.70
2.99
153.62
2.07
11.43
0.5
0.70
2.99
126.01
1.71
11.55
1
0.70
2.99
72.32
1.17
12
TABLE V: Parameters extracted with multi device optimization with varying Ugw
Gate Width (mm)
Rth (ohms)
Rs(ohms)
Rg (Ohms)
0715
0.70
2.48
100.85
1.38
11.74
1
0.70
2.48
82.51
1.17
12
2
0.70
2.48
59.5
0.90
12.9
3
0.70
2.48
51.83
0.81
13.8
3.4
0.70
2.48
50.03
0.79
14.16
TABLE VI: Parameters extracted with multi device optimization with vary ing Nf
Some extracted parameters from multidevice optimization are shown in Table V and VI. The size dependent parameter follows exactly the scaling rule, and the size independent parameter keep the same value for different devices.

RESULTS
The equation derived for temperature distribution is used to find the temperature distribution profile for all the devices at different voltages with varying Nf and Ugw. The heat source position as described earlier in the equation are used as the length and unit gate width parameters to define the value along with variable to define to Nf in Matlab. The values for x1, x2, y1, y2 and z are 0.2Âµm, 0.2Âµm, 71.5Âµm, 71.5Âµm and 0.01Âµm to keep all the parameters of the same unit, so that the length of the device is 0.4Âµm which is fixed and Ugw is 143Âµm which is dependable on the device Ugw size.
Fig 9: Temp distribution of device 1mm with Nf = 7 and
Ugw = 143 at 2V.
Fig 10: Temp distribution of device 1mm with Nf = 5 and Ugw = 200 at
2V.
Tables VII and VIII show the values of each device at different voltage. Power is calculated by the simple V*I, where current for each device is recorded while performing the experiment. The analytical value extracted for each de vice at each voltage by varying Nf and Ugw is recorded. To the analytical value reference value of 850C is added in order to compare the values obtained with that of experiment, as the reference plate was at 850C while measuring the tempera ture behavior of each device. Main concentration was in the linear region of the device till 2 V.
TABLE VII: Comparison between analytical and measured Temp value for devices with Varying Nf
Device (mm) 
Voltage (V) 
Power (W) 
Analytical value (0C) 
RefTemp +850C 
Measured value (0C) 
0.715 
1 
0.1 
9.2949 
94.2989 
89.8 
0.715 
2 
0.28 
26.0258 
111.0258 
97.3 
0.715 
3 
0.36 
33.4617 
118.4617 
127 
1 
1 
0.12 
9.7822 
94.7822 
90.16 
1 
2 
0.34 
27.7162 
112.7162 
112.3 
1 
3 
0.45 
36.6832 
121.6832 
133.1 
2 
1 
0.15 
9.1398 
94.1398 
91.5 
2 
2 
0.48 
29.2473 
114.2473 
114.1 
2 
3 
0.69 
42.043 
127.043 
152.4 
3 
1 
0.19 
9.5752 
94.5752 
92.45 
3 
2 
0.72 
36.2851 
121.2851 
120.8 
3 
3 
1.02 
51.4039 
136.4039 
176.1 
3.4 
1 
0.23 
10.8346 
95.8346 
95.89 
3.4 
2 
0.86 
40.5119 
125.5119 
126.8 
3.4 
3 
1.23 
57.9414 
142.9414 
184.3 
Fig 11: Analytical vs Measured for 1mm device (varying Nf)
Device (mm) 
Voltage (V) 
Power (W) 
Analyti cal value (0C) 
Ref Temp+8 50C 
Meas ured value (0C) 
0.125 
1 
0.02 
6.0169 
91.0169 
88.3 
0.125 
2 
0.052 
15.6439 
100.643 
95.7 
0.125 
3 
0.069 
20.7583 
105.758 
103.2 
0.25 
1 
0.03 
5.8359 
90.8359 
89.45 
0.25 
2 
0.084 
16.3404 
101.340 
97.6 
0.25 
3 
0.108 
21.0091 
106.009 
107.8 
0.375 
1 
0.04 
5.9128 
90.9128 
89.49 
0.375 
2 
0.116 
17.147 
102.147 
103.22 
0.375 
3 
0.144 
21.286 
106.286 
110.07 
0.5 
1 
0.055 
6.6361 
91.6361 
90.184 
0.5 
2 
0.14 
16.8919 
101.891 
104.79 
0.5 
3 
0.18 
21.7182 
106.718 
114.63 
1 
1 
0.1 
7.2232 
92.2232 
90.85 
1 
2 
0.4 
28.8928 
113.892 
110.77 
1 
3 
0.54 
39.0053 
124.005 
127.61 
P= V * I
Rth = T / P
T = T room temp
Device (mm) 
Rth (ohms) 
0.125 
300.5 
0.25 
194.3 
0.375 
147.7 
0.5 
120.6 
1 
72.7 
TABLE IX: Rth Analytical Value (Varying Ugw)
Device (mm) 
Rth (ohms) 
0.715 
92.7 
1 
81.5 
2 
60.8 
3 
50.3 
3.4 
47.1 
TABLE X: Rth Analytical Value (Varying Nf)
TABLE VIII: Comparison between analytical and measured Temp value for devices with Varying Ugw
Fig 12: Analytical vs Measured for 1mm device (varying Ugw)
The thermal resistance is calculated with the power calculated for each device and is given as
Comparing the values of thermal resistance from the table V and VI obtained with the simulating data fo devices on ADS with the analytical values from table IX and X, one can see that the value obtained are close enough and the fit ting for output, transfer characteristics of each device are close to each as shown in figures 7 and 8.
The scaling rule of thermal resistance proposed in [14][16] are used in the study.
Rth t (7)
kWL
Where t is substrate thickness, k is the thermal conductivity, W is gate width, and L is the length. The extracted gate width dependence of Rth is shown in Fig 13 and 14. For the devices with selfheating effect, the accurate dc performance predic tion cannot be achieved without an accurate scalable thermal resistance.
Fig13: Gate width vs. Rth (multidevice optimization Varying Ugw)
Fig14: Gate width vs. Rth (multidevice optimization Varying Nf)
CONCLUSION
A novel approach to extract dc HEMT model has been pro posed and demonstrated with accurate extraction of thermal resistance. The experimental data compared to the analytical data for accurate values of thermal resistance is observed to be very close. The temperature distribution (horizontally or vertically) along with the maximum temperature across the fingers in each devices observed analytically vs experimen tally has been very close. Scaling rule for thermal resistance has been confirmed for both the sets of devices with varying Nf and Ugw.
REFERENCES

B. Castagnola, A. Giorgio, A.G. Perry,Modeling Thermal ef fects on MESFET IV characteristics IEEE Electrotechnical Conference, Vol3, pp12981301, May 1996.

Ingo Schmale, Gunter Kompa, A novel thermal resistance tech nique for temperaturedependent FET modeling GAAS, Ams terdam 1998.

Anholt Robert Electrical and Thermal Characteristics of MES FETs, HEMTs and HBTs 1949.

L. G. Walshak and W. E. Poole, Thermal resistance measure ment by IR scanning, Microwave J., vol. 16, pp. 6265, Feb. 1977.

B. S. Siegal, A proposed method for testing thermal resistance of MESFETs, Microwave Syst. News, vol. 7, pp. 6769, Nov. 1977.

H. Fukui, Thermal resistance of GaAs fieldeffect transistors, in IEDM Tech. Dig. (Washington, DC), pp. 118121, 1980.

A.H.Peake, C.G. Rogers and P.M. White, Improved thermal resistance procedure for GaAs FETs using pulsed electrical me thod in Proc Semiconductor Thermal and Temperature Mea surement Symp., Dec 1984.

C.E. Stephens and F.N.Sinnadurai,A surface temperature limit detector using nematic liquid crystals with an application to microcircuits. J. physics E. Scientific Instr vol 7 pp 641643, 1974.

Donald B. Estreich, A DC Technique for Determining GaAs MESFET Thermal Resistance IEEE Trans, vol 12 no 4 Dec 1989.

W.R. Curtice, A Mesfet Model for use in the design of GaAs Integrated circuits IEEE Trans Microwave Theory, pp 44856,
May1980

W.R. Curtice and M Ettenberg,A Nonlinear GaAs FET model for use in the Design of output circuits for power amplifi ersIEEE Trans Microwave Theory tech, pp 138394, Dec 1985

H.Statz, P Newman, I.W.Smith R.. A. Pucel, H.A.Haus,GaAs Fet Device and Circuit Simulation in SpiceIEEE Trans Elec tron Devices vol ed 3, pp 16069, Feb 1987.

I. Angelov, H. Zirath, N. Rorsman, A New Empirical NonLi near Model for HEMT and MESFET Devices, IEEE Transac tion on Microwave Theory and Techniques, vol 40, no 12, pp 22582266, Dec 1992.

N. Rinaldi,Thermal analysis of solidstate devices and circuits an analytical approach. SolidState Electronics, vol44, issue 10,pp 17891798, Oct 2000.

Ali Mohamed, Andrew J. Bayba, H. Alfred Hung, Accurate Determination of Thermal Resistance of FETs Microwavethe ory and Techniques, IEEE, vol 53 issue 1, pp 306313, January 2005.

A. Giorgio, A.G. Perri, B. Castagnolo, Automatic design of GaAs MESFETs for thermal effect optimization Gallium Ar senide Application Symposium, Paris CNAM, June 1996.