Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T11:41:54.392Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Refinement of low-resistance Ni–Ge–Au ohmic contacts to n+ GaAs using screening and response surface experiments

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2011

Nancy E. Lumpkin ,
Warren King  and
T. L. Tansley
Nancy E. Lumpkin
Affiliation:
Division of Radiophysics, CSIRO, P.O. Box 77, Epping, New South Wales 2121, Australia
Warren King
Affiliation:
Division of Radiophysics, CSIRO, P.O. Box 77, Epping, New South Wales 2121, Australia
T. L. Tansley
Affiliation:
Physics Department, Semiconductor Science & Technology Laboratories, Macquarie University, New South Wales 2109, Australia
Get access

Abstract

Multivariable screening and response surface experiments have been performed to model ohmic contact resistance (Rc) of a Ni–Ge–Au ohmic metal process for n+ GaAs-based high electron mobility transistors (HEMTs). Seven variables were examined via a fractional factorial screening experiment to rank the effects of each process variable. The results of the screening experiment indicated that the most significant variables were total Ge and Au evaporated thickness, Ge-to-Au ratio, and the post-alloy cooling time. Response surface experiments were designed around these three variables to examine the first- and second-order effects. The results enabled the development of an empirical model of ohmic contact resistance from which a new low value of 0.03 ± 0.03 Ω · mm (one-sigma) was predicted. Twenty confirmation runs on the new process indicated an average Rc of 0.06 ± 0.02 Ω · mm (one-sigma), with a range of 0.02 Ω · mm to 0.11 Ω · mm, a reduction from the previous average process value of 0.14 ± 0.07 Ω · mm (one-sigma).

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Materials Research , Volume 11 , Issue 5 , May 1996 , pp. 1238 - 1243
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1.Myers, R. H., Khuri, A. I., and Cater, W. Jr., Technometrics 31, 137 (1989).Google Scholar
2.Montgomery, D. C., Design and Analysis of Experiments, 2nd ed. (John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1984), 538 pp.Google Scholar
3.Herr, D.J.C., SPIE Advances in Resist Technology and Processing IV 771, 290 (1987).Google Scholar
4.May, G. S., Huang, J., and Spanos, C. J., IEEE Trans. Semicon. Manuf. 4, 83 (1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Jenkins, M. W., Mocella, M. T., Allen, K. D., and Sawin, H. H., Solid State Technol., 175 (1986).Google Scholar
6.Jones, R. E. and Mele, T. C., IEEE Trans. Semicon. Manuf. 4, 281 (1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Taguchi, G., IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference 3, no. 1106 (1984).Google Scholar
8.Taguchi, G. and Wu, Y., Introduction of Off-line Quality Control (Central Japan Quality Control Association, 1980).Google Scholar
9.Box, G. E. P. and Draper, N. R., Empirical Model Building and Response Surfaces (John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1987), 669 pp.Google Scholar
10.Box, G. E. P., Hunter, W. B., and Hunter, J. S., Statistics for Experimenters (John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1978), 653 pp.Google Scholar
11.Piotrowska, A., Electron Technol 24, 3 (1991).Google Scholar
12.Sharma, B. L., Semiconductors and Semimetals 15, 1 (1981).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13.Rideout, V. L., Solid State Electrons 18, 541 (1975).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.Williams, R. E., Gallium Arsenide Processing Techniques (Artech House, Inc., Dedham, MA, 1984), 406 pp.Google Scholar
15.Box, G. E. P. and Hunter, J. S., Technometrics 3, 311 (1961).Google Scholar
16.Box, G. E. P. and Hunter, J. S., Technometrics 3, 449 (1961).Google Scholar
17.Lumpkin, N. E., Lumpkin, G. R., and Butcher, K. S. A., J. Mater. Res. 11, 1244 (1996).CrossRefGoogle Scholar