Hello Yuanzhao Yao
Your Discussion has gone 30 days without a reply. If you still need help with COMSOL and have an on-subscription license, please visit our Support Center for help.
If you do not hold an on-subscription license, you may find an answer in another Discussion or in the Knowledge Base.
Please login with a confirmed email address before reporting spam
Posted:
1 decade ago
26 mar 2010, 04:07 GMT-4
Dear Yuanzhao,
The used boundaries in the example are not Ohmic in the way that the field disappears at the contact. But nevertheless the charge density does not change with voltage. For a Schottky contact a field dependent injection barrier exists. Where the barrier is changed with a term proportional to sqrt(field).
I do also work on such a problem.
The problem I do see is the implementation of the boundaries. Since the charge density now depend on the field. This means there are to ways:
implement the field(charge density) or charge density(field).
I'm not sure which is the better one. The second has the disadvantage that the field as derivative of the potential is used for the definition of the density - which seems to be less accurate.
Do you know which is the best way?
Concerning the meshing I would prefer to stay at one length scale and normalize the length to the depletion region.
Best regards,
Oliver
Dear Yuanzhao,
The used boundaries in the example are not Ohmic in the way that the field disappears at the contact. But nevertheless the charge density does not change with voltage. For a Schottky contact a field dependent injection barrier exists. Where the barrier is changed with a term proportional to sqrt(field).
I do also work on such a problem.
The problem I do see is the implementation of the boundaries. Since the charge density now depend on the field. This means there are to ways:
implement the field(charge density) or charge density(field).
I'm not sure which is the better one. The second has the disadvantage that the field as derivative of the potential is used for the definition of the density - which seems to be less accurate.
Do you know which is the best way?
Concerning the meshing I would prefer to stay at one length scale and normalize the length to the depletion region.
Best regards,
Oliver