Analysis of dark current contributions in mercury

cadmium telluride junction diodes

V. Gopal
a,
*
, S.K. Singh
b
, R.M. Mehra
b
a
Solid State Physics Laboratory, Lucknow Road, Timarpur, Delhi 110054, India
b
Department of Electronic Sciences, University of Delhi, South Campus, Delhi, India
Received 20 November 2001
Abstract
An analytical approach to analyze the dark currentvoltage (IV) and dynamic impedance vs reverse bias voltage
(R
d
V ) characteristics of an HgCdTe junction diode is presented in this paper. Application to the experimental data is
discussed to illustrate the approach. It is shown that the relative contributions of the various dark current contributing
mechanisms viz. diusion, generationrecombination, thermal trap assisted tunneling, band-to-band tunneling, ava-
lanche multiplication and ohmic current component can all be isolated, if present.
2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
In the last three decades, HgCdTe junction di-
odes have been extensively studied [17] because of
their application in developing hybrid focal plane
arrays for thermal imaging. The dynamic imped-
ance of these diodes is an important performance
parameter as it determines the system noise at low
background photon ux levels and limits the signal
injection eciency between detector and focal
plane readout circuitry. It is well known that the
dynamic impedance of the mercury cadmium tel-
luride junction diodes is limited by dark current
contributing mechanisms operating in the given
diode [59]. In HgCdTe junction diodes, the fol-
lowing mechanisms are known to limit the diodes
impedance.
(i) Diusion currents: This component of the cur-
rent is due to the diusion of thermally gener-
ated minority carriers from the quasi-neutral
n- and p-regions to the junction.
(ii) Generationrecombination (gr) currents: This
component of the current can become a dom-
inant dark current contributing mechanism in
diodes whose depletion region has high den-
sity of ShockleyRead (SR) centers [10].
The SR centers may be present in the origi-
nal material used in the fabrication of diodes
or these may also be created during the pro-
cessing of the junction.
(iii) Trap assisted tunneling (TAT) currents: This
component of the current has its origin in the
tunneling of minority carriers from the occu-
pied trap states located either in the depletion
Infrared Physics & Technology 43 (2002) 317326
www.elsevier.com/locate/infrared
*
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: vishnu_gopal/sspl@ssplnet.org (V. Gopal).
1350-4495/02/$ - see front matter 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
PII: S1350- 4495( 02) 00159- 7
region or in the quasi-neutral region very
close to the depletion edge to the empty band
states on the other side of the junction [2,3].
(iv) Band-to-band (BTB) tunneling currents: This
component of the current originates due to
the direct tunneling of carriers under the inu-
ence of relatively high reverse bias in narrow
band gap semiconductors [47].
(v) Ohmic currents: This component of the cur-
rent is responsible for exhibiting a shunt-like
behavior in junction performance and owes
its origin to surface leakage currents [11] and
dislocations intersecting the junction [12,13].
(vi) Avalanche multiplication current: This compo-
nent of the current results due to the second-
ary ionization of the carriers in the depletion
region of a reverse biased junction and could
become a dominant excess dark current con-
tributing mechanism [14] in diodes with rela-
tively large depletion layer width.
Diusion current of thermally generated mi-
nority carriers constitutes the dark current of an
ideal junction diode. However, in practical diodes,
there can be more than one dark current compo-
nents depending upon the quality of material used
in the fabrication of the diodes and the level of
processing technology. The measured current
voltage (IV) characteristics of a given diode is the
composite prole of all the dark current compo-
nents constituting the diode current. In practice,
one would want to isolate the contribution of each
of the dark current components. The procedure of
identifying the current contributing mechanisms
normally consists of plotting the dynamic imped-
ance vs reverse bias voltage (R
d
V ) curve [15,16]
from the observed IV characteristic and then use
a curve tting procedure to t the experimental
data with the theory of known dark current con-
tributing mechanisms. In the absence of known
theoretical expressions to calculate the ohmic
current, the ohmic component is invariably omit-
ted. In addition, it is always possible in a curve
tting method to t the same curve with several
combinations of tting parameters leaving enough
room for the doubt in regard to relative contri-
butions of dierent mechanisms. In this article, we
will present a systematic approach to analyze the
reverse bias R
d
V characteristic of an HgCdTe
junction diode to isolate the individual dark cur-
rent contributions including the ohmic compo-
nent.
2. Modeling of dark currents and dynamic resis-
tances
In this section, we will rst briey summarize
the relevant expressions for calculating the dark
current and the associated dynamic resistance
contribution due to each of the above mentioned
mechanisms in a p

n junction.
(i) Diusion current (I
dif
): In a one-sided step
junction, the thermal diusion of the minority
carriers from the heavily doped side may be as-
sumed negligible. The minority carrier diusion
current in a p

n junction may therefore be de-

scribed by the following well known equation [17]:
I
dif

qAn
2
i
N
d
kT
q
l
h
s
h
_ _
1=2
tanh
d
L
p
exp
qV
kT
_ _ _
1
_
;
1
where N
d
is the donor concentration on the lightly
doped n-side of the junction, n
i
the intrinsic carrier
concentration, A the junction area, V the diode
bias voltage, d the thickness of the n-region, s
h
the
hole lifetime, l
h
the hole mobility and L
p
the hole
diusion length. The associated dynamic resistance
and its derivatives are given by
R
1
dif

q
kT
_ _
qAn
2
i
N
d
kT
q
l
h
s
h
_ _
1=2
tanh
d
L
p
_ _
exp
qV
kT
_ _
; 2
o
2
I
dif
oV
2

q
kT
_ _
2
qAn
2
i
N
d
kT
q
l
h
s
h
_ _
1=2
tanh
d
L
p
_ _
exp
qV
kT
_ _
: 3
The above equation (3) and similar expressions for
gr, TAT and BTB mechanisms will be required
later on to determine the trap density N
t
from the
experimental data.
318 V. Gopal et al. / Infrared Physics & Technology 43 (2002) 317326
(ii) Generationrecombination current (I
gr
): In
this type of current, defects (SR centers) within
the depletion region act as intermediate states for
the thermal generation and recombination of car-
riers. The resulting gr current is calculated by
using a simplied expression [18]:
I
gr

qn
i
W
dep
A
2s
gr
exp
qV
gkT
_ _ _
1
_
; 4
where g is the ideality factor whose value is 2. s
gr
is
the gr lifetime (in the present paper for calculat-
ing the gr contribution 350 ns lifetime is chosen)
and W
dep
is the voltage dependent depletion region
width given by
W
dep

2e
0
e
s
V
t
N
a
N
d

qN
a
N
d
_ _
1=2
; 5
where V
t
V V
bi
is the total junction potential,
e
0
is the permittivity of free space, e
s
is the static
dielectric constant of HgCdTe. The gr current
can be rewritten as
I
gr
A
gr
V
1=2
t
exp
qV
2kT
_ _ _
1
_
;
A
gr

qn
i
A
2s
gr
2e
0
e
s
N
a
N
d

qN
a
N
d
_ _
1=2
; 6
where A
gr
is an voltage independent term in Eq.
(6). The associated dynamic resistance and its de-
rivatives are given by
R
1
gr
A
gr
1
2
V
1=2
t
exp
qV
2kT
_ _ _ _
1
_

q
2KT
_
V
1=2
t
exp
qV
2kT
_ __
; 7
o
2
I
gr
oV
2
A
gr
_

1
4
V
3=2
t
exp
qV
2kT
_ _ _
1
_

q
2kT
V
1=2
t
exp
qV
2kT
_ _

q
2kT
_ _
2
V
1=2
t
exp
qV
2kT
_ __
: 8
(iii) Trap assisted tunneling current (I
tat
): In this
type of current, the minority carriers may tunnel
from the occupied trap states on the quasi-neutral
side to the empty band states on the other side of
the junction or through trap sites present in the
depletion region of the junction [2,3,8]. In p

n
junctions, the major contribution of the TAT may
be due to tunneling of holes, via trap levels to
valence band on the p-side which is completely
analogous to the tunneling of electrons via trap
levels to conduction band on the n-side in case of
n

p diodes [19]. This current is being calculated

using a modied simple one-dimensional model
[2]:
I
tat
qAN
t
W
dep
W
v
N
v
; 9
where W
v
N
v
, the tunneling rate of holes, is given by
[2,3]
W
v
N
v

p
2
qm
v
EM
2
h
3
E
g
E
t

exp
_

4 2m
v

1=2
E
g
E
t
_ _
3=2
3qhE
_
;
10
where m
v
is the eective mass of carrier in the
valence band, E
g
the band gap, M the matrix ele-
ment associated with the trap potential, h the
Plancks constant, E the electric eld strength
across the depletion region and E
t
the position of
trap levels in the band gap measured from the
bottom of the conduction band on the n-side.
Since the tunneling rate of carriers is inversely
proportional to the exponent of their mass, the
tunneling probability of heavy hole is much
smaller than that of light holes. As a result, the
hole tunnel transition is dominated by light holes.
As reported by the earlier authors, we assume the
value of the quantity M
2
(m
v
=m) as 10
23
Vcm
3
for
HgCdTe [3,6].
The associated dynamic resistance and its de-
rivatives are given by
R
tat

1

2q
3
Ap
2
m
v
M
2
h
3
E
g
E
t

N
t
exp
_

B
V
1=2
t
_
1
_

B
2V
1=2
t
_
; 11
o
2
I
tat
oV
2

2q
3
Ap
2
m
v
M
2
h
3
E
g
E
t

N
t
exp
_

B
V
1=2
t
_
B
4V
3=2
t
_

B
2
4V
2
t
_
; 12
V. Gopal et al. / Infrared Physics & Technology 43 (2002) 317326 319
B
4 2m
v

1=2
E
g
E
t
_ _
3=2
3qh
2qN
d
e
0
e
s
_ _
1=2
_ _ ; 13
where B depends on the shape of the barrier and
for a triangular barrier its value is given in Eq. (13)
and N
t
is the density of traps occupied by holes.
(iv) Band-to-band tunneling current (I
btb
): At
relatively higher bias voltages, the electrons di-
rectly tunneling from the valence band on the p

-
side to the conduction band on the n-side are
responsible for the BTB current [47]. For mod-
eling this current, we use the simple approach
presented in Ref. [20]. The BTB tunneling current
is given by
I
btb

qA
4hp
2
E
g
kT
P
2
_ _
1=2
_
0
E
max
T
p
E
2
_ _
dE;
where E
max
qV E
F
; 14
where P is the momentum matrix element and E
F
the Fermi energy. T
p
is the tunneling probability
associated with the BTB tunneling and is given by
T
p
exp
_

2m
e
h
2
_ _
1=2
2e
0
e
s
q
2
N
d
_ _
1=2
E
g
1
_
_

E
E
g
_

p
2
_
sin
1
E
E
g
E
_ _
1=2
_

E
E
g
_
1=2
__
:
15
The associated dynamic resistance and its de-
rivatives are given by
R
btb

1

q
2
A
4hp
2
_ _
E
g
kT
P
2
_ _
T
p
E
max
2
_ _
; 16
o
2
I
btb
oV
2

q
3
A
4hp
2
_ _
E
g
kT
P
2
_ _
2m
e
h
2
_ _
1=2
2e
0
e
s
q
2
N
d
_ _
1=2
E
g
T
p
E
max
2
_ _
_

_
p
2E
g

sin
1
E
E
g
E
_ _
1=2
E
g
_

_:
17
(v) Ohmic current (I
sh
): The currentvoltage
characteristics of a mercury cadmium telluride
junction often exhibit an excess current compo-
nent, a part of which can be modeled as an ohmic
current component given by [11]
I
sh

V
R
sh
; 18
where V is the applied voltage across the junction
and R
sh
is the diode shunt resistance. The surface
leakage currents and the dislocations in the mate-
rial which intersect the junction [12,13] are gener-
ally held responsible as a possible source of this
part of the excess dark current.
(vi) Avalanche multiplication current (I
mul
): The
dark current of a junction diode in which ava-
lanche multiplication is responsible for the excess
dark current may be written as
I M
d
V I
dif
: 19
In HgCdTe material, the process of avalanche
multiplication, once initiated, can be assumed to
be dominated by the electron impact ionization
[21] since (i) the impact ionization results in the
production of electronhole pairs and (ii) the
threshold energy for the impact ionization of elec-
trons is nearly half of that required for the hole
impact ionization. The ratio of electron-to-hole
ionization coecients is 10 in 2.5 lm cut-o and
should be even higher in case of LWIR HgCdTe
diode [22]. This implies that the process of impact
ionization will be always dominated by electrons
irrespective of the type of junction, i.e. n

p or
p

n. The dark multiplication factor M

d
V in this
case can be written as
M
1
1 a
e
W
dep

: 20
The electron impact ionization coecient a
e
can
be calculated with the Shockleys lucky electron
model and is given by
a
e

qE
re
ph
exp
_

e
i
qEL
ph
_
; 21
where L
ph
is the mean free path for phonon colli-
sions, e
i
the threshold energy for the impact ion-
ization (assumed to be equal to E
g
), e
ph
the optical
phonon energy and r the relative probability of
320 V. Gopal et al. / Infrared Physics & Technology 43 (2002) 317326
phonon emission to impact ionization for a hot
electron and E the electric eld across the deple-
tion region.
However it has been shown recently [14] that
the reported data on HgCdTe junction diode can
be tted well, if the electron impact ionization
coecient (a
e
) is assumed to be given by
a
e
a
0
exp
_

b
E
_
m
: 22
The associated dynamic resistance is given by
R
mul

1
M
d
V
oI
dif
oV

oM
oV
I
dif
: 23
3. Analytical approach
Some of the dening properties of each mech-
anism which will be helpful in identifying its con-
tribution in a practical case are discussed below.
Thermal diusion current being the most fun-
damental dark current contributing mechanism
even in an ideal junction contributes to both for-
ward and reverse bias characteristics of the junc-
tion and is always present in all kinds of junctions.
Gr currents too, inuence both forward and
reverse bias characteristics of the junction but the
ideality factor g is 2 in contrast to the unity ideality
factor in case of diusion currents. An ideality
factor of more than unity can be thus qualitatively
interpreted as indicating the additional contribu-
tion due to gr currents. Gr contribution also
implies the existence of defect levels (SR centers)
in the band gap of base material. These defects
could be either present in the original material or
created during the processing of the junction.
TAT currents can contribute to the junction
current if a sucient number of trap levels were
there in the band gap of the material, either
originally or created in the process of junction
fabrication. The existence of this current can be
qualitatively ascertained from the peak in the re-
verse bias R
d
V characteristic in low/medium bias
region. These TAT currents do not inuence the
forward characteristic of the junction.
BTB currents contribute to the reverse bias
characteristic at relatively higher bias voltage and
can be practically ignored in most practical cases
while analyzing the data near zero or low reverse
bias voltages.
Ohmic component can always be present in the
junction. Their magnitude is dependent on the
surface leakage currents and the quality of the base
material, i.e. the density of dislocations intersect-
ing the junction. Its contribution is normally bur-
ied in the reverse bias characteristic and is not
simply apparent from observations.
AVM component has its inuence on the re-
verse bias characteristic of the junction. Like TAT,
its contribution also gives rise to a peak in the
reverse bias R
d
V characteristic. At the rst in-
stance, this might be a bit confusing, but as will be
shown later, the two mechanisms cannot be mis-
taken with each other in the nal analysis due to
the dierence in their dependence on electric eld.
In addition, simple physical considerations also
suggest that in a junction where TAT contributes,
AVM is unlikely to operate because the conditions
favorable for TAT to operate are unfavorable for
AVM and vice versa. For example, a large number
of traps in the depletion region and relatively
smaller depletion layer width is favorable for TAT
to operate rather than AVM. On the other hand, a
large depletion layer width and near absence of
traps is favorable for AVM to operate rather than
TAT.
Based on the above observations and dis-
cussions, the contribution from the various dark
current contributing mechanisms may be grouped
in the following two cases for the ease of analysis
of the experimental data.
Case I: If a diode has been fabricated in a ma-
terial which has sizable number of defect levels in
the band gap contributing to gr and TAT cur-
rents, then the experimental data of such a diode
could be analyzed by assuming contribution from
diusion, gr, TAT, BTB and ohmic currents.
Case II: If a diode has been fabricated in a good
quality material with negligible defect levels re-
sponsible for gr and TAT contributions, then
the avalanche multiplication, diusion and ohmic
surface leakage currents can be considered as the
possible dark current contributing mechanisms
to the diode current. The contribution due to
BTB can be assumed negligible in this case as the
V. Gopal et al. / Infrared Physics & Technology 43 (2002) 317326 321
condition favorable to avalanche multiplication
(e.g. relatively large depletion layer width) is un-
favorable to BTB.
In actual practice while analyzing the experi-
mental data, an initial guess about the type of the
diode i.e. either belonging to case I or case II can
be had from the analysis of forward IV charac-
teristic of the given diode for its ideality factor. A
unity ideality factor that indicates diusion limited
diode performance will support the cause of ana-
lyzing the experimental data for a type II diode.
Whereas the cases belonging to ideality factor
g > 1 could be rst analyzed for the case of type I
diode.
Next we know from the previous section that
almost all the components of diode current and the
associated dynamic impedance can be calculated
from the known material and device parameters
except the ohmic component and its associated
dynamic impedance R
sh
. The trap density N
t
is one
of the parameter that has been used as a tting
parameter since the calculation of TAT currents
based on independent measurements of trap den-
sity did not lead to quantitative agreement be-
tween theory and experiment. Another parameter
that has also been used as variable tting param-
eter by some authors is the substrate carrier con-
centration. In the present paper, we will however
now describe below the procedure which enables
determination of R
sh
and N
t
analytically from the
measured experimental data while the substrate
carrier concentration will be treated as an already
known parameter of the material used in the diode
fabrication.
Let us rst consider a diode which corresponds
to case I mentioned above. It is now well known
that R
d
V characteristic of this kind of diode ex-
hibit a peak in the low or medium reverse bias re-
gion due to the contribution from thermal TAT
currents. Recently, we have shown that the posi-
tion [8,23] of this peak can be exploited to estimate
both N
t
and R
sh
as explained below. The peak po-
sition in R
d
V curve corresponds to the condition:
oR
d
oV
0; 24
where R
d
is the resultant dynamic resistance given
by
1
R
d

1
R
dif

1
R
gr

1
R
tat

1
R
btb

1
R
sh
: 25
An expression for the trap density (N
t
) obtained
from mathematical manipulation of Eqs. (3), (8),
(12), (17), (24) and (25) is given by
N
t

o
2
I
dif
oV
2
_ _
V V
m

o
2
I
gr
oV
2
_ _
V V
m

o
2
I
btb
oV
2
_ _
V V
m
_ _
2q
3
Ap
2
m
v
M
2
h
3
E
g
E
t

exp
B
V
1=2
m
_ _
B
4V
3=2
m

B
2
4V
2
m
_ _ :
26
Since all the parameters on the right hand side
of the above equation are known for the given
material of known composition, the density of
traps responsible for the TAT can be thus esti-
mated in a straightforward manner from the ob-
served position of the maxima. It may be noted
here that the above estimate of the N
t
is practically
independent of surface leakage current contribu-
tion, since oR
sh
=oV 0 (shunt resistance R
sh
is
independent of applied voltage V). Such a situa-
tion allows us to further obtain an estimate of
shunt resistance R
sh
from a comparison of experi-
mental peak dynamic resistance and theoretically
calculated resultant dynamic resistance due to
TAT (making use of estimated N
t
), gr current,
BTB tunneling and thermal diusion current
contributions.
Let us now consider a diode that belongs to case
II mentioned above. The possible dark current
contributing mechanisms in case of this type of
diodes are diusion, ohmic currents and avalanche
multiplication. To establish the possibility of con-
tribution from these mechanisms, the experimental
data need to be analyzed by using Eqs. (1) and
(18)(20). In the absence of analytical expressions
for ohmic component, to begin with the data may
be analyzed by assuming contribution from diu-
sion and avalanche multiplication. The multipli-
cation factor M and the ionization coecient a
e
as
a function of electric eld can be then calculated
by dividing the experimentally measured current
and the theoretically calculated diusion current of
an ideal junction using the model described in
Section 2. The example of application of this ap-
proach to the experimental data is discussed in the
next section.
322 V. Gopal et al. / Infrared Physics & Technology 43 (2002) 317326
4. Application to the experimental data
In this section, we will illustrate the practical
application of the above approach by taking one
example each belonging to case I and case II type
of diodes.
4.1. Type I
Here we will discuss an example of mesa etched
p

n diode fabricated by Yoshino, Morimoto and

Wada (YMW) [24,25] on HgCdTe epilayer grown
on Si substrate (with CdTe buer layer) by mo-
lecular beam epitaxy (MBE) technique. YMW
have shown from SADLTS measurements that
their diode had energy levels distributed in the
band gap of HgCdTe material around E
c
30
meV ranging from E
c
7 to E
c
56 meV. With
this information already available to us, this diode
appears to be a perfect example of a type I diode
mentioned in the previous section. The analysis of
the dark current characteristic of this diode is
discussed in the following paragraph.
Fig. 1 shows the measured dark IV charac-
teristic [24] of the diode at 78.5 K. The corre-
sponding reverse bias R
d
V characteristic of this
diode is shown in Fig. 2. To have an initial idea of
the possible dark current contributing mechanisms
to the diode current, determination of ideality
factor (g) from its forward IV characteristic led to
a value of approximately 6 indicating that the
diode performance is not limited by diusion
currents alone. Further there is already an evi-
dence of TAT contribution in this case as its re-
verse bias R
d
V characteristic exhibits a peak at
the low bias. We therefore assume it to be a diode
belonging to case I in which diusion, gr, TAT,
BTB and ohmic currents could be the possible
contributing mechanisms. As already explained in
the previous section, we make use of this peak to
estimate the density of traps participating in the
thermal TAT process and the ohmic shunt resis-
tance contribution, if any. In this case, the esti-
mated [23] trap density is 2:36 10
14
cm
3
with its
location as 6 meV below the conduction band edge
and the estimated shunt resistance is 2:3 10
6
X.
Based on these estimated values of N
t
and R
sh
, the
calculated resultant dynamic resistance along with
the relative contributions due to each of the dif-
fusion, gr, TAT, BTB and shunt resistances are
plotted in Fig. 2. For the sake of completeness, the
corresponding calculated variation of current as a
function of reverse bias voltage is also shown in
Fig. 1. Clearly the agreement between theory and
experiment is excellent, which conrms the validity
of our approach. The detailed study of several
Fig. 1. Comparison of experimental (continuous line curve)
and theoretically calculated currentvoltage characteristics in
the reverse bias region.
Fig. 2. Comparison of experimental (continuous line curve)
and theoretically (discrete points) calculated variation of dy-
namic impedance in reverse bias region. The relative contribu-
tions of dierent current mechanisms to the total dynamic
impedance are also shown.
V. Gopal et al. / Infrared Physics & Technology 43 (2002) 317326 323
other diodes similarly fabricated by YMW [25]
and analyzed by us has been reported elsewhere
[23].
4.2. Type II
Let us discuss another example [26] of a p

n
diode fabricated on Hg
1x
Cd
x
Te epilayers grown
on Si substrate with CdTe buer layer. This diode
is a p-on-n double-layer heterojunction consisting
of a 7 lm thick (x 0:25) n-type (1:7 10
15
cm
3
)
and a 2 lm thick (x 0:31) p-type (2 10
18
cm
3
)
cap layer. Since this is a wide-p

on narrow n
double-layer heterojunction, the diusion current
of this diode can be modeled here as analogous to
a homojunction [27].
The measured IV characteristic of this diode at
78 K is shown in Fig. 3. Our analysis shows that
the variation of the forward current with voltage
can be well described by Eq. (1) with the nearly
unity ideality factor implying nearly diusion
limited performance. But its reverse bias R
d
V
characteristic shown in Fig. 5 exhibits a peak in the
medium bias region. This peak could be caused by
either AVM or TAT contributions. As already
discussed in the previous section on analytical
approach, we assume it initially a case belonging
to type II diode because of its unity ideality factor,
meaning thereby that the avalanche multiplica-
tion could be a possible dark current contributing
mechanism in addition to the diusion current. To
conrm it, let us calculate the multiplication factor
M and the ionization coecient a
e
as a function of
electric eld. M is determined from Eq. (19) by
dividing the experimentally measured current and
the theoretically calculated diusion current of an
ideal junction using Eq. (1). Next a
e
can be de-
termined from Eq. (20). A plot of a
e
thus calcu-
lated in the present case is shown in Fig. 4 by
lled squares as a function of the reciprocal elec-
tric eld. Continuous line curve in this gure
shows the best t of the data to Eq. (22) with t-
ting parameters a
0
as 1:46 10
4
cm
1
, b as 3:93
10
3
Vcm
1
and m as 9.3. A comparison of the
theoretically generated IV curve (shown by sym-
bol ) using these tting parameters and Eq. (19)
with the experimental data is shown in Fig. 3. Fig.
5 shows the comparison of the variation of dy-
namic resistancearea product as a function of
voltage. The curves represented by the discrete
point and continuous line respectively correspond
to theoretical and experimental IV curves shown
in Fig. 3. It is clearly observed that the experi-
mental IV characteristic and as well as the re-
sultant dynamic resistancearea product variation
Fig. 3. Comparison of experimental (shown by continuous line)
IV curve with that of theoretically calculated assuming with-
out shunt and with shunt shown by symbols and O respec-
tively.
Fig. 4. Calculated impact ionization rate (n) as a function of
reciprocal electric eld by assuming the source of excess dark
current as impact ionization due to electrons in HgCdTe p

n
junction. Continuous line shows tting to the model given by
Eq. (22).
324 V. Gopal et al. / Infrared Physics & Technology 43 (2002) 317326
can be fairly well accounted by assuming diusion
and avalanche multiplication as the contributing
mechanisms in this case. Disagreement between
experiment and theory is however observed in
relatively higher bias region in both IV and R
d
V
characteristics. In addition, a notable disagree-
ment is visible between the calculated peak dy-
namic resistance and the experimental value in Fig.
5, though the good agreement is seen in IV
characteristics shown in Fig. 3. One of the possi-
bilities for this kind of observation could be the
result of overestimating the avalanche multiplica-
tion. This could happen if the experimental IV
includes in it an ohmic current component be-
side the diusion current component. The former
current, being simply responsible for a shunt re-
sistance eect, would not undergo avalanche
multiplication. In other words, Eq. (19) will then
be applicable in the following modied form:
I M
d
V I
dif

V
R
sh
: 27
In this equation, R
sh
was used as a variable tting
parameter. M, a
e
and as well as the constants a
0
, b
and m were re-determined using Eqs. (20), (22) and
(27). The nal values after taking into account the
eect of shunt resistance are a
0
1:45 10
4
cm
1
,
b 4:65 10
3
Vcm
1
and m 13:9. It can be
clearly seen from Figs. 3 and 5 that the analysis of
the experimental data by using the above equation
in place of Eq. (19) leads to the excellent agree-
ment (shown by symbol O) between theory and
experiment in both IV and R
d
V characteristics.
Finally, to illustrate that the contribution due
to TAT and AVM cannot be mistaken with each
other, we have shown in Fig. 6 a comparison of
experimental (same as in Fig. 5) and calculated ()
R
d
V characteristics of the diode by deliberately
assuming the observed peak of R
d
V characteristic
due to TAT contribution in place of avalanche
multiplication. It is clear that the calculated char-
acteristic does not match with the experimental
data. Obviously the two mechanisms cannot be
confused with each other in the detailed analysis.
In the end it may also be mentioned that the
shunt resistance obtained in this analysis for both
the cases discussed above is the resultant eect of
surface leakage currents and as well as of dislo-
cations. The two contributions cannot be isolated
in the present analysis.
5. Summary
In summary, we have described an approach to
analyze the experimental data of HgCdTe junction
diodes by broadly dividing them in to two classes.
Fig. 5. Comparison of experimentally observed and theoreti-
cally calculated (shown by symbols and O) variation of dy-
namic resistancearea product in reverse bias.
Fig. 6. Comparison of experimentally observed (n) variation of
dynamic resistancearea product in reverse bias with theoreti-
cally calculated variation (shown by symbol ) assuming TAT
responsible for the peak.
V. Gopal et al. / Infrared Physics & Technology 43 (2002) 317326 325
To the class I belongs the diodes, in which diu-
sion, gr, TAT, BTB and ohmic currents con-
tribute to the dark current of the diode. The
contribution due to gr and TAT is related to the
presence of defect levels in the band gap of sub-
strate material. Whereas in case of class II diodes
diusion, avalanche multiplication and ohmic
component can be the possible dark current con-
tributing mechanisms. By following the approach
described here, the relative contribution of each of
the contributing mechanisms including the ohmic
component can be isolated but the two contribu-
tions (surface leakage currents and dislocations
intersecting the junction) within the ohmic com-
ponent are not separable.
Acknowledgements
One of the authors (VG) would like to thank the
Director, Solid State Physics Laboratory, Delhi,
for granting permission to publish this work.
References
[1] A. Rogalski, Infrared Phys. 28 (1988) 139153.
[2] J.Y. Wong, IEEE Trans. Electron Dev. ED-27 (1980) 48
57.
[3] D. Rosenfeld, G. Bahir, IEEE Trans. Electron Dev. ED-39
(1992) 16381645.
[4] M.B. Reine, A.K. Sood, T.J. Tredwell, in: R.K. Willard-
son, A.C. Beer (Eds.), Photovoltaic Infrared Detectors,
Semiconductors and Semimetals, vol. 18, Academic Press,
New York, 1981 (Chapter 6).
[5] Y. Nemirovsky, D. Rosenfeld, R. Adar, A. Kornfeld, J.
Vac. Sci. Technol. A 7 (2) (1989) 528535.
[6] Y. Nemirovsky, R. Fastow, M. Meyassed, A. Unikovsky,
J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B 9 (3) (1991) 18291839.
[7] Y. Nemirovsky, A. Unikovsky, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B 10
(4) (1992) 16021610.
[8] S.K. Singh, V. Gopal, R.K. Bhan, V. Kumar, Semicond.
Sci. Technol. 15 (7) (2000) 752755.
[9] A. Rogalski, A. Jozwikowska, K. Jozwikowska, J. Rut-
kowski, Semicond. Sci. Technol. 8 (1993) S289S292.
[10] C.T. Sah, R.N. Noyce, W. Shockley, Proc. IRE 45 (1957)
12281243.
[11] V. Gopal, Semicond. Sci. Technol. 9 (1994) 22672271.
[12] S.M. Johnson, D.R. Rhiger, J.P. Rosbeck, J.M. Peterson,
S.M. Taylor, M.E. Boyd, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B 10 (1992)
14991506.
[13] I.M. Baker, C.D. Maxey, J. Electron. Mater. 30 (2001)
682689.
[14] V. Gopal, S.K. Singh, R. Mehra, Semicond. Sci. Technol.
16 (2001) 372376.
[15] A. Ajisawa, N. Oda, J. Electron. Mater. 24 (1995) 1105
1111.
[16] S.H. Bae, S.J. Lee, Y.H. Kim, C.L. Lee, C.K. Kim, J.
Electron. Mater. 29 (2000) 877882.
[17] V. Gopal, Int. J. Electron. 83 (2) (1997) 191200.
[18] S. Velicu, R. Ashokan, S. Sivnanthan, J. Electron. Mater.
29 (2000) 823827.
[19] W.W. Anderson, H.J. Homan, J. Appl. Phys. 53 (12)
(1982) 91309145.
[20] Y. Nemirovsky, I. Bloom, Infrared Phys. 27 (3) (1987) 143
151.
[21] P. Capper, Narrow-Gap IIVI Compounds for Optoelec-
tronic and Electromagnetic Applications, Chapman &
Hall, London, UK, 1997, pp. 450473 (Chapter 15).
[22] C.T. Elliot, N.T. Gordon, R.S. Hall, G. Crimes, J. Vac.
Sci. Technol. A 8 (1990) 12511254.
[23] S.K. Singh, V. Gopal, R.M. Mehra, Opto-Electron. Rev. 9
(4) (2001) 385390.
[24] J. Yoshino, J. Morimoto, H. Wada, Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 37
(1998) 40274031.
[25] J. Yoshino, J. Morimoto, H. Wada, A. Ajisawa, M. Kawano,
N. Oda, Opto-Eelectron. Rev. 7 (4) (1999) 361367.
[26] T.J. de Lyon, R.D. Rajavel, J.E. Jensen, O.K. Wu, J.A.
Vigil, Proc. SPIE 2816 (1996) 14341438.
[27] E.A. Kraut, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. A 7 (1989) 420423.
326 V. Gopal et al. / Infrared Physics & Technology 43 (2002) 317326