PN Junction Current: Understanding Dependence on Parameters

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the dependence of current in a PN junction on various parameters, particularly the doping concentrations of donors and acceptors (Na and Nd). Participants explore theoretical aspects, mathematical formulations, and implications of these parameters on current behavior in both forward and reverse bias conditions.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether decreasing the density of donors and/or acceptors leads to an increase in current, referencing a formula from Ashcroft and Mermin.
  • Another participant emphasizes the role of the intrinsic carrier concentration (ni²), arguing that it does not depend on Na or Nd, which raises questions about the initial claim.
  • A participant notes that the equation appears strange when considering doping in the denominators rather than the actual number densities of charge carriers.
  • One participant explains that the saturation current is influenced by thermal generation of carriers in the depletion region, which expands as doping concentrations decrease, suggesting that the formula is indeed correct.
  • Another participant elaborates on the derivation from Ashcroft and Mermin, indicating that it does not account for generation in the depletion region but still aligns with the behavior of reverse-biased diodes.
  • Discussion includes the relationship between hole current and the density of holes on both the N and P sides, with mathematical expressions provided for both reverse and forward bias scenarios.
  • One participant concludes that the current increases when Na decreases, as this reduces the built-in potential, although they express confusion about how lower carrier density can lead to higher current.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the relationship between doping concentrations and current, with some supporting the initial claim and others raising questions about the underlying assumptions and mathematical formulations. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of low carrier density on current behavior.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in the derivation and assumptions made, particularly regarding the role of generation in the depletion region and the dependence of intrinsic carrier concentration on doping levels.

daudaudaudau
Messages
297
Reaction score
0
Hi. I'm trying to understand how the current in a PN junction depends on various parameters. I have found this formula in Ashcroft and Mermin. It looks like the current will increase if we decrease the density of donors and/or acceptors, Na and Nd. Is this correct?

YIQyokv.jpg
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
There is still ##n_i^2##.
 
mfb said:
There is still ##n_i^2##.
##n_i^2## is the intrinsic carrier concentration, which doesn't depend on ##N_a## or ##N_d##, so how could that affect the result?
 
Ah wait, you have the doping in the denominators, not the actual number density of electrons/holes. Hmm, then it looks strange.
 
The saturation current is caused by the thermal generation of carriers in the depletion region, which are then swept out of the depletion region by the built-in field. As the doping concentration(Na and Nd) goes down, the depletion region gets larger, so there is a larger volume of depleted semiconductor where generation takes place. I think the equation is correct.
 
phyzguy said:
The saturation current is caused by the thermal generation of carriers in the depletion region, which are then swept out of the depletion region by the built-in field. As the doping concentration(Na and Nd) goes down, the depletion region gets larger, so there is a larger volume of depleted semiconductor where generation takes place. I think the equation is correct.

Actually this particular derivation in Ashcroft and Mermin doesn't include any generation in the depletion region, but anyway you're right that the formula does make sense when thinking about a reverse biased diode. If we let ##p_{no}## denote the equilibrium density of holes on the N side, and since ##n_i^2/N_d=p_{no}##, we can write for the hole current under reverse bias

<br /> J_p=en_i^2\frac{D_p}{L_pN_d}=e\frac{D_p}{L_d}p_{no}<br />

So the reverse hole current is proportional to the density of holes on the N side, which makes sense.

When the diode is forward biased I would like the hole current to depend on the density of holes on the P side. This is of course possible. If ##V_{bi}## is the built-in potential, ##V_T## the thermal voltage, and ##p_{po}## the density of holes on the P side, we have

<br /> p_{no}=p_{po}e^{-V_{bi}/V_T}<br />

Which leads to a hole current that is proportional to ##p_{po}=N_a## and decreases as the built-in potential increases.

<br /> J_p=e\frac{D_p}{L_d}N_ae^{-V_{bi}/V_T}(e^{V/V_T}-1)<br />

So the answer to my initial question must be that the current increases when you decrease ##N_a## because this decreases the built-in potential

<br /> V_{bi}=V_T\log{\frac{N_aN_d}{n_i^2}}<br />

WELL, still puzzling that a low carrier density gives the highest current...
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
10K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
7K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K