An analysis of the difference in behavior of top and bottom contact organic thin film transistors using device simulation

This paper presents a systematic analysis of an already reported phenomenon, namely, the difference in device performance of top and bottom contact organic thin film transistors (OTFT) by combining experiments and two-dimensional device simulations. The mobility of the as measured devices in the bottom contact OTFT is found to be lower by two orders of magnitude than the top contact structure, which is generally attributed to the higher metal-semiconductor contact resistance in the bottom contact devices due to lower contact area. However, we found that this large mobility difference exists even after correcting for the metal-semiconductor contact resistance through transfer line method (TLM). This result suggests that structural differences are playing a dominant role in lowering down the performance of bottom contact devices. This effect is then systematically investigated through two-dimensional physics-based numerical simulations by considering several structural inhomogenities around the contacts. The main reason for such an occurrence is attributed to the poor morphology (or comparatively low mobility) of pentacene films around the source/drain electrodes in the bottom contact devices. Finally, we also show a reasonable match between the simulated and experimental device characteristics, enabling calibration of the simulator for further use in design of OTFTs.

[1]  G. Paasch,et al.  Subthreshold characteristics of field effect transistors based on poly(3-dodecylthiophene) and an organic insulator , 2002 .

[2]  G. Paasch,et al.  Fabrication and analysis of polymer field-effect transistors , 2004 .

[3]  C. Daniel Frisbie,et al.  Potentiometry of an operating organic semiconductor field-effect transistor , 2001 .

[4]  Robert A. Street,et al.  Contact effects in polymer transistors , 2002 .

[5]  H. Sirringhaus,et al.  Noncontact potentiometry of polymer field-effect transistors , 2002 .

[6]  K. Kudo,et al.  High‐Performance Bottom‐Contact Organic Thin‐Film Transistors with Controlled Molecule‐Crystal/Electrode Interface , 2007 .

[7]  E. A. Silinsh,et al.  Molecular polaron states in polyacene crystals. Formation and transfer processes , 1995 .

[8]  Thomas N. Jackson,et al.  Contact resistance extraction in pentacene thin film transistors , 2003 .

[9]  G. Horowitz,et al.  All-organic field-effect transistors made of π-conjugated oligomers and polymeric insulators , 1993 .

[10]  P. Ruden,et al.  Channel formation in organic field-effect transistors , 2002 .

[11]  Sampath Purushothaman,et al.  High-performance bottom electrode organic thin-film transistors , 2001 .

[12]  N. Tessler,et al.  Structures of polymer field-effect transistor: Experimental and numerical analyses , 2002 .

[13]  Ulrich Kunze,et al.  Improved morphology and charge carrier injection in pentacene field-effect transistors with thiol-treated electrodes , 2006 .

[14]  C. Daniel Frisbie,et al.  Surface potential profiling and contact resistance measurements on operating pentacene thin-film transistors by Kelvin probe force microscopy , 2003 .

[15]  M. R. Pinto,et al.  A two-dimensional simulation of organic transistors , 1997 .

[16]  A. Kahn,et al.  Physisorption-like Interaction at the Interfaces Formed by Pentacene and Samarium , 2002 .

[17]  N. Takada,et al.  Electrode Effects of Organic Thin-Film Transistor with Top and Bottom Contact Configuration , 2005 .

[18]  Ian G. Hill,et al.  Numerical simulations of contact resistance in organic thin-film transistors , 2005 .

[19]  Charles B. Duke,et al.  Organic Molecular Crystals: Their Electronic States , 1981 .

[20]  A. Carlo,et al.  Influence of carrier mobility and contact barrier height on the electrical characteristics of organic transistors , 2002 .

[21]  G.A. Brown,et al.  Correcting effective mobility measurements for the presence of significant gate leakage current , 2003, IEEE Electron Device Letters.

[22]  Richard H. Friend,et al.  Close look at charge carrier injection in polymer field-effect transistors , 2003 .

[23]  Charles E. Swenberg,et al.  Electronic Processes in Organic Crystals and Polymers , 1999 .

[24]  K. Kudo,et al.  Potential mapping of pentacene thin-film transistors using purely electric atomic-force-microscope potentiometry , 2005 .

[25]  K. Stevenson,et al.  High‐Resolution Characterization of Pentacene/Polyaniline Interfaces in Thin‐Film Transistors , 2006 .

[26]  Claudia Ambrosch-Draxl,et al.  Electronic properties of oligoacenes from first principles , 2005 .

[27]  G. Paasch,et al.  Relevance of organic field effect transistor models: Simulation vs. experiment , 2003 .

[28]  Michael S. Shur,et al.  An experimental study of contact effects in organic thin film transistors , 2006 .

[29]  P. Paul Ruden,et al.  Film and contact resistance in pentacene thin-film transistors: Dependence on film thickness, electrode geometry, and correlation with hole mobility , 2006 .

[30]  P. Ruden,et al.  Investigation of bottom-contact organic field effect transistors by two-dimensional device modeling , 2003 .

[31]  John A. Rogers,et al.  Contact resistance in organic transistors that use source and drain electrodes formed by soft contact lamination , 2003 .

[32]  Bruce A. Parkinson,et al.  Orbital Alignment and Morphology of Pentacene Deposited on Au(111) and SnS2 Studied Using Photoemission Spectroscopy , 2003 .

[33]  S. Yoo,et al.  Modeling the electrical characteristics of TIPS-pentacene thin-film transistors: Effect of contact barrier, field-dependent mobility, and traps , 2008 .

[34]  Neal R. Armstrong,et al.  Effects of field dependent mobility and contact barriers on liquid crystalline phthalocyanine organic transistors , 2004 .

[35]  Xiaoyang Zhu,et al.  Pi-stacked pentacene thin films grown on Au(111) , 2003 .

[36]  Thomas N. Jackson,et al.  Temperature-independent transport in high-mobility pentacene transistors , 1998 .

[37]  Marco Sampietro,et al.  Modeling of organic thin film transistors: Effect of contact resistances , 2007 .