 |
So far we implicitly defined
(thermal) equilibrium as a total
equilibrium involving three components if
you think about it: |
|
 |
1. Equilibrium of the electrons in the
conductance band. This means their concentration was given (within
the usual approximations) by |
|
|
|
|
|
| ne = Neff e
· exp |
EC EF
kT |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
 |
2. Equilibrium of the holes in the valence
band. This means their concentration was given within the usual
approximations by |
|
|
|
|
|
| nh = Neff h
· exp |
EF EV
kT |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
3. Equilibrium between the electrons and
holes, i.e. between the bands. This means
that the Fermi energy is the same for both
bands (and positioned somewhere in the band gap). |
 |
If an equilibrium is disturbed, it
takes a certain time before it is restored again; this is described by the
kinetics of the processes taking place. In
a strict sense of speaking, the Fermi energy is not defined without
equilibrium, but only after it has been restored. This restoring process occurs
in the bands and between the bands: |
|
 |
In the bands,
local equilibrium (in
k-space) between the carriers will be obtained after there was
time for some collisions, i.e. after some multiples of the
scattering
time. This process is known as thermalization and occurs typically in picoseconds. |
|
 |
Between the
bands, equilibrium will be restored by generation and recombination
events and this takes a few multiples of the carrier
life time, i.e. at least nanoseconds if not milliseconds. |
 |
This means that we can have a
partial (or local) equilibrium in the bands
long before we have equilibrium between the bands. This
local equilibrium implies that: |
|
 |
Non-equilibrium means something changes in time.
Changes in the properties of the particle ensemble considered (i.e. electrons
and holes) in local equilibrium are only
due to "traffic" between the
bands while the properties of the particles in the band do not change anymore.
The term "local" of course, does not refer to a coordinate, but to a
band. |
|
 |
The carrier concentrations
therefore do not have their total or global equilibrium value as given, e.g.,
by the mass action law, but their
local equilibrium concentration can still be given in terms of the equilibrium
distribution by |
|
|
|
|
|
| ne = Neff
e · exp |
EC
EFe
kT |
| nh = Neff
h · exp |
EFh
EV
kT |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
with the only difference that the Fermi energy now is different for the electrons and
holes. Instead of one Fermi
energy EF for the whole system, we now have
two Quasi
Fermi energies, EFe and
EFh. |
 |
For the product of
the carrier densities we now obtain a somewhat modified mass-action law |
|
|
|
|
| ne · nh =
Neffe ·
Neffh · exp |
(EC
EV) + (EFe
EFh)
kT |
= |
ni2 · exp
|
EFe
EFh
kT |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
For this we used the
by now basic relation |
|
|
|
|
|
| Neff e ·
Neffh · exp |
EC
EV
kT |
=
ni2 |
|
|
| |
|
|
 |
The name "Quasi Fermi energy" is maybe not so good,
there is nothing "quasi" about
it. Still, that's the name we and everybody else will use. Sometimes it is also
called "Imref" (Fermi backwards), but that
doesn't help much either. |
|
 |
Rewriting the equations from
above gives a kind of definition for the Quasi Fermi energies: |
|
|
|
|
|
| EFe =
EC kT · ln |
Neff e
ne |
| EFh
= EV + kT · ln |
Neff h
nh |
|
|
|
|
 |
Quasi Fermi energies are extremely
helpful for the common situation where we do have non-equilibrium, but only
between the bands - and that covers most of
semiconductor devices under conditions of current flow. We will make frequent
use of Quasi Fermi energies. |
|
|
 |
If we calculate
carrier densities in non-equilibrium with the Quasi Fermi energies, we have to
be careful to use the right Quasi Fermi energy in the Fermi-Dirac formula or in
the Boltzmann approximation. |
|
 |
After all, we now have two (Quasi) Fermi energies, one
"regulating" the density of electrons in the conduction band, and the
other one doing the same for the holes in the valence band. That was already
implied above, here we want to make this topic
a bit clearer; we also introduce a new distribution function as a kind of
short-hand. |
|
 |
You really must now write f(E,
EFe, T) or f(E,
EFh, T) instead of simply
f(E, EF, T) or f(E),
because the functions are now different. This is illustrated below with the two
curves on the left and should be obvious. |
|
 |
In the pictures we even have some redundancy by
writing fe in C(E, EFe,
T) and so on. This is not necessary, but helps in the beginning to
avoid mix-up. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
The concentration of electrons or
holes in the conduction or valence band, respectively, would now be |
|
|
| ne =
Neff e · [fe in C(E,
EFe, T)] |
»
|
Neff e · exp
|
EC
EFe
kT |
| |
|
|
|
| nh =
Neff h · [1 fe in
C(E, EFh, T)] |
»
|
Neff h · exp
|
EFh
EC
kT |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
The red or blue triangles symbolize the
concentration of electrons in the conduction band or holes in the valence band,
respectively, as before. |
 |
The right-hand side is identical (of
course) to what we had above and shows a kind
of symmetry not contained in the formulation with the Fermi distribution, where
we have
f(E, EFh, T) and 1
f(E, EFh, T). |
|
 |
This can be remedied easily by simply equating
1 f(E, EFh, T)
:= fh in
V(E, EFh, T)
with fh in V being the probability of finding
holes on the available states in the valence band. |
|
 |
This is the curve shown on the right hand side in
the picture above. |
 |
If we use that definition, we obtain
more symmetry at the cost of more heavily indexed functions. It's a matter of
taste. |
|
 |
However, later we will encounter situations where
proper bookkeeping of electrons and holes is complicatesd and essential. The it
might be easier to keep the situation symmetric, to use fh in
V for the holes in the valence band, and to express all carrier densities in the valence band with
fh in V, while in the conductio band we use fe in
C. |
|
 |
The electron concentration in the valence band
than contains 1 fh in V and so on. |
© H. Föll (Semiconductor - Script)