1887
banner image
No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
Hybrid techniques for electrostatic analysis of nanoelectromechanical systems
Rent:
Rent this article for
USD
10.1063/1.1769608
/content/aip/journal/jap/96/4/10.1063/1.1769608
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aip/journal/jap/96/4/10.1063/1.1769608

Figures

Image of FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.

A typical nanoswitch consisting of a fixed-fixed semiconductor and a bottom conductor.

Image of FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.

Typical domain discretization for electrostatic analysis of the nanoswitch shown in Fig. 1.

Image of FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.

A system of semiconductors.

Image of FIG. 4.
FIG. 4.

Hybrid BIE/Poisson discretization of the domain. There are points on the semiconductor beam which include interior points and boundary points. There are also points on the boundary of the bottom conductor. Therefore, the total number of points on the boundary of the structures, including the semiconductor beam and the bottom conductor, is . Note that no exterior discretization is necessary.

Image of FIG. 5.
FIG. 5.

Hybrid BIE/Poisson/Schrödinger discretization of the nanoswitch domain.

Image of FIG. 6.
FIG. 6.

Potential profile obtained by using the conventional cutoff box approach.

Image of FIG. 7.
FIG. 7.

Potential profile obtained from the hybrid BIE/Poisson approach.

Image of FIG. 8.
FIG. 8.

Degree of freedom comparison between the Poisson and the hybrid BIE/Poisson approaches ( is the point spacing).

Image of FIG. 9.
FIG. 9.

CPU time comparison between the Poisson and the hybrid BIE/Poisson approaches.

Image of FIG. 10.
FIG. 10.

Convergence comparison between the Poisson and the hybrid BIE/Poisson approaches ( is the point spacing). The error is defined by , where is the reference solution obtained by using a fine point distribution and is the computed solution obtained from the coarser point distributions.

Image of FIG. 11.
FIG. 11.

Charge density profile obtained from the semiclassical analysis.

Image of FIG. 12.
FIG. 12.

Charge density profile obtained from the quantum-mechanical analysis.

Image of FIG. 13.
FIG. 13.

Comparison of the variation of the charge density along the width obtained from semiclassical and quantum-mechanical analysis.

Image of FIG. 14.
FIG. 14.

Comparison of the variation of the potential along the width obtained from semiclassical and quantum-mechanical analysis.

Image of FIG. 15.
FIG. 15.

Comparison of the variation of the charge density along the width obtained from semiclassical and quantum-mechanical analysis.

Image of FIG. 16.
FIG. 16.

Comparison of the variation of the potential along the width obtained from semiclassical and quantum-mechanical analysis.

Image of FIG. 17.
FIG. 17.

Degree of freedom comparison between the standard and the hybrid approaches ( is the grid spacing).

Image of FIG. 18.
FIG. 18.

Convergence comparison between the standard and the hybrid approaches ( is the grid spacing). Error is defined the same way as given in the caption of Fig. 10.

Tables

Generic image for table
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/aip/journal/jap/96/4/10.1063/1.1769608
2004-08-02
2014-04-25
Loading

Full text loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
Scitation: Hybrid techniques for electrostatic analysis of nanoelectromechanical systems
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aip/journal/jap/96/4/10.1063/1.1769608
10.1063/1.1769608
SEARCH_EXPAND_ITEM