Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-tnzcf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-13T23:25:24.532Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Charge Transfer Modeling for Charge-Coupled Devices

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 February 2011

James P. Lavine,
Eric G. Stevens,
Edmund K. Banghart,
Eugene A. Trabka,
Bruce C. Burkey and
David J. Schneider
James P. Lavine
Affiliation:
Microelectronics Technology Division, Eastman Kodak Company, Rochester, NY 14650–2008
Eric G. Stevens
Affiliation:
Microelectronics Technology Division, Eastman Kodak Company, Rochester, NY 14650–2008
Edmund K. Banghart
Affiliation:
Microelectronics Technology Division, Eastman Kodak Company, Rochester, NY 14650–2008
Eugene A. Trabka
Affiliation:
Retired from Eastman Kodak Company
Bruce C. Burkey
Affiliation:
Microelectronics Technology Division, Eastman Kodak Company, Rochester, NY 14650–2008
David J. Schneider
Affiliation:
Cornell Theory Center, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853–3801
Get access

Abstract

The three-dimensional Poisson's equation is solved by iterative methods and the resulting electric field is used in Newton's equation to simulate electron transfer in a charge-coupled device (CCD). The time dependence of charge transfer is studied through a random walk simulation of Newton's equation. Potential obstacles of the order of 0.03 V are seen to slow charge transfer. Electron motion is also followed in two spatial dimensions through Newton's equation in order to probe a more varied set of potential obstacles.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

1. Theuwissen, A. J. P.. Solid-State Imaging with Charge-Coupled Devices, Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, 1995.Google Scholar
2. Varga, R. S., Matrix Iterative Analysis. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1962, Ch. 6.Google Scholar
3. Rice, J. R. and Boisvert, R. F., Solving Elliptic Problems Using ELLPACK. Springer-Verlag, New York, Ch. 1, 1985.Google Scholar
4. Joly, P. and Eymard, R., J. Computat. Phys. 91, 298 (1990).Google Scholar
5. Scharfetter, D. L. and Gummel, H. K., IEEE Trans. Electron Dev. ED-16, 64 (1969).Google Scholar
6. Lavine, J. P., Banghart, E. K., and Pimbley, J. M., in Dynamics in Small Confining Systems, edited by Drake, J. M., Klafter, J., Kopelman, R., and Awschalom, D. D. (Mater. Res. Soc. Proc. 290, Pittsburgh, PA, 1993), p. 249–254.Google Scholar
7. Lavine, J. P. and Banghart, E. K., IEEE Trans. Electron Dev. 44, 1593 (1997).Google Scholar
8. Subroutine DRNUNF of IMSL.Google Scholar
9. Suzuki, N. and Yanai, H., IEEE Trans. Electron Dev. ED-21, 73 (1974).Google Scholar
10. Elsaid, M. H., Chamberlain, S. G., and Watt, L. A. K., Solid State Electron. 20, 61 (1977).Google Scholar
11. Strunk, S. J., McMacken, J. R. F., Kamasz, S. R., Washkurak, W. D., Harling, G., Lund, J., and Pfister, W., Proc. SPIE 1693, 35 (1992).Google Scholar
12. TSUPREM-4 of Technology Modeling Associates, Palo Alto, CA 94303–4605.Google Scholar
13. MEDICI of Technology Modeling Associates, Palo Alto, CA 94303–4605.Google Scholar
14. Iesaka, M., Osawa, S., Uya, S., Egawa, Y., Matsunaga, Y., Manabe, S., and Harada, N., Extended Abstracts of the 20th Conference on Solid State Devices and Materials. Tokyo, p. 359–362 (1988).Google Scholar