International Journal of Nanotechnology and Applications ISSN 0973-631X Volume 6, Number 1 (2012), pp.

23-41 Research India Publications http://www.ripublication.com/ijna.htm

Theoretical study on Carbon and Gallium Nitride Nanotubes based on Spin

Bagavathi C.1 and Dr. K.A. Narayanankutty2 P.G. Student, M.Tech. VLSI Design, 2Professor, Dept.of ECE, Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham, Amrita University, Coimbatore, India E-mail: 1bagavathi03amrita@gmail.com, 2ka_narayanankutty@yahoo.com
1

Abstract This work deals with the characterisation of carbon nanotube and gallium nitride nanotube through spin. Carbon nanotubes are preliminary quantum structures which had led to an interesting field of study in nano materials. Various other materials are being chequered for their unique properties in nanoscale. One such material is gallium nitride which has been noted for its wondrous characteristics of high power density, ability to emit short wavelength and many more. Spin becomes inevitable when the device enter the quantum regime. Carbon nanotube transistors have been analysed. In analysis of gallium nitride nanotube, boron nitride nanotubes give an approximate idea about the characteristics of gallium nitride nanotube. Keywords: carbon nanotubes (CNT), gallium nitride nanotube, boron nitride nanotube, spin, spintronics, carbon nanotube field effect transistors (CNTFET), carbon nanotube model

Introduction
Properties of materials radically change when their dimension falls below 100 nm. This can be explained by three effects: Significance of Quantum transactions, contribution of a till-now-hidden parameter named spin and nascent chemical nature of materials. Many of these effects can be made advantageous in various applications like optoelectronic devices, coatings, detectors and information storage. A new class of devices has also emerged by having a strong foothold on quantum of electron spin which had led to a new field of microelectronics that has not been visualized yet. Spin generally takes only two possible values, namely either up or down. This quantisation nature of spin can be utilised elegantly so that orbital electron can be used as binary

24

Bagavathi C. and Dr. K.A. Narayanankutty

information storeroom. The reasons which make spin characteristics significant are the relations between spin and quantum theory, increase in the authority of spin when the dimensions reduce and the speed and power dissipation problem at very low scales. The main advantage of utilizing spin is that it can be easily manipulated by externally applied magnetic fields and it stays the way it was defined for a long time (long coherence or relaxation time). So devices which are smaller, that consume less power and which are more powerful are possible when spin parameter is given importance in device modelling [1]. When the devices enter one dimensional regime [2], the devices are called nanostructures. One of nanostructures which were studied prominently is Carbon nanotube (CNT). CNTs are unique nanostructures that can be considered conceptually as a prototype one-dimensional (1D) quantum wire. The fundamental type of CNTs is the very long all-carbon cylindrical Single Wall Carbon Nanotube (SWCNT), one atom in wall thickness and tens of atoms around the circumference. A single-walled CNT (SWCNT) can be thought of as a rolled-up graphene sheet. By changing the direction in the roll-up, different chiralities can be created. Further, several tubes of different diameter can be fitted in a concentric fashion to make a multi - walled carbon nanotube (MWCNT). CNTs have one main advantage that it provides ballistic transport with low bias [3]. The conduction and valence bands are symmetric and hence it is suitable for complementary applications. It is mechanically robust and allows band-gap engineering [4]. It is highly resistant to electro-migration. They have highly sensitive layer and hence can be used as gas and chemical sensors [5]. They have high electrical and thermal conductivity. It is easy to control their electronic properties as this is dependent on the chirality of nanotubes. All these qualities make CNT as one of the devices for being the candidate for spin investigation [6]. Followed by CNTs, there has been a greater research in the possibility of nanotubes from various other chemical elements. The basic requirement for a material to exist as a nanotube is that it should have anisotropic crystal structure. Some materials that satisfied this property are Boron-Nitride (BN), Boron-Carbon-Nitride and Gallium Nitride (GaN). Our interest would be gallium nitride because of its potential applications in optoelectronics and high speed devices [7]. Gallium Nitride nanostructures are of particular interest because it has been shown to yield good quality wires and can be either as-grown n type or doped p type by the incorporation of magnesium during growth. The existence of carbon nanotubes implies a possibility of gallium nitride nanotubes because of their similar properties. Gallium-Nitride (GaN) nanotubes are important because of their applications in optoelectronic device and high speed devices [8]. Transistors are the core devices of microelectronics and nanotubes fulfil the criterion of a transistor as two-thirds of nanotubes are semi-conducting [9]. Nanotube transistors are obtained with nanotube as a channel between two heavily doped regions. Single walled CNTs (SWCNTs) are used in the fabrication of carbon nanotube field effect transistors (CNT-FETs), the first CNT-FETs were implemented in 1998. The structure of a CNT-FET is similar to the structure of a typical MOSFET

Theoretical study on Carbon and Gallium Nitride Nanotubes based on Spin

25

where the CNT forms the channel between two electrodes that work as the source and the drain of the transistor. CNT-based field effect transistors (CNT-FET) have resulted in excellent device performance. Due to low backscattering, ballistic transport is sustained up to micron scale, which provides high-density on-state current capability, whereas the large and diameter-dependent energetic spacing between onedimensional subbands results in tunable energy gaps, enabling the CNT-FET to operate with a very low off-state current. This paper deals with significance of spin in quantum devices like GaN nanotubes along with special features of GaN and CNTs. The paper is organised as follows: Section II describes the carbon nanotubes and its properties. Section III describes the GaN nanotubes and its diverse properties. Section IV deals with the spin aspects of nanostructures. Section V presents the working method of nanotube transistors. Section VI presents the overview of mathematical modelling of CNT transistors and resulting strategies to explore transport phenomena in Gallium Nitride nanotubes. Section VII gives the results of this model.

Carbon Nanotube
CNTs are the commonly encountered nanoelectronic material known for its distinguished properties. CNTs are unique nanostructures that can be considered conceptually as unidimensional (1D) quantum structures. CNTs are long cylinders of 3-coordinated carbon, slightly pyramidalized by curvature [10] from the pure sp2 hybridization of graphene, toward the diamond-like sp3. A single-walled CNT (SWCNT) can be thought of as a rolled-up graphene sheet in which the edges of the sheet are joined together to form a seamless tube [11]. By changing the direction in the roll-up, different chiralities can be created. Every carbon atom in SWNTs is a surface atom, which makes SWNTs electronic properties very sensitive to their environment, especially to the electron donors or acceptors which are physically absorbed on SWNTs. Such a unique material geometry makes SWNTs very good candidates for chemical sensors. Based on unique electronic properties, SWNTs can be metallic or semiconducting as predicted theoretically and observed experimentally, depending on their chirality. Further, several tubes of different diameter can be fitted into each other to make a multi-walled carbon nanotube (MWCNT). The properties of CNTs follow that of Graphene. To understand the CNT electronic band structure, we start with its ancestor: Graphene, a single Graphite sheet. A narrow strip of Graphene is severed out from the sheet in a specific direction and then rolled into a seamless cylinder. Depending on how a Graphene is rolled, various SWNTs can be formed. SWNT electronic band structures are closely related to Graphene band structure. Due to the tubular structure of SWNTs, the phase of the electron wave-function has to be identical when travelling one complete circumference of the tube. This causes a quantization of the wave vector along the circumferential direction [12]. The energies corresponding to SWNTs allowed k-states make one dimensional sub-bands.

26

Bagavathi C. and Dr. K.A. Narayanankutty

Figure 1: Graphene sheet Figure 1 shows a honeycomb Graphene sheet, a simple two-dimensional hexagonal Bravais lattice, with bases containing two identical carbon atoms. Each black dot represents a Carbon atom. The Carbon-Carbon distance in graphite is 1.42 [13]. Single walled CNTs are either metallic or semiconducting. CNT are direct bandgap materials. In a metallic single walled carbon nanotube device, the conductance is almost independent of a gate bias. In a semiconducting single walled carbon nanotube device, the conductance is modulated by a gate bias, like a FET. Thus semiconducting CNT are of prime importance in electronic devices. The electrical resistance in solid materials is due to scattering of electrons on static defects such as impurities and vacancies or interactions with lattice vibrations known as Phonons. Scattering in CNTs is different from scattering in bulk due to the lower dimensionality. In a bulk material the electrons can scatter in any direction while in a one dimensional system they can only scatter in the forward or reverse direction giving a lower probability for scattering due to the unavailability of states for the electron to reach after scattering. In addition, the wave functions near the Fermi level are delocalised and extend around the circumference which means that the electrons are not strongly affected by a static defect in the carbon nanotube wall. Transport in one dimensional system can be described using the LandauerButtiker formula which gives a conductance of G = NTe2/h where N is the number of transport channels and T the transmission probability between the source and drain contacts [14]. For a device with ideal contacts (contact resistance = 0) and a mean free path much longer than the CNT length giving negligible scattering, the transport is said to be ballistic. Measurements on short CNT segments have shown that nearly ballistic transport in CNTs is indeed possible [15]. Ballistic transport has been observed in both metallic and semiconducting SWNTs over micron length scales at low biases. In the diffusive regime, SWNTs can carry current density up to 109 A/cm2, as observed for both metallic [17] and

Theoretical study on Carbon and Gallium Nitride Nanotubes based on Spin

27

semiconducting SWNTs [18]. This current density of nanotubes is over three orders higher compared to that of copper wires. CNTs are robust at such high current densities in air and at elevated temperatures whereas metals lose the battle due to electromigration problems [19]. CNTs are very good for interconnections because of its high current handling capability. SWNTs have extremely high mobility (over 105 cm2/Vs at room temperature) in the low electric field, and very high carrier velocity (~ 2 x 107 cm/s) in the high electric field regime [18]. Due to weak spin-orbital coupling in carbon-based material, spin-scattering lengths are predicted to be very long in CNTs. They have very long mean free paths over 1 m. CNTs should be a very good conductor to preserve spin information during transport [20]. Many electronics applications of SWNTs, such as molecular circuit interconnects, single electron transistors (SETs), p-n junctions, high mobility field-effect transistors (FETs), nonvolatile memory elements, logic circuits [16], field emission elements, and so on, have been proposed and realized.

Gallium Nitride Nanotubes

Gallium Nitride is a very hard, mechanically stable wide bandgap semiconductor material with high heat capacity and thermal conductivity. It is well known for its optical properties. Gallium nitride exists in three phases which are Wurtzite, Zincblende and rock salt. The most stable form is Wurtzite structure. Boron-Nitride (BN) was the first chemical compound to replace elemental Carbon in nanotubes because of its hexagonal structure which is similar to graphite [7]. BN crystallizes in a graphite-like structure and can be simply be viewed as replacing a CarbonCarbon pair in the Graphene sheet with the iso-electronic Boron-Nitrogen pair. Replacement of the Carbon-Carbon pairs entirely by the BoronNitrogen pairs in the hexagonal network of graphite leads to the formation of a wide array of twodimensional phases that can form hollow cage structures and nanotubes [21]. The possibility of replacing Carbon-Carbon pairs by Boron-Nitrogen pairs in the hollow cage structure of C60 was predicted and verified experimentally [7]. Pure BN nanotubes have been generated by employing several procedures, yielding nanotubes with varying wall thickness and morphology. They existed in zigzag, chiral and armchair forms. It is therefore quite possible that nanotube structures of other layered materials can be prepared as well. For example, many metal halides (e.g., NiCl2), oxides (GeO2) and nitrides (GaN) crystallize in layered structures. There is a considerable interest at present to prepare attractive nanotubes and to study their properties. GaN nanotube is generally synthesized by epitaxial casting approach [22]. The method resulted in Gallium Nitride nanotubes of length 30-200 nm and wall thickness of 5-50 nm. Single crystal structure of GaN nanotube synthesized by this method was confirmed by electron diffraction measurements. It has been found that Aluminium Nitride (AlN) and Gallium Nitride (GaN) dont take up the path of carbon and BN when morphology of nanotube is considered. This calls for an appealing research in the area of Gallium Nitride nanotubes. AlN and GaN nanotubes have Wurtzite

28

Bagavathi C. and Dr. K.A. Narayanankutty

morphology directed in their tube axis. Gallium Nitride had strain energies similar to that of that of carbon. The energies of hexagonal structure of AlN and GaN low compared to their nanotube structures and hence they are stable. Moreover the delocalization in GaN is weak compared to BN. Thus GaN nanotubes are different compared to other third group nitrides [7]. Tubular morphology differences in GaN nanotubes can also be attributed to the fact that in the outer shell of GaN super-cell in the nanotube, the more electronegative atoms (Nitrogen) are pushed outward radially and Gallium atoms are pushed inwards. In the inner shell, the opposite occurs. This type of morphology is not found in carbon nanotubes where all the atoms are of the same nature [23]. Rectangular piece of infinite GaN honeycomb structure is rolled to form a nanotube. Nanotube is defined by pair of integers (n,m). It can also be defined by radius R and chiral angle . GaN nanotube (8,0) have been found to have a bandgap of 2.2 eV with semiconducting properties [24]. The nearest Gallium-Nitrogen distance is 1.8 , and the nearest Gallium-Gallium and Nitrogen-Nitrogen distances are 3.1 and 3.2 , respectively. Single walled GaN nanotube was found to be radially soft [22].

Figure 2: Gallium Nitride Nanotube Obviously, there are clear distinguishing features for GaN nanotubes based on which they differ from CNTs. GaN nanotube and CNTs are mechanically stiff in (n, n) nanotube configuration compared to (n, 0) configuration [25]. Youngs moduli of GaN nanotubes are found to be lower compared to carbon nanotubes. This claim is due to difference in bonding nature of Carbon-Carbon bond which is strong compared to Gallium-Gallium, nitrogen-nitrogen and Gallium-Nitrogen bonds [25]. Gallium Nitride nanotube is not strong compared to GaN in bulk. When subjected to strain, both GaN and CNTs respond elastically until a critical strain limit is reached. Crossing this limit, the bonds tend to get direct along axial direction rather than circumferential direction. This is results in bond rotations known as Stone Wales transformation. Compared to Gallium Nitride nanotubes which are more prone to bond breaking, CNTs are relatively robust [25]. These statements explain the difficulty and delay in developing Gallium Nitride nanotube based transistors.

Theoretical study on Carbon and Gallium Nitride Nanotubes based on Spin

29

Nascent Spin
Spin is a purely quantum mechanical quantity which provides a superfluous degree of freedom for the electron to interact with a magnetic field. Spin can also travel through devices as charge does. Therefore, adding the spin degree of freedom to conventional semiconductor charge-based electronics adds more capability and functionality to electronic devices resulting in a new field known as Spintronics [1]. Spintronics is the offspring of spin concepts and electronics. It had been first observed nearly four decades ago. The fundamental concept of spintronic devices is that when a spin associated particle is subjected to magnetic field, the particle responds to the magnetic field through its inherent spin nature. There are two specific spin states for an electron, either a spin-up or a spin-down state. This native character of spin could be exploited for binary information storage [1]. The important property of spin is its weak interaction with the environment and with other spins, resulting in a long relaxation length, which is a very important parameter in the field of spin-transport and quantum computing. Spin relaxation length is the length at which the spin signal decreases by exponent e from its initial value. The relaxation length can be controlled by switching electric field direction or changing the type of charge carriers by using gate voltage. This length is used to signify the effectiveness of a material to toil as a spintronic device. One of the effects directly inherited from spin property is the giant magneto resistance effect (GMR). The GMR effect can be obviously understood through a spin valve device. A spin valve device consists of a non magnetic material sandwiched between two ferromagnetic materials. The resistance of this device depends on the relative orientations of magnetizations of the magnetic layers. Electrons with different spins will experience different spin scattering strengths in ferromagnetic materials because the density of states for spin-up and spin-down electrons at the Fermi level in ferromagnetic materials are different; spin-up electrons travel more easily without spin scattering through the ferromagnetic material with density of spin-up electrons higher compared to density of spin-down electrons and vice versa. The nonferromagnetic middle layer in magneto resistive devices not only can be an insulator, but also semiconductor, normal metal, or superconductor for divergent purposes [1]. When the spins of the two ferromagnetic (FM) layers in the spin valve device are oriented in same direction, then the device is in parallel state with low resistance. When the spins of the two ferromagnetic (FM) layers are oriented in different direction, then the device is in antiparallel state with high resistance. Figure 3 explains the resistance change according to the relative magnetizations of the ferromagnetic regions. The simplest mechanism for giant Magneto resistive effect is that electrons from one ferromagnetic layer tunnel through non-ferromagnetic layer to the other ferromagnetic without spin scattering. The ferromagnetic layer through which the spin current penetrates the device is called the spin injector and the ferromagnetic layer which detects the spin current is called the spin detector.

30

Bagavathi C. and Dr. K.A. Narayanankutty

Figure 3: Spin configurations The main difficulty faced by researchers with spintronic devices is that the measurement of spin signals was improper due to a conductivity mismatch [26] between the layers. The resistance of the non magnetic layer (semiconductor) dominated the total resistance of the device as it was high compared to the ferromagnetic layers. The interface properties were modified to measure the spin signals. In order to maximize GMR, the spin-polarized current injected from one ferromagnetic layer needs to be preserved for a long distance. The organic devices like Graphene and CNTs are considered for spin property evaluation because these materials are expected to have high spin relaxation lengths due to small interactions. Graphene and CNTs are made up Carbon which is an element of small atomic number. The spin orbit interaction depends on the fourth power of atomic number [27]. Thus small spin orbit interaction is found in graphene and carbon nanotubes. Carbon nanotubes are of prime importance as it can be contacted with ferromagnetic leads such as Cobalt [28]. Single walled CNT is found to have weak electron spin flip scattering. CNTs showed that spin can be comprehensibly transported over 130 nm through the carbon nanotube [28]. It has also been shown that CNTs behaves ballistic quantum conductors with long phase coherence lengths for the charge carriers. Since CNTs can be very long one can expect to be able to manipulate and control the electron spin (by external parameters like gate and/or source-drain bias, magnetic field, temperature and optical excitation while it travels through the nanotube in the FET geometry. In the one dimensional limit, one can expect to observe the predicted spin-charge separation i.e., the different velocities of spin and charge excitations in CNT. Spin charge separation is a bizarre behaviour of electrons in some materials in which they split into two independent particles, the spinon and the chargon. The electron can always be theoretically considered as a bound state of the two, with the spinon

Theoretical study on Carbon and Gallium Nitride Nanotubes based on Spin

31

carrying the spin of the electron and the chargon carrying the charge. They can become deconfined and behave as independent particles. It is difficult to discriminate spin and charge transports in reputable two-terminal spin measurements. Four terminal non-local spin measurements were used to separate spin and charge transports and to demonstrate spin accumulation in CNTs. The resistance measured by this method with all four terminals to be ferromagnetic was closer to that predicted by Landauer theory. [29] Different experiments showed that CNT can behave like a quantum dot (QD) at low temperatures. Using a local gate or back-gate one can tune the energy levels of CNT-based Quantum Dot. CNTs, contacted with ferromagnetic electrodes, offer spin transport in CNT-based Quantum Dot. A Quantum dot is considered as an artificial atom with specific spin ground state. The total spin of a quantum dot depends on the number of electrons present in the dot. For an even number of electrons, total spin is either 0 or 1 and for an odd number of electrons total spin is 1/2.

Nanotube Transistors
Nanotube transistors are achieved with nanotube used as a channel in the transistor architecture. SWCNTs are used in the fabrication of CNT field effect transistors (CNT-FET) where the first CNT-FETs were implemented in 1998. CNTs were considered for the transistor channels because of its high current carrying capability, simple integration with other semiconductors and excellent performance. The structure of a CNT-FET is similar to the structure of a typical MOSFET where the CNT forms the channel between two electrodes that work as the source and the drain of the transistor. Carbon nanotubes-based field effect transistors (CNT-FET) have resulted in excellent device performance. Due to low backscattering, ballistic transport is sustained up to micron scale, which provides high-density on-state current capability, whereas the large and diameter-dependent energetic spacing between onedimensional sub-bands results in tunable energy gaps, enabling the CNT-FET to operate with a very low off-state current. The CNTFET devices are usually fabricated on silicon/silicon dioxide substrate from suspension or grown directly on the sample. When silicon based substrate is used, the substrate acts as a back gate for the transistor. Many other variations have been proposed with various materials acting as side gates [30] and top gates [31]. In conventional MOSFET, the source and drain are heavily doped regions whose polarity is opposite to that of channel doping polarity. It is a known fact that the controlled doping of CNT is difficult. Instead of heavily doped regions for source and drain, metals are used. It is also hard to control the position and density of CNT. Hence the transistors should be synthesized individually. There are a lot of deviations when the device is being imitated due to the obscurity of reproducing the exact fabrication conditions and constraints. Now there have been several methods to conquer these restrictions. Initially the working of CNTFET was considered to be similar to that of traditional MOSFET. The actual domineering factor in CNTFET is the potential barriers between CNT and the metals which subjugated the transport characteristics

32

Bagavathi C. and Dr. K.A. Narayanankutty

[32]. These barriers are very common in metal-semiconductor junctions which are known as Schottky barriers. These barriers are formed due to mismatch in the work function of metal and electron affinity of semiconductors. Schottky barrier is an important phenomenon which determines the type and magnitude of current, current ratio and switching. For a transistor to comply the standards of logic computation, it has to have high on/off current ratio. If the Schottky barrier of one carrier is increased, the other will be decreased. If both carriers have similar barriers, it is not suitable for logic applications. There have been reports about zero Schottky barriers with help of palladium contacts [15]. With the barrier restriction out of the way, CNTFET behaves in a similar manner as that of conventional MOSFETs. CNT modelling is essential for Gallium Nitride nanotube (GaNNT) because both materials are of similar structural stability and electronic characteristics [33]. The strain energies of carbon nanotube and Gallium Nitride nanotube are similar.

Figure 4: Carbon nanotube Field Effect Transistor Inorganic nanotubes such as BN have been synthesized by using CNT as a seed in arc discharge method. This leads to the possibility of other inorganic third (III) group nitride nanotubes such as Gallium Nitride. Thus modelling of CNT is given more importance. Carbon nanotube transistors have been under study for more than a decade. Gallium nitride nanotube transistors are under the current subject of investigation.

CNT Model
The device characteristics of CNTFET have to be understood for proper utilization of CNTFET in various applications. The CNTFET model described in this work models intrinsic channel region and full device performance [34][35]. This model is applicable to one dimensional device with density of states appropriately modified. This model of CNTFET is valid for wide range of chiralities and diameters, metallic or semiconducting carbon-nanotube (CNT) conducting channel. It includes circumferential and axial quantum confinement, the acoustical/optical phonon scattering, which are incoherent scattering process, in the channel region and intrinsic

Theoretical study on Carb and Gallium Nitride Nanotubes based on Spin bon

33

ac behaviour by a dynam gate capacitance network. Multiple CNT are used under mic same gate to increase th current characteristics. The effect of eac CNT on its he ch neighbours (screening eff fect) will be included. The complete device model includes channel elastic scattering which deals with dependence of device p g performance on carrier energy. Doped sou urce and drain may act as interconnects be etween adjacent devices. Capacitance and r resistance of source/drain extension regions a included for are analysis. The heavily do oped source and drain regions are conne ected to metal electrodes which require a study about the Schottky barrier resistance.

Figure 5: Equivalent model of intrinsic channel [34] : Semiconducting sub ba current is dominated by n-type carriers d to heavily nand due doped source and drain. Th total current in semiconducting sub band i the difference he is between the current from source to drain and the current from d m drain to source. Acoustic and optical pho onon scatterings are considered in the calcu ulation of semi conducting subband curre ents which are dependent on carrier energ and channel gy surface potential change with gate/drain bias. Metallic sub band c current requires consideration of both n-type and p-type carriers. Metallic sub b band current is independent of carrier en nergy because density of states is indepen ndent of carrier energy. Band-to-band tun nneling becomes significant if the device is in subthreshold region. When tunneling occurs, holes get accumulated near source which lowers e surface potential and increases the current. Tunneling current thr rough drain is considered. The main challenge o the model is in calculation of channel su of urface potential change with gate/drain bia The channel surface potential change with gate/drain bias as. h B was calculated by a applying conservation of charge to electrostatic capacitor model. This procedure h to be done iteratively to calculate B since all the had equations dependent on ea other [34]. Instead the calculation can be done by using ach e an empirical model (1) for the calculation of surface potential change with gate/drain bias can be used [36].

34

Bagavathi C. and Dr. K.A. Narayanankutty

(1) The advantage of such a proposal is that the iterative procedure [34] need not be performed when semi empirical model is chosen. This also preserves the working of the model.

Results
A (19, 0) carbon nanotube is considered for the simulation. The model parameters used in this simulation are given in table 1. Table 1: Input Parameters

Theoretical study on Carbon and Gallium Nitride Nanotubes based on Spin

35

Intrinsic channel model [34] includes quantum confinement (circumferential, axial), the acoustical/optical phonon scattering in the channel region, and screening effect by parallel CNTs for CNTFET with multiple CNTs and intrinsic ac behaviour by a dynamic gate capacitance network. The design values obtained by employing appropriate formulas, we get the following results. The model is run in Synopsys HSPICE for the overall voltage and current relationship. The model is run in MATLAB which resulted in complete analysis of the device characteristics. The parameters obtained by running the model in MATLAB are given in table 2. Table 2: Results from MATLAB for (19, 0) CNT

The carrier energy of first and second sub bands for various sub states are shown in the figure 6. The energy of the first sub band is lower compared to second implying that the energy required for carriers in the first sub band is less. The kinetic energy of the two bands is also plotted. The phonon scattering alters the mean free path of a device based on the density of states and carrier energy.

36

Bagavathi C. and Dr. K.A. Narayanankutty

Figure 6: Plot of energy vs sub states in first and second sub bands The mean free path due to acoustic and optical phonon scattering is high in first sub band compared to second sub band.

Figure 7: Effective mean free path due to acoustic and optical phonon scattering The transmission probability is the probability of a carrier to move from one end to another end of the device. It is required to be high for good performance of device. Reflection probability is the probability of a carrier to get reflected. In first sub band, it is seen that for first few sub states, the transmission probability is high and reflection probability is low as shown in figure 8.

Theoretical study on Carbon and Gallium Nitride Nanotubes based on Spin

37

Figure 8: Transmission and Reflection probability of first and second sub band. The charge from source is quite high in the first sub band and correspondingly the current in first sub band is of the order 1.2 x 10-3 A. Compared to first, the charge from the source and the current in sub band of second sub band is low. It is of the order 10-8 as shown in figure 9. In FET, the gate voltage controls the flow of carriers in the channel. The gate is insulated from the channel by an insulator whose thickness is thin enough for the gate to have sufficient control on the flow of carriers and thick enough so that carriers do not affect the gate. Thus in FET, the movement of carriers should not induce any charge on the gate.

Figure 9: Charge from source and current in the subband

38

Bagavathi C. and Dr. K.A. Narayanankutty

When substrate is considered, the channel is adjacent to channel. There is induction of negative charge on substrate due to movement of carriers. It is seen in figure 10 that the charge induced on gate is negligible of order 10-26. The charge induced on substrate is of order 10-10 which is also negligible.

Figure 10: Charge induced on gate and substrate in the first sub band Thus CNTFET can be proved to have FET characteristics.

Conclusion
CNTs and BN nanotube were considered as a prelude to the study of GaN nanotubes. CNT was analyzed and its features have been verified to correlate exactly as a FET channel. It has been verified that the first subband of CNT transistor has the least energy, maximum transmission probability and high mean free path compared to the second subband. The charge induced on gate is found to be negligible proving the working of a field effect transistor. On similar grounds, the GaN nanotube transistor can also be formulated by incorporating the differences of GaN nanotubes from CNTs.

References
[1] Sankar Das Sharma, Spintronics, American Scientist, volume 89, pp 516 523, 2001. [2] Anatoli Korkin and Federico Rosei, Nanoelectronics and Photonics, From Atoms to Materials, Devices, and Architectures Springer, 2008.

Theoretical study on Carbon and Gallium Nitride Nanotubes based on Spin

39

[3] Ali Javey, Jing Guo, Qian Wang, Mark Lundstrom and Hongjie Dai, Ballistic carbon nanotube field-effect transistors, Nature, volume 424, pp 654 657, 2003. [4] Paul Holister, Tim E Harper, Cristina Roman Vas, Nanotubes White paper, CMP Cientifica, 2003. [5] J. Suehiro, G. Zhou and M. Hara, Fabrication of a carbon nanotube-based gas sensor using dielectrophoresis and its application for ammonia detection by impedance spectroscopy, Journal of Applied Physics, volume 36, pp 109 114, 2003. [6] S. Sahoo, T. Kontos, J. Furer, C. Hoffmann, M. Grber, A. Cottet and C. Schnenberger, Electric Field Control of Spin Transport, Nature Physics, volume 1, 2005. [7] Min Zhang, Zhong Min Su, Li Kai Yan, Yong Qing Qiu, Gua Hua Chen, Rong Shun Wang, Theoretical interpretation of different nanotube morphologies among Group III (B, Al, Ga) nitrides, Chemical Physics Letters, volume 408, pp 145 149, 2005. [8] M.C. Lu, Y.L. Chueh, L.J. Chen, L.J. Chou, H.L. Hsiao and An Ba Yang, Synthesis and Formation Mechanism of Gallium Nitride Nanotubular Structure, Electrochemical and Solid State Letters, volume 8, pp 153 155, 2005. [9] A Bachtold, P. Hadley, T.Nakanishi and C. Dekker, Logic circuits with carbon nanotube transistors, Science, volume 294, 2001. [10] John E. Fischer, Carbon Nanotubes: Structure and Properties, NanoMaterials Handbook, 2006. [11] Franz Kreupl Carbon Nanotubes in Microelectronic Applications Advanced Micro & Nanosystems Carbon Nanotube Devices, volume 8, 2008. [12] N. Hamada, S. Sawada and A.Oshiyama, New One-dimensional conductors Graphitic Microtubules, Physical Review Letters, volume 68, pp 1579 1581, 1992. [13] M. S. Dresselhaus, G. Dresselhaus, and P. Avouris, Carbon Nanotubes: Synthesis, Structure, Properties and Applications, Springer-Verlag, volume 80, 2001. [14] Y. Imry and R. Landauer, Conductance viewed as transmission, Review of Modern Physics, volume 71, pp 306 312, 1999. [15] A. Javey, J. Guo, Q. Wang, M. Lundstrom, and H. Dai, Ballistic carbon nanotube field-effect transistors, Nature, volume 424, pp 654 657, 2003. [16] Adrian Bachtold, Peter Hadley, Takeshi Nakanishi, Cees Dekker, Logic circuits with carbon nanotube transistors, Science, volume 294, pp 1317 1320, 2001. [17] Z.Yao, C.L. Kane and C.Dekker, High field electrical transport in single-wall carbon nanotubes, Physical Review Letters, volume 84, pp 2941 2944, 2000. [18] Y. F. Chen and M.S. Fuhrer, Electric-field-dependent charge carrier velocity in semiconducting carbon nanotubes, Physical Review Letters, volume 95, 2005.

40

Bagavathi C. and Dr. K.A. Narayanankutty

[19] A.Javey, J. Guo, M.Paulsson, Q. Wang, M. Lundstrom and H.J.Dai, Highfield quasiballistic transport in short carbon nanotubes, Physical Review Letters, volume 92, 2004. [20] B. Nagabhirava, T. Bansal, G. U. Sumanasekara, B.W. Alphenaar and L.Liu, Gated spin transport through an individua; single wall carbon nanotube, Applied Physics Letters, volume 88, 2006. [21] H. Hohmann, Advanced nanomaterials, Power Technology Laboratory, IMX, EPFL, 2009. [22] Joshua Goldberger, Rongrui He, Yanfeng Zhang, Sangkwon lee, Haoquan Yan, Heon Jin Choi, Peidong Yang, Single Crystal gallium nitride nanotubes, Nature, volume 422, pp 599 602, 2003. [23] K. Rezouali, M.A. Belkhir, An ab initio Study of a Model of Single Wall GaN Nanotubes with oxygen and zinc as Impurities: Structural and Electronic Properties, Acta Physica Polonica A, volume 113, pp 713 722, 2008. [24] Engin Durgun, Salim Ciraci, A Theoretical study on silicon and III-V compound nanotubes Journal of Turk Physics, volume 29, pp 307 318, 2005. [25] Yeau Ren Jeng, Ping Chi Tsai and Te Hua Fang, Tensile Deformation of Tubular Structures of Nitride-based Nanotubes: Brittle and Weak Behavior, Tamkang Journal of Science and Engineering, volume 8, pp 191 195, 2005. [26] A Cottet, T Kontos, S Sahoo, H T Man, M S Choi, W Belzig, C Bruder, A F Morpurgo and C Schonenberger, Nanospintronics with carbon nanotubes, Semiconductor Science and Technology, volume 21, pp 78 95, 2006. [27] I. Zutic, J. Fabian and S. Das Sarma, Reviews of Modern Physics, volume 76, 2004 [28] Kazuhito Tsukagoshi, Bruce W Alphenaar and Hiroki Ago, Coherent transport of electron spin in a ferromagnetically contacted carbon nanotube, Nature, volume 401, pp 572 574, 1999. [29] N Tombros, S J Van der Molen and B J van Wees, Separating spin and charge transport in single wall carbon nanotubes, Physical Review, volume 73, 233403, 2006. [30] K. Ishibashi, M. Suzuki, T. Ida, and Y. Aoyagi, Formation of coupled quantum dots in single-wall carbon nanotubes, Applied Physics Letters, volume 79, pp 1864 1866, 2001. [31] S. J. Wind, J. Appenzeller, R. Martel, V. Derycke, and P. Avouris, Fabrication and electrical characterization of top gate single-wall carbon nanotube fieldeffect transistors, Journal Vac. Science and Technoogyl B, volume 20, pp 2798 2801, 2002. [32] R. Martel, T. Schmidt, H. R. Shea, T. Hertel, and Ph. Avouris, Single-and multi-wall carbon nanotube field-effect transistors, Applied Physics Letters, volume 73, pp 2447 - 2449, 1998. [33] Lee, S. M., Lee, Y. H., Hwang, Y. G., Elsner, J. and Porezag, D., Frauenheim, Stability and Electronic Structure of GaN Nanotubes from Density-Functional Calculations, Physical Review B, volume 60, pp 7788-7791, 1999.

Theoretical study on Carbon and Gallium Nitride Nanotubes based on Spin

41

[34] Jie Deng, H.S. Philip Wong, A compact SPICE Model for Carbon nanotube Field-Effect Transistors Including Nonidealities and Its Application Part I: Model of the Intrinsic Channel Region, IEEE Transactions on Electron Devices, volume 54, pp 3186 3194, 2007. [35] Jie Deng, H.S. Philip Wong, A Compact SPICE Model for Carbon nanotube Field-Effect Transistors Including Nonidealities and Its Application Part II: Full Device Model and Circuit Performance Benchmarking, IEEE Transactions on Electron Devices, volume 54, pp 3195 3205, 2007. [36] Gennaro Gelao, Roberto Marani, Roberto Diana, Anna Gina Perri, A Semi empirical SPICE Model for n-Type Conventional CNTFETs IEEE Transactions on Nanotechnology, volume 10, pp 506 512, 2011