4.8 Article

Gate Oxide Degradation Condition Monitoring Technique for High-Frequency Applications of Silicon Carbide Power MOSFETs

期刊

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS
卷 38, 期 1, 页码 1079-1091

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TPEL.2022.3198291

关键词

Condition monitoring (CM); frequency spectrum; gate oxide degradation; reliability; wide bandgap

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Gate oxide degradation is a major cause of failure in both silicon and silicon carbide power MOSFETs, with the latter being more significantly affected. This article proposes a reliable fully analog condition monitoring technique to assess the reliability level of the gate oxide region with high resolution.
Gate oxide degradation, which considerably affects turn-ON/- OFF dynamics of the switch, embraces a large percentage of chip-related failure modes both in silicon and silicon carbide power MOSFETs. The gate oxide layer is thinner in silicon carbide power MOSFETs in comparison to their silicon-based counterparts. Consequently, the problem of gate oxide degradation has become a more crucial impediment in achieving reliable performance in silicon carbide power MOSFETs. This problem is even more severe in high-frequency applications due to higher EMI signature and complicated and costly measurement. In this article, a reliable fully analog cost-effective gate oxide degradation condition monitoring technique is proposed and validated. High-order harmonicsmagnitudes of drain-source voltage are used to produce a dc signal as the aging precursor of the gate oxide region. Using a dedicated degradation setup, the credibility of the developed condition monitoring technique was examined at different rates of gate oxide degradation for 650-V/22-A silicon carbide discrete MOSFET. In 200-kHz, 217-V switch operation, the proposed precursor showed 68% change in comparison to its initial value. This brings a high-resolution assessment on the reliability level of the switch gate oxide region.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据