One time programmable (OTP) and multi-time programmable (MTP) memories have been recently introduced for beneficial use in a number of applications where customization is required for both digital and analog designs. These applications include data encryption, reference trimming, manufacturing ID, security ID, and many other applications. Incorporating OTP and MTP memories nonetheless typically comes at the expense of some additional processing steps.
A new form of OTP is disclosed in the aforementioned U.S. application Ser. No. 12/264,029 and which is incorporated by reference herein. In that disclosure, a new type of single-poly non-volatile memory device structure can be operated either as an OTP (one time programmable) or as an MTP (multiple time programmable) memory cell is disclosed. The device structure is fully compatible with advanced CMOS logic process, and would require, at the worst case, very minimal additional steps to implement. A unique aspect of the device is that the floating gate of the memory cell structure is electrically coupled strongly through one of the S/D junctions of the transistor, whereas traditional single poly nonvolatile memory cells require either an additional interconnect layer to couple to the floating gate, or the floating gate has virtually none or minimal electrical coupling to any of the existing electrical signals.
Another key feature is that it is implemented with an NMOS device structure, whereas the traditional single-poly OTP is commonly implemented with a PMOS device structure. This means that the device can be formed at the same time as other n-channel devices on a wafer.
Another advantage of an NMOS device structure is that it behaves similar to an EPROM device, i.e., the device is programmed into a non-conducting state from a conducting state. (The most commonly used PMOS OTP device is programmed from a non-conducting state into a conducting state). This can eliminate the need of an additional masking step that is commonly associated with a PMOS OTP device in order to make sure that PMOS device is in a non-conducting state coming out of the manufacturing fab. In addition, since an NMOS device's programming mechanism with channel hot electrons injection is self-limiting, unlike that case of a PMOS with channel hot electron programming, the amount of energy consumption during programming is self-limited for this invention.
An additional benefit of the aforementioned device is the fact that multi-level functionality can be incorporated very easily by simply employing different forms of variable electrical coupling as discussed below. The ability to have OTP and MTP cells capable of storing n bits—instead of merely one—is believed to be unique to the aforementioned device.
Another NMOS OTP implementation is disclosed by U.S. Pat. No. 6,920,067, incorporated by reference herein. The device in this reference is programmed with channel hot-hole-injection. The disclosure teaches that the device is programmed into conducting state, after the channel hot hole injection. However, it is unclear whether the device actually works in the way the inventors claim. That is, it is not apparent that the channel current will be initiated to induce hot-hole-injection since the state of the floating gate is unknown and there is no available means to couple a voltage unto the floating gate. An NMOS device will conduct a channel current to initiate the hot hole injection only when the floating gate potential is sufficient to turn on the device, or when the threshold voltage is always low initially to allow channel current conduction. The only way to ensure either scenario is to introduce an additional process step to modify the turn on characteristics of the NMOS. Now assuming the channel is conducting initially and hot holes are injected, the holes injected on the floating gate will make the device more conductive. So the device basically goes from a conductive state (in order to initiate channel current for hot hole injection) to a highly conductive state. This is not a very optimal behavior for a memory device.
Another prior art device described in U.S. publication no. 2008/0186772 (incorporated by reference herein) shows a slightly different approach to the problem of providing a programming voltage to a floating gate embodiment of an OTP device. In this design, shown in FIG. 4, the drain border length L1 is increased relative to the source side length L1 to increase a coupling ratio to the eraseable floating gate 416. By increasing the coupling ratio, the amount of channel current is increased; therefore the charge injection into the floating gate will also increase. The drawbacks of this cell, however, include the fact that the cell and channel 412 must be asymmetric, and the coupling is only controlled using the length dimension of the active regions. Because of these limitations, it also does not appear to be extendable to a multi-level architecture. Moreover, it apparently is only implemented as a p-channel device.
Accordingly there is clearly a long-felt need for a floating gate type programmable memory which is capable of addressing these deficiencies in the prior art.
USPTO Backgrounds
USPTO Backgrounds