Share Email Print
cover

Proceedings Paper

Evaluation of the KLA-Tencor 2138 for line monitoring applications
Author(s): Brian Metteer; James F. Garvin; Frank Cataldi; Albert Ng; Jon Button; Robyn Newell; Mike D. Rodriguez; Arlisa Miller
Format Member Price Non-Member Price
PDF $14.40 $18.00

Paper Abstract

This report summarizes the results of an evaluation of the KLA-Tencor (KT) 2138 Ultra-Broadband (UBB) optical inspection system performed in the DP1 development facility at Texas Instruments from July 1997 to November 1997. The purpose of this project was to evaluate the effectiveness of the new 2138 UBB system compared to a KT AIT, non-SAT tests on a KT 2135, and SAT recipes on the KT 2132. The 2138 system was designed to provide improved sensitivity and defect detection over the 2135 and other tools. In particular, the UBB illumination source utilized by the 2138 system was expected to provide a significant sensitivity improvement over the 2135 on wafers with color variation as a source of noise. The speeds of the individual pixel tests on the 2138 are the same as those on the 2135. However, it was found that the 2138 0.62 micrometer pixel tests actually found more defects than did the 0.39 micrometer pixel tests on the 2132 on the process levels where this comparison was studied. This type of comparison was not performed between the 2138 and the 2135 since SAT capability was not available on the DP1 2135 during the evaluation. Initially, the primary objective of this project was to measure the UBB system's performance as compared to the 2135 on two Memory levels and three Logic levels. However, since the DP1 2135 system did not possess segmented autothreshold (SAT) capability during this evaluation and the DP1 2132 system did possess SAT capability, the DP1 2132 was added to the evaluation for a 2138 versus 213X SAT direct comparison. Also, the AIT was added to the evaluation plan for a brightfield versus darkfield technology comparison. Finally, three additional Logic levels were added to the evaluation plan, including one Post-CMP level. During this evaluation, the 2138 was proven to be significantly more sensitive than was the 2135, 2132, and the AIT on all process levels compared. Also, very few hardware or software problems were noted during the evaluation.

Paper Details

Date Published: 8 June 1998
PDF: 10 pages
Proc. SPIE 3332, Metrology, Inspection, and Process Control for Microlithography XII, (8 June 1998); doi: 10.1117/12.308769
Show Author Affiliations
Brian Metteer, Texas Instruments Inc. (United States)
James F. Garvin, Texas Instruments Inc. (United States)
Frank Cataldi, Texas Instruments Inc. (United States)
Albert Ng, Texas Instruments Inc. (United States)
Jon Button, KLA-Tencor Corp. (United States)
Robyn Newell, KLA-Tencor Corp. (United States)
Mike D. Rodriguez, KLA-Tencor Corp. (United States)
Arlisa Miller, KLA-Tencor Corp. (United States)


Published in SPIE Proceedings Vol. 3332:
Metrology, Inspection, and Process Control for Microlithography XII
Bhanwar Singh, Editor(s)

© SPIE. Terms of Use
Back to Top