Share Email Print

Proceedings Paper

Evaluating the potential of alternating phase-shift masks using lithography simulation
Author(s): Christoph M. Friedrich; Klaus Ergenzinger; Fritz Gans; Andreas Grassmann; Uwe A. Griesinger; Juergen Knobloch; Leonhard Mader; Wilhelm Maurer; Rainer Pforr
Format Member Price Non-Member Price
PDF $14.40 $18.00
cover GOOD NEWS! Your organization subscribes to the SPIE Digital Library. You may be able to download this paper for free. Check Access

Paper Abstract

This paper quantifies the expected gain in the process window of 150nm structures printed with DUV for alt PSM vs. COG masks and HT PSM. Most of the analysis was performed for dense lines and isolated lines using lithography simulation. Alt PSM show an increase of dose latitude by 9 percent and an improved DOF by 0.2 micrometers for dense liens. For isolated lines the real advantage is seen in the increase of DOF by 0.7 micrometers . Furthermore it will be demonstrated, that alternating PSM can improve the imagin performance of contacts significantly over competitive techniques. Chromeless PSM may push the ultimate resolution limit. However to vary the linewidth three adjacent quartz edges must be used, since two phase edges are instable in defocus. A phase shifting region needs to exceed a minimum width in order to enhance the contrast of the aerial image of the whole feature. Experimental data and simulations show that the required minimum phase-shifter width for an isolated line is in the region of 400nm. Simulation and experiment show, that 90 degrees edges are very sensitive to defocus and neighboring patterns. Using a 3D mask simulator, correction values for etch depth and parameters for a lateral underetch were determined in order to achieve intensity balancing for alt PSM for various feature sizes.

Paper Details

Date Published: 26 July 1999
PDF: 10 pages
Proc. SPIE 3679, Optical Microlithography XII, (26 July 1999); doi: 10.1117/12.354371
Show Author Affiliations
Christoph M. Friedrich, Siemens AG (Germany)
Klaus Ergenzinger, Siemens AG (Germany)
Fritz Gans, Siemens AG (Germany)
Andreas Grassmann, Siemens AG (Germany)
Uwe A. Griesinger, Siemens AG (Germany)
Juergen Knobloch, Siemens AG (Germany)
Leonhard Mader, Siemens AG (Germany)
Wilhelm Maurer, Siemens AG (United States)
Rainer Pforr, Siemens AG (Germany)

Published in SPIE Proceedings Vol. 3679:
Optical Microlithography XII
Luc Van den Hove, Editor(s)

© SPIE. Terms of Use
Back to Top