Share Email Print
cover

Proceedings Paper

Comparison of at-wavelenth inspection, printability, and simulation of nanometer-scale substrate defects in extreme ultraviolet lithography (EUVL)
Author(s): Gregory Frank Cardinale; John E. M. Goldsmith; Avijit K. Ray-Chaudhuri; Aaron Fisher; Scott Daniel Hector; Pawitter J. S. Mangat; Zorian S. Masnyj; David P. Mancini; Bill Wilkinson; Jeffrey Bokor; Seongtae Jeong; Scott C. Burkhart; Charles J. Cerjan; Christopher C. Walton; Cindy C. Larson; Pei-yang Yan; Guojing Zhang
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

We report on the comparison of defect printability experimental results with at-wavelength defect inspection and printability modeling at extreme ultraviolet (EUV) wavelengths. Two sets of EUV masks were fabricated with nm- scale substrate defect topographies patterned using a sacrificial layer and dry-etch process, while the absorber pattern was defined using a subtractive metal process. One set of masks employed a silicon dioxide film to produce the programmed defects, whereas the other set used chromium films. Line-, proximity- and point-defects were patterned and had lateral dimensions in the range of 0.2 micrometer X 0.2 micrometer to 8.0 micrometer X 1.5 micrometer on the EUV reticle, and a topography in the range of 8 nm - 45 nm. Substrate defect topographies were measured by atomic force microscopy (AFM) before and after deposition of EUV-reflective Mo/Si multilayers. The programmed defect masks were then characterized using an actinic inspection tool. All EUVL printing experiments were performed using Sandia's 10x- reduction EUV Microstepper, which has a projection optics system with a wavefront error less than 1 nm, and a numerical aperture of 0.088. Defect dimensions and exposure conditions were entered into a defect printability model. In this investigation, we compare the simulation predictions with experimental results.

Paper Details

Date Published: 30 December 1999
PDF: 11 pages
Proc. SPIE 3873, 19th Annual Symposium on Photomask Technology, (30 December 1999); doi: 10.1117/12.373339
Show Author Affiliations
Gregory Frank Cardinale, Sandia National Labs. (United States)
John E. M. Goldsmith, Sandia National Labs. (United States)
Avijit K. Ray-Chaudhuri, Sandia National Labs. (United States)
Aaron Fisher, Sandia National Labs. (United States)
Scott Daniel Hector, Motorola and EUV LLC (United States)
Pawitter J. S. Mangat, Motorola (United States)
Zorian S. Masnyj, Motorola (United States)
David P. Mancini, Motorola (United States)
Bill Wilkinson, Motorola (United States)
Jeffrey Bokor, Lawrence Berkeley National Lab. and Univ. of California/Berkeley (United States)
Seongtae Jeong, Lawrence Berkeley National Lab. (United States)
Scott C. Burkhart, Lawrence Livermore National Lab. (United States)
Charles J. Cerjan, Lawrence Livermore National Lab. (United States)
Christopher C. Walton, Lawrence Livermore National Lab. (United States)
Cindy C. Larson, Lawrence Livermore National Lab. (United States)
Pei-yang Yan, Intel Corp. (United States)
Guojing Zhang, Intel Corp. (United States)


Published in SPIE Proceedings Vol. 3873:
19th Annual Symposium on Photomask Technology
Frank E. Abboud; Brian J. Grenon, Editor(s)

© SPIE. Terms of Use
Back to Top