Share Email Print

Proceedings Paper

Mighty high-T lithography for 65-nm generation contacts
Author(s): Will Conley; Patrick K. Montgomery; Kevin Lucas; Lloyd C. Litt; John G. Maltabes; Laurent Dieu; Gregory P. Hughes; David L. Mellenthin; Robert John Socha; Eric L. Fanucchi; Arjan Verhappen; Kurt E. Wampler; Linda Yu; Erika Schaefer; Shawn Cassel; Jan Pieter Kuijten; Wil Pijnenburg; Vincent Wiaux; Geert Vandenberghe
Format Member Price Non-Member Price
PDF $14.40 $18.00

Paper Abstract

Contact patterning for the 65nm device generation will be an exceedingly difficult task. The 2001 SIA roadmap lists the targeted contact size as 90nm with +/-10% CD control requirements of +/-9nm. Defectivity levels must also be below one failure per billion contacts for acceptable device yield. Difficulties in contact patterning are driven by the low depth of focus of isolated contacts and/or the high mask error (MEF) for dense contact arrays (in combination with expected reticle CD errors). Traditional contact lithography methods are not able to mitigate both these difficulties simultaneously. Inlaid metal trench patterning for the 65nm generation has similar lithographic difficulties though not to the extreme degree as seen with contacts. This study included the use of multiple, high transmission, 193nm attenuated phase shifting mask varieties to meet the difficult challenges of 65nm contact and trench lithography. Numerous illumination schemes, mask biasing, optical proximity correction (OPC), mask manufacturing techniques, and mask blank substrate materials were investigated. The analysis criteria included depth of focus, exposure latitude and MEF through pitch, reticle inspection, reticle manufacturability, and cost of ownership. The investigation determined that certain high transmission reticle schemes are strong contenders for 65nm generation contact and trench patterning. However, a number of strong interactions between illumination, OPC, and reticle manufacturing issues need to be considered.

Paper Details

Date Published: 26 June 2003
PDF: 10 pages
Proc. SPIE 5040, Optical Microlithography XVI, (26 June 2003); doi: 10.1117/12.485499
Show Author Affiliations
Will Conley, Motorola, Inc. (United States)
Patrick K. Montgomery, IMEC (Belgium)
Molotola, Inc. (United States)
Kevin Lucas, Motorola, Inc. (United States)
Lloyd C. Litt, Motorola, Inc. (United States)
John G. Maltabes, Motorola, Inc. (United States)
Laurent Dieu, DuPont Photomasks, Inc. (United States)
Gregory P. Hughes, DuPont Photomasks, Inc. (United States)
David L. Mellenthin, DuPont Photomasks, Inc. (United States)
Robert John Socha, ASML (United States)
Eric L. Fanucchi, Motorola, Inc. (United States)
Arjan Verhappen, ASML (Netherlands)
Kurt E. Wampler, ASML (United States)
Linda Yu, ASML (United States)
Erika Schaefer, ASML (United States)
Shawn Cassel, ASML (United States)
Jan Pieter Kuijten, ASML (Netherlands)
Wil Pijnenburg, ASML (Netherlands)
Vincent Wiaux, IMEC (Belgium)
Geert Vandenberghe, IMEC (Belgium)

Published in SPIE Proceedings Vol. 5040:
Optical Microlithography XVI
Anthony Yen, Editor(s)

© SPIE. Terms of Use
Back to Top