Share Email Print
cover

Proceedings Paper

Checking design conformance and optimizing manufacturability using automated double patterning decomposition
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

Delays in equipment availability for both Extreme UV and High index immersion have led to a growing interest in double patterning as a suitable solution for the 22nm logic node. Double patterning involves decomposing a layout into two masking layers that are printed and etched separately so as to provide the intrinsic manufacturability of a previous lithography node with the pitch reduction of a more aggressive node. Most 2D designs cannot be blindly shrunk to run automatically on a double patterning process and so a set of guidelines for how to layout for this type of flow is needed by designers. While certain classes of layout can be clearly identified and avoided based on short range interactions, compliance issues can also extend over large areas of the design and are hard to recognize. This means certain design practices should be implemented to provide suitable breaks or performed with layout tools that are double patterning compliance aware. The most striking set of compliance errors result in layout on one of the masks that is at the minimum design space rather than the relaxed space intended. Another equally important class of compliance errors is that related to marginal printability, be it poor wafer overlap and/or poor process window (depth of focus, dose latitude, MEEF, overlay). When decomposing a layout the tool is often presented with multiple options for where to cut the design thereby defining an area of overlap between the different printed layers. While these overlap areas can have markedly different topologies (for instance the overlap may occur on a straight edge or at a right angled corner), quantifying the quality of a given overlap ensures that more robust decomposition solutions can be chosen over less robust solutions. Layouts which cannot be decomposed or which can only be decomposed with poor manufacturability need to be highlighted to the designer, ideally with indications on how best to resolve this issue. This paper uses an internally developed automated double pattern decomposition tool to investigate design compliance and describes a number of classes of non-conforming layout. Tool results then provide help to the designer to achieve robust design compliant layout.

Paper Details

Date Published: 12 March 2008
PDF: 8 pages
Proc. SPIE 6925, Design for Manufacturability through Design-Process Integration II, 69251Q (12 March 2008); doi: 10.1117/12.774647
Show Author Affiliations
Chris Cork, Synopsys SARL (France)
Brian Ward, Synopsys, Inc. (United States)
Levi Barnes, Synopsys Technology Park (United States)
Ben Painter, Synopsys Technology Park (United States)
Kevin Lucas, Synopsys, Inc. (United States)
Gerry Luk-Pat, Synopsys, Inc. (United States)
Vincent Wiaux, IMEC (Belgium)
Staf Verhaegen, IMEC (Belgium)
Mireille Maenhoudt, IMEC (Belgium)


Published in SPIE Proceedings Vol. 6925:
Design for Manufacturability through Design-Process Integration II
Vivek K. Singh; Michael L. Rieger, Editor(s)

© SPIE. Terms of Use
Back to Top