Share Email Print
cover

Proceedings Paper • new

Creating nonideality: enabling cross-platform process matching solutions with MPC (and a lot of hard work)
Author(s): Charles Whiting; Ingo Bork; Peter Buck; Robin Chia; Bharadwaj Durvasula; Daniel M. Hill; Gazi Huda; Ken Jantzen; Matthew Leuthold; Jianliang Li; Joerg Mellmann; Kushlendra Mishra; Jed Rankin; Nageswara Rao; Malavika Sharma; Rachit Sharma; Adam Smith; Michaela Wentz
Format Member Price Non-Member Price
PDF $17.00 $21.00

Paper Abstract

The bulk of photomask demand is in technology nodes ≥65nm, using equipment, processes, and materials developed more than two decades ago1. Despite mature processes and tools, mask makers are challenged to meet continuing demand. The challenge comes not only in the forms of increased demand, but also that much of the equipment is approaching the end of its viable lifetime to support and maintain due to parts or expertise availability2. Mask writers in particular are problematic from a technical and financial perspective. Modern equipment and processes can be “too good” to simply use as a direct substitute when original equipment or processes become unavailable During initial lithography and device integration, device manufacturers tailored Optical Proximity Correction (OPC) and other wafer processing conditions based on the original mask signature for multiple mask layers. Changing to state-of-the-art mask fidelity would actually represent a liability, as the altered mask character could result in device shifts, yield reduction, or even unanticipated reliability failures. To account for the improved fidelity, re-optimization of the synergistic patterning between mask, wafer lithography and etch is required. Even on mature technologies, reintegration can require costly, difficult, and time-consuming requalification. While this path has often been pursued when manufacturers declare EOL of tools, we propose instead to contain the change in the mask shop by using Mask Process Corrections (MPC)3. Instead of using MPC to maximize mask fidelity, as is done in advanced nodes, we use MPC to replicate the original mask non-idealities on a new mask process.

Paper Details

Date Published: 16 October 2019
PDF: 12 pages
Proc. SPIE 11148, Photomask Technology 2019, 1114805 (16 October 2019); doi: 10.1117/12.2538347
Show Author Affiliations
Charles Whiting, GLOBALFOUNDRIES Inc. (United States)
Ingo Bork, Mentor, a Siemens Business (United States)
Peter Buck, Mentor, a Siemens Business (United States)
Robin Chia, Mentor, a Siemens Business (Singapore)
Bharadwaj Durvasula, Mentor, a Siemens Business (India)
Daniel M. Hill, GLOBALFOUNDRIES Inc. (United States)
Gazi Huda, Mentor, a Siemens Business (United States)
Ken Jantzen, Mentor, a Siemens Business (United States)
Matthew Leuthold, GLOBALFOUNDRIES Inc. (United States)
Jianliang Li, Mentor, a Siemens Business (United States)
Joerg Mellmann, Mentor, a Siemens Business (United States)
Kushlendra Mishra, Mentor, a Siemens Business (India)
Jed Rankin, GLOBALFOUNDRIES Inc. (United States)
Nageswara Rao, Mentor, a Siemens Business (India)
Malavika Sharma, Mentor, a Siemens Business (India)
Rachit Sharma, Mentor, a Siemens Business (India)
Adam Smith, GLOBALFOUNDRIES Inc. (United States)
Michaela Wentz, GLOBALFOUNDRIES Inc. (United States)


Published in SPIE Proceedings Vol. 11148:
Photomask Technology 2019
Jed H. Rankin; Moshe E. Preil, Editor(s)

© SPIE. Terms of Use
Back to Top