Share Email Print

Proceedings Paper

Pitch doubling through dual-patterning lithography challenges in integration and litho budgets
Author(s): Mircea Dusa; John Quaedackers; Olaf F. A. Larsen; Jeroen Meessen; Eddy van der Heijden; Gerald Dicker; Onno Wismans; Paul de Haas; Koen van Ingen Schenau; Jo Finders; Bert Vleeming; Geert Storms; Patrick Jaenen; Shaunee Cheng; Mireille Maenhoudt
Format Member Price Non-Member Price
PDF $17.00 $21.00

Paper Abstract

We present results from investigating critical challenges of pitch doubling through Double Patterning to meet manufacturing requirements for 32nm 1/2 pitch on 1.2NA lithography system. Simulations of lithography alternatives identified manufacturable Dose-Focus latitudes for a dual-line positive process option which led to an experimental setup based on a single hardmask process. Key challenges of the selected process relate to the presence or absence of the hardmask layer during 1st or 2nd patterning step. This has an effect on wafer topography, process setup, etch bias and wafer litho-to-etch CDU offsets, which will create two final CDU populations. Therefore, there are two metrology challenges, separation between the two CD populations and overlay-at-resolution using CDSEM. They were addressed by designing appropriate CD and overlay targets and by implementing an adequate dense sampling allowing modeling of wafer and field CD distributions. We introduced a new CDU model to calculate double patterning budgets based on defining CD from its edges and pooling CD variance from two adjacent patterns within 2*Pitch distance. For a single line and 1.35NA system, the model predicted 3.1nm variance with mask CDU and etch bias being the major contributors. We achieved an experimental resolution of 32-nm 1/2 pitch on 1.2NA system, which equals 0.20k1. Experimental results at 32-nm resolution were confirmed in a pre-manufacturing environment on a full lot of 24 wafers, with raw CDU of 6nm (3s). After modeling and correcting for interfield (wafer) and intrafield spatial distributions, CDU was improved to 2.5nm (3s). Best overlay results equaled scanner SMO capability of ~7nm (mean+3s).

Paper Details

Date Published: 27 March 2007
PDF: 10 pages
Proc. SPIE 6520, Optical Microlithography XX, 65200G (27 March 2007); doi: 10.1117/12.714278
Show Author Affiliations
Mircea Dusa, ASML US Inc. (United States)
John Quaedackers, ASML Netherlands B.V. (Netherlands)
Olaf F. A. Larsen, ASML Netherlands B.V. (Netherlands)
Jeroen Meessen, ASML Netherlands B.V. (Netherlands)
Eddy van der Heijden, ASML Netherlands B.V. (Netherlands)
Gerald Dicker, ASML Netherlands B.V. (Netherlands)
Onno Wismans, ASML Netherlands B.V. (Netherlands)
Paul de Haas, ASML Netherlands B.V. (Netherlands)
Koen van Ingen Schenau, ASML Netherlands B.V. (Netherlands)
Jo Finders, ASML Netherlands B.V. (Netherlands)
Bert Vleeming, ASML Netherlands B.V. (Netherlands)
Geert Storms, IMEC (Belgium)
Patrick Jaenen, IMEC (Belgium)
Shaunee Cheng, IMEC (Belgium)
Mireille Maenhoudt, IMEC (Belgium)

Published in SPIE Proceedings Vol. 6520:
Optical Microlithography XX
Donis G. Flagello, Editor(s)

© SPIE. Terms of Use
Back to Top
Sign in to read the full article
Create a free SPIE account to get access to
premium articles and original research
Forgot your username?