Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-75dct Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-16T18:03:56.526Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A Kinetic Study of the C49 to C54 Conversion in TiSi2 Using Electrical Resistivity Measurements on Single Sub-Micron Lines

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 February 2011

K. L. Saenger
Affiliation:
IBM Research Division, T.J. Watson Research Center, Yorktown Heights, NY.
C. Cabral Jr
Affiliation:
IBM Research Division, T.J. Watson Research Center, Yorktown Heights, NY.
L. A. Clevenger
Affiliation:
IBM Research Division, T.J. Watson Research Center, Yorktown Heights, NY.
R. A. Roy
Affiliation:
IBM Research Division, T.J. Watson Research Center, Yorktown Heights, NY.
Get access

Abstract

A simple, quasi-in situ resistivity technique was used to examine the C49 to C54 conversion kinetics of TiSi2 on sub-micron (0.2 to 1.1 μm) line structures formed in a self-aligned silicide (salicide) process. This technique was used to examine both aggregate conversion vs. time behavior and individual-line conversion vs. time behavior as a function of linewidth and polysilicon doping. As linewidth decreased, aggregate conversion vs. time at temperature behavior slowed, and the conversion behaviors shown by nominally identical lines became more variable. Four line behaviors were identified on the narrowest lines: short incubation/prompt conversion, gradual conversion, incomplete conversion, and no conversion. These behaviors are compared to those predicted by the Avrami equation, and to those predicted for a nucleation-site-density controlled reaction under conditions of low nucleation density. It is suggested that C49-C54 conversion in narrow lines may be primarily limited not by the number of C54 nucleation events, but by the presence of randomly occurring line-edge “defect” sites which slow and/or halt C54 grain growth.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Lasky, J.B., Nakos, J.S., Cain, O.J., and Geiss, P.J., IEEE Trans. Electron Devices, ED–38, 262 (1991).Google Scholar
2. See, for example: Ganin, E., Wind, S., Ronsheim, P., Yapsir, A., Barmak, K., Bucchignano, J., Assenza, R., Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 302, 109 (1993); C. Blair, E. Demirlioglu, E.Yoon, and J. Pierce, Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 320, 53 (1994); T. Ohguro, S.-I. Nakamura, M. Koike, T. Morimoto, A. Nishiyama, Y. Ushiku, T. Yoshitomi, M. Ono, M.Saito, H. Iwai, IEEE Trans. Electron Devices ED-41, 2305 (1994).Google Scholar
3. Saenger, K.L., Cabral, C., Jr., Clevenger, L.A., Roy, R.A., and Wind, S., J. Appl. Phys. 78, 7040 (1995).Google Scholar
4. Christian, J.W., Theory of Transformation in Metals and Alloys, 2nd edition, (Pergamon, Oxford, 1981), Part 1.Google Scholar
5. Clevenger, L.A., Hong, Q.Z., Mann, R., Harper, J.M.E., Barmak, K., Cabral, C. Jr., Nobili, C., and Ottaviani, G., Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 311, 253 (1993).Google Scholar
6. Kittl, J.A., Prinslow, D.A., Apte, P.P., and Pas, M.F., Appl. Phys. Lett. 67, 2308 (1995).Google Scholar