Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-25wd4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T02:07:11.262Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

EUV Lithography: Patterning to the End of the Road

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 March 2011

Jonathan L. Cobb
Affiliation:
Motorola DigitalDNA Laboratories, Austin, TX 78721
Robert L. Brainard
Affiliation:
Shipley Company, 455 Forest St., Marlborough, MA 01752
Donna J. O'Connell
Affiliation:
Sandia National Laboratory, Livermore, CA 94551
Paul M. Dentinger
Affiliation:
Sandia National Laboratory, Livermore, CA 94551
Get access

Abstract

Extreme Ultraviolet (EUV) lithography is gaining momentum as the patterning technology of choice for the semiconductor nodes with less than 70-nm half-pitch. As such, it must be ready for manufacturing in the 2006-2007 time frame, and it must be extendable to the lower limits of CMOS technology. Successful patterning of 40-nm dense lines in viable EUV photoresists indicates that today's resist materials may have the necessary resolution, but better optics are needed to verify this more rigorously. Although little is understood about the impact of line-edge roughness (LER) on device performance, it is generally assumed that EUV LER must be less than 3 nm 3σ. EUV lines have been printed with LER as low as 4 nm 3σ, but they were printed with unacceptable photospeed. Deliberate attempts to increase the photospeed while maintaining low LER have produced a resist with sizing dose of 1.7 mJ/cm2 and LER of 6.6 nm 3σ. Photospeed is important because EUV photons are difficult to create, and the photoresist must use them efficiently for economically acceptable throughput. Throughput models indicate that patterning doses may need to be 1-2 mJ/cm2, and only 30-40% of these photons will be absorbed, so the resists must be able to accommodate statistical dose fluctuations that are an appreciable fraction of the mean dose. Highly sensitive resists such as these have been produced with good LER. Since all resist materials absorb EUV radiation strongly, the photoresist layer will have to be less than 150 nm thick. Resists this thin pose problems for device manufacturing, largely because they will not have acceptable etch resistance, and this etch resistance will have to be recovered in some other way. Efforts have begun to integrate hard masks with thin resists in real device fabrication. Defect data indicate that defect densities do not increase in resist films less than 100 nm thick, and transistors, via chains, and microprocessors have all been fabricated with these thin-resist/hard-mask integrations.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2002

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.For more information on these topics, see, for example, Emerging Lithographic Technologies V, edited by Dobisz, E. A. (Proc. SPIE 4343, 2001).Google Scholar
2. Dentinger, P. M., J. Vac. Sci. Tech. B 18, 3364 (2000).Google Scholar
3.Optical density is defined as OD = -log10(I/Io) where I and I0 are the transmitted and incident intensity, respectively. The 150-nm resist thickness limit assumes that 50% of the light must be transmitted to insure adequate exposure at the bottom of the resist film.Google Scholar
4. Fryer, D. S., Nealey, P. F., and Pablo, J. J. de, J. Vac. Sci. Tech. B 18, 3376 (2000); U. Okoroanyanwu, J. Vac. Sci. Tech. B 18, 3381 (2000).Google Scholar
5. Li, W., Solak, H. H., and Cerrina, F. in Emerging Lithographic Technologies IV, edited by Dobisz, E. A. (Proc. SPIE 3997, 200), pp. 794798; M. D. Shumway, S. H. Lee, C. H. Cho, P. Naulleau, K. A. Goldberg, and J. Bokor in Emerging Lithographic Technologies V, edited by E. A. Dobisz (Proc. SPIE 4343, 2001), pp. 357-362.Google Scholar
6. Sanchez, M. I., Hinsberg, W. D., Houle, F. A., Hoffnagle, J. A., Ito, H., and Nguyen, C. in Advances in Resist Technology and Processing XVI, edited by Conley, W. (Proc. SPIE 3678, 1999), pp. 160171.Google Scholar
7. Brainard, R. L., Henderson, C., Cobb, J., Rao, V., Mackevich, J.F., Okoroanyanwu, U., Gunn, S., Chambers, J., and Connolly, S., J. Vac. Sci. Tech. B 17, 3384 (1999).Google Scholar
8. Henderson, C., Wheeler, D. R., Pollagi, T., O'Connell, D., Goldsmith, J., Fisher, A., Cardinale, G., Hutchinson, J., and Rao, V. in Emerging Lithographic Technologies II, edited by Vladimirsky, Y. (Proc. SPIE 3331, 1998), p. 32.Google Scholar
9. Ryoo, M., Shirayone, S., Oizumi, H., Matsuzawa, N., Irie, S., Yano, E., and Okazaki, S. in Advances in Resist Technology and Processing XVIII, edited by. Houlihan, F. (Proc. SPIE 4345, 2001), pp. 903911.Google Scholar
10. Kubiak, G., presented at the International Workshop on EUV Lithography, Matsue, Japan, 2001 (unpublished).Google Scholar
11. Szmanda, C. R., Brainard, R. L., Mackevich, J. F., Awaji, A., Tanaka, T., Yamada, Y., Bohland, J., Tedesco, S., DalíZotto, B., Bruenger, W., Torkler, M., Fallmann, W., Loeschner, H., Kaesmaier, R., Nealey, P. M., Pawloski, A. R., J. Vac. Sci. Tech. B 17, 3356 (1999).Google Scholar
12. Kessel, C. R., Boardman, L. D., Rhyner, S. J., Cobb, J. L., Henderson, C. C., Rao, V., and Okoroanyanwu, O. in Advances in Resist Technology and Processing XVI, edited by Conley, W. (Proc. SPIE 3678, 1999), pp. 214220; L. D. Boardman, C. R. Kessel, S. J. Rhyner, pp. 562-572.Google Scholar
13. Okoroanyanwu, U., Cobb, J., Dentinger, P., Henderson, C., Rao, V., Monahan, K., Luo, D., and Pike, C. in Metrology, Inspection, and Process Control for Microlithography XIV, edited by Sullivan, N. T. (Proc. SPIE 3998, 2000), pp. 515526.Google Scholar
14. Pike, C., Bell, S., Lyons, C., Plat, M., Levinson, H., and Okoroanyanwu, U., J. Vac. Sci. Tech. B 18, 3360 (2000).Google Scholar
15. Cobb, J., Conley, W., Guenther, T., Huang, F., Lee, J. J., Lii, T., Dakshina-Murthy, S., Parker, C., Usmani, S., Wu, W., and Hector, S. in Advances in Resist Technology and Processing XVIII, edited by Houlihan, F. M. (Proc. SPIE 4345, 2001), pp. 261272.Google Scholar
16. Rao, V., Cobb, J., Henderson, C., Okoroanyanwu, U., Bozman, D., Mangat, P., Brainard, R., and Mackevich, J. in Emerging Lithographic Technologies III, edited by Vladimirsky, Y. (Proc. SPIE 3676, 1999), pp. 615626.Google Scholar
17. Chauhan, M. M. and Nealey, P. F., J. Vac. Sci. Tech. B 18, 3402 (2000).Google Scholar