Test sample from BPC2 (23/04/2013), 10x3mm, CSNSM-type with no ground plane.
Idea: Performing a Post-Expsoure-Bake (PEB) to reduce mechanical stress. This method is suggested for photoresists (Baking Steps MicroChemicals.pdf). Tg of PMMA = 95 - 106°C (http://www.microchem.com/pmma_faq.htm) and Tg of PMGI = 180-190°C (http://www.microchem.com/pmgi-lor_faq.htm). Exposing a larger number of the same structure to have good statistics.
Exposure: The DC-structure (i.e. 4 times the main structure with island, two gates and SQUID each) will be exposed on a 10x3mm sample. One row and sixteen columns (labelled 1-16, in 500um distance) gives 64 patterns to compare. 30kV, Spot 1.
PEB: Cut chip in two and heat one half on the hot plate for 90" at 110°C with small beaker. Important: Measured temperture directly on hot plate (which is around 5°C lower than setpoint).
dev: MIBK/IPA=90s, IPA=30s, ODI=15s, MIF726=60s, ODI=60s, Ethanol=15s. Gentle N2 dry.
obtical microscope: The part without PEB looks fine but the one with PEB might be slightly underdeveloped in MIBK/IPA but it is difficult to say. Both samples have a similar sized undercut.
Evap: Ar milling (3mA, 505V) and TwoAngleAu.prg evaporation (+/- 22°), each 30 nm.
Lift-Off: PG remover at 60°C
Obs:
Top image is without PEB and bottom with PEB. None of the small structures (island and SQUID) was visible but it seems that the PEB increased already the larger structures (gates and lead) by around 100nm.
To do: PEB with 95,100,105°C.
Test sample from BPC2 (23/04/2013), 10x3mm, CSNSM-type with no ground plane.
Idea: Same as for BPCT2 but at PEB with 95,100,105°C.
Exposure: The DC-structure (i.e. 4 times the main structure with island, two gates and SQUID each) will be exposed on a 10x3mm sample. Three rows (labelled a,b,c and in 500um distance) and sixteen columns (labelled 1-16, in 500um distance) gives 192 patterns to compare.
PEB: Cut chip into three and perform PEB for each temperatur (90") with small beaker. Important: Measured temperture directly on hot plate (which is around 5°C lower than setpoint).
dev: MIBK/IPA=90s, IPA=30s, ODI=15s, MIF726=60s, ODI=60s, Ethanol=15s. Gentle N2 dry.
obtical microscope: All look the same optically -> BPC2_T3_afterDevelopment.pdf
Evap: Ar milling (3mA, 505V) and TwoAngleAu.prg evaporation (+/- 22°), each 30 nm.
Lift-Off: PG remover at 60°C
Obs: All 192 patterns were observed and checked if there was any stress induced strain (short between island and crabe or between gate and crabe or if the left arm of the crabe was significantly wider than the right one or vice versa).
- The structures did not increase in width for different PEB temperatures. (see "A6", "C4" and "B13" in BPC2_T3.zip)
cracked | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 |
a | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
b | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
c | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
on top of | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 |
a | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
b | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
c | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
corr | 1 | 0,87 | 0,87 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0,19 | 0,5 | 0,28 | 0,5 | 0,98 | 0,76 | 1 |
- It is more likely to find cracks if the structure is on top of Al-Ti-Au than on the substrate itself
- half of the structures of row c is on top of the AlTi and the other half on the SiOx substrate which supports the correlation:
C5 is on the 95°C chip, C6 and C12 on the 100°C chip, C13 is on the 105°C chip. Note that the white area on the C5 images comes from the cleaving. For the 95°C chip: the two structures on top of Al-Ti-Au had consistently cracks whereas the two on the substrate were fine. For the 100°C chip: same as for the 95°C chip but with a massively increased undercut for all structures which are on top of Al-Ti-Au, this might be caused by an adhesion problem of the PMGI on the gold. For the 100°C chip: All four structures of row c look fine.
-It is likely that the resist thickness is different on top of the Al-Ti-Au than on top of the substrate (i.e. nonconformal) but one would then also expect a large difference in the displacement of the two evaporated layers which is not the case. (TI prime was used for before coating the e-beam resist which is meant to help to get a more conformal film and improve adhesion). It is unlikely that PEB helps in this regard even if the 105°C-chip looks best.
-Vivien adds a small rectangle next (around 1um) to the area where they usually observe cracks and it worked for them but they have little islands close to the junctions. We do not want that for our design.
-contacted MicroChem with the following response:
"Ok, it does seems like the PMGI may be cracking from stress, underneath the PMMA. Both the fact that the PMGI is baked below its Tg and the thermal shock from the application of the PMMA and evaporation in spin coating may be a little too much for the PMGI which is unable to relieve the stress.
Real sample from BPC2 (24/04/2013), 10x3mm, Quantronics-type with ground plane and single lumped-LC.
Idea: Trying to make a real sample without changing anything in the design but without PEB.
Exposure: 30 kV, Spot 1, using the new 20 nm diameter gold particle to perform focus.
dev: MIBK/IPA=90s, IPA=30s, ODI=15s, MIF726=60s (refilled bottle in room P6 from the large bottle in the cleanroom), ODI=60s, Ethanol=15s. Gentle N2 dry.
obtical microscope: All look the same optically.
Evap: Ar milling (3mA, 505V), Al 10nm +22deg with p=(8.0+/-0.3)x10^-7mbar, dynamic oxydation 150ubar for 10min, Ti-flash 150nm at 0.5nm/s, Al 60nm -22deg with p=(3.3+/-0.2)x10^-7mbar, O2 flush before venting.
Lift-Off: PG remover at 60°C
Obs: BPC2S3.zip. vertical parts did not work but it was possible to take some nice pictures of the fine Al-structure on top of the Al-Ti-Au sandwich. It is clearly visible that the ramp creates a smooth interface between the obtical- and e-beam structures.
mercredi-jeudi14-15/05
BPC2_S4
Real sample from BPC2 (24/04/2013), 10x3mm, Quantronics-type with ground plane and single lumped-LC.
Idea: Repeating BPC2_S3 but with the gold particles very close to the alignment markes (the ones at the edges of the sample) to improve the focussing of the e-beam.
Exposure: 30 kV, Spot 1. Software crashed several times so the alignement had to be repeated.
dev: MIBK/IPA=90s, IPA=30s, ODI=15s, MIF726=60s (refilled bottle in room P6 from the large bottle in the cleanroom), ODI=60s, Ethanol=15s. Gentle N2 dry and trying to blow along the island in order not to shift/rotate the hanging PMMA inside the loop of the crabe..
obtical microscope: All look the same optically.
Evap: Ar milling (3mA, 505V) had to increase neutraliser current limit from 4A ti 4.2A due to "error -24", Al 10nm +22deg with p=(7.2+/-0.2)x10^-7mbar, dynamic oxydation 150ubar for 10min, Ti-flash 150nm at 0.5nm/s, Al 60nm -22deg with p=(3.0+/-0.2)x10^-7mbar, O2 flush before venting.
Lift-Off: done on the 15/05/2014. PG remover at 60°C but it took around 45min (usually 20-25min) and several US bursts at low power.
Obs: BPC2S4.zip. Resist residuals can be seen and it is not clear if one of the gates is connected to the island.
mercredi-jeudi15/05
BPC2_S5
Real sample from BPC2 (24/04/2013), 10x3mm, Quantronics-type with ground plane and single lumped-LC.
Idea: Repeating BPC2_S4.
Exposure: 30 kV, Spot 1.
dev: MIBK/IPA=90s, IPA=30s, ODI=15s, MIF726=60s (refilled bottle in room P6 from the large bottle in the cleanroom), ODI=60s, Ethanol=15s. Gentle N2 dry and trying to blow along the island in order not to shift/rotate the hanging PMMA inside the loop of the crabe..
obtical microscope: All look the same optically.
Evap: Ar milling (3mA, 505V), Al 10nm +22deg with p=(7.7+/-0.4)x10^-7mbar, dynamic oxydation 150ubar for 10min, Ti-flash 150nm at 0.5nm/s, Al 60nm -22deg with p=(2.2+/-0.2)x10^-7mbar, O2 flush before venting.
Lift-Off: PG remover at 60°C and several US bursts at low power.
Obs: BPC2S5.zip. DC parts show a rotation of the inner part of the loop, clockwise for all of them. The main structure has a short between island and crabe arm, probably caused by mechanical stress.
To do: Embed crabe into the lead to which it is connected to such that the rotation of this free standing PMMA can not reach nearby PMMA and thus avoid sticking to it.
venredi16/05
BPC2_S6
Real sample from BPC2 (24/04/2013), 10x3mm, Quantronics-type with ground plane and single lumped-LC.
Idea: Similar to BPC2_S5 but embedding the crabe into the lead.
Exposure: 30 kV, Spot 1.
dev: MIBK/IPA=90s, IPA=30s, ODI=15s, MIF726=60s, ODI=60s, Ethanol=15s. Gentle N2 dry and trying to blow along the island in order not to shift/rotate the hanging PMMA inside the loop of the crabe..
obtical microscope: All look the same optically.
Evap: Ar milling (3mA, 505V), Al 10nm +22deg with p=(8.2+/-0.3)x10^-7mbar, dynamic oxydation 150ubar for 10min, Ti-flash 150nm at 0.5nm/s, Al 60nm -22deg with p=(2.5+/-0.2)x10^-7mbar, O2 flush before venting.
Lift-Off (done on 19/05/2014): PG remover at 60°C for 1h and several US bursts at low power.
Obs: BPC2S6.zip
-main structure looks fine with each JJ having an overlap-area of around 150x40 nm^2.
-loop size is around 1.0 x 0.93 um^2.
-DC part: tested different amounts of embedding into the top lead of the crabe. From 200nm of vertical embedding up to 500 nm (in100nm steps). All of them look fine so it is possible to embed even more.
To do: Embed more of the crabe into the top lead and try one complete embedding.
Bonding of BPC2S6 on the PCB on which BPC1_3 was bonded beforehand.
Fichier | Taille | Date | Attaché par | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Baking Steps MicroChemicals.pdf About PEB for photoresists | 277.77 Ko | 16:10, 7 Mai 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions | ||
BPC2_T3.zip BPC2T3 SEM images | 3.44 Mo | 17:22, 7 Mai 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions | ||
BPC2_T3_afterDevelopment.pdf BPC2_T3_afterDevelopment | 64.53 Ko | 16:10, 7 Mai 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions | ||
BPC2S3.zip BPC2S3 all images | 4.68 Mo | 18:52, 15 Mai 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions | ||
BPC2S4.zip BPC2_S4 all SEM images | 1657.64 Ko | 19:09, 15 Mai 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions | ||
BPC2S5.zip BPC2_S5 all images | 1450.82 Ko | 19:17, 15 Mai 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions | ||
BPC2S6.zip BPC2S6 all images | 3.08 Mo | 12:54, 19 Mai 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions | ||
BPC2S6_1.jpg BPC2S6 after bonding part 1/3 | 582.81 Ko | 12:06, 20 Mai 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions | ||
BPC2S6_2.jpg BPC2S6 after bonding part 2/3 | 480.32 Ko | 12:06, 20 Mai 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions | ||
BPC2S6_3.jpg BPC2S6 after bonding part 3/3 | 552.93 Ko | 12:06, 20 Mai 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions | ||
BPC2T2 with PEB.jpg BPCT2 with PEB | 87.66 Ko | 16:43, 7 Mai 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions | ||
BPCT2 No PEB.jpg BPCT2 no PEB | 86.43 Ko | 16:43, 7 Mai 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions | ||
C12ALL.jpg BPC2T3 C12 | 105.04 Ko | 17:37, 7 Mai 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions | ||
C13ALL.jpg BPC2T3 C13 | 101.56 Ko | 17:37, 7 Mai 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions | ||
C5ALL.jpg BPC2T3 C5 | 106.32 Ko | 17:37, 7 Mai 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions | ||
C6ALL.jpg BPC2T3 C6 | 103.55 Ko | 17:37, 7 Mai 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions | ||
CHIP100.jpg BPCT3 100C | 166.5 Ko | 17:19, 7 Mai 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions | ||
CHIP105.jpg BPCT3 105C | 175.8 Ko | 17:19, 7 Mai 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions | ||
CHIP95.jpg BPCT3 95C | 165.36 Ko | 17:19, 7 Mai 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions | ||
DC_BL1.jpg BPC2_S5, BottomLeft DC part | 187.3 Ko | 19:17, 15 Mai 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions | ||
MAIN2.jpg BPC2_S5, main structure | 188.05 Ko | 19:17, 15 Mai 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions | ||
MAIN3.jpg BMC2S6 main structure | 231.12 Ko | 12:54, 19 Mai 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions | ||
MAIN4.jpg BMC2S6 main structure | 230.91 Ko | 12:54, 19 Mai 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions | ||
MAIN_1.jpg BPC2_S4 main structure | 188.12 Ko | 19:09, 15 Mai 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions | ||
MAIN_2.jpg BPC2S3 main structure | 172.02 Ko | 18:52, 15 Mai 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions | ||
MAINA_2.jpg BPC2S3 main structure with angle observation | 168.06 Ko | 18:52, 15 Mai 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions | ||
MAINA_3.jpg BPC2S3 main structure with angle observation | 166.8 Ko | 18:52, 15 Mai 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions | ||
MAINA_4.jpg BPC2S3 main structure with angle observation | 168.36 Ko | 18:52, 15 Mai 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions | ||
MAINA_6.jpg BPC2S3 main structure with angle observation | 163.19 Ko | 18:52, 15 Mai 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions |
Images 22 | ||
---|---|---|
BPC2S6 after bonding part 1/3BPC2S6_1.jpg | BPC2S6 after bonding part 2/3BPC2S6_2.jpg | BPC2S6 after bonding part 3/3BPC2S6_3.jpg |
BPCT2 with PEBBPC2T2 with PEB.jpg | BPCT2 no PEBBPCT2 No PEB.jpg | BPC2T3 C12C12ALL.jpg |
BPC2T3 C13C13ALL.jpg | BPC2T3 C5C5ALL.jpg | BPC2T3 C6C6ALL.jpg |
BPCT3 100CCHIP100.jpg | BPCT3 105CCHIP105.jpg | BPCT3 95CCHIP95.jpg |
BPC2_S5, BottomLeft DC partDC_BL1.jpg | BPC2_S5, main structureMAIN2.jpg | BMC2S6 main structureMAIN3.jpg |
BMC2S6 main structureMAIN4.jpg | BPC2_S4 main structureMAIN_1.jpg | BPC2S3 main structureMAIN_2.jpg |
BPC2S3 main structure with angle observationMAINA_2.jpg | BPC2S3 main structure with angle observationMAINA_3.jpg | BPC2S3 main structure with angle observationMAINA_4.jpg |
BPC2S3 main structure with angle observationMAINA_6.jpg |