Decide to separate 2nd process in 2 steps: 1 gate exposure + evap + oxidation, 1 CPB
Try 2 designs: Standard planar capacitance:
overlap capacitance:
BPC2v4_1 + BPC2v4_2
EBL: Using 30kV and Spot 1 to get around 23 pA. Area step size=4 nm, area dose=300 uC/cm^2
dev: MIBK/IPA=90s, IPA=30s, ODI=15s, MIF726=60s, ODI=60s, Ethanol=15s, N2 dry.
BPC2v4_1 the underctus were not visble, decided to put it again in developper, but for too long. All structures collapsed -> reprocess: spin only PMMA A6
BPC2v4_2 As well no undercut visible so decided to use O2 ashing for 10 sec, 0.2mbar O2, 100 W.
+ MIF726=15s, ODI=60s, Ethanol=15s, N2 dry -> undercut OK
Evap BPC2v4_2: Ar milling (3mA, 505V), 3.0x10^-7 mbar, -90deg, Ti=30nm @ ? at 0deg
Lift-off BPC2v4_2: 30min in PGRemover, 60 C. worked very well. ODI and blow N2 dry.
Obs BPC2v4_2: Looks fine and all marks are visible:
BPC2v4_2 step 3, spinning:
spin TI prime @ 4000rpm 60" bake 120°C for 1' spin PMGI SF8 (batch 12060407, exp. 7/1/2013) @ 3000rpm for 60" bake hot plate setpoint 175°C, 5', under beaker spin PMMA A6 (from Youri bottle) @ 6000rpm for 60" bake hot plate setpoint 175°C, 15', under beaker
EBL: 30keV
Alignement is very difficult because bilayer too thick
one can see only the largest marks (on the working area of CPB). However, luckily, 1st alignement was performed only with those marks, so it appears the patterns are well aligned
Evap:
Ar milling (3mA, 505V) 2x10", Al 15nm @ 1nm/s, 0° (very bad vacuum , 7e-7mb !!!) Ox 800mb, stay 5' (then pump down to 30mb in 1') Ti=100nm Al 60nm @ 1nm/s, +30° (vacuum still bad, ~2e-7)
Lift OK
Patterns are awful! The mask was deformed, or the e-beam was too unstable (problems with e-beam during the last exposures). NB: during observation, we notice the edge of the trilayer was damaged (see SEM and optical)
-> reprocess. Remove Al with MIF726 1'.
BPC2v4_2 step 3, spinning (this time uses MAA EL10 + PMMA A6):
spin MAA EL10 (batch 14020103, exp. 3/1/2015) @ 2000rpm for 60" bake hot plate setpoint 180°C, 5', under beaker spin PMMA A6 (batch 14020103, exp. 3/1/2015) @ 6000rpm for 60" bake hot plate setpoint 180°C, 17', under beaker
BPC2v5_1
Design avec capas d'overlap
Step 2: gates
EBL 30keV, standard PMGI PMMA development, Ar mill 20" 5mA 500V, evap Al 30nm @ 1nm/s P~7e-7mb
Oxidation development:
Following F. Nguyen thesis, Al oxidation in RIE, 50cc O2, 10µb, 260W, >1'
+ have to try it before lift-off, otherwise creates a 2DEG in Si (reason why it was abandonned in FN thesis)
witness wafer with same Al evap (wafer standard, P doped Si [100] 1-10ohm.cm + Si thermal 100nm)
Cut in 4 parts
Measure ellipsometer (model Al2O3 -fit param 20nm, +/-99%-, Al 30nm -fit param, +/-30%-, SiO2 100nm, Si):
find between 2 and 9nm depending on how much one let the Al thickness be varied. Uniformity is usually more or less equivalent to thickness. GOF is around 85%
sample 1: RIE on hot Al rod (oven 220°C), 10cc O2, 10µb, 260W (V = 460V) 1'
Now measure 14nm +/-4nm, but the results depend a lot on the fit constraints.
Method not really appropriate.
Maybe we can use the laser in-situ to monitor the growth of Al2O3 ??
sample 2: use laser but there is not much of a signal. 2'30 same conditions
ellispometer: 19nm +/- 7nm.... well, could be (at least the change is significant with same fit procedure)
Put sample 1 with 1' ox + piece with natural ox in MIF319.
From the beginning, bubbles appear on the no ox. At 2'30, all Al disappeared, leave up to 3'.
The sample 1 with 1' ox has nothing, no bubbles even clos to corners (visually OK -> observe it in SEM)
Now oxidize the true sample BPC2v5_1 with Al rod @ 220°C, and RIE 50cc O2, 10µb, 260W, 1'30
Optically looks as if the resist below has been damaged! (granular)
Lift-off warm aceton 15' + low power 2" US -> OK, except 1 pad which remains on the side of the sample
Followed by 1h remover PG (lunch time) -> OK
step3, spin BPC2v5_1
- spin MAA8.5 EL10 (batch 14020103, exp. 3/1/2015) @ 2000rpm for 45" NB: vivien recipe works very well for edge removal on small sample: 5" 500rpm 200rpm/s + 45" 2000rpm 1000rpm/s + 10" 8000rpm 4000rpm/s - bake setpoint 180°C, 6' - spin PMMA A6 (batch 14020103, exp. 3/1/2015) @ 4000rpm for 45" (same trick to remove edges) NB: spin speed should be 6000 to comply with previous tests on whole wafers but not calibrated for small samples with edge removal - bake hot plate setpoint 180°C, 17'
ellipsometer: 660nm MAA, 320nm PMMA
(Compared to previous results (2013-07): 500nm MAA, 270 PMMA)
step3, expo BPC2v5_1
30keV, 300µC/cm2, spot 1 30pA, align on the coarse and fine optical marks but not on Al marks from step 2 (cannot see them).
area step 4nm, dwell
undercut area step 8nm, dwell
dev: 1'10 MIBK/IPA + 1' stop IPA
obs: looks well aligned but island and ground patterns might be not separated (?)
old canon
- 30nm Al @ 1nm/s, P_ev = 7e-7 !!!!!
- oxidation, 118mb, 9'40 then pump (@10' is down to 20mb @12' open valve)
- ~1nmAl @ 0.2nm/s (target 0.5nm)
Does not have a program for 0.1nm/s. Launch before rate 0.2 is achieved, to be more precise
But there is a timeout and pop up message, and the shutter does not close automatically!!!
grrr. So in the end the thickness is close to 1nm instead of target 0.5nm
- oxidation 149mb, 9' then 2' to pump
- Ti pump -> P=1e-7
- 60nm Al @ 1nm/s, P_ev = 3e-7
Lift-off warm aceton + 30" US (hard to remove small pieces on the edges)
obs optical: alignement seems OK, gates seems damaged on res 0 (left) but OK on res1 (right)!!
Does the problem come from residues of MIF under the gates, which is rehydrated and reactivated when processed again ?????
step1, spin BPC3
- bake 110°C, 1' - spin AZ5214E (batch) 4000rpm - bake 110°C, 1' - expo 3" @ 9mW/cm2 - bake 125°C (setpoint) 2'30 - flood expo 30" - dev MF-CD26 30" 19°C
Undercut looks good
remove resist residues: Ozone plasma, 100W 40"
desox: HF:ODI 1:20, 30" -> rinse ODI 30"
evap BPC3
pump over night in new canon with valve open -> P_sas = 6.8e-8mb (on 23/04/14 : 5.2e-8mb)
- Ti pump, 30nm @ 0.2nm/s -> P_sas = 3e-8mb (gun off) - Al 130nm @ 2nm/s, 10°, planetary 16°/s, P_ev ~ 3e-7mb (on 23/04/14 : 2.5e-7mb) - Ti 20nm @ 0.5nm/s, 10°, planetary 16°/s, P_ev ~ 3.3e-8mb (on 23/04/14 : 2e-8mb) - Au 10nm @ 0.1nm/s, 10°, planetary 16°/s, P_ev ~ 6.8e-8mb (on 23/04/14 : 4.6e-8mb)
NB: regulation does not make it on gold! (rises very very slowly, and vacuum rises as well, so I have to skip the rate regulation step)
lift aceton, easy. Finishes with ~30" US to remove metallic residues
ozone plasma 2', 100W to remove resist residues
step 2 (gates only), spin BPC3
- spin MAA8.5 EL10 (batch 14020103, exp. 3/1/2015) @ 2000rpm for 45" - bake setpoint 180°C, 6' - spin PMMA A6 (batch 14020103, exp. 3/1/2015) @ 4000rpm for 45" - bake hot plate setpoint 180°C, 17'
NB: make a bilayer only to be sure that the lift will go easy
Dose-undercut testing on MAA/PMMA bilayer from the sample-box dated 28/06/2013. chip is around 5x5 mm^2.
EBL: 30keV, 300µC/cm2, spot 1 with around 30pA, 3 points focus correction. Dose factor varying from 1.0-1.4 in 0.1 steps. line widths: 1 single line, 2 singles lines (20 nm apart), 50, 70, 90, 110, 130, 150nm. No undercut boxes were used.
dev: 1' MIBK/IPA + 1' stop IPA.
cleaving: sputtering Au (using SEM coater) on one part and taking SEM images at 70° and on the other part a 15nm Au layer is evaporated at 0° (with ion-milling beforehand) and taking SEM images before and after stripping resist (warm acetone).
obs: summary.pdf
note: "mask opening" is the measured opening of the mask before the lift off was done (the second part of the cleavage was used for this purpose). "real width" is the width of the gold layer which was measured after lift-off (i.e. gold layer which is sticking on the substrate).
Conclusion: Without using undercut boxes, the clearing doses should be chosen in the following way:
designed width [nm] | Dose factor for 300µC/cm2 |
70 | 1.4 - 1.5 |
90 | 1.3 - 1.4 |
110 | 1.2-1.3 |
130 | 1.1-1.2 |
150 | 1.1-1.2 |
The minimal width of the evaporated Au line was 100nm, below that it was not possible to create a continiues line.
real structure dose testing on MAA/PMMA bilayer from the sample-box dated 28/06/2013. chip is around 5x5 mm^2. This time with undercut boxes.
Design: 6 junctions as below. First row: changing the shortest distance between the island and the lead: from left to right: 210nm, 260nm, 310nm. dose of undercut box was 0.4. The second row is a duplicate of the first row but with an undercut box dose of 0.3 (the dose of the island was increased by 0.1 to have the same total dose). This design with 6 junctions was copy-pasted and each time the total dose of all elements increased from 1.1 to 1.4 in 0.1 steps (leaving the undercut box dose at the same value).
Two designs were tested (the left one is refered to "planar" and the right on "reduced"):
EBL: 30keV, 300µC/cm2, spot 1 with around 30pA, 3 points focus correction.
dev: 1' MIBK/IPA + 1' stop IPA.
Evap: 15nm Au layer is evaporated at 0° (with ion-milling beforehand) and at 30° (again 15nm).
obs: 20141029.zip
Oxygen ashing: performing an oxygen ashing for 1 min, 100 W, 0.2 mbar and taking SEM pictures afterwards. repated this a second time.
Conclusion: summary20141029.pdf.
- The undercut box needs a minimal dose of 0.4 to work.
- There is no significant change between the dose 1.1-1.4 on the main junction structure.
- The first oxygen ashing removed (at least optically) some resist residues whereas a significant damage of the gold layer can be observed after a second ashing.
- although the designed width of the island was 80 nm, the real island is a factor 2 wider on average.
Fichier | Taille | Date | Attaché par | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2014-10-23_BPC2v4_2_step2-Ti-gates.jpg Aucune description | 85.9 Ko | 12:24, 29 Oct 2014 | Helene_Le_Sueur | Actions | ||
2014-10-28_overlap-res0.PNG Aucune description | 19.35 Ko | 18:54, 29 Oct 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions | ||
2014-10-28_overlap-res1.PNG Aucune description | 9.77 Ko | 18:54, 29 Oct 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions | ||
2014-10-28_planar-res0.PNG Aucune description | 14.46 Ko | 18:54, 29 Oct 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions | ||
2014-10-29_CPB2v5_1_end_res0.jpg Aucune description | 102.78 Ko | 18:42, 29 Oct 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions | ||
2014-10-29_CPB2v5_1_end_res0b.jpg Aucune description | 105.44 Ko | 18:42, 29 Oct 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions | ||
2014-10-29_CPB2v5_1_end_res1.jpg Aucune description | 99.26 Ko | 18:42, 29 Oct 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions | ||
2014-10-29_CPB2v5_1_end_res1b.jpg Aucune description | 101.97 Ko | 18:42, 29 Oct 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions | ||
2014-12_BPCv4_res1_design.PNG Aucune description | 20.2 Ko | 12:07, 16 Déc 2014 | Helene_Le_Sueur | Actions | ||
2014-12_BPCv5_res0_design.PNG Aucune description | 33.07 Ko | 12:07, 16 Déc 2014 | Helene_Le_Sueur | Actions | ||
2014-12_BPCv5_res1_design.PNG Aucune description | 34.04 Ko | 12:07, 16 Déc 2014 | Helene_Le_Sueur | Actions | ||
20141027.zip 20141027 | 4.17 Mo | 20:10, 29 Oct 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions | ||
20141029.zip 20141029 sem | 11.73 Mo | 20:10, 29 Oct 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions | ||
BPC2v4_2_etch trilayer.jpg BPC2v4_2 after removal of CPB in 1' MIF | 1171.28 Ko | 15:33, 24 Oct 2014 | Helene_Le_Sueur | Actions | ||
BPC2V5_1.zip SEM images at the end | 1495.28 Ko | 14:12, 10 Déc 2014 | Helene_Le_Sueur | Actions | ||
Designs20141029all.jpg Designs20141029all | 27.2 Ko | 12:29, 5 Nov 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions | ||
Designs20141029planar.jpg Designs20141029planar | 17.37 Ko | 12:29, 5 Nov 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions | ||
Designs20141029simplified.jpg Designs20141029simplified | 18.18 Ko | 12:29, 5 Nov 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions | ||
planar.zip Aucune description | 6.29 Mo | 13:10, 5 Nov 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions | ||
reduced.zip Aucune description | 5.84 Mo | 13:10, 5 Nov 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions | ||
SEM BPC2v4_2.jpg SEM BPC2v4_2. | 167.2 Ko | 15:35, 24 Oct 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions | ||
summary.pdf Dose-undercut testing for MAA/PMMA bilayer. 20141027. | 1371.14 Ko | 16:47, 28 Oct 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions | ||
summary20141029.pdf summary20141029 | 733.48 Ko | 16:10, 5 Nov 2014 | Simon_Schmidlin | Actions |
Images 16 | ||
---|---|---|
BPC2v4_2 after removal of CPB in 1' MIFBPC2v4_2_etch trilayer.jpg | ||
Designs20141029allDesigns20141029all.jpg | Designs20141029planarDesigns20141029planar.jpg | Designs20141029simplifiedDesigns20141029simplified.jpg |
SEM BPC2v4_2.SEM BPC2v4_2.jpg |