Was this page helpful?

2014-10
2014-10Edit

    Decide to separate 2nd process in 2 steps: 1 gate exposure + evap + oxidation, 1 CPB

    Try 2 designs: Standard planar capacitance:

    2014-12_BPCv4_res1_design.PNG

    overlap capacitance:

    2014-12_BPCv5_res0_design.PNG2014-12_BPCv5_res1_design.PNG

    Mercredi 22/10Edit section

    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:

    2014-10-23_BPC2v4_2_step2-Ti-gates.jpg

    Jeudi 23/10Edit section

    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)
    vendredi 24/10

    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)
    BPC2v4_2_etch trilayer.jpgSEM BPC2v4_2.jpg

    -> 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)

    lundi 27/10

    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 (?)

    step3, evap BPC2v5_1

    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 ?????

    2014-10-29_CPB2v5_1_end_res0.jpg2014-10-29_CPB2v5_1_end_res1.jpg

    New wafer BPC3 (runs out of samples on BPC2 + decide to make gates on a whole wafer)

    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

    mardi 28/10

    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.

    mercredi 29/10Edit section

    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).

    Designs20141029all.jpg

    Two designs were tested (the left one is refered to "planar" and the right on "reduced"):

    Designs20141029planar.jpg     Designs20141029simplified.jpg

    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.

    Was this page helpful?
    Mots clés (Modifier les mots clés)
    • No tags

    Fichiers 23

    FichierTailleDateAttaché par 
     2014-10-23_BPC2v4_2_step2-Ti-gates.jpg
    Aucune description
    85.9 Ko12:24, 29 Oct 2014Helene_Le_SueurActions
     2014-10-28_overlap-res0.PNG
    Aucune description
    19.35 Ko18:54, 29 Oct 2014Simon_SchmidlinActions
     2014-10-28_overlap-res1.PNG
    Aucune description
    9.77 Ko18:54, 29 Oct 2014Simon_SchmidlinActions
     2014-10-28_planar-res0.PNG
    Aucune description
    14.46 Ko18:54, 29 Oct 2014Simon_SchmidlinActions
     2014-10-29_CPB2v5_1_end_res0.jpg
    Aucune description
    102.78 Ko18:42, 29 Oct 2014Simon_SchmidlinActions
     2014-10-29_CPB2v5_1_end_res0b.jpg
    Aucune description
    105.44 Ko18:42, 29 Oct 2014Simon_SchmidlinActions
     2014-10-29_CPB2v5_1_end_res1.jpg
    Aucune description
    99.26 Ko18:42, 29 Oct 2014Simon_SchmidlinActions
     2014-10-29_CPB2v5_1_end_res1b.jpg
    Aucune description
    101.97 Ko18:42, 29 Oct 2014Simon_SchmidlinActions
     2014-12_BPCv4_res1_design.PNG
    Aucune description
    20.2 Ko12:07, 16 Déc 2014Helene_Le_SueurActions
     2014-12_BPCv5_res0_design.PNG
    Aucune description
    33.07 Ko12:07, 16 Déc 2014Helene_Le_SueurActions
     2014-12_BPCv5_res1_design.PNG
    Aucune description
    34.04 Ko12:07, 16 Déc 2014Helene_Le_SueurActions
     20141027.zip
    20141027
    4.17 Mo20:10, 29 Oct 2014Simon_SchmidlinActions
     20141029.zip
    20141029 sem
    11.73 Mo20:10, 29 Oct 2014Simon_SchmidlinActions
     BPC2v4_2_etch trilayer.jpg
    BPC2v4_2 after removal of CPB in 1' MIF
    1171.28 Ko15:33, 24 Oct 2014Helene_Le_SueurActions
     BPC2V5_1.zip
    SEM images at the end
    1495.28 Ko14:12, 10 Déc 2014Helene_Le_SueurActions
     Designs20141029all.jpg
    Designs20141029all
    27.2 Ko12:29, 5 Nov 2014Simon_SchmidlinActions
     Designs20141029planar.jpg
    Designs20141029planar
    17.37 Ko12:29, 5 Nov 2014Simon_SchmidlinActions
     Designs20141029simplified.jpg
    Designs20141029simplified
    18.18 Ko12:29, 5 Nov 2014Simon_SchmidlinActions
     planar.zip
    Aucune description
    6.29 Mo13:10, 5 Nov 2014Simon_SchmidlinActions
     reduced.zip
    Aucune description
    5.84 Mo13:10, 5 Nov 2014Simon_SchmidlinActions
     SEM BPC2v4_2.jpg
    SEM BPC2v4_2.
    167.2 Ko15:35, 24 Oct 2014Simon_SchmidlinActions
     summary.pdf
    Dose-undercut testing for MAA/PMMA bilayer. 20141027.
    1371.14 Ko16:47, 28 Oct 2014Simon_SchmidlinActions
     summary20141029.pdf
    summary20141029
    733.48 Ko16:10, 5 Nov 2014Simon_SchmidlinActions
    Vous devez être connecté pour poster un commentaire.
    Propulsé par MindTouch Core