Litho1-litho2 proximity differences for LELE and LPLE double patterning processes

Patrick Wong; Peter De Bisschop; Stewart Robertson; Nadia Vandenbroeck; John Biafore; Vincent Wiaux; Jeroen Van de Kerkhove

doi:10.1117/12.916156

13 March 2012 Litho1-litho2 proximity differences for LELE and LPLE double patterning processes

Patrick Wong, Peter De Bisschop, Stewart Robertson, Nadia Vandenbroeck, John Biafore, Vincent Wiaux, Jeroen Van de Kerkhove

Author Affiliations +

Proceedings Volume 8326, Optical Microlithography XXV; 83260E (2012) https://doi.org/10.1117/12.916156
Event: SPIE Advanced Lithography, 2012, San Jose, California, United States

Abstract

Double Patterning (DP) is the most immediate lithography candidate for IC technologies requiring pitches below the single exposure capabilities of today's ArF immersion scanners. Litho-Process-Litho-Etch (LPLE) double patterning (DP) processes potentially offer substantial cost and throughput benefits over the more proven Litho-Etch-Litho-Etch (LELE) approaches. However, LPLE DP approaches typically use a different resist for each lithography step and there are many potential process and material interactions between the lithographic layers which could have an impact on proximity effects after full DP flow. In this work the impact of process and material interactions on proximity effects is investigated for a metal 1 double trench LELE process and a poly double line LPLE process. The process windows for several pitches and proximity behaviour of both pattern 1 and pattern 2 is studied. Results obtained from a single patterned wafer are compared with results from a single patterned and double patterned area on a double patterned wafer. The results reveal that for the LPLE case there are process window and proximity differences between single and double patterned wafers showing the influence of a neighbouring line from another patterning step. The process window differences do not just consist of a simple shift along the dose axis. For a few specific cases the experimental results are compared to calibrated LPL Prolith model predictions. The Prolith simulation model matches the experimental data and helps to distinguish between chemical, optical and processing effects as the root cause of the observed differences.

Citation Download Citation

Patrick Wong, Peter De Bisschop, Stewart Robertson, Nadia Vandenbroeck, John Biafore, Vincent Wiaux, and Jeroen Van de Kerkhove "Litho1-litho2 proximity differences for LELE and LPLE double patterning processes", Proc. SPIE 8326, Optical Microlithography XXV, 83260E (13 March 2012); https://doi.org/10.1117/12.916156

ACCESS THE FULL ARTICLE

INSTITUTIONAL
Select your institution to access the SPIE Digital Library.

SELECT YOUR INSTITUTION

PERSONAL
Sign in with your SPIE account to access your personal subscriptions or to use specific features such as save to my library, sign up for alerts, save searches, etc.

PERSONAL SIGN IN

No SPIE Account? Create one

PURCHASE THIS CONTENT

SUBSCRIBE TO DIGITAL LIBRARY

50 downloads per 1-year subscription

Members: $195

Non-members: $335 ADD TO CART

25 downloads per 1 - year subscription

Members: $145

Non-members: $250 ADD TO CART

PURCHASE SINGLE ARTICLE

Includes PDF, HTML & Video, when available