Process window variation comparison between NTD and PTD for various contact type

Doyoun Kim; Hyoungsoon Yune; Daejin Park; Joohong Jeong; Woosung Moon; Mingu Kim; Seyoung Oh; Chanha Park; Hyunjo Yang

doi:10.1117/12.2218858

16 March 2016 Process window variation comparison between NTD and PTD for various contact type

Doyoun Kim, Hyoungsoon Yune, Daejin Park, Joohong Jeong, Woosung Moon, Mingu Kim, Seyoung Oh, Chanha Park, Hyunjo Yang

Proceedings Volume 9780, Optical Microlithography XXIX; 97800D (2016) https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2218858
Event: SPIE Advanced Lithography, 2016, San Jose, California, United States

Abstract

As technology node has been shrinking for bit growth, various technologies have been developed for high productivity. Nevertheless, lithography technology is close to its limit. In order to overcome these limits, EUV(Extreme Ultraviolet Lithography) and DSA(Directed Self-Assembly) are being developed, but there still exists problems for mass production. Currently, all lithography technology developments focus on solving the problems related to fine patterning and widening process window.

One of the technologies is NTD(Negative Tone Development) which uses inverse development compared to PTD(Positive Tone Development). The exposed area is eliminated by positive developer in PTD, whereas the exposed area is remained in NTD. It is well known that NTD has better characteristics compared to PTD in terms of DOF(Depth of Focus) margin, MEEF(Mask Error Enhancement Factor), and LER(Line End Roughness) for both small contact holes and isolated spaces [1]. Contact hole patterning is especially more difficult than space patterning because of the lower image contrast and smaller process window [2]. Thus, we have focused on the trend of both NTD and PTD contact hole patterns in various environments. We have analyzed optical performance of both NTD and PTD according to size and pitch by SMO(Source Mask Optimization) software. Moreover, the simulation result of NTD process was compared with the NTD wafer level performance and the process window variation of NTD was characterized through both results. This result will be a good guideline to avoid DoF loss when using NTD process for contact layers with various contact types.

In this paper, we studied the impact of different sources on various combinations of pattern sizes and pitches while estimating DOF trends aside from source and pattern types.

Citation Download Citation

Doyoun Kim, Hyoungsoon Yune, Daejin Park, Joohong Jeong, Woosung Moon, Mingu Kim, Seyoung Oh, Chanha Park, and Hyunjo Yang "Process window variation comparison between NTD and PTD for various contact type", Proc. SPIE 9780, Optical Microlithography XXIX, 97800D (16 March 2016); https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2218858

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