Resolution limitation of x-ray proximity lithography--secondary electron and waveguide effects

Taro Ogawa; Seiichi Murayama; Kozo Mochiji; Eiji Takeda

doi:10.1117/12.146509

Translator Disclaimer

24 June 1993 Resolution limitation of x-ray proximity lithography--secondary electron and waveguide effects

Taro Ogawa, Seiichi Murayama, Kozo Mochiji, Eiji Takeda

Author Affiliations +

Proceedings Volume 1924, Electron-Beam, X-Ray, and Ion-Beam Submicrometer Lithographies for Manufacturing III; (1993) https://doi.org/10.1117/12.146509
Event: SPIE'S 1993 Symposium on Microlithography, 1993, San Jose, CA, United States

Abstract

Although it is commonly said that x-ray proximity lithography can be one of the most promising technologies in the replication of patterns as small as 100 nm or less, there are two physical phenomena that can degrade the resolution: one is due to secondary electrons generated in the substrate or resist polymer by x-ray excitation, and the other is due to the waveguide effect caused by the interference of propagated waves through mask patterns. In this study, these two effects are discussed both experimentally and theoretically from the viewpoint of the resolution limit. In the secondary electrons, those generated from an Si substrate were determined to overexposure the resist-substrate interface and deteriorate the resolution. The results of simulation clarify that Si KLL Auger electrons mainly cause this problem, and selecting a wavelength that does not excite the Si 1s state (0.68 nm) is most effective in eliminating these electrons. Consequently, the application of a shorter wavelength for improving resolution is limited to 0.7 nm to eliminate the excitation of the Si 1s state.

Citation Download Citation

Taro Ogawa, Seiichi Murayama, Kozo Mochiji, and Eiji Takeda "Resolution limitation of x-ray proximity lithography--secondary electron and waveguide effects", Proc. SPIE 1924, Electron-Beam, X-Ray, and Ion-Beam Submicrometer Lithographies for Manufacturing III, (24 June 1993); https://doi.org/10.1117/12.146509

ACCESS THE FULL ARTICLE