The low-k1 domain of immersion lithography tends to result in much smaller depths of focus (DoF) compared to prior technology nodes. For 28 nm technology and beyond it is a challenge since (metal) layers have to deal with a wide range of structures. Beside the high variety of features, the reticle induced (mask 3D) effects became non-negligible. These mask 3D effects lead to best focus shift. In order to enhance the overlapping DoF, so called usable DoF (uDoF), alignment of each individual features best focus is required. So means the mitigation of the best focus shift. This study investigates the impact of mask 3D effects and the ability to correct the wavefront in order to extend the uDoF. The generation of the wavefront correction map is possible by using computational lithographic such Tachyon simulations software (from Brion). And inside the scanner the wavefront optimization is feasible by applying a projection lens modulator, FlexWaveTM (by ASML). This study explores both the computational lithography and scanner wavefront correction capabilities. In the first part of this work, simulations are conducted based on the determination and mitigation of best focus shift (coming from mask 3D effects) so as to improve the uDoF. In order to validate the feasibility of best focus shift decrease by wavefront tuning and mitigation results, the wavefront optimization provided correction maps are introduced into a rigorous simulator. Finally these results on best focus shift and uDoF are compared to wafers exposed using FlexWave then measured by scanning electron microscopy (SEM).
Source Mask Optimization (SMO) technique is an advanced resolution
enhancement technique with the goal of extending optical lithography
lifetime by enabling low k1 imaging [1,2]. On that purpose, an appropriate
source and mask duo can be optimized for a given design.
SMO can yield freeform sources that can be realized to a good accuracy
with optical systems such as the FlexRay [3],. However, it had been
showen that even the smallest modification of the source can impact the
wafer image or the process.[4] Therefore, the pupil has to be qualified, in
order to measure the impact of any source deformation[5].
In this study we will introduce a new way to qualify the difference
between sources, based on a Zernike polynomial decomposition [6]. Such
a method can have several applications: from quantifying the scanner to
scanner pupil difference, to comparing the source variation depending of
the SMO settings etc. The straighforward Zernike polynomial decomposition
allow us to identify some classic optical issues like coma or lens
aberration.
The 22-nm technology node presents a real breakthrough compared to previous nodes in the way that state of the
art scanner will be limited to a numerical aperture of 1.35. Thus we cannot "simply" apply a shrink factor from
the previous node, and tradeoffs have to be found between Design Rules, Process integration and RET solutions
in order to maintain the 50% density gain imposed by the Moore's law. One of the most challenging parts to
enable the node is the ability to pattern Back-End Holes and Metal layers with sufficient process window. It is
clearly established that early process for these layers will be performed by double patterning technique coupled
with advanced OPC solutions.
In this paper we propose a cross comparison between possible double patterning solutions: Pitch Splitting (PS)
and Sidewall Image Transfer (SIT) and their implication on design rules and CD Uniformity. Advanced OPC
solutions such as Model Based SRAF and Source Mask Optimization will also be investigated in order to ensure
good process control.
This work is a part of the Solid's JDP between ST, ASML and Brion in the framework of Nano2012 sponsored
by the French government.
Source Mask Optimization (SMO) technique is an advanced RET with the goal of extending optical lithography lifetime by enabling low k1 imaging [1,2]. Most of the literature concerning SMO has so far focused on PV (process variation) band, MEEF and PW (process window) aspects to judge the performance of the optimization as in traditional OPC [3]. In analogy to MEEF impact for low k1 imaging we investigate the source error impact as SMO sources can have rather complicated forms depending on the degree of freedom allowed during optimization.
For this study we use Tachyon SMO tool on a 22nm metal design test case. A free form and parametric source solutions are obtained using MEEF and PW requirements as main criteria. For each type of source, a source perturbation is introduced to study the impact on lithography performance. Based on the findings we conclude on the choice of freeform or parametric as a source and the importance of source error in the optimization process.
Access to the requested content is limited to institutions that have purchased or subscribe to SPIE eBooks.
You are receiving this notice because your organization may not have SPIE eBooks access.*
*Shibboleth/Open Athens users─please
sign in
to access your institution's subscriptions.
To obtain this item, you may purchase the complete book in print or electronic format on
SPIE.org.
INSTITUTIONAL Select your institution to access the SPIE Digital Library.
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.