Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T07:44:03.125Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Semiconductor Microscopy - Microscopy at the Instrumental Performance Limit

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 July 2020

Bryan M. Tracy*
Affiliation:
Materials Technology Development, Advanced Micro Devices, Sunnyvale, Ca, 94088
Get access

Abstract

The microscopy to support process development of Si-based semiconductors has consistently required state-of-the-art instrumentation. As the industry strains to achieve 1 OOnm design rules, this requirement has never been more pronounced. This paper presents TEM, SEM and FIB examples with a focus on using the instrumentation near the performance limit.

Transmission Electron Microscopy - The high contrast and high resolution images provided by the TEM have made this “research instrument” into the mainstay of the semiconductor analysis laboratory. For the vast majority of samples, both plan view and cross sections, precious little tilt is required. For cross sections, +/- 3 degrees is usually adequate to bring the silicon into (110) orientation and plan views are commonly made from polycrystalline films, which benefit more from choosing the right thickness than from tilt. Under appreciated is the benefit of very high resolution polepieces which have superior spherical and chromatic aberration coefficients producing real improvements in image quality.

Type
Microscopy in the Real World: Semiconductors and Materials
Copyright
Copyright © Microscopy Society of America 2001

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Yanaka, T, Moriyama, K., Buchanan, R., MRS 139, (1991) 271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Basile, D. et al., MRS 254, (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Tsung, L. et al., Microsc. Microanal. 6 (Suppl 2 Proceedings), (2000) 500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. The work of Myers, A. F., Morgan, S. R. and Gray, J. D. is gratefully acknowledged.Google Scholar