Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T15:23:09.660Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Effect of Immersion Sn coating on the Electromigration Failure Mechanism and Lifetimes of Cu Dual Damascene Interconnects

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 February 2011

Minyu Yan
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Engineering, UCLA, 6532 Boelter Hall, 405 Hilgard Ave, Box 951595, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1595, U.S.A.
King-Ning Tu
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Engineering, UCLA, 6532 Boelter Hall, 405 Hilgard Ave, Box 951595, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1595, U.S.A.
Anand V. Vairagar
Affiliation:
School of Materials Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, N4.1-B3-02, 50 Nanyang Avenue, 639798 Singapore. Institute of Microelectronics, 11 Science Park Road, Singapore Science Park II, 117685 Singapore.
Subodh G. Mhaisalkar
Affiliation:
School of Materials Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, N4.1-B3-02, 50 Nanyang Avenue, 639798 Singapore.
Ahila Krishnamoorthy
Affiliation:
Institute of Microelectronics, 11 Science Park Road, Singapore Science Park II, 117685 Singapore.
Get access

Abstract

In sub-micron dual damascene Cu interconnects, electromigration occurs mainly along the interfaces between Cu and dielectric cap layer. Many reports have shown that the interface of Cu/dielectric cap is the dominant diffusion path. In-situ electromigration experiments were carried out recently by A. V. Vairagar etal [APPL. PHYS. LETT., 85, 2502 (2004)] to investigate the electromigration failure mechanisms in the upper and lower layers in dualdamascene Cu test structures. It was found that electromigration-induced void first nucleates at locations which are far from the cathode, then moves along the Cu/dielectric cap interface in opposite direction of electron flow, and eventually causes void agglomeration at the via in the cathode end to open the interconnect. In the present study, immersion Sn (20 nm) was employed after CMP and before SiN deposition. All the samples, with a line-width of 0.28 um, were assessed by package level electromigration tests at 300°C under a current density of 3.6MA/cm2. We found that immersion Sn surface treatment effectively introduced the Cu-Sn bonding to the Cu/dielectric interface and has influenced electromigration along the Cu/dielectric interfaces. Failure analysis shows that the samples with these Sn processes have a median-time-to-failure almost 1 order of magnitude larger than the control samples. A careful characterization utilizing FIB and SEM cross-sectional images shows that the failure mechanism has changed due to the Sn surface treatments. After electromigration-induced void nucleation, its movement is blocked by the strong Cu-Sn bonding so that its growth is localized and occurs along grain boundaries. With the increased impedance to surface diffusion, failure analysis seems to indicate that grain boundary diffusion now participates in the void movement and growth, which is proposed to be the reason for the increased lifetime.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2005

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. Ogawa, E. T., Lee, K. D., Blaschke, V. A., and Ho, P. S., IEEE Trans. Reliab. 51, 403 (2002).Google Scholar
2. Yokogawa, S., Okada, N., Kakuhara, Y., and Takizawa, H., Microelectron. Reliab. 41, 1409 (2001).Google Scholar
3. Wei, F., Gan, C. L., Thompson, C. V., Clement, J. J., Hau-Riege, S. P., Pey, K. L., Choi, W. K., Tay, H. L., Yu, B., and Radhakrishnan, M. K., Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 716, B13.3 (2002).Google Scholar
4. Hau-Riege, S. P., Appl. Phys. Lett. 91, 2014 (2002).Google Scholar
5. Gan, G. L., Wei, F., Thompson, C. V., Pey, K. L., Choi, W. K., Hau-Reige, S. P., and Yu, B., Proceedings of the IEEE IPFA Conference 2002, p. 124.Google Scholar
6. Rosenberg, R., Edelstein, D. C., Hu, C.K., and Rodbell, K. P., Annu. Rev. Mater. Sci. 30, 229 (2000).Google Scholar
7. Hu, C.K., Giganac, L., Malhotra, S. G., Rosenberg, R., and Boettcher, S., Appl. Phys. Lett. 78, 904 (2001).Google Scholar
8. Zschech, E., Geisler, H., Zienert, I., Prinz, H., Langer, E., Meyer, A. M., and Schneider, G., Proceedings of the Advanced Metallization Conference, 2002, p. 305.Google Scholar
9. Vairagar, A. V., Mhaisalkar, S. G., Krishnamoorthy, A., Tu, K. N., Gusak, A. M., Meyer, M. A., and Zschech, E., APPL. PHYS. LETT., 85, 2502 (2004)Google Scholar
10. Hu, C.K., Gignac, L., Liniger, E., Herbst, B., Rath, D. L., Chen, S. T., Kaldor, S., Simon, A., and Tseng, W.T., Appl. Phys. Lett. 83, 869 (2003)Google Scholar
11. Hu, C.K., Gignac, L., Rosenberg, R., Liniger, E., Rubino, J., Sambucetti, C., Stamper, A., Domenicucci, A., Chen, X., Microelectronic Engineering 70, 406411 (2003)Google Scholar
12. Vairagar, A.V., Mhaisalkar, S.G., Krishnamoorthy, Ahila, Thin Solid Films 462–463, 325329 (2004)Google Scholar