Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T09:49:11.536Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Predicting and Comparing Electromigration Failure for Different Test Structures

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 February 2011

D.D. Brown
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science & Engineering, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, 14850
M.A. Korhonen
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science & Engineering, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, 14850
P. Børgesen
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science & Engineering, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, 14850
C.-Y. Li
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science & Engineering, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, 14850
Get access

Abstract

Electromigration and stress migration are important reliability concerns in the semiconductor industry. Relative and absolute assessments of lifetimes generally rely on the accelerated testing of ‘standard’ test structures. However, the sensitivity to various important electromigration phenomena is found to depend strongly on the type of test structure. Two common structures for electromigration testing are (i) a long line with large pads at either end and (ii) a more realistic interconnect line with W-studs at the line end. The effects of (a) different flux divergences at the line end, (b) interfacial diffusion, and (c) Cu-depletion generally result in different lifetimes for the two types of test structures under the same testing conditions. In this paper, we compare void growth rates and mean times to failure for both types of test structure taking these effects into account. Our results are used to explain differences in MTF values reported in the literature for different test structures.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1994

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

REFERENCES

1. Kwok, T. and Ho, P.S. in Diffusion Phenomena in Thin Films and Microelectronic Materials, edited by Gupta, D. and Ho, P.S. (Noyes, Park Ridge, NJ, 1988), p.369.Google Scholar
2. Railey, P.E., Peng, S.S., and Fang, L., Solid State Technology, 36, 47 (1993).Google Scholar
3. Kahn, H. and Thompson, C.V. in Materials Reliability in Microelectronics II, edited by Thompson, C.V. and Lloyd, J.R. (MRS Proc. 225, Pittsburgh, PA, 1991), p.15.Google Scholar
4. Rodbell, K.P., DeHaven, P.W., and Mis, J.D. in Materials Reliability in Microelectronics II, edited by Thompson, C.V. and Lloyd, J.R. (MRS Proc. 225, Pittsburgh, PA. 1991), p.126.Google Scholar
5. Hu, C.-K., Smail, M.B., Rodbell, K.P.. Stanis, C., Mazzeo, N., Blauner, P., Rosenberg, R., and Ho, P.S. (MRS Proc. 309, Pittsburgh, PA, 1993), p.111.Google Scholar
6. Korhonen, M.A., Brown, D.D., Li, C.-Y., and Rathore, H.S., Stress Voiding and Electromigration in Multilevel Interconnect Metallizations, Advanced Metallization for Devices and Circuits - Science, Technology and Manufacturability, edited by Murarka, S.P., Tu, K.N., Katz, A., and Maex, K. (MRS Proc. 337, Pittsburgh, PA, 1994)Google Scholar
7. Korhonen, M.A., Bgrgesen, P., Brown, D.D., and Li, C.-Y.. J. Appl. Phys. 74(8), 4995 (1993)Google Scholar
8. Hu, C.-K., J. Appl. Phys. 72, 291 (1993)Google Scholar
9. Vaida, S., Sheng, T.T., and Sinha, A.K., Appl. Phys. Lett. 36, 464 (1980)Google Scholar
10. Korhonen, M.A., Børgesen, P., Tu, K.N., and Li, C.-Y., J. Appl. Phys. 73, 3790 (1993)Google Scholar
11. Rodbell, K.P., Knorr, D.B., and Tracy, D.P. (MRS Proc. 265, Pittsburgh, PA. 1992), p.107.Google Scholar
12. Hummel, R.E., IEEE/IRPS (1989). p.207.Google Scholar
13. Rathore, H., Filippi, R.G., Wachnik, R.A., Estabil, J.J., and Kwok, T.. SPIE Vol.1805 Submicrometer Metallization (1992), p.251.Google Scholar
14. Oates, A.S. and Barr, D.L., Accepted for publication in Journal of Electronic Materials.Google Scholar
15. Hu, C.-K., Small, M.B., and Ho, P.S., J. Appl. Phys. 74(2), 969 (1993).Google Scholar
16. Hu, C.-K., Mazzeo, N.J., and Stanis, C., Mat. Chem. Phys. 35, 95 (1993).Google Scholar