Specific Process Knowledge/Etch/DRIE-Pegasus/nanoetch/nano12: Difference between revisions

From LabAdviser
Jml (talk | contribs)
Jmli (talk | contribs)
 
(6 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
'''Feedback to this page''': '''[mailto:labadviser@nanolab.dtu.dk?Subject=Feed%20back%20from%20page%20http://labadviser.nanolab.dtu.dk/index.php/Specific_Process_Knowledge/Etch/DRIE-Pegasus/nanoetch/nano12 click here]'''
<!--Checked for updates on 30/7-2018 - ok/jmli -->
<!--Checked for updates on 5/10-2020 - ok/jmli -->
== The nano1.2 recipe ==
== The nano1.2 recipe ==
{{Template:Author-jmli1}}
<!--Checked for updates on 2/02-2023 - ok/jmli -->


{| border="2" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="1"  
{| border="2" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="1"  
Line 44: Line 50:
C4F8 52 sccm, SF6 38 sccm, 4 mTorr, Strike 3 secs @ 15 mTorr, 800 W CP, 50 W PP, -10 degs, 120 secs
C4F8 52 sccm, SF6 38 sccm, 4 mTorr, Strike 3 secs @ 15 mTorr, 800 W CP, 50 W PP, -10 degs, 120 secs
</gallery>
</gallery>
{| {{table}}
| align="center" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|'''Nominal trench line width'''
| align="center" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|''''''
| align="center" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|'''30'''
| align="center" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|'''60'''
| align="center" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|'''90'''
| align="center" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|'''120'''
| align="center" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|'''150'''
| align="center" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|'''Avg'''
| align="center" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|'''Std'''
|-
| Etch rates||nm/min||241||285||307||325||335||299||37
|-
| Sidewall angle ||degs||92||92||92||91||91||92||0
|-
| CD loss ||nm/edge||-5||-8||-18||-18||-34||-17||11
|-
| CD loss foot||nm/edge||-5||-8||-18||-18||-4||-10||7
|-
| Bowing||||19||11||11||14||10||13||4
|-
| Curvature ||||-48||-46||-43||-40||-40||-44||4
|-
| Zep etch rate||nm/min||||||||||||95||
|-
|
|}


== Comments ==
== Comments ==


Lower temperature certainly looks like a step in the right direction.  Confirms that the process was too etch aggressive previously, hence the isotropic profiles.
Lower temperature certainly looks like a step in the right direction.  Confirms that the process was too etch aggressive previously, hence the isotropic profiles.

Latest revision as of 15:17, 2 February 2023

Feedback to this page: click here

The nano1.2 recipe

Unless otherwise stated, all content on this page was created by Jonas Michael-Lindhard, DTU Nanolab

Recipe nano1.2
Recipe Gas C4F8 38 sccm, SF6 52 sccm
Pressure 4 mTorr, Strike 3 secs @ 15 mTorr
Power 800 W CP, 50 W PP
Temperature -10 degs
Hardware 100 mm Spacers
Time 120 secs
Conditions Run ID 1817
Conditioning Sequence: Oxygen clean, MU tests, processes, no oxygen between runs
Mask 343 nm zep etched down to 154 nm



Nominal trench line width ' 30 60 90 120 150 Avg Std
Etch rates nm/min 241 285 307 325 335 299 37
Sidewall angle degs 92 92 92 91 91 92 0
CD loss nm/edge -5 -8 -18 -18 -34 -17 11
CD loss foot nm/edge -5 -8 -18 -18 -4 -10 7
Bowing 19 11 11 14 10 13 4
Curvature -48 -46 -43 -40 -40 -44 4
Zep etch rate nm/min 95

Comments

Lower temperature certainly looks like a step in the right direction. Confirms that the process was too etch aggressive previously, hence the isotropic profiles.