CMP Tutorial PDF

Tutorial on
Chemical Mechanical Polishing (CMP)
Ara Philipossian
Intel Corporation
© 1999 Arizona Board of Regents for The University of Arizona
Philipossian
NSF/SRC Engineering Research Center for Environmentally Benign Semiconductor Manufacturing
1
Outline of the Tutorial
• Section A: Overview
– Generalized schematics of CMP and Post-CMP Clean
– Current CMP environment
– Evolution of CMP
– The CMP Module
– The CMP Infrastructure
• Section B: Polishing equipment trends
• Section C: Polishing process issues
• Section D: Consumables (pads & slurries)
– Quality issues
– Factors affecting productivity
– Critical pad and slurry parameters
Philipossian
2
Outline of the Tutorial
• Section E: Industry - University Gaps

• Section F: Environmental Health and Safety (EHS)
considerations
• Section G: Slurry fluid dynamics
• Section H: Slurry re-use
• Section I: Post-CMP cleaning
Philipossian
3
Section A: Overview
Philipossian
4
Schematic Diagram of
Chemical Mechanical Polishing Process
Downforce
Carrier
Pad Conditioner
Retaining Slurry
Ring Pad
Polish Platen
Philipossian
5
Schematic Diagram of
Post-CMP Scrubbing
PVA brush
wafer
Cleaning Fluid
Philipossian
6
CMP Environment
• CMP has become the widely accepted planarization method of choice
for < 0.5 micron technologies
• The overall CMP market is growing at a rate of ~ 50% per year
• The current momentum in process integration and scaling far exceeds
the fundamental understanding of complex interactions among:
– Equipment
– Consumables (i.e. slurry, pad, carrier film)
– Process parameters
– IC type and density
• Processes and consumables are formulated to provide optimum
performance for a given equipment and IC product set
• For a 4 metal layer process with STI, ILD and W CMP steps,
approximately 20 polishers are needed ( 60% utilization, 20 wafers
per hour, 5000 wafer starts per week factory)
Philipossian
7
CMP Environment
• Protection of intellectual property hinders shared learning among IC,

equipment and consumables manufacturers, but also provides a
technological advantage:
– Internally developed equipment, precision parts and
sub-systems
• Morimoto & Patterson, US Patent No. 5,104,828 (1992)
• Breivogel, Blanchard & Prince, US Patent No. 5,216,843 (1993)
• Breivogel, Louke, Oliver, Yau & Barns, US Patent No. 5,554,064
(1996)
– Internal slurry formulations licensed to suppliers for exclusive use
– Customized pads
– 3rd party modifications of off-the-shelf consumables and
equipment
Philipossian
8
Evolution of CMP
12
10
Number of Polish Steps
6 Tungsten
4
Oxide
0
1994 (0.25 1997 (0.25
to 0.50 to 0.35
micron) micron)
Philipossian
9
Evolution of CMP
Generation Application CMP Post-CMP Clean

Attributes Attributes
First ILD Single platen, single head, Wet station,

one step polish scrubber, DI water
(0.8 to 0.5
um)
Second ILD, Doped ILD, Multiple platens, multiple Scrubber, DI water
STI & W heads, buffing, end-point & NH4OH
(0.5 to 0.25 detection & on-board
um) metrology
Third ILD, Doped ILD, Integrated Dry-In Dry-Out, Integrated Dry-In
STI, W, Low K multiple platens, multiple Dry-Out, scrubbing,
(0.25 to 0.18 ILD, Cu, Al & heads, non-rotary (i.e. orbital DI water, NH4OH,
um) polysilicon and linear), multiple step HF, novel cleaning
polish, end point detection methods and
and on-board metrology chemistries
Philipossian
10
Total Cost
Chemical Expenditure per fully Processed Product Wafer
(Disposal and Treatments Costs are Included)
a - Negotiate Price
b - Insert competition
c - Reduce disposal volume
d - reclaim and re-use
Normalized Cost per Wafer
a - Negotiate Price
b - Insert competition
c - Increase pad life via better QC
d - Increase pad life via better chemistry
ILD Slurry
W Slurry
ILD Top
2
8
Pad
Philipossian
11
The CMP Module
Product and Test Wafers
Measure & Inspect

Filter
Water Polish
Energy
Energy Re-work
In-Situ Measure
Solid Waste
Slurry
Clean
Pad Liquid Waste
Carrier Film Measure & Inspect
Product and Test Wafers

Philipossian
12
The CMP Infrastructure
• Polishing:
✓ Rotary (single or multiple heads and platens)
– Orbital (single or multiple heads and platens)
– Linear (multiple heads)
• Cleaning:
✓ Mechanical scrubbing (with & without chemistry or megasonics)
✓ Wet cleaning (with and without megasonics)
• Measurement and inspection:
✓ Removal Rate
– Thickness uniformity (wafer-to-wafer, within-die, die-to-die)
– Defect density
– Dishing
– Erosion
– Plug recess
✓ Planarity
– Surface Roughness
Philipossian
13
The CMP Infrastructure
• In-situ Measurement:
– End-point detection
• Consumables:
✓ Pad (polyurethane, impregnated felt, fixed abrasive)
✓ Slurry (silica, alumina or ceria abrasives, organic and inorganic
additives)
– Filter (point-of-use or post-slurry-blending)
– Conditioning (diamonds)
• Slurry delivery
• Water delivery
• Waste treatment:
– Off-site disposal
– Recycling
✓ Re-use
Philipossian
14
Section B: Polishing Equipment Trends
Philipossian, Morimoto and Cadien, CMP-MIC,

Santa Clara, CA (1996)
Philipossian
15
Equipment Environment
• In high-volume manufacturing, the balance between high throughput,

size and complexity needs to be maintained
Polisher Number of Number of

Polish Heads Polish Plattens
A 1 1
B 2 1
C 3 3
D 4 4
E 5 1
F 6 1
Philipossian
16
Equipment Environment
• Development of automated dry-in-dry-out systems that:
• Improve throughput
• Reduce footprint
• Reduce total cost
Polish 1 Polish 2
• Reduce ergonomic issues
• Reduce number of people
Polish Clean Robot
I/O I/O Clean
• Ability to polish 300-mm wafers

• In-situ metrology for device wafers with closed-loop control
Philipossian
17
Section C: Polishing Process Issues
Philipossian, Morimoto and Cadien, CMP-MIC,

Santa Clara, CA (1996)
Philipossian
18
Process Issues
• Within-Wafer Non-Uniformity (WIWNU):
– Wafer flatness
– Carrier film, pad & slurry type (discussed earlier)
– Carrier design
– Pad conditioning method
– Platen & carrier speeds
– Retaining ring design (i.e. extent of pressure discontinuity between wafer
edge and retaining ring)
– Slurry injection scheme
• Removal rate: • Defect density:

– Carrier film, pad & slurry – Pad & slurry type
type (discussed earlier) – Use of secondary platen
– Downforce – Post-CMP cleaning
– Platen & carrier speeds method
Philipossian
19
Process Issues
• Planarity:
– Pad type
– Circuit density & structure size
– Extent of ILD removed
– Downforce, platen speed & carrier speeds
Pre
Polish
Post
Planarization Distance (PD)
– Step Height Ratio (SHR) = Post Step Height / Pre Step Height
– The goal is to minimize SHR and maximize PD thereby
minimizing Within-Die Non-Uniformity (WIDNU)
Philipossian
20
Effect of Structure Size & Density
on Post Step Height
8000 2000
Post Step Height (A)

6000 1500
4000 1000
2000 500
0 0
0 4 8 12 16 0 20 40 60 80 100
Structure Size (mm) Structure Density (%)
• SHR is greater on metal pads compared to isolated narrow lines

• Areas with lower circuit density polish faster than areas with dense underlying topography
• Each circuit design will have a different WIDNU due to variations in size and density of
interconnects
Philipossian
21
Effect of Downforce on Removal Rate &
Planarity
2500 1
Removal Rate (A/min)
0.8
2000
0.6
SHR
1500
0.4
1000
0.2
500 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10
Downforce (psi) Downforce (psi)
• Increase in downforce (wafer pressure applied to the polishing pad) results in a linear
increase in removal rate (i.e. Preston’s Equation)
• Increase in downforce degrades planarity due to pad deformation and subsequent
increase in local pressure at the ‘valley’ regions (i.e. Hook’s Law)
Philipossian
22
Effect of Platen Speed on Removal Rate &
Planarity
3000 1
0.8
2500
0.6
SHR
2000
0.4
1500
0.2
1000 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
Platen Speed (RPM) Platen Speed (RPM)
• Increase in platen speed increases removal rate linearly (i.e. Preston’s Equation)
• Increase in platen speed improves planarity
• At higher speeds the pad contacts mainly the ‘hill’ regions since it does not have
sufficient time to conform to the ‘valley’ regions
Philipossian
23
Effect of Carrier Speed on
Wafer Center & Edge Removal Rates
3000
2500
Edge
2000
Center
1500
1000
0 20 40 60 80 100
Carrier Speed (RPM)
• Platen speed is maintained at 70 RPM
• Center-to-edge removal rate difference increases with increasing carrier speed
• Carrier diameter << platen diameter & at low carrier speeds, the linear velocity vector
created by the carrier is much smaller than that created by the platen
• As carrier speeds approach & exceed platen speed, the linear velocity vector created by the
carrier becomes significant
Philipossian
24
Effect of Pad Hardness on
Post Step Height and Planarization Distance
8000
Soft Pad
6000
Hard Pad
4000
2000
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
Horizontal Distance (mm)
• Harder pads deform less under pressure thus leading to:

- Lower SHR, higher PD, and improved WIDNU (i.e in mm range)
- Poorer WIWNU (i.e. in cm range)
• Harder pads also result in higher removal rates and higher defect densities
Philipossian
25
Effect of Pad Compressibility
on Electrical Integrity of ILD
Kaufman, Proceedings of Spring MRS, CA (1995)
E-Field at 50% Fails 11
10
(MV/cm)
6
As Deposited
Glass Bead / Polymer
Polymer
Stacked Polymer
Felt
Philipossian
26
Section D: CMP Consumables
Philipossian, Sanaulla, and Moinpour,

Semicon West Technical Session on CMP, CA (1998)
Philipossian
27
CMP Slurries and Pads
Areas of Concern
Manufacturability
Design
Supplier
Total Cost
Availability
EHS
Quality & Reliability

Legal
Philipossian
28
Quality Issues
Intel Corporation
All Chemicals
Delivery &
Intrinsic Warehousing
Material 15%
27%
Packaging
24%
Procedural
34%
Philipossian
29
Quality Issues
Intel Corporation
CMP Slurries
Delivery &
Warehousing
19%
Packaging
19%
Intrinsic
Material
43%
Procedural
19%
70% Abrasive Issues
20% Foreign Matter
10% Other
Philipossian
30
Quality Issues
Intel Corporation
CMP Pads
Delivery &
Warehousing
10%
Procedural
15%
Intrinsic
Material
75%
40% Texture
30% Foreign Matter
20% Adhesive
10% Other
Philipossian
31
Impact of Quality Issues
The Quality Indicator (QI)
QI = 100 - (2) [(a) + (2) (b) + (4) (c) + (8) (d) + (16) (e)]
e = No. of factory interrupts (i.e. issues resulting in tool or
factory downtime, or product loss)
d = No. of near misses (i.e. issues requiring extra

Intel resources to keep the factory running)
c = No. of repeat SCARs
b = No. of SCARs (i.e. issues caused by

gross supplier negligence)
a = No. of issues (i.e. all issues

regardless of impact to Intel)
SCAR: Supplier Corrective Action Request

Note: The Quality Indicator is measured on a quarterly basis for each supplier
Philipossian
32
Supplier Comparison
CMP Suppliers vs. Photoresist and Wet Chemical Suppliers
(Data Collected Since 1Q96)
100
Average Quality Indicator
80
60 Challenge
40
20
0
Pad & Slurry Photoresist Wet Chemical
Suppliers Suppliers Suppliers
Philipossian
33
Factors Influencing Productivity
Process Stability & Manufacturability
- RR
- WIWNU, WTWNU, WIDNU
- Defects
- Planarity
- Pad life
- Pad & slurry quality
Productivity
Equipment Labor
- Availability - EHS
- Reliability - Ergonomics
- Integrated Run Rate - Automation
Philipossian
34
Tool Integration and Automation
Integrated Run Rate
R2 Robot Limited
CMP#1
Robot Robot Cleaner

Wafers Wafers
R1 R1 R4
CMP#2
R3
Cleaner Limited
CMP#1
R2
Robot Robot Cleaner

Wafers CMP#2 Wafers
R1 R3 R1 R5
CMP#3
R4
Philipossian
35
Polishing Pad Life
Frequency of Changing Pads as a Function of Pad Life
• Changing pads in high-volume
manufacturing poses a serious
ergonomic issue:
– Frequency of change
– Difficulty of change 60
• A compromise must be reached 50
# of pad changes per week

between adhesive strength and 40
its effect on the polishing

30
process:
– Hardness 20
– Compressibility 10
– Corrosion resistance 0
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000
– Use of chemicals to remove WSPW
adhesive residues
• Mechanical pad-pullers are
becoming a requirement in
factories
Philipossian
36
Polishing Pad Life
Effect of Pad Life on Tool Availability
• Availability (%) = 100 - Scheduled Downtime - Unscheduled Downtime
• Scheduled Downtime:
– Tool PM, facilities PM, monitors, tool qualification and consumables changeout
• Unscheduled Downtime:
– Out-of-control conditions, repairs
95
Tool Availability (%)
90
85
80
100 200 300 400 500 600
Pad Life
Philipossian
37
No. of Polishers vs. Tool Availability
Effect of Pad Change Duration
(Pad Life & Scheduled and Unscheduled Downtime are Fixed)
• 5000 WSPW
• 5 oxide polish steps
• Pad life of 500 (i.e. number
of wafers polished before 5 Layers
pad change)
120
• Pad change duration:
100
– Complexity of process
80
qualification on fresh
% Availability
0.5 hours
pad (i.e. pad break-in) 60 1 hour
2 hours
– Other consumable 40 4 hours
6 hours
changes (i.e. wafer 20
carrier & pad 0
conditioner) 0 5 10
# of Polishers
15 20 25
– Ergonomics of pad
change (i.e. pad size and
adhesive strength)
Philipossian
38
No. of Polishers vs. Tool Availability
Effect of Un-Scheduled Downtime
(Pad Life, Pad Change Duration and Scheduled Downtime are Fixed)
5 Layers
120
100
80
% Availability
60 1 hour
6 hours
40 12 hours
20
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
# of Polishers
Philipossian
39
Oxide Polisher Downtime Pareto Chart
C = Consumables
C+P P = Process
T = Tool
C+P+T
Normalized Time
C+P+T
C+P
Scheduled Qual
Unscheduled
Tool PM
Facilities PM
OOC
Other
Repair
Qual
Philipossian
40
Oxide Polisher Downtime Pareto Chart
average pad life
average POU filter life
variability in pad and slurry properties (PSD)
average filter life

Normalized Time
variability in slurry properties (PSD)

Scheduled Qual
Unscheduled
Tool PM
Facilities PM
OOC
Other
Repair
Qual
Philipossian
41
Effect of pH and Abrasive Content on ILD
Removal Rate
Scherber et al., Proceedings of the Symposium on Planarization Technology:
CMP, Semicon West (1994)
110
100
Removal Rate
90
80
70
60
50
9.5 10.5 11.5
pH
9% 12% 15%
Philipossian
42
Effect of Trace Metals on
ILD Polish Performance
Slurry [Al] [Ca] [Cr] [Fe] [Ni] Normalized

Defect Density
F < 0.2 < 0.2 0.7 1 < 0.2 1
G 99 1.2 3 18 3.2 3 to 11
- All units in ppm

- Slurries F & G are identical except for the metal content
- Comparable removal rate and uniformity
Philipossian
43
Effect of Hydrocarbons on
ILD Polish Performance
Slurry Normalized Normalized

Hydrocarbon Defect
Content Density
H 1 1
I 14 3 to 6
- Slurries H & I are identical except for the hydrocarbon

content
- Hydrocarbon contained a polar group
- Comparable removal rate and uniformity
- Majority of defects were ‘scratches’
Philipossian
44
Abrasive Geometry
Aggregate
Primary Particle
Philipossian
45
Effect of Abrasive Geometry
on ILD Polish Performance
Slurry Appx. Primary Appx. Mean Normalized Normalized

Particle Aggregate Mean WIWNU
Size Size Removal (3-sigma)
(nm) (nm) Rate
A 29 122 86 --
B 29 110 100 100
C 19 95 82 83
D 20 110 79 154
E 50 200 94 104
- Fumed silica abrasive

- Constant pH and abrasive content
- Comparable defect density and planarity
Philipossian
46
Effect of Abrasive Geometry
on ILD Removal Rate
110
100
Removal Rate
90
80
70
0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
PPS / MAS (unitless)
Philipossian
47
Section E: Industry - University Gaps
Philipossian
48
Development of Core Competencies
(Industry - University Gaps)
Core Subject Funded Universities
Pad synthesis
Pad deformation studies SUNY, Saitama Univ, RPI,
Nagoya Inst of Tech
Brush synthesis
Adhesive development
Abrasive powder synthesis
Abrasive powder and slurry morphology, PSD, Univ of Minnesota, Univ of
geometry and type Central Florida
Abrasive powder metrology
Slurry and pad fluid mechanics (empirical) Tufts, Georgia Inst of Tech
Slurry and pad fluid mechanics (modeling) Tufts
Slurry consumption reduction Tufts
Consumable - tool - process interactions Berkeley, MIT, Tufts, ASU
Electrochemistry Univ of NM, Sandia, RPI,
Univ of Arizona
Slurry dispersion and mixing
Slurry filtration IMEC
Philipossian
49
Development of Core Competencies
(Industry - University Gaps)
Core Subject Funded Universities

Reaction kinetics RPI, Sandia, Clarkson,
Univ of NM
CMP process development & modeling IMEC, MIT, Tohoku Univ,
Stevens Institute
Slurry, pad and brush shelf-life studies
Additives to enhance or retard removal rates Clarkson, RPI, Tohoku
Univ
Additives to modulate removal rate selectivity RPI, Clarkson
Dispersion and colloidal stability Clarkson, Univ of Arizona
Anti-caking agent development
Slurry reclaim and re-use Univ of Arizona
Dissolution, passivation, adhesion and roughening Univ of Florida, Clarkson
Surfactants Univ of Arizona, Clarkson
Pad and slurry interactions SUNY
Enhanced Pourbaix diagrams
Philipossian
50
Section F: EHS Hierarchy and Considerations
Philipossian, Moinpour and Poliak,

Proceedings of VMIC, Santa Clara, CA (1998)
Philipossian
51
EHS Hierarchy & Issues
Replace > Reduce > Re-use > Recycle > Abate
• Environmental regulations are growing at an amazing rate:

– Federal and local initiatives & regulations
– International initiatives
• Recycling regulations are extremely complex and require detailed
understanding and follow-through
• Many new materials are not designed with EHS in mind. In many
cases, suppliers do not even know the potential EHS impact of these
materials
• To find out late in the process that a material has a serious EHS
impact can delay technology introduction or increase cost
• Most chemical suppliers have committed to ownership from cradle-
to-grave, but follow-through is poor
Philipossian
52
Growth of US Environmental Legislation
(Cumulative No. of Environmental Laws)
160
CERFA EPA
OPA
Technology & Environment, PPA GCRA
140
Washington DC, National Academy CAAA

Press, p. 101 (1989)
120
GCPA SPA
EPCRA WQA
HSWA SARA
100
APA NWPA
UORA CERCLA
SWDAA
EAWA
80
NCPA
CWA
RCRA SWDA
TSCA
60
HMTA
CZMA SDWA
ODA
EQIA
CAA
40
MVAPCA NPAA NEPA

AQA
FWPCA NESA
FMLA WRA WA
20
IA WL FWCA FIFRA WA
RHAA PHSA
RA FCA TGA RHA
1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
0
Year
Philipossian
53
EHS in CMP
(Level - I Considerations)
chemical inputs
energy outputs
EHS energy inputs

ergonomics
chemical outputs
Philipossian
54
EHS in CMP
(Level - II Considerations)
chemical blending & delivery system

publicly owned treatment works
post-polish tool
slurry type
energy outputs pad type
film type
post-polish consumable
chemical inputs
IC type
energy inputs
IC density EHS
ergonomics UPW system
wafer size chemical outputs process recipe
wafer starts per week

polish tool
fab location
in-fab discharge treatment method
Philipossian
55
EHS in CMP
(Level - III Considerations)
film type chemical outputs
pH
IC type chemical inputs
abrasive type
abrasive size IC density energy outputs
abrasive shape slurry type energy inputs
abr. morphology pad type ergonomics
solids content UPW system
oxidizer type chemical blending & delivery system
additive type wafer size
buffer type polish tool
base type
post-polish tool
acid type
zeta potential
ionic strength process recipe
viscosity wafer starts per week
color fab location
shelf life in-fab discharge treatment method
pot life publicly owned treatment works
dispersability
Philipossian
56
EHS in CMP
film type chemical outputs
size
IC type chemical inputs
material
stack IC density energy outputs
thickness slurry type energy inputs
texture pad type ergonomics
morphology UPW system
hardness chemical blending & delivery system
specific gravity wafer size
compressibility polish tool
hole pattern
post-polish tool
groove pattern
adhesive strength
life process recipe
shelf life wafer starts per week
fab location
Philipossian
57
EHS in CMP
automation (Level - III Considerations)
film type
footprint
conditioner IC type
endpoint detection IC density
water inj. scheme slurry type
slurry inj. scheme pad type
effluent segregation UPW system
POU filtration chemical blending & delivery system
flow dynamics post-polish tool
re-use compatibility chemical
chemical outputs
inputs
polish tool
carrier design energy outputs
wafer size
platen design energy inputs
ring design post-polish consumable
process recipe ergonomics
number of platens
rotation scheme wafer starts per week
vent design fab location
parts clean req. in-fab discharge treatment method
PPE req. publicly owned treatment works
ease of maint.
run rate
Philipossian
58
EHS in CMP
film type
IC type
IC density
water flow rate slurry type
slurry flow rate pad type
chemical flow rate UPW system
dilution chemical blending & delivery system
flow overlap wafer size
automation polish tool
carrier speed chemical outputs
platen speed chemical inputs
post-polish tool
down-force energy outputs
back-pressure process recipe
energy inputs
number of platens fab location
ergonomics
conditioning recipe wafer starts per week
Philipossian
59
Section G: CMP Fluid Dynamics
Coppeta, Roger, Racz, Kaufman & Philipossian, Pad effects on slurry transport
beneath a wafer during polishing,
CMP-MIC, Santa Clara (1998)
Philipossian
60
Fluid Dynamics
• Goal:
– Reduce slurry dispense volume
– Increase slurry utilization efficiency
– Entrain a uniform layer of new slurry beneath the wafer
– Prevent polished material from being re-entrained beneath the
wafer
• Key issues which need to be comprehended:
– Chemical & mechanical factors which influence polishing
– Slurry film thickness between wafer and the pad
– Slurry transport mechanism, and factors that influence slurry
transport
• Slurry injection scheme
• Slurry flow rate
• Pad type, conditioning and topography
• Platen and carrier speed
Philipossian
61
Dual-Emission Laser-Induced Fluorescence
Camera Laser
Glass Wafer
Polish Platen
Slurry with Fluorescence dye Slurry

Pad
Philipossian
62
http:\\www.tuftl.tufts.edu
Philipossian
63
Slurry Transport
Wafer
Examining:
- Mean slurry age
Post - Residence time
- Slurry Gradients
(flat pads)
- Drag on wafer
- Fluid thickness
Interrogation
measurements
Region
Pad
Philipossian
64
Slurry Flow Rate
Percent New Slurry
Manufacturer: Rodel
Grooved Pad Slurry Flow Rate: x cc/min
Wafer Down Force: 4 psi
Platen Speed: 60 rpm
X-Y Groove Depth: 20 mils
Flat Pad
Time (sec)
Philipossian
65
Platen Speed
Grooved Pad Manufacturer: Freudenberg

Percent New Slurry
Slurry Flow Rate: 35 cc/min

Wafer Down Force: 4 psi
Platen Speed: x rpm
X-Y Groove Depth: 20 mils
Flat Pad
Time (sec)
Philipossian
66
Static Case
Pad deformation: (4 psi, 0 rpm)
Image of a single pad Thickness profile as determined

by ratiometric technique
Philipossian
67
Section H: Slurry Reuse
Kodama, A reclaim use of CMP slurry, 29th Symposium on ULSI Ultra Clean
Technology, Tokyo, Japan (1996)
Philipossian
68
Slurry Re-Use
Experimental Setup
Secondary Platen Primary Platen
Pump & Filter
Slurry Capture Tub
Spent Slurry Reservoir
Philipossian
69
RR & WIWNU vs. Slurry Reclaim
2000 fumed 50 / 200 nm 10
colloidal 102 / 212 nm
9
1750 8
WIWNU (% 1-sigma)
7
1500 6
1250 4
1000 2
750 0
1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
No. of Reclaims No. of Reclaims Philipossian
70
Surface Roughness & pH vs. Slurry Reclaim
0.4 fumed 50 / 200 nm 11.5
11.4
0.35 colloidal 102 / 212 nm 11.3
11.2
0.3 11.1
11
0.25
10.9
Ra (nm)
10.8
pH
0.2
10.7
10.6
0.15
10.5
0.1 10.4
10.3
0.05 10.2
10.1
0 10
1 6 1 6
No. of Reclaims No. of Reclaims Philipossian
71
Mean Aggregate Size vs. Slurry Reclaim
220 fumed 50 / 200 nm
colloidal 102 / 212 nm
215
Mean Aggregate Size (nm)
210
205
200
195
190
185
180
1 6
No. of Reclaims Philipossian
72
Section I: Post-CMP Cleaning
Moinpour & Burke, Keynote Address, CMP-MIC, Santa Clara (1998)
Jankovsky, 3rd CMP Workshop, Lake Placid, NY (1998)
Busnaina, 3rd CMP Workshop, Lake Placid, NY (1998)
Philipossian
73
Post-CMP Clean
• Requirements:
• Defects & Contamination:
– Quick and repeatable
– Abrasive particle residues
(i.e. silica, alumina or ceria) – Cause do damage to devices
or films (i.e. change
– Chemicals on surface (i.e.
roughness or planarity)
surfactants, or slurry
additives) – No residue or redeposition
– Alkali metal contaminants – Low cost of ownership
(i.e. K or Na) (COO)
– Heavy metals (i.e. Fe) • Environment:
– Pad residues – Mechanical scrubbing (with
& without chemistry or
– Pad conditioner (i.e.
megasonics)
diamond) residues
– Wet cleaning (with and
without megasonics)
Philipossian
74
Post-CMP Clean
(Defect Reduction Strategies)
• Step - I … Reduce defects

during the CMP process:
– Use slurry additives
• Step - II … Reduce defects Application Process Chemical
further by performing an
Oxide NH4OH & HF
additional buffing process: W NH4OH & HF
– Use chemicals on the STI NH4OH
secondary platen polysilicon APM & HCl
Copper Proprietary
• Step - III … Reduce defects Chemicals
even further during the post-
CMP cleaning process:
– Use chemicals in the post-
CMP cleaning tool
Philipossian
75
Post-CMP Clean
(A Sampling of Chemicals or Methods
Cited in the Literature)
18
15
12
0
NH4OH
KOH
NH4F
HCl
HF
H2O2
APM
DI Water
Hot DI Water
TMAH
Ice
Citric Acid
Surfactant
Megasonics
Proprietery
Philipossian
76
Post-CMP Clean
(Process Improvement)
• 0.35 um, 200mm technology

• Effect of post ILD CMP clean 1
chemistry on end-of-line yield

0.8
Cumulative Probability
• Process 1 and Process 2 are
0.6
identical polish processes
• Process 2 uses a different 0.4
Post-CMP Clean chemistry 0.2
• Improved consumable lifetime 0
Yield Impact
• No impact on overall run rate
Philipossian
77
Cleaning Theory
• Particles in liquids:
– Primary cause of adhesion is van der Walls forces (DLVO
Theory)
– Secondary cause of adhesion is Electric Double Layer (EDL)
forces (however, they are usually repulsive and can help in
particle removal)
• Particles in solution become charged
• Stern Layer + Diffuse Layer = EDL
• Potential at shear plane = Zeta Potential
• EDL thickness varies as inverse square root of the ionic strength
(i.e. 4X increase in ionic strength will reduce EDL thickness by
2X)
• EDL and the Zeta Potential are a function of pH
Philipossian
78
Cleaning Theory
• ELECTRIC DOUBLE LAYER
Philipossian
79
Cleaning Theory
• DLVO THEORY
Philipossian
80
Post-CMP Cleaning
Al2O3 Pure
6
M obility (m 2/V /S)
0 Mobility
-2
-4
-6
2 4 6 8 10 12
pH
Philipossian
81
Brush Cleaning
• Advantages:
• Disadvantages:
– Most common cleaning – Contact with wafers may be
methodology harmful
– Double-side and edge – Brush loading with particle
cleaning capability and re-deposition
– High energy scrub capability – Low throughput
– The contact mechanism can – High COO (chemicals, DI
help clean wafers with water, consumables parts)
topography – Static build-up which may
increase particle adhesion
– Simple integration with dry- forces
in-dry-out processing
– Tough for brushes to contact
– Compatible with wet high aspect ratio topography
chemistry – Brush shedding
– Compatible with the recent – Brush break-in required
advances in ‘smart-brushes’
(zeta-potential engineering)
Philipossian
82
Wet Chemical Cleaning
• Advantages: • Disadvantages:
– More chemically intensive compared – Particle saturation in the
to brush cleaning recirculating tank
– Residues and foreign matter can be – Difficult to integrate
readily dissolved and removed from with dry-in-dry-out
the surface processing
– Ability to manipulate zeta potential to – Cleaning process must
be tailored to each
remove particles
device layer and
– Low COO material
– High throughput – Uncontrolled cavitation
– Controlled cavitation (formation of gas may cause wafer surface
bubbles by ultrasound) and acoustic damage
streaming (steady flow induced by
sound field) can be used to detach and
remove particles from the surface
– Formation of acoustic boundary layer
Philipossian
83

CMP Tutorial PDF

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

CMP Tutorial PDF

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Tutorial on

Chemical Mechanical Polishing (CMP)

© 1999 Arizona Board of Regents for The University of Arizona

• Section E: Industry - University Gaps

• Protection of intellectual property hinders shared learning among IC,

Generation Application CMP Post-CMP Clean

First ILD Single platen, single head, Wet station,

Measure & Inspect

Carrier Film Measure & Inspect

Product and Test Wafers

Philipossian, Morimoto and Cadien, CMP-MIC,

• In high-volume manufacturing, the balance between high throughput,

Polisher Number of Number of

Polish Clean Robot

I/O I/O Clean

• Ability to polish 300-mm wafers

Philipossian, Morimoto and Cadien, CMP-MIC,

• Removal rate: • Defect density:

Planarization Distance (PD)

Post Step Height (A)

• SHR is greater on metal pads compared to isolated narrow lines

• Harder pads deform less under pressure thus leading to:

Philipossian, Sanaulla, and Moinpour,

Quality & Reliability

d = No. of near misses (i.e. issues requiring extra

b = No. of SCARs (i.e. issues caused by

a = No. of issues (i.e. all issues

SCAR: Supplier Corrective Action Request

Robot Robot Cleaner

Robot Robot Cleaner

• A compromise must be reached 50

# of pad changes per week

its effect on the polishing

carrier & pad 0

variability in pad and slurry properties (PSD)

average filter life

variability in slurry properties (PSD)

Slurry [Al] [Ca] [Cr] [Fe] [Ni] Normalized

F < 0.2 < 0.2 0.7 1 < 0.2 1

- All units in ppm

Slurry Normalized Normalized

- Slurries H & I are identical except for the hydrocarbon

Slurry Appx. Primary Appx. Mean Normalized Normalized

- Fumed silica abrasive

Core Subject Funded Universities

Philipossian, Moinpour and Poliak,

• Environmental regulations are growing at an amazing rate:

Washington DC, National Academy CAAA

MVAPCA NPAA NEPA

EHS energy inputs

chemical blending & delivery system

wafer size chemical outputs process recipe

wafer starts per week

Slurry with Fluorescence dye Slurry

Grooved Pad Manufacturer: Freudenberg

Slurry Flow Rate: 35 cc/min

Image of a single pad Thickness profile as determined

Secondary Platen Primary Platen

Pump & Filter

Slurry Capture Tub

Spent Slurry Reservoir

Moinpour & Burke, Keynote Address, CMP-MIC, Santa Clara (1998)

Jankovsky, 3rd CMP Workshop, Lake Placid, NY (1998)