ETH Diss 12675

DISS. ETH No.
12675
CMOS Microsystems for

Thermal Presence Detection
A thesis submitted to the

SWISS FEDERAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ZURICH
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF NATURAL SCIENCE
presented by
NIKLAUS WERNER SCHNEEBERGER

Dipl. Phys. ETH Zurich
Born December 24, 1967
Citizen of Schoren bei Langenthal, Bern, Switzerland
accepted on the recommendation of
PROF. DR. H. BALTES, examiner

DR. U. DILLNER, co-examiner
PROF. DR. O. PAUL, co-examiner
1998
Copyright © 1998 by Niklaus Schneeberger, Physical Electronics Laboratory

All rights reserved. All parts of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval
system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, pho-
tocopying, recording or otherwise, without the written permission of the copyright
holder, if properly referenced by name and institution.
Published by:
Physical Electronics Laboratory

Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH) Zurich
ETH-Hoenggerberg, HPT H6
CH-8093 Zurich
Switzerland
Printed in Switzerland
Cover:
Foreground, thermal image of a person aquired with an infrared sensor array
microsystem (cf. chapter 6). Background, scanning electron micrograph of a
micromachined sensor array (cf. chapter 3).
3
Contents
Contents
Contents 4
Abstract 6
Zusammenfassung 7
1 Introduction 8
1.1 Infrared Radiation 9
1.2 Infrared Sensor Types 10
1.3 Applications 13
1.4 CMOS Fabrication of IR Sensors 15
1.5 Previous Art 15
1.6 Outline of the Thesis 17
2 Theory 18
2.1 Infrared Radiation 18
2.2 Sensor Principle 23
2.3 Heat Transfer 25
2.4 Seebeck Effect 27
2.5 Imaging Optics 28
2.6 Sensor Characteristics and Figures of Merit 30
3 Device Fabrication 35
3.1 CMOS Processes 35
3.2 Post-Processing Method 38
3.3 Fabricated Device Types 44
3.4 Post-Processing Restrictions 65
4
4 Characterization 73
4.1 Sensitivity Measurements 73
4.2 Array Characterization 83
4.3 Spectral Absorptance Measurements 85
5 Modeling 100
5.1 Analytical Model 103
5.2 Variational Model 107
5.3 Finite Element Model 108
5.4 Comparison of Models 112
5.5 Device Optimization 112
6 Demonstrators 117
6.1 Presence Detector 117
6.2 Thermal Imager 121
7 Summary and Outlook 126
Appendix 128
References 128
Acknowledgments 136
Curriculum Vitae 138
List of Abbreviations 139
5
Abstract
Abstract
In this thesis we report the development, fabrication, characterization, and model-

ing of thermoelectric infrared sensor microsystems. These devices are intended
for the detection of the presence of persons by means of the emitted infrared radi-
ation.
The presented microsystems consist of dedicated signal conditioning circuitry
cointegrated on a chip with a pair or an array of sensors. The microsystem chips
are fabricated in a commercial CMOS process. The sensor devices consist of ther-
mopiles integrated in a thermally isolated structure made from the dielectric
CMOS layers. Thermal isolation is achieved by removing silicon under the sensor
structure using bulk-micromachining after completion of the industrial CMOS
process. The sensor structure absorbs incident infrared radiation and therefore
heats up. The resulting temperature increase is converted into an electrical signal
by thermopiles. The thermopiles consist of two of the conducting CMOS layers,
namely, n+-polysilicon/aluminium, p+-polysilicon/aluminium, or n+-polysili-
con/p+-polysilicon. This approach allows mass production and cointegration of
sensors and of state-of-the-art signal conditioning circuitry in a mature low-cost
technology.
We fabricated devices with sizes of the sensitive area ranging from 0.015 mm2 to
1.05 mm2. Sensitivities of 45.8 V/W and normalized detectivities of 6.69 107
cm√Hz/W were achieved. Array microsystems with up to 240 pixels and an
on-chip low-noise amplifier were fabricated and integrated in a demonstrator
system for thermal imaging. With an array of 100 pixels we demonstrated a noise
equivalent temperature difference of 715 mK on the target with a signal band-
width of 50 Hz, and a frame rate of 0.49 Hz.
We developed models of the sensor performance using finite element analysis.
Comparison of modeled and measured sensor performance shows a deviation of
21% in the worst case. These models allow the optimization of sensor designs for
the intended application prior to fabrication.
6
Zusammenfassung
Diese Dissertation befasst sich mit der Entwicklung, Herstellung, Charakterisie-

rung und Modellierung von thermoelektrischen Infrarotsensor-Mikrosystemen.
Diese Systeme detektieren die Anwesenheit von Personen anhand der emittierten
Infrarot-Strahlung.
Die vorgestellten Mikrosysteme bestehen aus einem Sensor-Paar oder einem Sen-
sor-Array das zusammen mit geeigneter Schaltungen zur Signalverarbeitung auf
einem Chip integriert wurde. Die Chips mit den Mikrosystemen werden in einem
kommerziellen CMOS-Prozess hergestellt. Die Sensoren bestehen aus Thermo-
säulen die in einer thermisch isolierten Struktur aus den dielektrischen Schichten
des CMOS-Prozesses eingebettet sind. Thermische Isolation wird durch Mikro-
strukturierung anschliessend an den CMOS-Prozess erreicht. Einfallende Infrarot-
strahlung wird in der Sensorstruktur absorbiert die sich dadurch erwärmt. Der
resultierende Temperaturanstieg wird durch die Thermosäulen in ein elektrisches
Signal verwandelt. Die Thermosäulen bestehen aus einem Paar der elektrisch lei-
tenden Dünnschichten des CMOS-Prozesses, nämlich n+-Polysilizium/Alumi-
nium, p+-Polysilizium/Aluminium oder n+-Polysilizium/p+-Polysilizium. Diese
Herstellungsmethode ermöglicht die Massenproduktion und Integration mit
modernen Signalverarbeitunsschaltungen.
Die Sensoren haben eine sensitive Fläche von 0.015 mm2 bis 1.05 mm2. Es
wurden Empfindlichkeiten bis 45.8 V/W und normalisierte Detektivitäten bis
6.69 107 cm√Hz/W erreicht. Sensor-Arrays mit bis zu 240 Pixeln und integrierter
Verstärkerschaltung wurden hergestellt und in ein Wärmebild-Demonstrationssy-
stem eingebaut. Mit einem Array von 100 Pixeln wurde eine rauschequivalente
Temperaturdifferenz am Objekt von 715 mK bei einer Signalbandbreite von
50 Hz und einer Bildwiederholrate von 0.49 Hz erreicht.
Wir haben Finit-Element-Modelle der Sensoren zur Vorhersage der Empfindlich-
keit entwickelt. Der Vergleich zwischen gemessener und simulierter Empfind-
lichkeit ergab im schlechtesten Fall 21% Abweichung. Diese Modelle ermögli-
chen eine Optimierung der Sensoren für die geplante Anwendung vor der Herstel-
lung.
7
1 Introduction
1 INTRODUCTION
Integrated circuits (IC) are ubiquitous in modern life. They perform various tasks
in credit cards, computers, cars, and communication networks. This has become
possible due to the drastic drop of the price-to-performance ratio of silicon ICs in
the last three decades, enabled by batch fabrication, integration, and miniaturiza-
tion. In the late sixties, silicon IC technology has been expanded by silicon micro-
machining technology, i.e., ways to selectively structure the IC materials. This
added new, mechanical [1] and thermal [2] functionality to previously purely elec-
trical devices; hence the current term “micro electro mechanical systems”
(MEMS). A large variety of such systems is fabricated and investigated using
methods borrowed from silicon IC technology [2-4]. These methods enable high
functionality at a low device cost through miniaturization and mass production.
The devices presented in this thesis were fabricated in commercial IC production
facilities with subsequent post-processing (IC MEMS) [5]. This approach limits
the choice of available process steps, materials, and layer thicknesses. However,
it builds on a mature low-cost technology and benefits from the possibility to coin-
tegrate state-of-the-art circuitry with the sensors [6-10]. This improves perfor-
mance and minimizes system size and cost [11]. Such integrated MEMS systems
are called iMEMS or CMOS MEMS.
This thesis presents the development of thermoelectric infrared sensor microsys-
tems fabricated using commercial CMOS processes with subsequent microma-
chining. These microsystems comprise infrared sensor pairs or sensor arrays coin-
tegrated with dedicated signal conditioning circuitry on a single chip. They are
intended to detect the presence of a person in their vicinity by means of its infrared
radiation. This application is generally referred to as intrusion, motion, or pres-
ence detection. Most intrusion detectors applied today sense only moving persons,
and thus, are also called motion detectors. In contrast, the presence detector sys-
tems presented in this thesis also sense a person at rest. Intrusion detector systems
comprising a two-dimensional array of sensors allow to obtain an infrared image
and are referred to as thermal imagers.
8
1.1 Infrared Radiation

Infrared (IR) radiation is the part of the electromagnetic radiation spectrum
extending from 0.8 µm to 1000 µm wavelengths. The respective photon energies
range from 1.5 eV to 1.2 meV. Figure 1.1 shows the IR transmittance of the atmo-
sphere at sea level over a distance of 2 km. The bands from 0.8 µm to 1 µm,
1.3 µm to 1.8 µm, 2 µm to 2.6 µm, 3 µm to 5.5 µm, and from 8 µm to 14 µm are
transparent to IR radiation. Some solid materials such as germanium, silicon, and
zinc selenide, transmit IR radiation and allow the fabrication of IR lenses. Mirrors
for IR radiation are easily accessible since many metals such as gold, silver, alu-
minium, and copper are excellent IR reflectors. This allows the construction of
imaging optics for IR cameras and imagers similar to their analogues for visible
light. While reflected light is used for imaging in the visible range, IR imaging
relies on the thermal radiation emitted by the imaged objects. The intensity and
spectral composition of the emitted thermal radiation depends on the material and
its temperature. At room temperature the highest radiation intensity is emitted typ-
ically in the band from 7 µm to 14 µm. Thermal radiation can be exploited for
imaging, even in the absence of illumination. This makes IR vision particularly
attractive where the observer wants to be unnoticed such as in surveillance appli-
cations.
Fig. 1.1: Atmospheric transmittance over 2 km at sea level [12].
9
1 Introduction
1.2 Infrared Sensor Types

Two main types of IR sensors are distinguished: photonic and thermal devices. In
the following the two types and their performance are summarized. An important
figure of merit of IR sensors is their normalized detectivity D*. It describes the
signal-to-noise ratio that can be obtained at a given radiation intensity and is mea-
sured in cm√Hz/W. A more detailed definition and explanation is given in
section 2.6.
Photonic sensors
In photonic sensors IR photons excite electrons to higher energy states and thus
modulate some electronic property of the sensor. The most important examples
are listed in table 1.1. Photonic sensors are inherently fast and have a normalized
Type Excited state Sensor property

Photodiode electron-hole pair photo-current
Photoconductor mobile electron resistance
Charge coupled device tunnelling electron gate charge
Tab. 1.1: Popular types of photonic sensors.
detectivity in the range of 1010 to 1012 cm√Hz/W. Their sensitivity strongly

depends on the photon energy. The energy of an incident photon must be high
enough to excite an electron to an available state. For longer wavelengths, corre-
sponding to lower energy photons, the sensitivity decays rapidly to zero. For long
wavelength applications low-band-gap detector materials with a low electron
excitation energy are applied such as InSb, PbSe, PbS, and doped silicon [13]. To
avoid large background signals and noise due to thermal carrier excitation, the
sensor has to be cooled to cryogenic temperatures.
Thermal sensors
Thermal sensors are “two-stage transducers”, including a radiation absorbing
material and a temperature measurement. In the first stage the photon energy is
10
1.2 Infrared Sensor Types
converted to thermal energy in the absorber, which heats up. This temperature
change is converted to an electrical signal by the second stage. A trade-off exists
between the sensitivity and response time of thermal sensors [14]. To maximize
signals for a given radiation power the absorbing structure is thermally isolated
from the ambient. On the other hand, the response time of the device is roughly
proportional to the product of the thermal conductance to the ambient and the ther-
mal mass of the absorber. Shrinking the device dimensions reduces the thermal
mass. Thus miniaturization is very attractive for thermal IR sensors. The spectral
sensitivity of thermal sensors is entirely defined by the properties of the absorber.
Specialized absorbers are available with a uniform spectral absorptance over a
wide wavelength band [15].
The second stage of the device measures the temperature increase of the absorber.
Depending on which physical property is exploited for the measurement, thermal
sensors are grouped in the types listed in table 1.2.
Type Measured property

Golay cell gas pressure
Bolometer electrical resistance
Pyroelectric sensor electrical polarization
Thermoelectric sensor Seebeck voltage
Tab. 1.2: Types of thermal IR sensors
In a Golay cell, gas is confined in a fixed volume [16]. Either the gas itself absorbs
the radiation or it is in thermal contact with an absorber. In both cases the gas heats
up when the cell is irradiated and the pressure in the volume increases. Then pres-
sure is measured. The normalized detectivity of Golay cells is in the range of
109 cm√Hz/W, but the cells are highly sensitive to sound and atmospheric pres-
sure variations [18,19]. These problems are addressed by a very rigid housing and
venting the gas cell through a small leak [20].
In a bolometer temperature changes are measured via the temperature dependent

resistance of a resistor that is in thermal contact with the absorber. Usually a bias
current is applied to the resistor and the potential drop is measured. Bolometers
11
1 Introduction
with sizes down to 40 µm have been fabricated. By operating specialized materi-

als, e.g., VO2 or superconductors, close to a phase transition temperature, large
temperature coefficients of resistance are obtained. Resulting normalized detec-
tivities are in the range of 109 cm√Hz/W [21]. Bolometers always have a large
offset due to the potential drop over the resistor in the absence of radiation. This
issue can be addressed by, e.g., a Wheatstone bridge.
In pyroelectric sensors, a film of material with a spontaneous electrical polariza-

tion is in close thermal contact with the absorber. The polarization is temperature
dependent. Its direction is usually perpendicular to the film. This results in an elec-
trical potential difference between top and bottom faces of the film. This differ-
ence is measured by electrodes on the two faces. However, leakage currents flow
between the two electrodes and tend to equalize the potential difference. Thus,
pyroelectric sensors are insensitive to steady-state (dc) radiation signals. To obtain
a defined decay behavior a high ohmic resistor (GΩ) is used as an intentional leak-
age path. Uncontrolled leakage due to humidity is avoided by hermetic encapsu-
lation. Normalized detectivities of 108 to 109 cm√Hz/Ware typical [22].
Some authors use the term “thermoelectric” also for pyroelectric and bolometric
sensors. For distinction, we use it only for sensors based on thermocouples mea-
suring the temperature difference between the absorber and the ambient. A ther-
mocouple consists of two stripes of different conducting materials A and B extend-
ing from the absorber to the supporting structure. The latter acts as a heat sink at
ambient temperature. The two conductors are connected near the absorber as
shown in fig. 1.2. This is called the hot contact. When the absorber heats up to a
temperature T2, while the heat sink is at T1, the so called Seebeck voltage UC
arises. It is given by
U C = α ( T 1 – T 2 ) = α ∆T , (1.1)
where α is the relative Seebeck coefficient of the two thermocouple materials.

Several thermocouples can be connected in series to add their respective Seebeck
voltages. This is called a thermopile. The thermocouples are connected on the heat
12
1.3 Applications
AAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAA
A A A
AAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAA
A A A
AAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAA
A A A
Cold contact
AAAAAAAAAAAA
AA AA AA
Material A
Hot contact
AA AA AA AA
U
C
Material B
T1 T2
AAAAA
Heat sink
AAAAA Absorber
Fig. 1.2: Schematic view of a thermopile consisting of several thermocouples

connected in series. Each thermocouple consists of two different con-
ducting materials.
sink to form the so-called cold contacts. The voltage UT of a thermopile contain-
ing N thermocouples is given by
U P = Nα ∆T . (1.2)
Normalized detectivities of 108 cm√Hz/W have been reported [23]. Thermopiles

are inherently offset-free and capable of measuring dc signals. However, since the
thermocouples connect the absorber and the support, they limit the thermal isola-
tion of the absorber.
1.3 Applications
There are mainly two motives to apply detectors for thermal radiation: Remote
temperature measurement and vision without visible light [16]. In all applications
the detector system contains at least the following parts: Imaging optics, sensors,
electronics, signal output, and housing. The optics collects the radiation and
focuses it on the sensors which convert it into electrical signals. The electronics
processes the signal and feeds it to the output. The housing supports the compo-
nents and protects them from environmental influences. Additional functions may
be necessary such as cryogenic cooling, or radiation chopping. Depending on the
13
1 Introduction
complexity and cost of the components the detector systems can be divided into
three main classes [17]:
• Consumer products characterized by large volume production (>10’000 per

year), price below $1’000, and room temperature operation. An example for
this class is a intrusion detector.
• Professional and equipment products characterized by medium scale produc-
tion and a price of $1’000 up to $50’000. Examples are cameras for thermal
imaging.
• New products with top performances and price at very low quantities. Exam-
ples are research equipment or space qualified instruments.
Development of CMOS infrared sensors focuses on applications in the first class,
since the strength of this method is mass production at low cost. The devices
reported in this thesis, presence detectors and thermal imagers, are intended for
intrusion detection. The presence detector systems feature two identical sensors
“staring” at different areas as shown in fig. 1.3. Only the difference of the two
sensor signals is processed by the electronics. Thus homogenous background tem-
perature changes cancel. In contrast, the radiation of a localized IR source, such
as an intruder, is focussed only on one sensor, and thus, provides a signal. In case
Sensors Optics Surveyed Areas
2.5 m
10 m
Fig. 1.3: Typical application of a motion detector.
14
1.4 CMOS Fabrication of IR Sensors
of a thermal imager the pixels in the sensor array “stare” at a number of adjacent
areas and their signals are processed individually. Thus they provide information
on the shape, position, and movement of the intruder. The typical working range
of a low-cost intrusion detector is 10 m. With the average surface temperature of
a clad human being of 24°C [17] the total radiation power collected by the optics
and transmitted to the sensors is in the order of 1 µW.
1.4 CMOS Fabrication of IR Sensors

The production of the IR sensor microsystems discussed in this thesis is based on
commercial, standard CMOS IC fabrication with subsequent post-processing.
CMOS IC technology is a set of highly sophisticated, well developed fabrication
steps of approved reliability [24]. Hundreds of individual steps are performed to
fabricate transistors and their interconnections. They are carried out on single
crystal silicon wafers producing numerous identical chips per wafer. The main
steps are implantation and diffusion of dopants into silicon, thin film growth and
deposition, and patterning by photolithography and etching. By exploiting this
process sequence, not only electronic circuits, but also sensors can be fabricated,
simultaneously, on the same chip [25]. The cointegration of sensors and circuitry
allows to reduce the system size, pin count, and length of noise sensitive signal
paths. Nevertheless, some features required for sensor operation, such as thermal
isolation or deposition of specialized materials can only be obtained by dedicated
processing steps. Such additional process steps can be performed before, during,
or after the standard CMOS process [26,27] and are referred to as pre-, intermedi-
ate-, or post-processing, respectively. We chose post-processing because it bears
the smallest risk of interference with the sophisticated CMOS process technology.
The thermal isolation is obtained by bulk micromachining: the silicon underneath
the sensor area is removed with an anisotropic silicon etchant, e.g., potassium
hydroxide (KOH) or ethylene-diamine pyrocatechol (EDP) in aqueous solution.
1.5 Previous Art

Today’s low-cost segment for thermal radiation detectors is dominated by pyro-
electric sensors. Due to their high performance, room temperature operation, and
15
1 Introduction
low cost, these have been widely used in motion detectors. However, their inabil-
ity to measure dc radiation signals without mechanical chopping makes them
unsuitable for presence detection. Thermopiles, in contrast, are capable of mea-
suring dc signals and are readily accessible with micromachining technology.
Early research on infrared thermopile sensors using silicon planar technology was
carried out by Lahiji et al. [29,30], Shibata et al. [31], and Sarro et al. [32]. In
1982 Lahiji et al. reported an infrared sensor fabricated on a 2 mm by 2 mm sili-
con membrane with bismuth/antimony thermocouples. In 1982 he proposed the
fabrication of a similar sensor with higher performance using polysilicon and gold
for the thermopile. In 1987 Sarro et al. [32] reported the fabrication of IR detec-
tors using silicon structures with integrated p-doped silicon/aluminium thermo-
piles. The first thermoelectric IR sensor using dielectric thin film membranes was
reported by Völklein et al. [23] in 1991. This sensor consists of a silicon
oxide/nitride membrane with Bi-Sb-Te thermopiles. In the same year
Lang et al. [28] proposed a thermoelectric sensor with dielectric membrane and
polysilicon/aluminium thermopile that can be produced in a CMOS line, while
Baltes et al. [33] reported the fabrication of thermoelectric infrared sensors using
commercial CMOS technology. In 1993 Lenggenhager et al. [34] reported the
fabrication of thermoelectric sensors using n+-poly/p+-poly thermopiles in a com-
mercial CMOS process. Srinivas et al. [35] demonstrated a free-standing cop-
per/constantan thermopile. Today, various infrared thermoelectric sensors are
commercially available. Examples of manufacturers are:
• Meggitt Avionics, Inc., Manchester, New Hampshire, USA.

• EG&G Heimann Optoelectronics, Wiesbaden, Germany.
• IPHT, Institut für Physikalische Hochtechnologie, Jena, Germany.
IR detectors of Meggitt Avionics Inc. rely on thermopiles deposited on mylar films
in various sizes and thermopile materials. EG&G Heimann offers a silicon micro-
machined membrane sensor from a reduced CMOS process [36] where the ther-
mopile materials polysilicon and aluminum are optimized for a low temperature
coefficient of sensitivity. The IPHT specializes in custom sensor designs with
optimized (non-CMOS) thermopile materials and absorbers on stress compen-
sated silicon nitride/silicon oxide membranes.
16
1.6 Outline of the Thesis
In the last seven years a significant number of contributions were made to the opti-
mization of thermopile IR sensors in the choice of material [23], geometry
[37-42], and signal conditioning circuitry [8,10]. The cointegration of circuits and
thermoelectric IR sensors was first demonstrated by Baer et al. [43] in 1991. They
fabricated a linear array of 32 sensors with multiplexing circuit. The monolithic
cointegration of circuits for signal conditioning was reported in 1993 by Lenggen-
hager et al. [44,45] and in 1995 by Müller et al. [7]. With integrated addressing
circuit, large two-dimensional arrays of sensors became feasible. In 1994 Kanno
et al. [46] reported an array of 128 by 128 sensor elements, designed for operation
in vacuum and fabricated using a custom silicon process. Later, in 1995,
Oliver et al. [47] reported a sensor array with 32 by 32 pixels, fabricated in a
research CMOS facility.
1.6 Outline of the Thesis

In this thesis we report the fabrication, characterization, and modeling of inte-
grated IR sensor microsystems. In chapter 2 we present the basic theory of IR radi-
ation, thermoelectric sensor operation and explain the figures of merit for sensor
performance. Chapter 3 starts with a description of a generic CMOS process, fol-
lowed by a description of the specific processes and materials used for sensor fab-
rication. Then an introduction is given to bulk micromachining used for the
post-processing of the sensor devices. Finally we list the fabricated sensors, sensor
arrays, and sensor systems with descriptions of their physical layout and special
features. In chapter 4 we report the sensor characterization. We begin with the
setup used to measure the sensitivity, followed by the measured sensor character-
istics. Next we introduce a method to determine in-situ the relative spectral
absorptance of thin film absorber sandwiches. The measured relative spectral
absorptance in the range from 2 µm to 14.6 µm is reported for a complete set of
absorbing CMOS layer sandwiches. In chapter 5 we discuss different models for
the sensor performance. An analytical, variational, and finite element model are
reported and compared. To show the power of the finite element model, we dem-
onstrate the optimization of a sensor device for a presence detection. In chapter 6
we report the fabricated motion detector and thermal imager demonstrator sys-
tems. The thesis is summarized with chapter 7.
17
2 Theory
2 THEORY
This chapter summarizes the theoretical background of the work described in the
following chapters. It starts with a discussion of infrared radiation. Then a detailed
description of the sensor principle is given, followed by a discussion of the under-
lying physical effects, viz. heat transfer and the Seebeck effect. Next, imaging
optics is briefly reviewed. Finally, the figures of merit used to characterize the per-
formance of sensors and detector systems are introduced.

Infrared radiation extends over the range from 0.8 µm to 1 mm wavelength. The
respective photon energies range from 1.5 eV to about 1.2 meV. Various authors
distinguish four subbands of the infrared spectrum, varying slightly in the defini-
tion: The near infrared from 0.8 µm to 3 µm, the middle infrared from 3 µm to
6 µm, the far infrared from 6 µm to 16 µm, and the extreme infrared from 16 µm
to 1000 µm. Infrared radiation, invisible to the human eye, was discovered by
William Herschel (1738 - 1822) in 1800 in an experiment on the solar spectrum.
Radiometry
In this section a few terms and definitions of radiometry are compiled. Differing
terminologies abound in the literature. The one given here follows Siegel
et al. [48].
A fundamental concept of radiometry is the spectral intensity i'λ. It describes the

energy flow at a point in space, per unit time, of specific wavelength λ, and in a
specific direction through a unit surface area normal to the direction. The subscript
λ and the prime, respectively, denote a spectral and direction dependent quantity.
In contrast to i'λ the spectral emissive power e'λ usually refers to a point on a sur-
face A. It describes the radiation power density through A, in a specific direction
18
relative to the surface, of a specific wavelength λ. If the radiation from a surface

is isotropic, i'λ is a constant for all directions (ϑ, ϕ), and Lambert’s law,
e' λ(ϑ, ϕ) = i' λ cos ϑ (2.1)
holds. Such surfaces are called Lambert radiators. Three important quantities are
derived from e'λ by integration over the wavelength spectrum, the hemisphere, or
both. They are, respectively, the directional total emissive power e' defined as
e'(ϑ, ϕ) = ∫ e'λ(ϑ, ϕ) dλ , (2.2)

0
the hemispherical spectral emissive power eλ given by
π ⁄ 2 2π
eλ = ∫ ∫ e' λ(ϑ, ϕ) dϑ dϕ , (2.3)

ϑ= 0 ϕ= 0
and the hemispherical total emissive power e, i.e.,
∞ π ⁄ 2 2π
e = ∫ e λ dλ = ∫ ∫ e'(ϑ, ϕ) dϑ dϕ . (2.4)
0 ϑ= 0 ϕ= 0
The absorptivity or absorptance α'λ of a surface is defined as the ratio of the

absorbed power density pabs(λ) and the incident intensity e'λ(ϑ, ϕ),
p abs(λ)
α' λ(T , ϑ, ϕ) = -------------------
-. (2.5)
e' λ(ϑ, ϕ)
As proposed in [48] the ending -ity in absorptivity will be used for the intensive
property, i.e. for opaque materials where α is independent of sample size. The
absorption behavior of a partly transparent sample, in contrast, depends on its spe-
cific size, and thus, is extensive. In this case the ending -ance will be used.
19
2 Theory
Similar to eqns. (2.2), (2.3), and (2.4) the hemispherical absorptivity αλ, total
absorptivity α', and total hemispherical absorptivity α can be defined by respec-
tive integrations over eqn. (2.5). The largest possible absorptivity is unity. In this
case all incident radiation is absorbed. A body with this property is called black,
or a blackbody.
The hemispherical reflectivity ρλ is defined as the ratio of the radiation intensity

reflected from the sample and the one impinging on it. It is given by
ρ λ = iˆλ ⁄ i λ , (2.6)
where iˆλ denotes the reflected intensity and is integrated over the hemisphere. The
absorptivity and reflectivity of an opaque surface satisfy the energy conservation
condition
αλ + ρλ = 1 . (2.7)
Thermal Radiation
All matter constantly radiates IR radiation. The spectral energy distribution and
intensity depends on the material and its temperature. This phenomenon yields a
connection between electrodynamics and thermodynamics. Its principal laws
were first formulated by Kirchhoff [49] in 1859. They can be understood by con-
sidering a model system of two flat surfaces of equal area A facing each other over
a small gap where radiation is the only means of energy exchange. Let α1, α2 and
e1, e2 denote their total hemispherical absorptivity and emissive power, respec-
tively. Then Ae1 denotes the power emitted from body 1 and the power absorbed
by body 2 is Ae1α2. In thermal equilibrium the equation
e1 α2 = e2 α1 (2.8)
holds. The same argument applies separately for all components of the transmitted
power having different wavelengths λ. From eqn. (2.8) it becomes clear that the
20
ratio eλi/αλi is a constant ebλ for all surfaces, depending on temperature T and
wavelength only. This leads to Kirchhoff’s law
e λ(λ, T ) = α λ(λ, T ) ⋅ e bλ(λ, T ) . (2.9)
As a consequence from eqn. (2.9) a blackbody with αλ = 1 has the largest possible
emissive power eλ = ebλ. This leads to the interpretation of ebλ as the emissive
power of a blackbody. The total hemispherical emissive power of a blackbody was
found experimentally by Stefan [50] and theoretically by Boltzmann [51] as
∫ ebλ(T ) dλ = σT
4
eb = , (2.10)
0
where
–8 W
σ = 5.670 ×10 -------------
2 4
- (2.11)
m K
is the Stefan-Boltzmann constant. The spectral emissive power ebλ, however, was
first correctly described by Planck [52] in 1900. It is given by
2
2πhc 1
5
- ⋅ ------------------
e bλ(T ) = -------------- hc
-. (2.12)
λ ----------
kTλ
e –1
where c, k, and h denote the speed of light and Boltzmann’s and Planck’s con-
stants, respectively. Figure 2.1 shows plots of ebλ for T = 300 K and T = 400 K. A
body at “terrestrial” temperatures radiates mostly in the range from 2 µm
to 40 µm. Hence the name thermal radiation.
21
2 Theory
140
120
Emissive power [W/m2µm]

100
80
400 K
60
40
20 300 K
0
1 10 100
Wavelength [µm]
Fig. 2.1: Spectral emissive power ebλ of a blackbody at 300 K and 400 K.
Black surfaces are always Lambertian, i.e. eqn. (2.1) holds, and thus e'bλ, and e'
can be deduced from eqn. (2.12). The values are
2
2hc cos ϑ
e' bλ(ϑ, T ) = ----------
5
- ⋅ ------------------
hc
-, (2.13)
λ ---------
kTλ
-
e –1
and
4
σT
e' b(ϑ, T ) = ---------- cos ϑ . (2.14)
π
The emissivity ε of a surface is defined as the ratio of its emissive power e and that
of a blackbody eb
e
ε = ----- . (2.15)
eb
22
2.2 Sensor Principle
By definition (see eqn. (2.9)) the emissivity is equal to the absorptivity of the sur-
face.
As a consequence of eqns. (2.9), (2.10), and (2.15) the net radiative heat transfer
pem from a unit surface area with emittance ε at temperature T1 to the surroundings
at T2 is given by
4 4 3
p em = εσ ( T 1 – T 2 ) ≈ 4εσT 1 ( T 1 – T 2 ) , (2.16)
where the approximation is valid for
T1 – T2
- « 1.
-------------------- (2.17)
T1
2.2 Sensor Principle

The sensitive area of the sensor consists of a thermally isolated structure sup-
ported by the silicon substrate. This can be a membrane, bridge, or cantilever, as
shown in fig. 2.2. These structures are composed of the dielectric CMOS layers.
Thermopiles made from two of the conducting CMOS thin films (aluminum,
n-poly, n+-poly, p+-poly) are integrated in the layer sandwich of the structure.
Their cold contacts are on the silicon substrate and their hot contacts are near the
absorber.
IR radiation incident on the sensor is absorbed in the membrane. Due to the low
thermal conductivity of the dielectric layers and their small thickness (roughly
4 µm), the free parts of the structure are well isolated from the bulk silicon. Thus
the temperature of the structure is increased with respect to the silicon substrate.
The temperature increase is measured with the thermopiles providing the output
voltage UP given by
N
UT = ∑ γ∆T i , (2.18)
i=1
23
2 Theory
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAA
Thermopile
AAAAAA
AAAAAA
AAAAAA
A
Membrane Substrate
Thermopile
Bridge
Substrate
Thermopile
Beam
Substrate
Fig. 2.2: Schematic view of a thin membrane, bridge and cantilever structure
with integrated thermopiles.
where N, γ, and ∆Ti denote the number of thermocouples, their Seebeck coeffi-
cient, and the individual temperature differences between their hot and cold con-
tacts, respectively. A heating resistor may be integrated near the hot contacts. It
allows to dissipate a controlled heating power for test purposes or calibration.
To protect the sensor from mechanical damage, contamination, and stray signal,
the sensor is packaged in a closed housing. An IR transparent filter window inte-
grated in the package provides access for the radiation to be sensed.
24
2.3 Heat Transfer
2.3 Heat Transfer

The thermopile signal originates from a non-uniform temperature distribution
T ( x, t) governed by the heat transfer equation
∂T
ρc V – ∇ ⋅ ( κ ∇T ) = I ( x, t) , (2.19)
∂t
where ρ, cV, and κ, denote the density, heat capacity, and thermal conductivity of
the medium, respectively. The right hand side of eqn. (2.19) is the source term I.
The source term takes into account heat generation due to absorption and heat loss
due to thermal radiation. To describe the behavior of the sensor, eqn. (2.19) has to
be analyzed in the domain of the sensor chip and the surrounding air. The bound-
ary condition is given by the package surface S0 surrounding the sensor and acting
as a heat sink at T0
T ( x, t) = T 0( x, t) for x ∈ S 0 , (2.20)
and the initial condition
T ( x, 0) = f ( x) at t = 0 . (2.21)
The typical power incident on the sensor structure of area 1 mm2 is 1 µW. The
resulting temperature increase is in the order of 1 mK. The radiation loss resulting
from this is roughly 5 mW/m2 or 0.5% of the absorbed power density. This rough
estimate shows that the radiation losses can be neglected in the calculation of the
temperature distribution.
The solution of the heat transfer problem (see e.g. [53]) involves an expansion of
the solution of eqn. (2.19) in terms of the orthonormal eigenfunctions Ψi of the
differential operator
2
∇ ⋅ κ∇Ψ i = µ i ρc V Ψ i , (2.22)
25
2 Theory
where the µ i2 denote the respective eigenvalues with the homogenous boundary
condition
Ψi = 0 x ∈ S0 . (2.23)
The general solution then has the form
∞ 2
t 2
–µi t µ i t'
T ( x, t) = ∑e ∫
Ψ i( x) f˜ i + g i(t')e dt' , (2.24)
i=1 0
where
f˜ i = ∫V ρcV Ψi f dv , (2.25)
is the decomposition of the initial condition in terms of the eigenfunctions, and
∂
∫S
g i(t) = – T 0( x, t)κ ∫
Ψ ( x) ds + Ψ i( x)I ( x, t) dv ,
∂n i
V
(2.26)
accounts for the boundary condition and the production term. Evaluating this gen-
eral solution involves finding all the eigenfunctions. In our case, this can be done
only numerically at large computational expense, which makes this direct
approach unpractical. Nevertheless eqn. (2.24) reveals some interesting properties
of the temperature distribution. First, the spatial distribution is a linear combina-
tion of the eigenfunctions, each of which evolves independently with time. Sec-
ond, in the case of steady sources and boundary conditions, individual compo-
nents essentially relax exponentially to the steady-state. Different components
decay with different time constants τm. These are the inverses of the eigenvalues
µ i2 of the associated eigenfunctions.
The response of the sensor to steady radiation is described by the steady state
problem associated with eqn. (2.19)
∇ ⋅ ( κ ∇T ) = I , (2.27)
26
2.4 Seebeck Effect
and the boundary condition (2.20). The steady state problem can be solved, as the
dynamic problem, by the expansion of eqn. (2.27) with the eigenfunctions. The
eigenfunction to the eigenvalue 0 is proportional to the steady-state temperature
distribution. However, solutions can be found more efficiently using the finite ele-
ment method (FEM). Numerical calculation of the temperature distribution with
FEM is discussed in chapter 5.
2.4 Seebeck Effect

The Seebeck effect is one of the three thermoelectric effects [54]. The other two
are the Thomson and Peltier effects. It occurs when a conducting material A, i.e.
a material with mobile charge carriers, is subject to a temperature gradient ∇T ,
which leads to an electric field E given by
E = γ A ∇T , (2.28)
where γA is the Seebeck coefficient of the material. Since the temperature is a

potential field, the integral of the related gradient field E along any closed path
vanishes. Thus the Seebeck effect cannot be used to generate an electromotive
force in a closed circuit of one material. However, in case of two materials, the
generation of an electromotoric force is possible. This effect is employed, e.g., in
thermocouples. They consist of two different conducting materials A and B that
are in electrical contact as shown in fig. 2.3. If T2 is the temperature of the contact,
Cold contact, T1 Hot contact, T2
Material A
U
C
Material B
Fig. 2.3: Schematic view of a thermocouple.
27
2 Theory
a voltage UC is generated between two points on materials A and B at temperature

T1. With the Seebeck coefficients γA and γB of the two materials the voltage is
T2 T1 T2
UC = ∫ γ A dT + ∫ γ B dT = ∫ ( γ A – γ B ) dT . (2.29)
T1 T2 T1
With the relative Seebeck coefficient
γ AB = γ A – γ B (2.30)
of the two materials, and for sufficiently small temperature differences the voltage
on the thermocouple is
U C = γ AB ( T 1 – T 2 ) = γ AB ∆T . (2.31)
2.5 Imaging Optics

Any complete detector system comprises some form of imaging optics. This
optics may consist of a stop, a light guide, or complex system of mirrors and
lenses. It collects the infrared radiation from the environment and directs it onto
the sensors. In the simplest case the optics just defines a field of view from which
the sensor receives radiation. In most cases, however, the optics transfers an image
of the scene on the sensors. Here we discuss the implications of the imaging in
simple systems with fixed focus and sensors in a focal plane geometry. The fol-
lowing calculations apply for both single sensors and sensor pixels in an array.
The setup is shown in fig. 2.4.
The sensor is placed at the focal distance f from the optical element. This assures
that the image of an object far away from the optical element is sharply defined.
The area in the object space that is imaged onto the sensor is called entrance
28
2.5 Imaging Optics
Entrance window Optics Sensor
x’
l f
Fig. 2.4: Schematic view of a optics system with sensor and its entrance window.
window of the sensor. Its size x is related to its distance from the detector l, the
size x' of the sensitive area, and focal length by
x x'
-- = --- . (2.32)
l f
The radiation power P captured by the optics from an object filling the entrance
window of the sensor can be approximated [55] by
2 2 3 2 2
D π x 4εσT ∆T x' D 3
P = ---------
- ⋅ -----------------------------
- = ------------
- ⋅ εσT ∆T , (2.33)
4l
2 π f
2
where D denotes the diameter of the optics or the aperture stop and ε is the objects
emissivity. The first term on the right-hand side in eqn. (2.33) is the spatial angle
of the optics aperture with respect to the object. The second term denotes the
power emitted by the object. The size of the optics aperture is commonly
described by the f-number nf , defined as
f
n f = ---- . (2.34)
D
29
2 Theory
The collected power P is focused on the sensor but reduced by the nonideal trans-
mission efficiency E of the optics. The power available on the sensor P' is then
2
x' 3
P' = E -------2- εσT ∆T . (2.35)
nf
For sensor arrays the x' in eqns. (2.32) through (2.35) refers to the extent of the
sensitive pixel area A rather than the pitch y of the array. The ratio of the area A
and the area y2 occupied in the array is called the fill factor F = A/y2.
The field of view angle Θ covered by an array with n × m quadratic pixels is given
by
 y n 2 + m 2
Θ = 2 atan  ------------------------- . (2.36)
 2f 
2.6 Sensor Characteristics and Figures of Merit

Thermoelectric infrared sensors can be described by a small set of primary char-
acteristics. These are their size, sensitivity, output resistance, signal noise, and
response time. From these, a set of additional characteristics, i.e., signal-to-noise
ratio, noise equivalent power, normalized detectivity, and noise equivalent tem-
perature difference can be derived. Depending on the application, one or several
of these characteristics are suitable as figures of merit.
In the following these sensor characteristics are defined and briefly commented.
The measurement of these characteristics is described in chapter 4.
30
Sensitivity
The sensitivity S is the most frequently used property. It describes the static
response to radiation. It is defined as the change in signal voltage ∆U per change
in total incident radiation power ∆P on the absorbing sensor area [56]
∆U
S = -------- . (2.37)
∆P
Assuming a linear dependence and neglecting offset, eqn. (2.37) can be simplified
to
U
S = ---- . (2.38)
P
The sensitivity, e.g., depends on the sensor temperature, ambient gas pressure,
radiation wavelength, and incidence angle.
Thermopile Resistance
Besides to being the source of the voltage UP a thermopile is also a resistor. Its
representation in electrical models is a resistor with a thermoelectric voltage
source in series. This model describes both its noise performance and its behavior
when driving a load.
Noise
The noise in thermopile sensors is due to Johnson noise from the thermopile resis-
tance. The frequency spectrum of Johnson noise is white and the spectral noise
voltage density ν of the thermopile resistance RT is
ν = 4kT R T . (2.39)
31
2 Theory
If several noise sources are present in a system’s signal path, such as different sen-
sors or circuits, the noise powers of the different sources superimpose. The result-
ing total spectral noise voltage density is
∑ νi
2
ν = . (2.40)
For white noise and a limited signal frequency bandwidth ∆f the total noise volt-
age V becomes
V = ν ∆f . (2.41)
If the output of such a system is sampled, the measured amplitudes have a gauss-
ian distribution. The mean value of the distribution corresponds to the signal
including offset. The standard deviation of the distribution is V. Thus 68% of the
samples lie within ±V/2 of the mean value.
Signal-to-Noise Ratio
The signal-to-noise ratio Q is a figure to describe the quality of a signal in a spe-
cific situation rather than a sensor property. It is defined as the ratio of the signal
and noise voltages, i.e.,
Q = U ⁄V. (2.42)
It can be used to describe the signal quality of a stand-alone sensor or an entire

system. From eqn. (2.42) it is obvious that Q depends on the radiation power pro-
ducing the signal U and the relevant bandwidth. The definition of Q given here
follows the literature on IR sensors [55,56]. A different definition common in the
electrical engineering literature is the ratio of signal and noise power, rather than
voltage.
Noise Equivalent Power

The noise equivalent power NEP describes, like the signal-to-noise ratio, the qual-
ity of the sensor or system signal. In contrast to Q it characterizes the system. It is
32
defined as the incident radiation power producing a signal-to-noise ratio equal to

one at the output. It can be calculated as
V P
NEP = ---- = ---- . (2.43)
S Q
If nothing else is stated, the noise refers to a bandwidth ∆f of 1 Hz. For systems
with a non-white noise spectrum the NEP also depends on frequency.
Normalized Detectivity
Like the NEP the normalized detectivity D* describes the signal quality. It is
derived from the detectivity D which is the inverse of the NEP. The normalized
detectivity is defined as
A ⋅ ∆f
D∗ = ------------------- , (2.44)
NEP
where A is the sensitive sensor area, ∆f refers to the bandwidth used in the defini-
tion of the NEP. The normalized detectivity is applied to compare the performance
of sensors of different size and type. This is possible because in comparison with
D and NEP, the dependence of D* on size is reduced.
Noise Equivalent Temperature Difference

In contrast to the previous characteristics describing sensor performance, the noise
equivalent temperature difference NETD is a figure to describe a detector system
including imaging optics. It is defined as the temperature difference on a black
object that produces a signal-to-noise ratio of one at the system output. By substi-
tuting eqn. (2.35) into eqn. (2.43) and solving for ∆T the NETD becomes
2
n f NEP 1
NETD = -------- ⋅ ------------ ---------3- . (2.45)
E A σT
The first term on the right-hand side of eqn. (2.45) depends on the optics only
while the other term describes the performance of the sensor.
33
2 Theory
Response Time
The response time of the sensor characterizes how fast its signal reacts to an abrupt
change in the incident radiation power. As describes in section 2.3 the response
consists of a superposition of exponential relaxations to the new steady state
response. In practice the component associated with the longest relaxation time
has the largest amplitude and all others are neglected. Thus the response U(t) of
the sensor to a sudden change in radiation power ∆P at t = 0 is given by
–t ⁄ τ
U (t) = U (0) + ∆P ⋅ S ( 1 – e ), (2.46)
where U (0) denotes the sensor signal for t ≤ 0 , and τ defines the response time.
The dynamic response can also be described using the response to radiation with
a harmonic time dependence of angular frequency ω
– iωt
P(t) = P ω e . (2.47)
Then the sensor response is also of the form
– iωt
U (t ) = U ω e , (2.48)
and the frequency response is then given by
U 1
------ω- = ------------------------- . (2.49)
Pω 1+ω τ
2 2
This is the typical behavior of a low-pass filter with cut-off frequency (2πτ)-1.
Crosstalk
If a pixel A within an array is irradiated, and therefore heats up, a nearby pixel B
may also heat up due, e.g., to heat conduction. This leads to a signal from pixel B
although it is not irradiated. The ratio of the signals from pixel UB and the irradi-
ated pixel UA is called crosstalk tAB. The crosstalk depends on the relative position
of the two pixels within the array and is usually given in percent.
34
3.1 CMOS Processes
3 DEVICE FABRICATION
The IR sensors and IR sensor arrays in this thesis were fabricated using commer-
cial standard CMOS IC technology with subsequent CMOS compatible post-pro-
cessing. In the following we describe the main fabrication steps. We start with a
description of a general CMOS process followed by the special features of the
three processes we used. Next we discuss CMOS compatible post-processing.
Then a physical description of the devices we fabricated is given. Finally we dis-
cuss the critical steps and pitfalls we encountered in micromachining CMOS pro-
cessed silicon wafers and chips.
3.1 CMOS Processes

CMOS technology for integrated circuits is a set of highly sophisticated, well
developed fabrication steps [24] of high reliability. Modern very large scale inte-
gration (VLSI) circuits contain more than 100 million transistors on a single chip.
The fabrication of the CMOS devices is carried out on single crystal (100) ori-
ented silicon wafers. Several hundred process steps are required for the fabrication
of the transistors and their interconnections. The main fabrication steps involve
implantation and diffusion of dopants into silicon, oxidation of silicon, thin film
deposition, and patterning by photolithography and etching. The typical device for
a CMOS process is the inverter schematically shown in fig. 3.1. It consists of two
field effect transistors (FET) and their interconnections. Their metal oxide semi-
conductor (MOS) structure is realized with the gate polysilicon, gate oxide, and
substrate. The complementary action of the two transistors, which gave the name
to CMOS (complementary MOS), is achieved by placing one transistor in a well
of doping type opposite to that of the substrate. The active area of the transistors
is defined by an opening in the field oxide. Two metallization layers are used to
connect the active devices. They are made from an aluminum alloy. The dielectric
layers include field, contact, and intermetal oxides and the passivation. They iso-
late the conducting layers from each other. When opened, they allow the contact
35
3 Device Fabrication
AAAAAAAAA Pad
AAAAAAAAA
Passivation
AAAAAAAAA AAAAA
AAAAAAAAA
Metal 2
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAA
AA
AAAAA
AAA
AAAAA
Intermetal oxide
Contact oxide
Field oxide
Gate Gate oxide Well Metal 1 Substrate
Fig. 3.1: Schematic cross-section of a CMOS inverter.
between different conducting layers.The passivation protects the circuit from cor-
rosion and mechanical damage. Openings in the passivation are called pads and
are used for connections between the chip and the package. The layers in the
cross-section 3.1, and their typical materials, thicknesses, and purposes are listed
in table 3.1. While the basic structure is similar for all CMOS processes, a variety
of specialized processes exists. We now describe the special features of the three
processes ECPD 10, alp2lv, and alp1mv used for this thesis.
ECPD10
The ECPD 10 process of Atmel ES2 in Aix-en-Provence, France, is a digital
CMOS process. It features a minimum gate length of 1 µm, two metallization lay-
ers, and one polysilicon layer. The process was derived from the ECPD 10 of Phil-
ips. Table 3.2 lists the materials of the ECPD 10 process that were used for IR sen-
sors with their thickness and thermal conductivity. For the dielectrics, the overall
thickness and their average thermal conductivity are listed. The thermoelectric
properties of the conducting layers are listed in table 3.3. The relative Seebeck
coefficient of polysilicon and metal 1 is given. The data in tables 3.2 and 3.3 were
measured by von Arx [57].
36
3.1 CMOS Processes
Layer Purpose Material Thickness

Passivation circuit protection Si3N4 2 µm
Metal 2 interconnect aluminum alloy 1 µm
Intermetal
isolation spin-on-glass 1 µm
oxide
Metal 1 interconnect aluminum alloy 1 µm
Contact oxide isolation reflow glass 1 µm
Gate transistor polysilicon 0.4 µm
Field oxide isolation SiO2 0.5 µm
Gate oxide isolation SiO2 0.04 µm
Source/drain contact doped Si 0.3 µm
Well transistor doped Si 4 µm
Substrate substrate Si 700 µm
Tab. 3.1: Layers contained in the CMOS inverter shown in fig. 3.1 with typical
thicknesses.
Layer Material Thickness κ [W/mK]

Passivation oxynitride
Intermetal oxide spin-on-glass
3.15 µm 1.06
Contact oxide boro-phosphorous (overall) (average)
silicate glass
Field oxide SiO2
Metal 2 aluminum alloy 1 µm 180
Metal 1 aluminum alloy 0.5 µm -
Poly n+-polysilicon 0.35 µm 23.7
Tab. 3.2: Thicknesses and thermal conductivities of the layers of ECPD 10 [57].
37
Layer Ω/sq]
Sheet resistance Rsq [Ω Seebeck coeff. γ [µV/K]
Metal 2 0.06 -
Metal 1 0.06 -
Poly 30.8 -108
Tab. 3.3: Electrical properties of the conducting layers of ECPD 10 [57].
alp2lv
The alp2lv process of EM Microelectronic-Marin SA in Marin, Switzerland, is an
analog, low-power, low-voltage IC process. It features a minimum gate length of
2 µm, two metallizations, and two polysilicon layers. One of these polysilicon
layers is available with three different doping levels, used in capacitors, resistors,
poly-diodes, tunnel-diodes, and EEPROM cells. The process is carried out on
6” wafers. The thermal material properties of alp2lv layers are listed in table 3.4.
An option of the alp2lv process are gold bumps. These are normally used for tape
automated bonding. They are electroplated on top of the passivation or pads to a
height of 25 µm. The electrical parameters of the conducting layers are listed in
table 3.5.
alp1mv
Like the ECPD 10 process of Atmel ES2, the alp1mv process of EM Microelec-
tronic-Marin SA in Marin, Switzerland, was derived from the ECPD 10 of Philips.
The two processes are electrically equivalent and the material data in tables 3.2
and 3.3 were also used for the alp1mv process. Gold bumping is also available for
the alp1mv process.
3.2 Post-Processing Method

Post-processing is the crucial step in CMOS IR sensor fabrication. It provides the
thermal isolation necessary for the sensor operation. The silicon underneath the
active sensor area is removed by an anisotropic etching step. We used aqueous
solutions of potassium hydroxide (KOH) or ethylene-diamine pyrocatechol
(EDP). KOH is suitable for the etching of sensor membranes from the rear of the
38
Layer Material Thickness κ [W/mK]

Bump Au 25 µm 312
Passivation Si3N4/SiO2 1 µm 1.1
Metal 2 aluminum alloy 1 µm 174
Intermetal oxide spin-on-glass 0.9 µm 1.0
Metal 1 aluminum alloy 0.7 µm 197
Contact oxide borophosphorous glass 0.7 µm 1.2
Poly 2 n+-polysilicon 0.38 µm 18
n-polysilicon 0.38 µm 22
p+-polysilicon 0.38 µm 14
Poly 1 n+-polysilicon 0.38 µm 18
Field oxide SiO2 1 µm 1.2
Tab. 3.4: Thicknesses and thermal conductivities of the layers of alp2lv [58,59].
Layer Ω/sq]
Sheet resistance Rsq [Ω Seebeck coeff. γ [µV/K]
Metal 2 0.03 0
Metal 1 0.044 0
n+-poly 2 29 -88
n-poly 2 2613 -454
p+-poly 2 427 270
n+-poly 1 29 -92
Tab. 3.5: Electrical properties of the conducting layers of alp2lv [58,59].
wafer, while EDP is used for beam and bridge type structures etched from the
wafer front. KOH would destroy the metal pads at the front of the wafer, while
they are preserved in EDP.
39
Bulk Micromachining by Anisotropic Etching

Bulk micromachining of silicon with KOH and EDP is based on the fact that dif-
ferent planes of the silicon monocrystal have different etch rates. In these solu-
tions the (111) and (100)-planes have the slowest and fastest etch rates, respec-
tively. Etch rate ratios up to 35:1 are reported [60]. This property can be exploited
to etch cavities of diverse forms into the (100)-oriented wafers. The surface of the
wafer is protected by an etch mask. The mask is patterned to locally expose the
silicon bulk. For a rectangular mask opening the cavity grows in the shape of a
AAAAAAAA
<111>
Convex corner
Etch mask AAAAAA
AAAAAAAA
AAAAAA
AAAAAAAA
Etch groove
AAAAAA
AAAAAAAA
AAAAA AAAAAA
AAAAAAAA
Undercut
<100> structure
Silicon
AAAAA AAAAAAAA
AAAAAA
AAAAA AAAAAAAA
AAAAAA
Fig. 3.2: Schematic cross-section of an etched groove and top view of a structure
released by the underetching of convex mask corners.
inversed truncated wedge restricted laterally by (111)-planes. A schematic

cross-section and SEM picture of such a cavity are shown in figs. 3.2 and 3.3,
respectively. The size of the mask opening in fig. 3.3 is 1800 µm by 1300 µm. The
bottom of the etch pit is a (100)-plane and is etched until the cavity has the form
of a v-groove. As indicated in fig. 3.2 the comparatively low etch rate of
(111)-planes leads to a small undercut of the mask. If the opening in the etch
masks contains convex corners or line segments not aligned with the crystal the
mask is undercut accordingly. After a sufficient etching the undercut has the shape
of the rectangular envelope of the mask opening aligned with the crystal lattice.
The undercutting allows the formation of laterally supported structures such as
beams and bridges composed of the masking material. Figure 3.4 shows an array
40
Etch mask
(111)-planes
(100)-plane
Fig. 3.3: SEM picture of a cavity etched into rectangular mask opening. The size
of the mask opening is 1800 µm by 1300 µm.
of such beams. The length and width of these cantilever beams is 300 µm and
100 µm, respectively. Bridges are obtained from the combination of several open-
Fig. 3.4: Array of micromachined beams. The length of the beams is 300 µm.
ings in the etch mask. As shown in fig. 3.5 the individual cavities overlap and join
due to the undercutting. An example is shown in fig. 3.6. It consists of an s-shaped
bridge obtained with two etch mask openings. The size of the bridge is 100 µm by
150 µm.
If the mask opening is large enough the etched cavity eventually reaches the rear
of the wafer and an opening is formed. If the rear of the wafer is protected by an
41
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAA AAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAA AAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAA AAAAAAAA
Opening Opening
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAA AAAAAAAA
Bridge Bridge
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAA AAAAAAAA
Opening Opening
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Fig. 3.5: Schematic top view of two underetched bridge structures.
Fig. 3.6: S-shaped bridge obtained with two etch mask openings.
etch resistant film, the etching stops at the silicon/film interface. This results in a
closed membrane as shown in fig. 3.7.
Etch mask
Silicon
Membrane
Fig. 3.7: Cross-section of a membrane obtained by etching through the wafer.
EDP
We used EDP type S [61] at 95°C to fabricate beams and bridges. It contains
1000 ml ethylene-diamine, 160 g pyrocatechol, 133 ml water, and 6 g pyrazine.
42
The etch rate in (100) direction for fresh solutions at 95°C is 27 µm/h. The etch
behavior varies significantly with water, oxygen, and silicon concentration. To
obtain a predictable etch, the solution has to be kept under nitrogen atmosphere in
a reflux condenser [62]. After 10 g of silicon have been dissolved per liter of solu-
tion, solid reaction products are deposited on the surfaces [63]. The field oxide and
passivation layers are etched more than 104 times more slowly than silicon. This
allows the fabrication of beams and bridges in a maskless post-processing step,
using the CMOS dielectrics as the etch masking layers [64]. The access openings,
where the EDP attacks the silicon, are defined by a cut in the passivation, inter-
metal oxide, contact oxide, and field oxide. The unprotected aluminum of pads is
etched 180 times slower than silicon in the (100) direction. This provides an etch
window of 4 h during which bondable pads are preserved [65]. The details of the
etching procedure are given in [66].
The advantages of EDP are the simplicity of the post-processing procedure and
the possibility to process a single chip for prototype fabrication. However, the size
of the fabricated structures is limited by mechanical stability and maximum etch-
ing time of 4 h. Stress in the dielectric layers causes structures larger than approx-
imately 300 µm to break during fabrication [66].
KOH
We used 6 M solution of KOH at 95°C to fabricate dielectric membranes. Its etch
rate for silicon in (100) direction, silicon nitride, and field oxide are 150 µm/h [6],
0.1 nm/h [67], and 0.12 nm/h [67], respectively. Up to 190 g of silicon per liter
can be dissolved with only a 7% change in (100) etch rate [68]. KOH removes the
pad metallization within seconds, and thus cannot be used in contact with unpro-
tected pads. Thus, KOH is preferentially used for micromachining from the rear
of wafers.
We processed entire 6” wafers to obtain hundreds of micromachined membranes

in one process step [6]. A wafer fixture developed by Linder [69] was used to
mechanically protect the wafer front during the etch. A cross-section through the
wafer fixture is shown in fig. 3.8. It consists of two stainless steel parts. The wafer
is clamped between them with two sealing rings. The cavity formed by the wafer
and the fixture is rinsed with diluted ascorbic acid. This balances the hydrostatic
pressure from the KOH on the wafer and neutralizes KOH possibly leaking
43
AAAA AAA
AAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAA Wafer
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAASeal ring Cavity Fixture
Fig. 3.8: Cross-section through the fixture used for the protection of the wafer
front side during KOH etching.
through broken membranes. We etched until the silicon underneath the mem-
branes was completely removed and the etching stopped at the field oxide, leaving
membranes composed of all dielectric CMOS layers.
The preparation of the wafers for the KOH etch consists of the following steps
[6,70]:
• Deposition of stress compensating passivation.

• Deposition of additional dielectric front protection layer.
• Polishing of rear side of the wafers.
• Deposition of the etch mask.
• Electrochemical growth of gold bumps.
• Patterning of the etch mask.
The membrane yield after etching is increased by controlling the mechanical
stress in the membranes. This is done by compensating the stress of the membrane
layers with a customized passivation [70].
The surface state of the wafer back is crucial for the adhesion of the etch mask.
After the CMOS process the back of the wafers are covered with process residuals
and scratched from handling. An isotropic etch of the wafer back is used to obtain
the required surface quality [6]. After etching, the front protection layer is
removed, the wafers are cleaned, and finally diced.
3.3 Fabricated Device Types

In this section we describe the fabricated IR sensors, i.e., the layout, fabrication
process, choice of materials, and geometry. Their measured performance is
reported in chapter 4. IR sensors of the beam, bridge, and membrane type were
44
fabricated. Sensors of the bridge and membrane type were integrated into arrays
with up to ten rows and columns. Single sensors and arrays were cointegrated with
on-chip signal conditioning electronics, in order to form integrated microsystems.
The devices are reported in the following order:
• Single sensors, beam type.

• Single sensors, bridge type.
• Single sensors, membrane type.
• Sensor arrays, composed of several sensors.
• Sensor systems, composed of sensors and electronics.
CMOS thermopiles for beam, bridge, and membrane sensors can be designed in
two ways. In the first, the two thermocouple legs are stacked one on top of the
other as shown in fig. 3.9 a. In the second, the two thermocouple legs are arranged
laterally as shown in fig. 3.9 b. Both layouts are characterized by the number N of
thermocouples, the spacing w0 between them, and the widths of both thermocou-
ple legs, i.e. w1 and w2. The spacing between the two thermocouple legs in the
second type was designed to be equal to the spacing between the thermocouples.
w2
w1
w1
w0
w2
w0
w0
Material 2
Material 2
Material 1 Material 1
(a) (b)
Fig. 3.9: Layout of stacked (a) and neighboring (b) thermopile layout.
45
Beams
Beam and bridge type thermoelectric sensors have previously been investigated
by Sarro et al. [32] and Lenggenhager et al. [34,71]. They are obtained by mask-
less bulk-micromachining with EDP. The advantage of these types is that
post-processing is simple and can be done with a single chip for prototype fabri-
cation. However, their size is limited to roughly 300 µm by mechanical stability
and a maximum etching time of 4 h [66].
A series of test structures test1 to test10 was designed to measure the spectral
absorptivity of layer sandwiches applicable for IR sensors. These test structures
are simple thermoelectric IR sensors of the beam type as shown in fig. 3.10. They
Absorber Thermopile
Bulk silicon
Fig. 3.10: Schematic top view and cross-section of a test structure.
were fabricated in the ECPD 10 process. The cantilevers are 300 µm long and
150 µm wide. A 150 µm by 150 µm square area at the tip serves as radiation
absorber. It consists of the layer sandwich under test. Nine versions with different
absorber sandwiches were fabricated. The various layer sandwiches are listed in
table 3.6. These combinations are a complete list of the absorbing sandwiches
which can be fabricated reproducibly using the ECPD 10 process and subsequent
micromachining with EDP. From the seven layers deposited in ECPD 10,127
combinations can be inferred, however, most of them can be excluded as absorber
sandwiches by the following considerations:
46
test10
test1
test2
test3
test4
test5
test6
test7
test8
test9
Layer
Passivation ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
Metal 2 ■ ■ ■
Intermetal ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
Metal 1 ■ ■
Contact ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
Poly ■ ■
Field oxide ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
Tab. 3.6: Absorbers layer compositions of the test structures.
• The fabrication of absorbing stacks by the CMOS process does not allow arbi-
trary layer combinations. During fabrication all layers are first deposited and
then etched away locally, where necessary. Thus, if a layer is to be omitted
from the stack, the underlying layer has to offer a clear etch stop. Otherwise it
is also removed (overetched). As an example, metal 2 may not be omitted on
top of metal 1. Dielectric layers may usually be removed only above conduc-
tors.
As an exception, this rule does not apply to the lowest layer in the stack.
Overetching of this layer attacks the substrate. Since the substrate is removed
by the subsequent micromachining, the overetch does not affect the final
absorber sandwich.
• During the post-processing the top and bottom layer of the stack are exposed to
the etchant. Polysilicon is attacked by EDP and thus has to be sandwiched
between other layers.
• Aluminum with a thickness larger than 100 nm is completely opaque to IR
radiation [73]. Thus, if metal 1 or metal 2 is included in the sandwich, only the
layers on top of the metallization absorb radiation. Sandwiches differing only
in the layers below the metallization, were thus considered as equivalent
absorbers. However, they still may differ by thermal conductance.
Systematic application of these rules results in a list of the nine absorbing layer
sandwiches test1 to test9 listed in table 3.6. The absorber sandwich test10 is
equivalent to test3 according to the last rule. Nevertheless it was included to test
47
the validity of this rule. A micrograph of the structures test5, test7, and test9 is
shown in fig. 3.11. The different absorber squares can be distinguished by their
different degree of transparency. A thermopile is integrated in the test structure
with cold contacts on the bulk silicon and hot contacts adjacent to the absorber
area. The thermopile consists of 30 thermocouples of poly and metal 1 with a
spacing of 2 µm. The width of the metal 1 thermocouple legs is 1.5 µm. They are
stacked on top of the 2.5 µm wide poly legs. A reference structure without absorb-
ing area was also fabricated. Its schematic is shown in fig. 3.12.
Fig. 3.11: Optical micrograph of the structures test5, test9, and test7.
The sensor named ECPD-I consists of two identical cantilever beams extending
from two opposite sides of an etch cavity as shown in fig. 3.13. The thermopiles
of both beams are connected in series. The beam length and width are 145 µm and
160 µm, respectively. The separation between the tips of the beams is 10 µm. The
width of the lateral etch access openings is 70 µm. Sensor layout data are listed in
table 3.7.
48
Fig. 3.12: Schematic top view of the reference structure.
Fig. 3.13: SEM micrograph of the sensor ECPD-I.
Bridges
IR sensors of the bridge type are fabricated, like beams, by front-side microma-
chining with EDP. In comparison with beams the doubly supported bridges are
more rugged and can be made larger. Nevertheless, their size is limited by the
maximum etching duration of 4 h [65].
Five types of s-shaped bridge sensors were fabricated. One is based on the ECPD
10 process, the others on the alp1mv technology. When these sensors are used to
create an array, the distinctive s-shape shown in fig. 3.6 has these advantages:
• The s-shape ensures complete underetching.

• The in-plane stress in the structure may partially relax by out-of-plane bending.
• The rectangular bridge fits into the rectangular cavity, giving a high fill factor.
• A large number of identical bridges can be placed in a row, resulting in one
long etched groove spanned by parallel bridges.
49
Sensor name ECPD-1

Process ECPD 10
Cavity size length [µm] 300
width [µm] 300
Etch opening width [µm] 70
Number of thermocouples 70
Thermo- material A poly
couple
width [µm] 2.5
spacing width [µm] 1.5
material B metal 1
width [µm] 1.5
layout stacked
Tab. 3.7: Layout parameters of sensor ECPD-I.
• In the above configuration wires can run across the groove over the bridges.
This is important for array addressing.
The sensor ECPD-II is shown in fig. 3.6. The central area serves as absorber. It
contains an integrated metal 2 reflector embedded in the dielectric layers. The
absorber is connected by two arms to opposite rims of the micromachined cavity.
Each arm contains a thermopile with five thermocouples. The thermopiles are
connected in series. The overall size of the bridge is 100 µm by 150 µm. Data are
provided in table 3.8. Along the border of the etch openings in fig. 3.6 imperfec-
tions can be observed. These “stringers” are a severe problem for front-side
post-processing. The origin of stringers and methods to avoid them are discussed
at the end of this chapter.
The sensors alp1-I to alpI-IV were fabricated using the alp1mv process. They have
an s-shape similar to that of ECPD-II. In contrast to ECPD-II, they have no inte-
grated reflector. The thermopiles extend to the center of the structure. An SEM
micrograph of alp1-III is shown in fig. 3.14. A polysilicon resistor is integrated in
the middle of the bridge for testing and calibration purposes. The layout data for
50
Sensor name ECPD-II alp1-I alp1-II alp1-III alp1-IV

Process ECPD 10 alp1mv
Bridge length [µm] 150 182 258 192 192
size
width [µm] 100 188 325 195 195
Etch
width [µm] 20 22 22 30 45
opening
Number of th. couples 10 18 40 8 8
Thermo- material A poly poly poly poly poly
couple
width [µm] 2.5 2.5 2.5 10 10
spacing
1.5 1.75 1.75 1.5 1.5
width [µm]
material B metal 1 metal 1 metal 1 metal 1 metal 1
width [µm] 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
layout stacked stacked stacked stacked stacked
Tab. 3.8: Layout parameters of bridge type sensors.
the three sensors are listed in table 3.8. The sensors alp1-I, alp1-III, and alp1-IV
are similar in bridge size and thermopile layout. All three sensors are designed for
integration in arrays for thermal imaging. The variations were introduced to opti-
mize the performance and to improve the post-processing yield.
Fig. 3.14: SEM micrograph of alp1-III.
51
Membrane Sensors
Sensors of the membrane type have been investigated by various authors
[7,33-47]. Their advantage, in comparison with beams and bridges, is the higher
mechanical stability. This allows post-processing on the wafer level for mass pro-
duction and fabrication of larger sensors. Membranes up to 14 by 16 mm were
successfully etched [70].
All membrane sensors discussed in this thesis have the general layout shown in
fig. 3.15. The membrane is rectangular and consists of all the dielectric layers of
the CMOS process, namely field oxide, contact oxide, intermetal oxide, and pas-
sivation. Two identical thermopiles are symmetrically integrated into the mem-
brane. They are connected in series. This layout is highly symmetric and can be
described by a few parameters:
• The length lm and width wm of the membrane.

• The number N of thermocouples.
• The material of the thermocouple legs, their widths w1 and w2, and their spac-
ing w0.
• The margin wb of the thermopile to the border of the membrane.
On some sensors a polysilicon heating resistor is integrated on the membrane as
shown schematically in fig. 3.15. It is used for test and calibration purposes.
Thirteen different membrane sensor designs were fabricated, three using the
ECPD 10 process, six using the alp2lv technology, and four using the alp1mv pro-
cess. The membrane lengths range from 1500 µm to 200 µm. The membrane
widths are between 800 µm and 200 µm. The sensors larger than 600 µm were
fabricated for motion detector systems. The sensors smaller than 345 µm were
designed for application in arrays.
The sensor ECPD-III is similar to the beam sensor ECPD-I. They have a similar
size, but a different thermopile layout. The ECPD-III has 148 thermocouples with
a 1.5 µm wide poly leg, while ECPD-I has 70 thermocouples with wpoly = 2.5 µm.
All design data are shown in table 3.9.
The two sensors ECPD-IV and ECPD-V are based on large membranes. Their size
is 630 µm by 625 µm and 720 µm by 720 µm, respectively. The detail of their
52
Silicon substrate
Membrane
Thermopiles
Resistor
lm wb Marging
wm
Fig. 3.15: General layout of a membrane sensor.
layout is given in table 3.9. These sensors were designed to test the feasibility of
large membranes fabricated with the ECPD 10 process.
The sensors alp2-I to alp2-IV are all designed to have the same thermopile resis-
tance of 300 kΩ. However, they vary in size, thermocouple materials, and thermo-
pile layout. The sensors alp2-III to alp2-VI make use of the p+-poly available in
the alp2lv process. The design data are listed in table 3.10.
Three membrane based sensors were fabricated using the alp1mv process. Their
design data are shown in table 3.11. The sensor alp1-V has a size of 1500 µm
by 700 µm. It is intended for a motion detection system. The smaller membranes,
i.e., alp1-VI and alp1-VII, are intended for a sensor array. The sensor alp1-VII was
fabricated in four versions. All versions have the same thermopile layout. How-
53
Sensor name ECPD-III ECPD-IV ECPD-V

Process ECPD 10
Membrane length [µm] 345 630 720
size
width [µm] 325 625 720
Margin width [µm] 20 145 200
Number of th. couples 148 64 46
Thermo- material A poly poly poly
couple
width [µm] 1.5 7.5 11
spacing
1.5 2 2
width [µm]
material B metal 1 metal 1 metal 1
width [µm] 1.5 1.5 1.5
layout stacked stacked stacked
Tab. 3.9: Layout of membrane sensors fabricated using the
ECPD 10 process.
ever, they vary in margin and consequently in size. The margins and respective
dimensions are listed in table 3.11.
Arrays
Linear arrays of integrated thermoelectric sensors have been studied as early as
1985 by Choi et al. [74] and later by Sarro et al. [75]. Two-dimensional arrays
became feasible with the cointegration of sensors and circuitry. In 1994 Kanno
et al. [46] reported an array of 128 by 128 sensor elements designed for vacuum
operation. In 1995 Oliver et al. [47] reported a 32 by 32 element array which
allows operation in air at ambient pressure.
We have fabricated arrays using the ECPD 10 and the alp1mv process. Three dif-
ferent arrays were fabricated with the ECPD-IV membrane sensors. Six different
arrays were fabricated with the alp1-VI and alp1-VII membrane sensors from the
alp1mv process. Another four arrays were made with the bridge sensors alp1-I,
alp1-II, alp1-III, and alp1-IV using the same process. These arrays are periodic
54
alp2-III
alp2-IV
alp2-VI
Sensor name
alp2-II
alp2-V
alp2-I
Process alp2lv
Membrane length [µm] 1200 1000 1200 1000 1200 1500
size
width [µm] 800 500 800 500 700 700
Margin width [µm] 100 100 90 90 100 100
Number of th. couples 190 54 40 42 112 118
Thermo- material A n+-poly p+-poly n+-poly n+-poly n+-poly n+-poly
couple
width [µm] 8 27 11 7 3 4
spacing
2.5 2.5 3 3 3 3
width [µm]
material B metal 1 metal 1 p+-poly p+-poly p+-poly p+-poly
width [µm] 2 2 34 26 9 12
layout stacked stacked lateral lateral lateral lateral
Tab. 3.10: Layout data of membrane sensors fabricated using the alp2lv process.
arrangements of the same sensor in columns and rows. Each sensor constitutes a
pixel of the array. The array layout is described by the number of rows and col-
umns and two pitches. Further issues are how to address individual pixels within
the array and how to suppress cross-talk between neighboring pixels. As an exam-
ple, a close-up of an array of alp1-III pixels is shown in fig. 3.16.
The arrays fabricated using the ECPD 10 process are ArrECPD-I to ArrECPD-III.
They consist of two membrane pixels ECPD-III. The two pixels are united on a
single membrane as shown in fig. 3.17. Since they share the same thermally iso-
lated structure a large cross-talk is to be expected. Broad lines of the metal 1 and
2 were thus integrated into the membrane, between the two pixels. These lines
provide a thermal separation between the pixels. To investigate this thermal sep-
aration scheme, different layouts were explored in the three arrays: No metal lines
in ArrECPD-I; one line, 10 µm wide, of stacked metal 1 and 2 in ArrECPD-II.;
two lines, 4 µm wide and 2 µm apart, in ArrECPD-III.
55
Sensor name alp1-V alp1-VI alp1-VII a/b/c/d

Process alp1mv
Membrane length [µm] 1500 216 200/240/260/250
size
width [µm] 700 216 200/240/260/250
Margin width [µm] 124 28 5/25/35/30
Number of th. couples 44 64 12
Thermo- material A poly poly poly
couple
width [µm] 55 2.5 30
spacing
2 2 2
width [µm]
material B metal 1 metal 1 metal 1
width [µm] 2 1.5 1.5
layout stacked stacked stacked
Tab. 3.11: Layout data of membrane sensors fabricated using the alp1mv
process.
Grooves
Switch
Pixel
Signal line
Bulk silicon rim
Fig. 3.16: SEM micrograph of an array of alp1-III sensors.
56
Membrane
Absorber
Thermopile
Thermal
separation
Fig. 3.17: ArrECPD-II with two ECPD-III sensors integrated on one membrane.
Six arrays of membrane sensors were also fabricated using the alp1mv process.
Like ArrECPD-I to ArrECPD-III they consist of pixels integrated on a single
membrane. In contrast to these, however, they are two-dimensional. The thermal
separation is provided by a similar scheme as with ArrECPD-III. A path with high
thermal conductance is provided between the pixels by metal lines. In these
two-dimensional arrays the separation lines also provide a heat sink for the cold
contacts of the thermopiles. Instead of the CMOS metallization, 25 µm thick gold
lines were used as shown in fig. 3.18. These lines are electrochemically grown
using the gold bumping service of the alp1mv process. The signal lines of all indi-
vidual pixels run under the gold lines to the border of the membrane. There,
addressing switches are integrated in the bulk silicon of the membrane support.
The array ArrAlp1-VI consists of alp1-VI sensor pixels. The array consists of three
columns and four rows with pitches of 350 µm. The pixel is square with a width
of 216 µm. The two gold lines are 50 µm wide with a spacing of 34 µm. The array
layout data are listed in table 3.12.
The array ArrAlp1-VII was fabricated in five different versions. Like in

Arralp1-VI all pixels are located on one membrane and are thermally separated by
gold lines. All versions consist of alp1-VII pixels with the same pitch and pixel
layout. Four different versions of the thermal separation lines, and two different
array sizes were implemented. Versions a, b, c, and d consist of seven by seven
pixels, whereas version f consists of ten rows and ten columns. The thermal sepa-
57
Pixel
Gold lines
Fig. 3.18: SEM micrograph of a pixel in ArrAlp-VII. Double gold lines thermally
separate neighboring pixels.
ration in versions a, b, and c is provided by double gold lines, while versions d and
f have only one line. The layout data of the five arrays are listed in table 3.12. The
total width of the thermal separation varies, but the pitch is constant. Thus the
pixels of the four versions have different sizes. These four versions allow to com-
pare the cross-talk of different thermal separation layouts.
Four additional arrays were fabricated using the alp1mv process. These arrays
consist of front-etched, s-shaped bridge pixels. The array ArrAlp1-I to ArrAlp1-IV
consist of alp1-I to alp1-IV sensors, respectively. Figure 3.16 shows an SEM
micrograph of ArrAlp1-III. Each column in these arrays consists of pixels sus-
pended over a long micromachined groove. The array thus consists of parallel
adjacent grooves. The cold contacts of the pixels are located on the bulk silicon
rim between the columns. A single signal line runs along each column on this rim.
The signals from the columns pixels are selectively connected to this line using
switching transistors integrated in the bulk silicon of the rim. The switches are
controlled by an addressing line as shown in fig. 3.19. For clarity the signal lines
are highlighted in the SEM micrograph. The addressing line runs over the bridges
along the row. By selecting an address line, all pixels of the corresponding row are
connected to their respective column signal line where their signal can be read out.
A schematic of this arrangement is shown in fig. 3.20. This addressing scheme is
58
ArrAlp1-VI Arralp1-VII
a b c d f
Pixel name alp1-VI alp1-VII
width [µm] 216 200 240 260 250 250
length [µm] 216 200 240 260 250 250
Columns number 4 7 10
pitch [µm] 350 330 330
Rows number 3 7 10
pitch [µm] 350 330 330
Thermal number 2 2 2 2 1 1
separation width [µm] 50 50 25 20 80 80
lines
spacing [µm] 34 30 40 30
Tab. 3.12: Layout data of ArrAlp1-VI and five versions of ArrAlp1-VII.
Signal line
Addressing line
Pixel output
Switch
Fig. 3.19: Addressing scheme used in ArrAlp1-I to ArrAlp1-III.
59
extendable to arrays of arbitrary size. The same addressing scheme has been
applied by Cole et al. [76] and Tanaka et al. [77] for micromachined bolometers
and by Oliver et al. [47] for an array of 32 by 32 micromachined thermoelectric
sensors. The pixels within the arrays are separated from each other by an air gap.
This ensures thermal separation and therefore a relatively small cross-talk.
Address lines
Pixel
Switch
Signal lines
Fig. 3.20: Schematic of the addressing scheme used in ArrAlp1-I to ArrAlp1-III.
The ArrAlp1-I consists of the smallest pixels alp1-I. Their size is 182 µm by
188 µm. They are arranged in three columns and six rows with a pitch of 210 µm.
The largest array is ArrAlp1-IV. It consists of 240 alp1-IV pixels arranged in six-
teen columns and fifteen rows. The dimensions of alp1-IV are 190 µm by 200 µm.
The pitch of the rows and columns is 217 µm and 243 µm, respectively. The
alp1-IV pixel is similar in layout to alp1-I and alp1-III. The alp1-IV is the newest
version and the small changes were made to improve the post-processing yield.
The pixels alp1-II of the ArrAlp1-II are larger than the others. The dimensions are
258 µm by 325 µm. There are three rows and columns with a pitch of 347 µm and
287 µm, respectively. The layout data of arrays ArrAlp1-I to ArrAlp1-IV are given
in table 3.13.
60
ArrAlp1-I ArrAlp1-II ArrAlp1-III ArrAlp1-IV

Pixel name alp1-I alp1-II alp1-III alp1-IV
width [µm] 182 258 190 190
length [µm] 188 325 195 200
Columns number 3 3 10 16
pitch [µm] 210 287 210 217
Rows number 6 3 10 15
pitch [µm] 210 347 224 245
Tab. 3.13: Layout data of ArrAlp1-I, ArrAlp1-II, ArrAlp1-III., and ArrAlp1-IV.
Systems
Integrated IR sensor microsystems consist of one or more IR microsensors coin-
tegrated on a chip with signal conditioning circuitry. The first CMOS integrated
microsystem using thermoelectric IR sensors were reported by Lenggenhager
et al. [44] in 1993, and by Müller et al. [7] in 1995.
We report the fabrication of eight IR sensor microsystems using the alp2lv and
alp1mv process. Six systems are designed for motion or presence detection and
consist of two IR sensors connected in parallel to the inputs of a differential
low-noise amplifier. The circuit schematic of this setup is shown in fig. 3.21. The
systems vary in sensors and amplifiers. Some include additional circuit blocks.
Two systems were fabricated for thermal imaging. They consist of a sensor array
cointegrated with addressing circuit and a low-noise amplifier. The block diagram
+ Sensor - -
Amplifier
+ Sensor - +
Fig. 3.21: Schematic circuit of motion detection systems.
61
of these systems is shown in fig. 3.22. Table 3.14 lists all eight systems with their
sensors and low-noise amplifier blocks.
Name Sensor/Array Amplifier

Impedance Size Noise
Number Name Principle
[MΩ] [µm] [nV/√Hz]
SysAlp2-I 2 alp2-I
SysAlp2-II 2 alp2-II 860
Bipolar 0.6 107
SysAlp2-III 2 alp2-III 210
SysAlp2-IV 2 alp2-IV
SysAlp2-V 2 alp2-V 850
Auto-zero 100 317
SysAlp2-VI 2 alp2-VI 600
SysAlp1-IV 1 ArrAlp1-IV 1260
Chopper 100 15
SysAlp1-VII 1 ArrAlp1-VII 1110
Tab. 3.14: Components of the sensor microsystems.
Row Select
Sensor Array
Row Address Differential

Column Multiplexer Amplifier
Column Address
-
Differential Sensor Signals
+
Fig. 3.22: Block diagram of the thermal imaging systems.
62
The systems SysAlp2-I to SysAlp2-IV consist of two sensors, alp2-I to alp2-IV,

respectively, and the same low-noise amplifier. This is a standard circuit block
from the analog cell library of alp2lv process. Its input stage consists of lateral
bipolar transistors with an input resistance of 600 kΩ and gain of 60. Its size is
860 µm × 210 µm.
The systems SysAlp2-V and SysAlp2-VI consist of two sensors alp2-V and
alp2-VI, respectively, and five circuit blocks. These blocks are a low-noise differ-
ential amplifier, low-pass filter, bandgap reference voltage generator, oscillator,
and output stage. The systems are configured as shown in fig. 3.23. The low-noise
+ Sensor - - -
+ +
+ Sensor -
Fig. 3.23: Block diagram of the SysAlp2-V and SysAlp2-VI.
amplifier was designed by Malcovati [8]. It has a MOSFET input stage with a
resistance larger than 100 MΩ, and a gain of 2000. Its size is 920 µm × 590 µm.
To suppress the large flicker noise inherent in FETs it employs the auto-zero tech-
nique in a switched capacitor implementation. A white noise spectrum with
317 nV/√Hz was obtained. To minimize clock feed-through and optimize the
power supply rejection ratio, a fully differential architecture was used. The band-
gap reference generates an analog ground from the power supply of 0 and 3.6 V.
The anti-aliasing filter limits the signal and noise bandwidth of the sensors, which
is necessary for the sampling of the amplifier. The clock for the amplifier and
output stage are provided by the on-chip oscillator with a frequency of 40 kHz.
The output stage converts the differential signal of the primary stage into a sin-
gle-ended output and provides the necessary impedance. Figure 3.24 shows a
63
Bandgap Output stage

reference
Sensors
Filter
Oscillator
Amplifier
Fig. 3.24: Micrograph of SysAlp2-V.
micrograph of SysAlp2-V. The systems are integrated on a chip 3.5 mm × 3.5 mm

in size, small enough to be packaged in a standard TO-5 transistor header. They
require three pins for operation, two for the power supply and one for the output.
The systems SysAlp1-IV and SysAlp1-VII are intended for thermal imaging. They
consist of a sensor array ArrAlp1-IV and ArrAlp1-VII, respectively, with address-
ing and multiplexing circuits and a low-noise amplifier. The amplifier has been
developed by Menolfi [10]. He applied the chopper stabilization technique,
obtaining a low-frequency noise-level of 15 nV/√Hz and an offset below 1 µV
with a transistor-only CMOS implementation. The input impedance is larger than
100 MΩ. To allow operation in a mixed-signal environment the signal path
throughout the amplifier was kept fully differential. The size of the amplifier is
1260 µm by 1110 µm. To take full advantage of the differential architecture of the
amplifier, the signal paths throughout the array and multiplexing circuits were
kept differential.
64
3.4 Post-Processing Restrictions
The system SysAlp1-IV consists of ArrAlp1-IV with 240 alp1-IV pixels in fifteen
rows and sixteen columns. Each individual pixel can be connected to the amplifier
through the multiplexing circuit. The multiplexing is controlled by applying an
eight-bit binary address with four bits each for the row and column address. A
micrograph of the system is shown in fig. 3.25. The size of the chip is 5.5 mm by
6.2 mm.
Fig. 3.25: Micrograph of SysAlp1-IV.
The system SysAlp1-VII consists of ArrAlp1-VII with 100 alp1-VII pixels in ten
rows and columns. Like in SysAlp1-IV the signals from the pixels are multiplexed
on-chip and directly fed to the amplifier. The chip with the integrated microsystem
is shown in fig. 3.26. Its size is 5.5 mm by 6.2 mm.

While commercial CMOS processes offer a reliable and well documented tech-
nology for circuit fabrication, they are usable, but neither intended nor optimized
65
Fig. 3.26: Micrograph of SysAlp1-VII d.
for, the fabrication of micromachined structures. Two difficulties arise from this
“misuse” of CMOS technology: broken membranes and stringers in the front
access openings. In the following, we analyse their origin and report possible
methods to avoid them.
Mechanical Stability
In the fabrication of microelectronic circuits the mechanical properties of the
applied materials are a minor issue, but they are crucial for the stability and yield
of micromachined structures. Only the initial stress of the deposited thin films are
routinely monitored in CMOS processes and tuned in view of film adhesion, step
coverage, and electromigration. Generally, a minimal compressive stress is con-
sidered optimal [78]. For beams, bridges, and membranes both the in-plane stress
and the stress gradient perpendicular to the plane are of importance.
Cantilever beams are singly clamped structures. Their in-plane stresses relax by
motion of the unclamped end. Nevertheless, during the release etch the stress may
66
cause the structures to break as discussed in [66]. An out-of-plane stress gradient

causes the structures to bend as shown in fig. 3.27. The beams in fig. 3.27 are fab-
ricated in the ECPD 10 process. They consist of all dielectric layers, except the
field oxide. The length and width of the beams are 200 µm by 100 µm, 400 µm by
200 µm, 600 µm by 300 µm, and 300 mm by 600 µm, respectively. The bending
radius is inversely proportional to the stress gradient [79]. Thus the out-of-plane
displacement at the tip is larger for long structures. The beam with 400 µm length
shows a tip deflection of 80 µm. Although bending does not cause catastrophic
failure, it is often undesirable and limits the maximum length of beams.
Fig. 3.27: Beams bending due to a stress gradient in their layer sandwich.
Bridges and membranes do not react to stress gradients as strongly as beams

because they are clamped on two respectively four sides. Doubly clamped struc-
tures also react to in-plane stresses. For homogenous, tensile or compressive stress
below a critical value, they remain flat. If the compressive stress exceeds the crit-
ical value they buckle out of the plane. The critical stress level depends on the
length to thickness ratio of the structure. The longer and thinner a structure the
lower the buckling threshold stress. Jaeggi [6] measured the critical stress for
square membranes composed of the dielectric layers from the alp2lv process. He
obtained a value of -13.2 a-2 Pa m-2, where a is the dimension of the square mem-
brane.
67
These considerations explain the following failure we observed. During the

post-processing, membranes with sides larger than 6 mm broke. In contrast
smaller membranes did not fail. Membranes of such size are required for arrays
AAAAAAAAAAAAA
with more than 20 alp1-VII pixels. The breaking occurred along the border of the
AAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAA
Silicon remains
Cracks
AAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAA
Etch mask
AAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAA
Dielectric
Membra
AAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAA
ne
AAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAA
Fig. 3.28: Location of the cracks on the etched membranes.
membrane as shown in fig. 3.28. Associated with the crack in the membrane was
a delamination in the dielectric layers. Closer examination showed the following.
In KOH the etching of membranes larger than 1 mm does not proceed uniformly
across the membrane area. The etch rate is higher along the perimeter of the
(100)-etch front and its corners. Figure 3.29 shows the profile of such an etch
front. It is obtained from a 6 mm by 6 mm membrane after 4 h of etching. The
height of this profile is approximately 15 µm. As the etching approaches the end,
the strongly compressive membranes buckled. The buckling introduces a bending
stress along the borders of the membrane. At this stage the remaining silicon in the
middle of the membrane is 10 µm thick, the corners are clear of silicon and little
silicon remains along the sides. Cracks in the silicon occurred in areas where the
bending stress is concentrated due to the thinner silicon. These cracks then prop-
68
20
Height [µm]
10
0
0
0 1
1 2
2 3
3 4
4 5 y [mm]
x [mm] 5
6
Fig. 3.29: Profile of the etch front from a membrane 6 mm by 6 mm in size.
agated into the dielectric layers as shown in fig. 3.30. They propagated through
the lowest membrane layers, allowing the KOH to attack the intermediate dielec-
trics.
Membrane Silicon remains
Silicon substrate Cracks
Fig. 3.30: Buckling membrane towards the end of the etching process.
This interpretation is supported by the micrograph shown in fig. 3.31. It shows a

crack in the dielectric layers along a sidewall of the etched cavity. The center of
the membrane is still covered with silicon. Separate patches of silicon remain on
69
Cavity wall
Membrane
Crack
Si remains
Fig. 3.31: Micrograph of a crack in the silicon and lower dielectric layers.
each side of the crack. Their borderlines are parallel and in equal distance to the
crack.
The problem of breaking dielectrics has been solved by finding an oxynitride layer
which serves both as passivation and stress compensation. Stress in thin film
oxynitride is largely determined by the deposition conditions. This stress can be
controlled over a range from 300 MPa to -300 MPa by appropriate control of pro-
cess parameters [70]. We chose a passivation with a small tensile stress, compen-
sating the compressive stress of the other membrane layers, and achieving flat
membranes.
Etch Access Openings

The access opening required for front side bulk micromachining are obtained by
stacked openings in the passivation, intermetal oxide, contact oxide, and field
oxide [66]. Such a structure never occurs in a standard CMOS circuit and creates
a non-standard situation in the patterning of these layers. Special care is therefore
required. Insulating dielectric layers are usually patterned to enable a connection
between the two conducting layers below and above the insulator. After the
dielectric is deposited on the lower conductor, an opening is obtained by photoli-
thography and subsequent etching. The etching process is optimized for high
selectivity to the underlying conductor. Thus the etching stops at the interface of
the two layers. Timing is not critical.
Two problems may occur when this procedure is used to obtain stacked holes in
dielectric layers. They are schematically shown in fig. 3.32. First, if an opening is
70
Overetch Thick resist Resist residuals Stringers
Resist
Insulators
Fig. 3.32: Photolithography problems from stacked openings in dielectric layers.
etched in the dielectric with no underlying conductor, overetching occurs. After

etching through the top dielectric is complete, the subjacent layer is exposed to the
etchant. Instead of stopping at the interface, the etching proceeds into the under-
lying layer. Second, when two stacked openings are present the step height for the
next layer in the stack becomes unusually high. As a consequence this third layer
and the resist on the steps are thicker than usual. Standard exposure is insufficient
for resist of such thickness. Along the steps some resist is not dissolved during
development. It eventually prevents the underlying layer from being etched. The
resulting structures are called stringers. Such stringers can be observed along the
border of the etched cavity in figs. 3.6 and 3.13.
Stringers can be minimized by proper design of the dielectric openings, the result
of which can be seen on fig. 3.14. The layout used to obtain these openings is
shown schematically in fig. 3.33. The contact oxide is not opened by the mask
design. The intermetal oxide opening is shifted with respect to the opening in the
field oxide. With an intentional, long overetch of the passivation the contact oxide
and gate oxide is opened. No stringers occur, and a well defined border of the
etched structure is obtained. A cross-section through the resulting structure is
shown in fig. 3.34.
71
AA AA AA AA
Contact oxide Intermetal oxide etch Passivation etch
AA AA AA
deposition
AA AA AA AA
AA Contact oxide
AA AA
AA Field oxide
AA AA AA
AA Silicon
AA AA
Fig. 3.33: Staggered openings in the dielectric layers to minimize stringers.
Passivation Intermetal Oxide Contact Oxide

Metal 2
Metal 1
Poly
Field Oxide
Silicon
Fig. 3.34: SEM cross-section through the border of an etch access opening.
72
4.1 Sensitivity Measurements
4 CHARACTERIZATION
This chapter reports the setups used to characterize the sensors and the respective
experimental results. The first part describes sensitivity measurements, the second
the characterization of arrays, and the third spectral absorptance measurements.

The sensitivity of IR sensors depends on the radiation wavelength. To provide
measurement results relevant for motion detection, we measured the sensitivity
using a broadband radiation spectrum similar to that of a person. This spectrum is
provided by a blackbody at controlled temperature.
Measurement Principle
According to eqn. (2.38) the sensitivity S is defined as
U
S = ---- . (4.1)
P
In practice it is more reliable to measure responses U1 and U2 of the sensor to two

different radiation power levels P1 and P2. The sensitivity is then calculated as
∆U
S = -------- , (4.2)
∆P
where ∆U = U1 - U2 and ∆P = P1 - P2. This method reduces errors such as mea-

suring equipment offset. To provide a controlled power difference ∆P we built a
measurement setup consisting of two blackbodies at respective temperatures T1
and T2, a chopper with reflecting blade, a mirror, and an aperture stop. The setup
is configured as shown in fig. 4.1. The sensor under test is alternatingly exposed
to radiation from either blackbodies. When the chopper is open, radiation from the
73
4 Characterization
Mirror
Blackbody, T1
Chopper
Blackbody, T2
Aperture Stop
Sensor
Fig. 4.1: Schematic view of the blackbody measurement setup.
blackbody at T1 is reflected from the fixed mirror through the open chopper to the
device under test. With the chopper closed, radiation from the blackbody at T2 is
reflected onto the sensor. The aperture stop is designed in such a way that the
Sensor, r Aperture Stop, r Blackbody, r

S A B
d d
SA AB
Fig. 4.2: Arrangement of sensor, aperture stop, and blackbody with optical axis
unfolded.
74
sensor views only the two blackbodies through the aperture. Figure 4.2 illustrates
this requirement. It can be stated as
rS + rB rS + r A
----------------------- ≤ ---------------- , (4.3)
d SA + d AB d SA
where rA, rB, and rS denote the radii of the aperture, blackbody, and sensor,
respectively. The symbols dSA and dAB denote the distance between sensor and
aperture, and blackbody and aperture, respectively. If condition (4.3) holds, from
the sensor’s point of view the aperture stop is equivalent to a blackbody of alter-
nating temperature. The radiation power density pin incident on the sensor from
the blackbody at T1 is
rA  2 4
p in(d SA, T 1) = εσT 1 -------- , (4.4)
 d SA
where ε denotes the emissivity of the blackbody and the last term on the right-hand
side is the spatial angle of the aperture stop with respect to the sensor. The differ-
ence in intensity ∆pin between the open and closed chopper phases results as
4  4rA  2
∆ p in(d SA, T 1, T 2) = εσ ( T 2 – T1 ) -------
- . (4.5)
 d SA
Blackbody
In our realization of the blackbodies we followed a standard approach [13,80].
Each blackbody consists of a conical cavity in a massive metal body. The conical
cavity is closed by a flat stop with circular opening as shown in fig. 4.3. This open-
ing acts as the black surface. The inside wall of the cavity is coated with 3M Black
paint. The spectral emissivity of the paint is high and uniform over a wide range
in the infrared [80]. The emissive power of the opening is influenced by the shape
of the cavity as well [80, 81]. The length and radius of the cavity are 93 mm and
50 mm, respectively. The radius of the opening is 25 mm. With this geometry the
theoretical cavity emittance is 0.997.
75
4 Characterization
AA
AAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AA AA AA Housing
AAAAA
AA
AAAAAAAAAAA
AA AA AA
Copper
body
AAAAA
AA
AAAAAAAAAA
A AA
AAAAAAAAA
AA AAAAAA Water
AAAAAAAAAAAA AAAA
channel
AAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAA
AAAA
Hollow
cone
AAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAA
AAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAA AAAA
AAAA
Black
aperture
AAAAAAAAAAAA AAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAA
AA AAAAAA
Temperature
Support sensors
Fig. 4.3: Schematic cross section through the blackbody in its housing.
The cavity was machined from a massive copper cylinder. A spiral channel was
cut into the surface of the cylinder as shown in fig. 4.4. It is used for water circu-
Fig. 4.4: Photographs of the cavity machined from a copper cylinder. The spiral
cut into the cylinder is used for a water channel.
lation. A copper tube, fitting over the cavity cylinder, covers the spiral as shown
in fig. 4.3. The cavity is fixed in its cylindrical steel housing by two supports made
76
out of “Delrine”. The space between the copper body and the housing is filled with
glass wool. Water from a thermalized bath (Julabo HC4) is pumped through the
water channel around the body. The temperature of the bath is regulated using a
temperature sensor directly inserted into the blackbody. After the initial stabiliza-
tion the bath achieves a temperature stability better than ±0.02°C. In addition the
temperature of the copper body is monitored by an independent temperature
sensor with an absolute error smaller than 0.03°C in the range from 0° to 100°C.
Two such blackbodies were made and placed in the measurement setup as shown
in fig. 4.5.
Reflecting Chopper Mirror Blackbodies

Chopper Blade
Aperture Stop
Sensor
Mounting Sensor Stop Temperature Monitor
Fig. 4.5: Photograph of the sensitivity measurement setup with two blackbodies.
The optical axis is indicated by a dotted line.
The mirror and the reflecting chopper blade were made from PMMA coated with
chrome and gold. Chrome was used as an adhesion layer between PMMA and
gold. Two openings were machined into the blade in the shape of 90° radial seg-
ments giving it a duty cycle of 50%.
77
4 Characterization
The sensor stop used for the adjustment of the setup is also shown in fig. 4.5. Its
aperture is larger than the sensitive area of the sensor under test. Its distance from
the aperture stop was adjusted to satisfy the condition (4.3). Its validity is checked
by looking through the sensor stop. Keeping the stop fixed in place, the sensor is
then mounted directly behind it.
Characterization
We determined the performance of the measurement setup by characterizing the
temperature stability of the blackbodies, the time used for initial stabilization, and
the achieved emissive power.
The total emissive power e was measured using an electrically calibrated pyro-
electric radiometer (ECPR) as a reference. We compared the measurements with
theoretical values obtained from eqn. (4.5). The ECPR measures the difference in
absorbed power density ∆p between the two chopper phases. This power ∆p is
given by
∆p = ∫ ∆ pλ(d SA, T 1, T 2) αλ dλ , (4.6)

0
where αλ denotes the absorptance of the ECPR. This parameter is known for the
range from 0.1 µm to 14 µm. The uncertainty about αλ outside this range leaves a
range of possible power density readings for a given incident spectral power dis-
tribution ∆pλ. The lower bound ∆pmin
14 µm
∆ p min = ∫ ∆ p λ(d SA, T 1, T 2) α λ dλ , (4.7)

0.1 µm
corresponds to no absorption outside the 0.1 - 14 µm range, and the upper bound
∆pmax corresponds to αλ = 1
∆ p max = ∆ p(d SA, T 1, T 2) . (4.8)
78
The radiation intensity was measured with an aperture stop diameter of 9.5 mm
from a distance of 235 mm. The diameter of the ECPR sensor is 8 mm. The tem-
perature of the first blackbody T1 was kept at 24°C and T2 was varied from 24°C
to 74°C. Figure 4.6 shows the comparison of measured ∆p, and the calculated
∆pmax and ∆pmin. The measurements agree with theory and the measured intensity
corresponds to a blackbody emittance of at least 0.98.
J
Power density [kW/m 2]
1.5
∆pmax ∆p
J
1
J
0.5 J ∆pmin
J
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Temperature difference [°]
Fig. 4.6: Measured radiation power density ∆p, and theoretical values ∆pmin
and ∆pmax for T1 = 24°C as a function of temperature difference
∆T = T2 - T1.
Figure 4.7 shows the blackbody temperature after the thermalized bath has been
switched on and set to 30°C and 70°C. The temperature is reached and stable
within 45 min and 140 min respectively. After stabilization, the measured devia-
tions from the mean value are smaller than 0.01°.
79
4 Characterization
80
Temperature [°C]
70°C
60
40
30°C
20
0 60 120 180
Time [min]
Fig. 4.7: Blackbody settling from room temperature to 30°C and 70°C.
Measurement Results
Table 4.1 lists the measured sensor area A, thermopile resistance RT, sensitivity S,
and response time τ of the beam and bridge type sensors. The NEP and D*, calcu-
lated from the measured results according to eqns. (2.43) and (2.44), are also
listed.The measurement error for the sensitivity and response time are estimated
at 5% to 10% due to the small signals(< 1 µV) that are involved. The bridge
alp1-II with the largest area, and the largest thermopile resistance also shows the
largest sensitivity of 30.4 V/W. The best NEP and D* however, is obtained with
the alp1-III bridge sensor. The changes introduced in the design of alp1-III and
Sensor A RT S τ NEP D*
[mm2] [kΩ] [V/W] [ms] [nW] [cm√Hz/W]
ECPD-I 0.090 161 20.9 0.83 2.5 1.21 107
ECPD-II 0.015 9.1 13.1 0.063 0.9 1.31 107
alp1-I 0.034 57 27 0.012 1.14 1.63 107
alp1-II 0.084 181 30.4 0.22 1.80 1.61 107
alp1-III 0.037 7.0 11.6 0.005 0.93 2.08 107
alp1-IV 0.037 7.9 11.1 0.005 1.03 1.88 107
Tab. 4.1: Sensor characteristics of beam and bridge type sensors.
80
alp1-IV with respect to alp1-I decreased the thermopile resistance and sensitivity.
As a consequence of the lower resistance the NEP and D* are improved.
Table 4.2 lists the measured sensor characteristics for the membrane sensors fab-
ricated using the ECPD 10 process. The membrane with the highest resistance,
i.e., ECPD-III shows the highest sensitivity of 20.7 V/W. The better NEP and D*
of 2.5 nW and 2.85 107 cm√Hz/W, respectively, are obtained with ECPD-V
which has a lower sensitivity and resistance.
ECPD-III 0.11 546 20.7 1.8 4.6 0.73 107
ECPD-IV 0.39 100 15.6 6.5 2.7 2.37 107
ECPD-V 0.52 50 11.4 0.72 2.5 2.85 107
Tab. 4.2: Characteristics of membrane sensors from the ECPD 10 process.
alp2-I 0.96 319 21.1 15.4 3.5 2.84 107
alp2-II 0.50 262 26.4 4.8 2.5 2.83 107
alp2-III 0.96 274 29.8 25.4 2.3 4.33 107
alp2-IV 0.50 276 27.5 9.8 2.5 2.88 107
alp2-V 0.84 2700 40.9 19.5 5.2 1.77 107
alp2-VI 1.05 2260 45.8 13.1 4.2 2.43 107
Tab. 4.3: Characteristics of membrane sensors from the alp2lv process.
The sensor membranes listed in table 4.3 are all fabricated in the alp2lv process.
The four sensors with n+-poly/p+-poly thermopiles, alp2-III to alp2-VI, show the
higher sensitivity than alp2-I and alp2-II. The largest membrane, alp2-VI with a
resistance of 2.2 MΩ shows the highest sensitivity of 45.8 V/W. Among the sen-
sors from the alp2lv process the largest D* of 4.33 107 cm√Hz/W is obtained with
the alp2-III sensor. An even higher D* of 6.69 107 cm√Hz/W is obtained with
81
4 Characterization
alp1-V 1.050 10.7 8.7 14.6 13.3 6.69 107
alp1-VI 0.047 91.2 12.0 0.192 10.2 0.67 107
alp1-VII a 0.040 4.1 0.006 5.9 1.07 107
alp1-VII b 0.058 4.1 0.007 5.9 1.28 107
3.6
alp1-VII c 0.068 4.2 0.010 5.8 1.42 107
alp1-VII d 0.063 4.3 0.009 5.0 1.56 107
Tab. 4.4: Characteristics of membrane sensors from the alp1mv process.
alp1-V. The measured sensor characteristics of alp1-V are listed in table 4.4 with
the those from the other sensors fabricated using the alp1mv process. As expected
the four versions of alp1-VII show very similar performance. The version c with
the largest area shows the highest D*. The highest sensitivity is observed for ver-
sion d.
Comparison of these figures of merit with values reported in literature shows:
• The performance of our devices is similar to those reported in [7,36,71], which

are fabricated using CMOS processes and include a dedicated absorbing struc-
ture covering less than a quarter of the membrane. The numbers for the sensi-
tivity reported in [7,36] are up to five times larger than the numbers in
tables 4.3 and 4.4. This seeming discrepancy is due to a difference in the
method to calculate the sensitivity: the figures of merit reported in [7,36] are
calculated with respect to the much smaller absorber area rather than the total
membrane area used in this work. Lenggenhager [71] reported the sensitivities,
calculated with both methods. The values with respect to the smaller absorber
area are up to 4.5 times larger for the same device. While direct comparison is
difficult, we conclude that our devices yield a performance similar to that of
[7,36], even without dedicated absorbers.
• Völklein et al. [23] achieved sensitivities up to ten times larger than those listed
in tables 4.3 and 4.4 using optimized thermopile materials (Bi-Sb-Te) showing
a high thermoelectric efficiency [72]. These materials are not included in any
silicon IC process and would have to be added on.
82
4.2 Array Characterization
4.2 Array Characterization

Two aspects are important for the performance of sensor arrays apart from the per-
formance of the pixels, namely the cross-talk between neighboring pixels and the
uniformity of the pixel performance over the array. The uniformities of
ArrAlp1-VI and ArrAlp1-VII were investigated by measuring the resistance and
sensitivities of their pixels. Results are shown in figs. 4.8, 4.9, and 4.10. The aver-
4
Resistance [kΩ]
Colu s
mns Row
Fig. 4.8: Resistance of thermopiles in ArrAlp1-VII d.
age resistance in ArrAlp1-VII is 3.6 kΩ with a root mean square (rms) deviation
of 1.1%. The sensitivities of these pixels are shown in fig. 4.9. They have a rms
deviation of 5.5% from the average of 4.3 V/W. The pixel yield after post-pro-
cessing and dicing was 98%. The thermopile resistance of the front-etched pixels
in ArrAlp1-IV is shown in fig. 4.10. Their average resistance is 7.9 kΩ with a rms
deviation of 7.2%. The missing values in the figure correspond to pixels that could
not be characterized. The address lines in this array are integrated in the pixels
which are s-shaped bridges (cf. fig. 3.14). If a pixels is damaged the address line
is broken. Therefore a number of other pixels can not be addressed. Hence, the
83
4 Characterization
6
5
Sensitivty [V/W]
4
3
2
1
0
Colu s
mns Row
Fig. 4.9: Sensitivities of pixels in ArrAlp1-VII d.
15
Resistance [kΩ]
10
Colu s
mns Row
Fig. 4.10: Resistance of thermopiles in ArrAlp1-IV.
84
4.3 Spectral Absorptance Measurements
half-column of missing resistance values in fig. 4.10. The yield of operational

pixels is 93%. Their average sensitivity is 11.1 V/W with a rms deviation of 15%.
Cross-Talk
The cross-talk in the arrays was measured by heating a pixel with the integrated
resistor and comparing the response of the heated pixel with that of its neighbors.
The cross-talk in ArrECPD-I, ArrECPD-II, and ArrECPD-III is 5.5%, 4.8%, and
4.7%, respectively. Broad lines of metal 1 and metal 2 are used as thermal sepa-
ration between the pixels of these arrays: No metal lines in ArrECPD-I; one line,
10 µm wide, of stacked metal 1 and 2 in ArrECPD-II.; two lines, 4 µm wide and
2 µm apart, in ArrECPD-III. The large cross-talk and the small difference
between the different versions shows that the thermal separation with stacked
metal 1 and metal 2 is inefficient. In contrast to this, the thermal separation by
gold lines is very effective. A cross-talk of 1% was measured in the version d of
ArrAlp1-VII with one gold line. In the versions a, b, and c with the pairs of thermal
separation lines, the cross-talk was below 0.2%.

A previous measurement setup [71] for spectral reflectance measurements has
been expanded to determine the response of sensors and test structures as a func-
tion of radiation wavelength. Devices can be exposed to radiation of a narrow
wavelength band, whose center wavelength can be scanned from 2 µm to 20 µm.
Specialized test structures were used to measure the relative spectral absorptance
αλ of the layer sandwiches applicable for IR sensors. The spectral absorptance
was determined by measuring both absolute radiation power and device response
as a function of wavelength.
In this section the measurement setup, radiation power measurement, test struc-
tures, and evaluation of the acquired data are explained.The section is concluded
with the experimental results, i.e., the relative spectral absorptance of the absorber
sandwiches.
85
4 Characterization
Measurement Setup
The measurement setup consists of a monochromator (Jobin-Yvon HR250), radi-
ation source, radiation chopper, imaging optics, and sample holder as shown in
fig. 4.11. The source, the so-called globar, is a silicon carbide rod heated resis-
Globar Chopper Monochromator Lens Vacuum chamber Sample
AAAAAAAAAAAA
Computer Oscilloscope Amplifier
Fig. 4.11: Schematic view of the spectral measurement setup.
tively to 1550°K. Depending on its configuration the monochromator is transpar-

ent to a narrow wavelength band of the radiation from the globar. The center of
the band can be adjusted between 2 µm and 20 µm, its width varies between
0.04 µm and 0.15, µm depending on the wavelength. The monochromator is of the
Czerny-Turner type. Its operating principle is shown schematically in fig. 4.12. It
consists of an entrance slit, two flat mirrors, two parabolic mirrors, a reflection
grating, and an exit slit. The first parabolic mirror shapes a bundle of parallel rays
from the light emerging from the entrance slit. The parallel rays hit the reflection
grating and are reflected according to
λ
sin θ' n – sin θ = n --- , (4.9)
d
where θ denotes the angle of incidence on the grating, θ'n the angle of reflection
of order n, and d is the period of the grating. Two gratings are available with
86
Parabolic Mirrors
Mirrors
θ θ’
Entrance slit Turnable grating Exit slit
Fig. 4.12: Schematic view of the monochromator.
150 lines/mm and 60 lines/mm, respectively. The second parabolic mirror focuses
the parallel rays forming an image of the entrance slit, with images formed by dif-
ferent wavelength radiation and reflection order separated spatially. Wavelengths
can be chosen by turning the reflection grating, thus varying θ and θ'. For a fixed
orientation of the grating the images of wavelengths λn satisfying
λ
λ n = ----1- . (4.10)
n
are projected onto the exit slit. A long-wavelength-pass filter at the monochroma-
tor exit is used to block all λn with n > 1. Several filters can be chosen for different
wavelength ranges. These are
• Filter 0: 2.0 µm - 3.0 µm

• Filter 1: 2.4 µm - 4.8 µm
• Filter 2: 3.5 µm - 7.0 µm
• Filter 3: 4.3 µm - 8.6 µm
• Filter 4: 7.3 µm - 14.6 µm
87
4 Characterization
The lens is used to image the exit slit onto the sample in its test chamber. The
chamber is evacuated to increase the sensitivity of the sample and to eliminate
influence from moving air and sound. The signal of the sample was amplified by
a low noise amplifier and registered by a digital oscilloscope LeCroy 9420. The
signal data is then transferred to a computer for evaluation.
Radiation Power Measurement

The spectral radiation power PR(λ) incident on the device under test was charac-
terized using the ECPR reference detector placed into the sample position. The
relation between PR(λ) and the power incident on the sample under test PS(λ) is
given by the following considerations. With eλ(x) denoting the intensity distribu-
tion in the image and AR the aperture area of the ECPR, the power PR(λ) is given
by
P R(λ) = ∫A R
e λ( x) d A , (4.11)
where x denotes the position in the aperture plane. Assuming no dispersion, the
spectral dependence in eλ(x) can be separated from the spatial variations f(x)
e λ( x) = e λ f ( x) , (4.12)
and eqn. (4.11) can thus be written as
P R(λ) = e λ ∫A R
f ( x) d A . (4.13)
Thus, the power PS incident on the sample under test with area AS is
P S(λ) = e λ ∫A S
f ( x) d A = CP R(λ) , (4.14)
where C is a constant independent of the wavelength. Thus the power incident on

the sample is proportional to the power measured with the ECPR. Figure 4.13
shows the measured spectral radiating power PR(λ). The segments in the spectrum
88
70
60
50
Power [µW]
40
30
20
10
0
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Wavelength [µm]
Fig. 4.13: Radiation power measured with the ECPR as a function of wavelength.
The segments of the spectrum correspond to different filters and grat-
ings applied in the monochromator.
correspond to different filters and gratings applied in the monochromator. The

segments, filters, and gratings used for the measurement are listed in table 4.5.
Wavelength range Filter No. Grating

[µm] [lines/mm]
2.0 - 3.0 0
2.9 - 4.1 1
150
4.0 - 7.0 2
6.9 - 7.7 3
7.6 - 14.6 4 60
Tab. 4.5: Measured wavelength ranges with the

applied filters and gratings.
89
4 Characterization
Test Structures
Specialized test structures were devised to measure the spectral relative absorp-
tance αλ of the layer sandwiches applicable for IR sensors. These test structures
and their absorbing sandwiches are described in section 3.3. A list of the sand-
wiches is given in table 3.6.
To obtain the absorptance of the absorber material we measured the respective

responses of the test structure ∆U(λ) and a reference structure ∆U0(λ) to the inci-
dent radiation power PS(λ) as a function of wavelength. The reference structure is
identical to the test structures but has no absorbing area. A schematic view of such
a reference structure is shown in fig. 3.12. To calculate the absorptance αλ from
PS(λ), ∆U(λ), and ∆U0(λ) we used the following analytical model of the temper-
ature distribution along the cantilever.
In view of the small thickness (3 - 5 µm) of the cantilevers the temperature varia-
tions perpendicular to the beam plane are neglected. Heat loss by conduction
through the surrounding gas can also be neglected under the experimental vacuum
conditions. Because of the highly symmetrical layout of the test structures the
temperature is a function of the distance from the support of the beam.
The incident radiation PS(λ) causes a temperature elevation ∆T(λ) of
α λ(λ) ⋅ P S(λ)
∆T (λ) = ------------------------------
- + ∆T 0(λ) , (4.15)
K
where K is the thermal conductance of the beam. It is defined as the sum
∑n κn an
1
K = ---- (4.16)
lb
over the component layers (indexed with n), where κnand an denote the respective
thermal conductivities and cross-sectional areas and lb denotes the length of the
beam. The first term on the right hand side of eqn. (4.15) results from absorption
in the absorber area and ∆T0(λ) is the contribution from the radiation power
90
absorbed in the thermopile area. The latter term can be determined with the refer-
ence structure (αλ = 0), for which eqn. (4.15) reduces to
∆T (λ) = ∆T 0(λ) . (4.17)
Thus the absorptance of the absorber area can be calculated from the measured
temperature difference as
∆T (λ) – ∆T 0(λ)
α λ(λ) = -------------------------------------
-. (4.18)
P S(λ)K
The temperature differences ∆T(λ) and ∆T0(λ) are obtained from the correspond-
ing thermopile signals ∆U(λ) and ∆U0(λ). Combining eqns. (2.31), (4.14) and
(4.18) allows αλ to be obtained from the measured thermopile signals and the
ECPR measurement via the proportionality
∆U (λ) – ∆U 0(λ)
α λ(λ) ∼ ---------------------------------------- . (4.19)
P R(λ)
Data Evaluation
To measure the response ∆U(λ) of the test structures a specialized signal retrieval
method was required. Since the radiation intensity on the samples is below
1 W/m2 and their area is 22×10-9 m2, only a few nanowatts are absorbed. With a
sensitivity in the range of 10 V/W the resulting signals are in the nanovolt range.
To distinguish the signals from the noise we used a phase sensitive detector (PSD)
technique [82]. It employs radiation chopping in combination with synchronous
signal averaging.
The oscilloscope was configured to repeatedly record the signal U(t) during a
cycle of the chopper. From the acquisitions over N chopper periods of length tc the
average U of the form
∑ U(t + nt c)
1
U (t) = ---- (4.20)
N
n=0
91
4 Characterization
was calculated. Because the noise, in contrast to the signal, is not correlated with
the chopping, its amplitude is reduced by the factor N in the averaging process.
Thus, by taking the average over thousand chopper cycles the signal-to-noise ratio
can be improved by more than a factor of 30. The averaged waveform U was then
analyzed to find the signal amplitude ∆U.
To find the steady-state signal amplitude ∆U from the dynamic response to

chopped radiation two cases have to be distinguished. The response of a sensor
(section 2.6) to a sudden change in radiation power at t = 0 is given by
–t ⁄ τ
U (t) = U (0) + ∆U ( 1 – e ). (4.21)
Two cases may be distinguished. In the first case, the chopping is slow compared
with the sensor response time, i.e.
τ « tc . (4.22)
In this case, at the end of each open or closed chopper phase the signal approxi-
mates its steady-state value with sufficient accuracy. Thus finding the steady-state
amplitude from U(t) is straightforward. The amplitude ∆U is calculated as
∆U = U (t c ⁄ 2) – U (t c) , (4.23)
where the chopper cycle starts at t = 0.
In the second case, i.e. if condition (4.22) is not satisfied, the sensor response does
not reach the steady-state value, in neither the open nor the closed phases of the
chopper. Thus ∆U is obtained from the dynamic response U(t). It is described by
–t ⁄ τ
1–e
U (t) = ∆U -----------------------
– t c ⁄ 2τ
- 0 < t < tc ⁄ 2 , (4.24)
1+e
92
for the open chopper and by
–( t – t h ) ⁄ τ
e
U (t) = ∆U -----------------------
– t c ⁄ 2τ
- tc ⁄ 2 < t < tc (4.25)
1+e
for the closed chopper. The amplitude ∆U is thus obtained by fitting this model of
the dynamic behavior to the experimental data. Figure 4.14 shows an example of
such a measured dynamic response and the model fit.
XX X
XX
XX
XX
X
XX
XXXXXXX
XX
XXXXXX X X XXX
XXX X
XX
XX XXXXX
X
XX
XX XXX
Response
XX X XXXX
XXX X
XX
XXXX XX XX
XXXXXXX X
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
X XXX
Time
Fig. 4.14: Example of measured sensor response (dots) and fitted model (line).
Measurement Results
The measurements of the spectral absorptance αλ performed in this work provide
relative values. They involve the response of different sensors under identical
radiation conditions, i.e., the device under test, the ECPR, and the reference struc-
ture. For successful measurements two conditions have to be met: First, the differ-
ent sensors have to be placed at the same position with respect to the image of the
exit slit, and second, the radiation intensity has to be stable with time. To meet the
first requirement we kept the distance from the exit slit to the lens and sample
fixed and moved the lens with a micropositioning stage in a plane perpendicular
to the optical axis, thus moving the image of the exit slit in the sample-plane.
Scanning the image intensity distribution with the sensor, the lens was positioned
93
4 Characterization
to give the maximum response, corresponding to the location of the sample in the
center of the image. With this method sample readings were reproducible within
2%. The stability of the radiation intensity was measured over a period of 12 h
with the ECPR. A maximum deviation of 0.3% was found.
The results of the relative spectral absorptance measurements are shown in

figs. 4.16 to 4.19. The spectra are calculated from the measured values of PS(λ),
∆U(λ), and ∆U0(λ) according to eqn. (4.19). The results αλ are given in percent
of the largest absorptance found for all test structures. This maximum value was
found for test3 at a wavelength of 12.45 µm. The spectra are labeled with the
Test structures Absorbing layers α̃

Test1 passivation 26%
Test2 metal 2 12%
Test3 passivation, metal 2 59%
Test4 passivation, intermetal oxide 31%
Test5 passivation, intermetal
55%
oxide, metal 1
32%
oxide, contact oxide
Test7 all dielectrics 35%
57%
oxide, poly, field oxide
Test9 all dielectrics, poly 63%
Tab. 4.6: Test structures with their absorbing layers (see also table 3.6) and
average absorptance.
layers of the stack exposed to radiation. The absorbing layers of the test structures
are listed in table 4.6. Since aluminum thicker than 100 nm is opaque to IR radia-
tion, layers below metal 1 and metal 2 are shielded from the radiation and are
assumed not to contribute to the absorptance. This assumption is confirmed by the
spectra shown in fig. 4.15. The figure shows the measured relative spectral
94
absorptance of test3 and test10. Both consist of all dielectrics and metal 2, in addi-
tion the absorber sandwich of test10 includes metal 1. Nevertheless, the average
deviation between both spectra is only 2%.
100%
Relative Absorptance test3
75%
test10
50%
25%
0%
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Wavelength [µm]
Fig. 4.15: Relative absorptance of test3 and test10 absorbers.
In test1 and test2 single layers act as absorbers. Their relative absorptance is
shown in fig. 4.16. The topmost layer of test2 is metal 2. Pure aluminum is a good
IR reflector [73] and a weak absorptance can be expected from metal 2. In agree-
ment with this it shows an absorptance below 24% over the entire spectrum. To
characterize the absorption of thermal radiation we introduce the weighted aver-
age absorptance α̃
14.6µm
α̃
∫ 2µm
α λ [ e λ(296K) – e λ(293K) ] dλ
= --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- , (4.26)
14.6µm
∫2µm [ e λ(296K) – e λ(293K) ] dλ
for radiation of a blackbody at 296°C with respect to a background at 293°C.
95
4 Characterization
100%
test3:
Relative Absorptance
75%
passivation,
metal 2
50%
test1:
25% passivation
test2: metal 2
0%
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Wavelength [µm]
Fig. 4.16: Relative absorptance of the passivation, metal 2, and passivation with
metal 2.
The weighted average absorptance α̃ of test2 is 12%. The absorber of test1 con-
sists of the oxynitride passivation. It shows 30% to 50% relative absorption in the
band from 8 µm to 13 µm. An absorption peak of 10% is observed at 2.95 µm. No
significant absorption was measured from 2 µm to 2.85 µm and 3.15 µm to 7 µm.
The average weighted absorptance α̃ is 26%. The absorber of test3 consists of the
passivation and metal 2. Its relative absorptance spectrum is also shown in
fig. 4.16. An absorptance of 50% to 100% is observed in the band from 8 µm to
14.5 µm. A 37% absorptance peak was measured at 2.95 µm. The average absorp-
tance α̃ is 55%. The increased absorption in test3 with respect to test1 is explained
by the reflecting properties of metal 2. Radiation transmitted by the passivation is
reflected back by the metal 2 layer and passes again through the passivation.
A similar effect is observed with the spectra in fig. 4.17. The figure shows the rel-
ative absorptance of test4 composed of passivation and intermetal oxide and test5
consisting of the same composition with a metal 1 reflector. For comparison the
relative absorptance of the passivation is also shown. The combination of the
intermetal and passivation layer shows a similar spectrum to the passivation
96
100%
test5:
passivation,
intermetal,
75%
metal 1
test4:
50% passivation,
intermetal
test1:
25%
passivation
0%
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Wavelength [µm]
Fig. 4.17: Relative absorptance of absorbers containing passivation, intermetal,

and metal 1.
100%
test7: test4:
all dielectrics passivation,
75%
intermetal
50% test6:
passivation,
intermetal,
25% contact oxide test1:
passivation
0%
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Wavelength [µm]
Fig. 4.18: Relative absorptance of absorbers containing only dielectric layers.
97
4 Characterization
100%
test9:
test8: all dielectrics,
passivation, poly
intermetal,
75%
poly,
field oxide
50%
test5:
passivation,
25% intermetal,
metal 1
0%
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Wavelength [µm]
Fig. 4.19: Relative absorptance of absorbers containing the poly layer.
alone. Absorption bands between 8 and 10 µm and 11.5 and 13 µm is increased.

Maximum absorption of 62% occurs between 8.5 and 9 µm. The average absorp-
tance is 31%. The absorption of the same sandwich with a metal 1 reflector is
enhanced over the entire spectrum. The absorptance peak at 2.95 µm is increased
to 31% and the absorptance in the band from 8 µm to 14.5 µm is higher than 50%.
The highest absorptance of 96% occurs at 8.5 µm and the average absorptance is
55%. The peak at a wavelength of 4.4 µm is an artifact. It is due to the sharp
decrease in the radiation power at the same wavelength (cf. fig. 4.13). This sharp
decrease in combination with a wavelength error in the radiation spectrum PR(λ)
relative to the spectral response ∆U(λ) leads to large error signals. The peak of
18% at 4.4 µm is explained by a wavelength error of 0.025 µm. Similar artifacts
are also observed in the spectra of test3, test8, and test9.
Figure 4.18 shows the relative absorptance of test1, test4, test6 and test7. The
absorber sandwiches of these four test structures contain only dielectric layers.
The absorber stack of test6 consists of the passivation, intermetal oxide, and con-
tact oxide. Its spectrum differs only slightly from the spectrum of the passivation
98
with intermetal oxide. In the band from 6.8 µm to 7.8 µm its absorptance is higher,
namely more than 20%. The average weighted absorptance is 32%. The absorber
layer stack of test7 contains the field oxide in addition to the layers of test6. The
effect of the additional layer is a slight increase of the absorption in the band from
7 µm to 9 µm. The maximum increase is 10%. The average absorptance is 35%.
Finally, fig. 4.19 shows the relative absorptance of the absorber layer stacks which
contain poly. These are the absorber sandwiches of test8 and test9. For compari-
son the sandwich composed of passivation, intermetal oxide, and metal 1 is also
shown. All dielectric layers and poly are contained in the absorber sandwich of
test9. It shows an absorption of at least 24% over the entire spectrum and an aver-
age absorptance of 63%. The strongest absorptance of 99% is observed for a
wavelength of 8.25 µm. Similarly the spectral absorptance of test8 is higher than
23% for a range from 2.6 µm to 14.6 µm. It consists of the same layers as test9
with the exception of the contact oxide. Its peak absorptance of 85% occurs at a
wavelength of 8.3 µm. The average weighted absorptance over the spectrum is
57%. The largest difference between the spectrum of test8 and test9 is 21%, the
average difference is 7%.
As a conclusion the effect of the individual materials on absorption of the layer

sandwich is summarized:
• Passivation absorbs uniformly in the range from 8 µm to 12 µm.

• The intermetal layer increases absorptance in the band from 8 µm to 10 µm by
more than 10%.
• The contact oxide increases absorptance in the range from 6.8 µm to 7.8 µm by
roughly 20%.
• No significant change in the absorptance is observed due to the field oxide.
• The absorptance of metal 2 is below 25% over the entire spectrum. Combining
an absorbing layer with metal 2 or metal 1 below strongly enhances the relative
absorptance.
• In contrast to the dielectric layers poly shows significant absorption in the
range from 2 µm to 7 µm.
99
5 Modeling
5 MODELING
To keep up with today’s short product cycles and time-to-market requirements

there is a need for accelerated microsensor development. This need is addressed
by sensor models predicting the performance of the devices before they are actu-
ally fabricated. Various models [23,37-42] for the optimization of thermoelectric
sensors have been reported. The models vary in complexity, flexibility, ease of
use, and accuracy. The most accurate model would be an analytical solution of the
steady-state heat transfer problem given by eqn. (2.27). Although, as discussed in
section 2.3, a general solution to this problem exists, it cannot be obtained analyt-
ically. Approximations to the solution can be found using the finite element
method (FEM). We used the SOLIDIS FEM modeling toolkit developed at our
laboratory [83] to study the steady-state response of IR sensors. We checked the
accuracy of this method by comparing measured and modeled sensor signals.
In this chapter we discuss three models of thermoelectric sensors: Analytical,

Variational, and FEM. We conclude with an examples of a sensor optimization for
a presence detection application using the FEM.
Optimizing System Performance

Optimizing an IR detector system means varying its layout within the restrictions
dictated by the fabrication process and the application in order to reach thew best
performance. Depending on the application, different figures of merit are used to
characterize performance. We chose the NEP for presence detector systems.
All models allow to calculate the sensor resistance R and the sensitivity S. The
normalized detectivity D* and noise equivalent power NEP of the sensor can be
calculated from these. If, in addition, the optics parameters are known, also the
NETD can be obtained. To calculate the performance of the system from the
sensor characteristics, a simple analytical model of the signal conditioning elec-
tronics is used. Figure 5.1 shows the equivalent electric circuit model used for a
presence detector system with a differential low-noise amplifier and two sensors.
100
U R
Ra
g
Va
U R
Thermopile Amplifier
Fig. 5.1: Schematic circuit of a thermoelectric presence detector system.
The thermopiles are described as ideal voltage sources U with a series resistance
R. The amplifier is characterized by its input impedance RA, gain g, and noise volt-
age density VA. The sensitivity Ssys and noise voltage density Vsys of the system,
are then calculated as
RA
S sys = Sg -------------------- (5.1)
R A + 2R
and
2
V sys = g ∆ f V A + 8kTR ∆ f . (5.2)
Each thermopile contributes the Johnson noise density of 4kTR. Substituting this
result into eqn. (2.43) yields
V sys R A + 2R 2
- = -------------------- ⋅ ∆ f V A + 8kTR ∆ f .
NEP sys = --------- (5.3)
S sys RAS
101
5 Modeling
Similarly, the normalized detectivity
A ⋅ ∆f
∗ = ------------------
D sys - (5.4)
NEP sys
and noise equivalent temperature difference
2
n f NEP sys 1
NETD sys = -------- ⋅ ------------------ ---------3- (5.5)
E A σT
are obtained by substitution into eqns. (2.44) and (2.45).
Thermoelectric sensors are two-stage transducers. The first stage consists of the
thermally isolated absorber structure that converts radiation into a temperature
increase. Its efficiency is given by α/K, where, α and K denote the absorptance
and thermal conductance of the sensor, respectively. The thermal conductance is
defined as the ratio of the average hot contact temperature increase and the total
absorbed power. The second stage is the thermopile which converts the tempera-
ture increase into an electrical signal. Its efficiency is given by γN, where γ denotes
the Seebeck coefficient. The sensitivity S of the complete sensor is the product of
these two efficiencies
U α
S = ---- = ---- ⋅ γN . (5.6)
P K
This expression suggests that increasing α, 1/K, γ, and N would improve the
sensor performance. However, this is misleading. Often, increasing one parameter
may lead to reduce another. For example, if a special IR absorbing layer is depos-
ited onto the membrane to increase α, at the same time 1/K is decreased. Similarly
an increase in the number of thermopiles N improves the thermopile efficiency,
but simultaneously increases its thermal conductance. Thus, for optimizations
these two stages can rarely be considered separately because the thermopile is
integrated in the supporting structure and thus, the performance of both stages are
intertwined.
102
5.1 Analytical Model
The approach followed here is to use a set of independent parameters describing

the layout. The efficiencies α/K and γN are then expressed as a function of these
parameters. The optimal sensor design for the use with a given amplifier is then
found by combining eqns. (5.3), (5.4), or (5.5) with eqn. (5.6). For thermoelectric
sensors based on a given CMOS process, a natural set of such parameters is given
by the thermopile materials and the sensor and thermopile dimensions as defined
in section 3.3. The four thermopile dimensions are the widths w1 and w2 of the two
thermocouple materials, their separation distance w0, and for membrane sensors
the lateral distance wb between the thermopile and the membrane edge (cf.
fig. 3.15). The thermopile efficiency γN and resistance R are determined by the
choice of materials and the number of thermocouples fitting onto the sensor struc-
ture. The absorptance α is given by the materials of the CMOS process. The ther-
mal conductance K was calculated using three different models.

Analytically the simplest case is the beam-type structure shown in fig. 5.2 oper-
ated in vacuum. In this case only the heat conduction in the thermopile and the sur-
AAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAA
AA
rounding dielectrics must be considered. As discussed in section 4.3 the heat
AAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAA
AA Package
AAAAAAAAAAAA
AA AA
AA AA
AA A AA
AA AA
AAAAAAAAAAAA
AA Substrate
Fig. 5.2: Sensor of the beam type.
transfer equation can be simplified to a one-dimensional problem in this highly

symmetrical sensors. We assume that radiation is absorbed homogeneously in the
103
5 Modeling
area of the beam and that the support of the beams is at ambient temperature T0.
Then eqn. (2.27) reduces to
2
t b κ∇ x T (x) = – αp , (5.7)
where tb, κ, and p denote the thickness of the beam, its average thermal conduc-
tivity, and the incident radiation intensity, respectively. The solution of eqn. (5.7)
shows that the temperature distribution is parabolic along the beam and the ther-
mal conductance K of the beam is given by
αP 2aκαP 2aκ
K = ---------------- = ------------------
- = ---------- , (5.8)
∆T (l T ) αpl T w T
2 lT
where a denotes the cross-sectional area of the beam, and P = plTwT the total inci-
dent radiation power. In view of the cross-section of the beam shown in fig. 5.3
the product aκ can also be written as
aκ = N ( κ d a d + κ 1 w 1 t 1 + κ 2 w 2 t 2 ) , (5.9)
where κ1, κ2, t1, and t2 denote the thermal conductivities and thicknesses of the
two thermopile materials, respectively, and ad and κd the cross-sectional area of
the dielectrics in a thermocouple and their average thermal conductivity. Taking
AAAAA
AAAA
AAAA
AAAAA
AAAA
AAAAA
AA AA AAAAAAA
AAAA
AA A w2
A
AAAA
AAAAA
AAAAA
AAAA ad
wd
w1
Fig. 5.3: Cross-section of a thermopile.
104
into account that both the thickness and thermal conductivity of the layers are con-
stant for a given CMOS process we define the thermal sheet conductivity κ̃ = κt
for both thermocouple materials and κ̃ d = κ d a d ⁄ w d for the dielectrics with
w d = w 1 + w 2 + 2w 0 . (5.10)
Then K is given by
N
K = 2 ---- ( κ̃ d w d + κ̃ 1 w 1 + κ̃ 2 w 2 ) . (5.11)
lT
Substitution of eqn. (5.11) into eqn. (5.6) yields
αγ l T
S = ----------------------
-, (5.12)
2 ∑i κ̃ i w i
where i runs over 1, 2, and d. Equation (5.12) implies that for maximum sensitivity
all thermocouple dimensions w0, w1, and w2 should be minimal. However, this
also causes a maximum resistance R. It is given by
ρ̃
R = N lT ∑ -----j ,
j wj
(5.13)
where j runs over 1 and 2, and ρ̃ 1 and ρ̃ 2 denote the sheet resistances of the two
thermocouple materials. With eqns. (5.12) and (5.13) the NEP and D* are given
by
ρ̃ j
4 ∑
κ̃ i w i ∆ f kTN j ----- ∑ w
NEP = ----------------------- ⋅ -----------------------------------j
i
(5.14)
αγ lT
105
5 Modeling
and
∆ f wT lT αγ l T ∑ wi
D∗ = ----------------------- = ----------------------- ⋅ ----------------------- .
i
(5.15)
NEP 4 ∑ i
κ̃ i w i
kT ∑
ρ̃
-----j
j wj
From eqn. (5.15) it is obvious that for maximum D* the absorptance, Seebeck
coefficient, and length of the beam should be maximal. If the contribution of the
dielectrics is neglected D* is a function of the ratio q = w1/w2, viz.
αγ l T 1+q
D∗(q) = ----------------------------- ⋅ ------------------------------ . (5.16)
4 ( qκ̃ 1 + κ̃ 2 ) ρ̃
kT  ----1- + ρ̃ 2
q 
For a given set of material parameters the optimal x is easily found. For the alp1mv
process, for instance, the optimal ratio wpoly/wmetal is 108.4.
This model has been expanded to approximate the sensor operation in air. The
approach followed by Elbel et al. [37], Völklein et al. [38], and Dillner [40] is to
expand eqn. (5.8) to
2
t b κ∇ x T (x) = ( T (x) – T 0 )G cond – αp , (5.17)
where Gcond describes the heat flow from the beam to the substrate and the pack-
age at T0. Approximating this flow by the heat conduction between parallel plates,
Gcond is
κ air κ air
- + --------- ,
G cond = -------- (5.18)
ds dp
106
5.2 Variational Model
where ds and dp denote the distance between the beam and the substrate and pack-
age, respectively. The resulting temperature distribution is of the form
sinh Cx
T (x) = T 0 + -------------------- , (5.19)
sinh Cl T
where C is a constant depending on material parameters and geometry.
The membrane type sensors require more complex models. Due to symmetry the
heat transfer problem is essentially two-dimensional. Only for quadratic and cir-
cular symmetric membranes a reduction to one dimension is possible. Corre-
sponding analytical models and solutions have been reported by Völklein
et al. [38] and Dillner [40].
5.2 Variational Model

To find the thermal conductance K of rectangular membrane sensors we used the
variational method to calculate the two-dimensional temperature distribution in
the membrane. A parametrized set of test functions TC(x) is used to approximate
the temperature distribution, where C stands for a set of parameters. Then the
parameter values C whose respective TC(x) best approximates the solution of the
heat transfer equation are calculated. These value satisfy
δC I = 0 , (5.20)
where I is the variational integral corresponding to eqn. (5.17), i.e.,
∫  – --2- tκ ( ∇xT C ) – --- αpT C + G cond T C d x .

1 2 1 2
I = (5.21)
2 
Due to symmetry, only a quarter of the membrane, as shown in fig. 5.4, is consid-
ered. The quarter membrane area is divided into two parts, namely the thermopile
107
5 Modeling
AAAAAA
AAAAAA Membrane
AAAAAA
AAAAAA
AAAAAA
AAAAAA
Thermopiles
Fig. 5.4: Schematic view of the quarter membrane.
area and the neighboring region between thermopiles and membrane edge. The
test functions TC(x,y) with the parameters C = (C0,C1,C2) are
sinh C 1 x
T C(x) = T 0 + C 0 ---------------------- (5.22)
sinh C 1 l T
in the thermopile area, and
sinh C 1 x sinh C 2 y
T C(x, y) = T 0 + C 0 ---------------------- ⋅ ------------------------ , (5.23)
sinh C 1 l T sinh C 2 w b
in the neighboring region. To validate the model we compared measured sensitiv-

ities of alp2-I, alp2-II, alp2-III, and alp2-IV with calculated values. A deviation
of -6%, -55%, -2% and 17% was found for the four sensors, respectively.
5.3 Finite Element Model

To model the three-dimensional heat flow in the membrane sensors and the sur-
rounding air, we carried out numerical simulations with the finite element model-
108
ing toolbox SOLIDIS [83]. Thermopile temperatures were obtained by solving

the static, three-dimensional heat transfer equation
∇ ⋅ ( κ ∇T ) = I A + I el , (5.24)
where κ is the thermal conductivity tensor, IA denotes the heat generation due to
the absorption of IR radiation, and Iel denotes the electrical power density dissi-
pated for calibration purposes in the integrated heater. The radiation is assumed to
be absorbed homogeneously over the entire membrane area and thickness d. Thus
–1
I A = αpd .
Equation (5.24) was solved in the domain defined by the sensor chip and the sur-
rounding air in the encapsulation. The surfaces of the substrate and filter were
taken as heat sink at T0 (cf. eqn. (2.20)). Figure 5.4 shows the simulation domain.
In view of the symmetry of the device only a quarter of the volume was simulated.
Package lid
Thermopile
Silicon Chip
Membrane
Substrate
Fig. 5.5: Simulation domain with discretization mesh. For clarity the mesh rep-
resenting air is not shown.
109
5 Modeling
To reduce the number of finite element nodes, an effective-medium approach was

chosen to simulate the integrated thermopiles: Membrane volumes containing
thermocouples were replaced by an equivalent homogenous material with aniso-
tropic thermal conductivity κ. The respective thermal conductivities in the three
principal directions were calculated similar to eqn. (5.11) using equivalent
lumped thermal resistance circuits [42].
Validation of the Model

To validate the finite element simulations we compared modeled and measured
responsivities of nine sensors in three situations:
• The sensor is in vacuum. An electrical power P el is dissipated in the integrated

heater and the thermopile output U vac is measured. The sensitivity Svac is
defined as S vac = U vac ⁄ P el .
• The sensor is at ambient pressure in air. An electrical power P el is dissipated in
the integrated heating resistor and the thermopile output U air is measured. The
sensitivity Sair is defined as S air = U air ⁄ P el .
• The sensitivity S is measured with the setup described in section 4.1 and simu-
lated assuming an absorptance α = 1.
All material parameters used in the numerical simulation of S vac and S air , namely
the thermal conductivity κ and Seebeck coefficient γ, were known from previous
measurements. Table 5.1 shows simulated and measured responsivities S vac and
S air . A maximum deviation of 21% was found. We explain the deviations listed
in table 5.1 by the inaccuracy of the sensitivity measurement, the simulation
model, and the material parameters. Recent, improved measurements of the mate-
rial parameters and film thicknesses [57] have shown deviations of 2% to 10%
from the values used for the simulations. We estimate the inaccuracy of the sim-
ulation model at 5%, mainly due to the lumped element analysis used for the cal-
culation of the anisotropic thermal conductivity κ in the thermopile area. The inac-
curacy of the sensitivity measurement is estimated at 5% to 10%.
In the simulation of the responsivity S, the absorptance α is the only unknown

parameter. The ratio of measured and modeled S provides an experimental value
of the true absorptance. Measured and calculated responsivities S are listed in
table 5.2 together with the deduced absorptances α. These range from 0.40 to
110
Sensor S vac [V/W] S air [V/W]

measured simulated % measured simulated %
alp2-I 63.2 67.3 6 44.6 49.8 12
alp2-II 59.7 66.1 11 45.1 48.7 8
alp2-III 121.5 125.4 3 64.0 70.1 10
alp2-IV 104.4 105.4 1 68.3 68.9 1
alp2-V 314.8 330.2 5 162.6 197.3 21
alp2-VI 294.0 292.6 0.5 162.0 182.6 13
ECPD-III 62.8 59.7 -5 61.3 54.0 -12
ECPD-IV 106.5 89.9 -15 76.8 66.3 -14
ECPD-V 102.0 91.0 -11 65.7 60.9 -7
Tab. 5.1: Measured and simulated sensor responsivities.
Sensor S [V/W]
measured simulated α
alp2-I 21.1 30.1 0.70
alp2-II 26.4 35.7 0.74
alp2-III 29.8 52.3 0.57
alp2-IV 27.5 36.7 0.75
alp2-V 40.9 103.1 0.40
alp2-VI 45.8 90.1 0.51
ECPD-III 20.7 27.3 0.76
ECPD-IV 15.6 22.7 0.69
ECPD-V 11.4 18.0 0.63
Tab. 5.2: Measured and simulated sensor responsivities and deduced
absorptances.
0.76. To check the validity of the deduced absorptances α we compare them with
the measured relative absorptance α̃ reported in section 4.3. The sensor mem-
branes consist, in different amounts, of three absorbing layer sandwiches; all
dielectrics and poly or passivation, intermetal, metal 1 in thermopile area and all
dielectrics on the rest of the membrane. The average relative absorptance of these
three sandwiches with ECPD 10 materials in the range from 2 µm to 14.6 µm are
111
5 Modeling
63%, 55%, and 35%, respectively. Taking into account the spectral range used for
the measurements and the estimated accuracies, the absorptances deduced from
the simulation and the spectral measurement are in agreement.
5.4 Comparison of Models

The three models for the thermal conductance of the thermopile sensors vary con-
siderably in complexity, flexibility, computational effort, and accuracy. The ana-
lytical model is the most transparent and enables the formulation of some gener-
alized rules independent on sensor layout. This model is practical for one-dimen-
sional heat flow and useful mainly for beams and bridges.
The variational model makes it possible to calculate two-dimensional temperature

distributions in sensor membranes. The heat conduction through air to the sur-
rounding package is modeled by a heat flow perpendicular to the membrane. This
model can be implemented with most existing tools for algebraic and numeric
computation as e.g. Mathematica™. The time to calculate the thermal conduc-
tance K of a sensor was approximately an hour on a Sun Sparc 5 workstation.
The FEM model allows the calculation of the three-dimensional temperature dis-
tribution in the sensor membrane and surrounding air. To implement such a model
an FEM tool such as SOLIDIS™ or ANSYS™ is required. The computation time
on a Sun Sparc 5 workstation is approximately a minute. The validation demon-
strates that the most reliable thermal conductance values are obtained with this
model. Based on these results we chose to use the FEM for the optimization of the
system performance.
5.5 Device Optimization

To find the optimum layout for the alp2-VI sensors for application in a presence
detector microsystem we performed FEM simulations of the sensor membranes.
The NEPsys was then calculated according to eqns. (5.3) and (5.6). The system
includes an auto-zero amplifier and was fabricated in the alp2lv technology. The
size of the sensor membrane was restricted to 1500 µm × 700 µm for reasons of
mechanical stability and system size.
112
Figure 5.6 shows the modeled sensitivity of the alp2-VI sensor with
p+-poly/n+-poly thermocouples. In the simulations we varied the width of the two
thermocouple legs wn and wp. The margin of the membrane in this simulation was
100 µm while the thermocouple spacing w0 was chosen at the technological min-
imum of 3 µm. As expected from eqn. (5.12) the largest sensitivity is obtained for
minimal thermocouple widths. The thermopile resistance as a function of the ther-
200
Sensitivity [V/W]
150
100
50
2 20
6 16
10 12
wp [µm] 14 8 w [µm]
18 4 n
Fig. 5.6: Modeled sensitivity of alp2-VI as a function of wn and wp.
mocouple dimensions is shown in fig. 5.7. The sensor with the minimal thermo-
couple widths has the largest resistance.
The calculated NEP of the sensor alone is shown in fig. 5.8. The smallest NEP of
6.5 nW is obtained for wp = 18 µm and wn = 6 µm. The corresponding modeled
NEPsys is shown in fig. 5.9. The optimum value of 11.5 nW for the presence detec-
tor system is found for wp = 12 µm and wn = 4 µm. These results were used for the
layout of the alp2-VI sensor integrated in the SysAlp2-VI system. If we had opti-
mized the stand-alone sensor for NEP, the resulting NEPsys of SysAlp2-VI would
113
5 Modeling
25
Resistance [MΩ]
20
15
10
2 20
6 16
10 12
wp [µm] 14 8 w [µm]
18 4 n
Fig. 5.7: Calculated thermopile resistance of alp2-VI as a function of wn and wp.
have been 7% higher, namely 12.3 nW. This example demonstrates that optimiza-
tions have to take into account the entire system.
The layout of alp1-V was optimized in the same manner as alp2-VI for a system
with a chopper amplifier. Similarly the pixels of SysAlp1-VII were optimized with
respect to the NETD of the system.
114
30
25
NEP [nW]
20
15
10
5
0
2 20
6 16
10 12
wp [µm] 14 8 w [µm]
18 4 n
Fig. 5.8: Modeled NEP of alp2-VI as a function of wn and wp with minimum at

wp = 18 µm and w n = 6 µm.
115
5 Modeling
30
25
NEPSys [nW]
20
15
10
5
0
2 20
6 16
10 12
wp [µm] 14 8 w [µm]
18 4 n
Fig. 5.9: Modeled NEPsys of SysAlp2-VI as a function of wn and wp with mini-

mum at wp = 12 µm and w n = 4 µm.
116
6.1 Presence Detector
6 DEMONSTRATORS
To show the potential of the microsystems reported in chapters 3 and 4 we built

two demonstrator systems. The first addresses presence detection, while the
second demonstrates IR thermal imaging. The presence detector is handheld, bat-
tery operated, and able to detect the presence of a human being at a distance of
approximately four meters. A small series of 32 demonstrators was manufactured.
Their core is a SysAlp2-VI microsystem with two sensors and a low-noise ampli-
fier on the same chip. The thermal imager is based on the microsystems
SysAlp1-IV and SysAlp1-VII. These systems contain a low-noise differential
amplifier, a sensor array, and addressing electronics (see figs. 3.25 and 3.26). A
lens is used to project an IR image of the scene onto the sensor array. A computer
is used to control the acquisition of the pixel signals and displays the resulting
image.

The presence detector demonstrator is a small instrument (27 mm × 30 mm ×
62 mm) detecting and indicating the presence of a person in its vicinity. The ther-
mal radiation of the person is sensed by the SysAlp2-VI microsystem. Upon detec-
tion of such an IR radiation source a red light emitting diode (LED) is turned on
and an electrical signal is provided on a connector allowing, e.g., to trigger an
alarm. A photograph of the presence detector demonstrator is shown in fig. 6.1. It
consists of a housing, a battery, and a SysAlp2-VI microsystem packaged and
mounted on a printed circuit board (PCB) with additional signal processing elec-
tronics. The microsystem contains two IR sensors and signal conditioning circuit
as described in section 3.3. The two sensors cover two different spatial angles. The
signal conditioning circuit amplifies and filters the difference of the two sensor
signals. In the absence of a localized heat source, both sensors receive radiation
from the background. If the temperature of the background is uniform the signals
of both sensors are equal the output signal of the circuit vanishes. When a person
117
6 Demonstrators
Fig. 6.1: Photograph of the presence detector system with PCB (front and back).
is present, its radiation is projected on one sensor only. Presumably the body tem-
perature differs from the background temperature and thus, the sensor signals do
not cancel. The output of the microsystem is either positive or negative, depending
on the location of the person in either sector. This output is processed by the elec-
tronics on the PCB. If the absolute value of the output exceeds a certain threshold,
either positive or negative, the detector indicates the presence of the person by
switching on the LED. Figure 6.2 shows the analog signal of the microsystem,
amplified and filtered by the processing electronics, together with the digital
output of the demonstrator when a person walks by at a distance of approximately
2 m. The positive and negative peaks occur when the person crosses the two sec-
tors.
Microsystem Packaging
The microsystem chip is packaged in a standard TO-5 header with a custom cap
shown in fig. 6.3. An IR filter window is integrated in the cap covered by a chrome
layer structured to form a slit diaphragm. The slit and the two sensors on
SysAlp2-VI are arranged as shown in fig. 6.4. This schematic cross-section shows
that each of the two sensors receives radiation from a separate space sector. The
sectors on both sides extend approximately from 2° to 40° with respect to the sym-
metry plane.
118
Processed
3 microsystem signal
Response [V]
2 Threshold levels
Digital output
0
0 1 2 3
Time [s]
Fig. 6.2: Processed microsystem signal and resulting digital output when a
person walks by at a distance of 2 m.
Slit diaphragm
IR filter
Package cap
Fig. 6.3: View of the package cap with IR filter window and slit diaphragm.
Signal Processing
The microsystem has two outputs. The difference of the two sensor signals is
amplified by the differential amplifier and output stage. This provides the first
output signal. The voltage of the on-chip bandgap reference of approximately
1.3 V is provided as the analog ground. The amplified sensor voltage refers to this
reference level. These signals are processed and displayed by the circuit placed on
the PCB. The block diagram of the circuit is shown in fig. 6.5. The offset of the
119
6 Demonstrators
Active sectors Chrome layer
Package
IR filter
Sensors
Fig. 6.4: Schematic cross-section of the packaged microsystem.
Microsystem Signal Amplifier Filter Comparator Trigger LED
A AA AAA AAA
AA AAA AA AAAAAAA
AA
+
AAA AAAAAA
AA
-
AAA AAA
AAA
AAA
AAA
AAA
Analog ground Offset compensation Reference Optocoupler Connector
Fig. 6.5: Block diagram of the demonstrators signal processing electronics.
microsystem signal with respect to the analog ground is canceled with the offset
compensation block. This block generates an adjustable reference level shifted
with respect to the analog ground. It consists of an amplifier with an adjustable
gain of approximately 1.1. The reference level is adjusted to the output signal level
corresponding to equal radiation power on both sensors. A differential amplifier
is used to amplify the difference between microsystem output and the reference
level. Its output voltage is filtered by a 10 Hz low-pass filter. This analog signal is
analysed with a window comparator. It checks whether the signal is within a given
range around the reference level. The digital output of the comparator is filtered
120
6.2 Thermal Imager
by a Schmitt trigger. Its output remains high for 100 ms after the comparator
detected an out-of-window condition. The signal from the Schmitt trigger is dis-
played by a LED and provided as a digital output on a connector. An optocoupler
is used to decouple connector and system potentials.
The processing electronics is realized with two ICs, two potentiometers, and var-
ious resistors and capacitors on the double-sided printed circuit board shown in
Microsystem
Potentiometer
for offset Window
compensation comparator IC
IC with four
differential On/Off switch
amplifiers
Window width Output

adjustment connector
LED Optocoupler
Fig. 6.6: Photograph of front and rear of the demonstrators PCB.
fig. 6.6. The IC AD T9631 contains four differential amplifiers. One is used for
signal amplification, one for offset compensation, and two for the Schmitt trigger.
The IC LT1042 is the window comparator. One high resolution potentiometer is
used for offset compensation, the other to adjust the comparator window width.
6.2 Thermal Imager

The thermal imager consists of an array microsystem, a housing for the microsys-
tem chip, a computer, and a multimeter. Either the SysAlp1-IV or SysAlp1-VII can
121
6 Demonstrators
be plugged into the imager. As shown in fig. 6.7 the computer is used to control
Object Lens Housing Microsystem
+
Multimeter
-
Control/
Readout
Addressing Computer
& Display
Fig. 6.7: Block diagram of the thermal imager.
the operation of the demonstrator and to acquire and display the image data. The
housing contains an IR Fresnel lens casting an image of the thermal scene onto the
sensor array. The lens is made from polyethylene with a diameter of 12.7 mm,
10 lines/mm, a focal length of 9.4 mm, and nf of 0.74. With the pitch of 245 µm
and 330 µm the angular resolution is 1.5° for of ArrAlp1-IV and 2° for
ArrAlp1-VII. The polyethylene sheet transmits 53% of the IR radiation from a
person at 24°C.
The signals from the individual pixels are multiplexed and amplified by the
on-chip circuit. The multiplexer is controlled by the address supplied by the com-
puter. The differential output signal of the microsystem is converted to digital
form by a multimeter and transmitted to the computer. To acquire a complete
image, all pixel addresses are sequentially supplied to the multiplexer, and the
respective signals are synchronously converted with the multimeter. The timing
122
6.2 Thermal Imager
of the addressing and A/D conversion is shown in fig. 6.8. To achieve synchroni-
zation between the addressing and the A/D conversion, the computer also pro-
vides a trigger whenever a new address is supplied. The A/D conversion is
delayed by 1 ms with respect to the trigger signal. This delay is required to let the
amplifier output signal settle to the new value. The multimeter measures the
output value by integrating the signal during 20 ms. The integration suppresses
Multimeter Delay Measurement Delay Measurement
Trigger
Output Signal
Address Address i Address i+1
Time
Fig. 6.8: Timing of the addressing and A/D conversion by the multimeter.
noise and signal components with frequencies above 50 Hz. With this timing
scheme the acquisition of a pixel signal lasts for 21 ms. Thus, 47.6 pixels per
second can be read. For SysAlp1-VII and SysAlp1-IV with hundred and 240 pixels,
respectively, the acquisition of a complete image frame lasts 2.1 s and 5.4 s,
respectively. This corresponds to a frame rate of 0.49 Hz and 0.18 Hz. The frame
rate can be increased by reducing the delay and integration time. However, a
shorter delay increases the electrical cross-talk between the pixels. Furthermore,
a decreased integration time deteriorates the NETD through larger signal band-
width and thus, increased noise. Cross-talk occurs because the amplifier has not
yet completely settled to the new pixel signal when the integration starts. Thus the
signal from the previous pixel affects the next reading.
123
6 Demonstrators
Figure 6.9 shows an image acquired with the microsystem SysAlp1-IV. A delay of
1 ms and an integration time of 20 ms was used, corresponding to a signal band-
width of 50 Hz and a frame rate of 0.49 Hz. The picture shows a person, head and
chest with arms up at a distance of approximately 2.5 m. Black corresponds to
ambient temperature, while white indicates 16°C above ambient.
16°
12°
∆T
8°
4°
0°
Fig. 6.9: Thermal image of a person at a distance of 2.5 m.
The NETD achieved with this configuration is 715 mK. This was determined by
the following measurements. The thermal imager was placed in the sensitivity
measurement setup described in section 4.1, viewing the two blackbodies. The
signal from the pixel viewing the centers of the blackbodies was then recorded.
Figure 6.10 shows the signal of an alp1-IV pixel with a signal bandwidth of 10 Hz
and blackbody temperatures of 23°C and 28°C. The temperature sensitivity of the
imager with the SysAlp1-IV and SysAlp1-VII is 1.5 mV/K and 1 mV/K, respec-
tively. The standard deviation of the signal with both blackbodies at equal temper-
atures is 380 µV and 320 µV, respectively. This corresponds to NETDs of
124
6.2 Thermal Imager
12
10 ∆T = 5 K
8
Signal [mV]
6
4
∆T = 0 K
2
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Time [s]
Fig. 6.10: Signals of a single pixel from SysAlp1-IV alternately viewing blackbod-
ies with a temperature difference of 5 K and 0 K.
715 mK for SysAlp1-IV and 560 mK for SysAlp1-VII with respect to a signal band-
width of 50 Hz.
125
7 Summary and Outlook
7 SUMMARY AND OUTLOOK
In this thesis we demonstrated the feasibility, and characterized the performance,

of fully integrated IR sensor microsystems for presence detection fabricated using
CMOS IC technology. The systems were fabricated using three different commer-
cial CMOS processes with subsequent wafer-by wafer post-processing. They con-
sist of pairs or arrays of thermoelectric sensors, combined with on-chip
state-of-the-art signal conditioning circuitry.
We reported the fabrication of a variety of micromachined IR sensors based on

micromachined beams, bridges and membranes. The size of their sensitive area
varies from 150 µm by 100 µm up to 1500 µm by 700 µm. Thermopiles were fab-
ricated using n+ -polysilicon/aluminium, n+ -polysilicon/p+ -polysilicon, and
p + -polysilicon/aluminium. Six of these sensors have been integrated in
two-dimensional arrays. Four arrays were fabricated using bridge type sensors.
Seven arrays were fabricated using two different membrane type pixels. The
pixels in these arrays are located on one membrane and are thermally separated by
25 µm thick gold lines. The largest array has 240 pixels arranged in 15 rows and
16 columns.
We built a measurement setup for reproducible measurement of IR detector sen-

sitivity with a radiation spectrum representative for presence detection applica-
tions. A second measurement setup was developed to determine the spectral
response of IR sensor devices in the range from 2 µm to 14.6 µm. Test structures
were fabricated for measuring in-situ the relative spectral absorptance of CMOS
layer sandwiches and the relative absorptance spectra of a complete set of CMOS
IR absorbing layer sandwiches were measured.
A FEM model was applied for the simulation of sensor performance before the
fabrication. The accuracy of this model was tested by comparing the measured and
simulated sensitivity for nine different sensors. A deviation of 21% was found in
the worst case. Optimization of a sensor layout with this model was demonstrated
for a presence detection system.
126
We built two demonstrators to show the potential of the fabricated microsystems.
The first, using two separate sensors, is for presence detection while the second
demonstrates IR thermal imaging with sensor arrays. With both demonstrators the
presence of a person at a distance of several meters is clearly detected.
To fully exploit the potential of this technology for integrated sensor microsys-
tems, future research will have to address several tasks:
• Two-sensor presence detection microsystems should be integrated also with the

chopper amplifier. The performance of these systems would benefit greatly
from its very low noise performance.
• For thermal imaging larger arrays with more pixels are needed to cover a larger
field of view and to improve spatial resolution. These arrays will need means to
increase the frame rate. A simple, though costly, solution is the cointegration of
several amplifiers.
• For arrays with large numbers of devices the fabrication yield is of paramount
importance. In view of this, the fabrication of the bridge type pixels is not satis-
factory, while the yield of the membrane pixels is very promising. Neverthe-
less, the latter must be improved before full large-scale production starts.
• Novel methods of packaging the integrated IR sensors have to be developed.
These packaging methods should be compatible with modern PCB fabrication
methods such as surface mount technology. Above all, the price of the package
has to be reduced in comparison with traditional TO headers.
• Other fields of application than the presence detection such as remote tempera-
ture sensing should be investigated. The thermoelectric sensors, their fabrica-
tion technology, and the simulation methods reported in this thesis can also be
used in different application areas.
If some of these challenges are met, a room-temperature IR camera with more than
1000 pixels and a price below $500 will be possible within a few years. An esti-
mate of the possible applications and market volume for such a product is left to
the imagination of the reader.
127
Appendix
Appendix
References
[1] K. Peterson, “Silicon as a Mechanical Material”, Proc. of the IEEE, Vol. 70,
pp. 420-457, 1982.
[2] H. Baltes, O. Paul, and O. Brand, “Micromachined Thermally Based
CMOS Microsensors”, Proc. of the IEEE, in press, 1998.
[3] S. Middelhoek and S. Audet, “Silicon Sensors”, Delft University Press,
Delft, 1994.
[4] G. Kovacs, “Micromachined Transducers Sourcebook”, McGraw-Hill, New
York, 1998.
[5] H. Baltes, “Future of IC Microtransducers”, Sensors and Actuators A,
Vol. 56, pp. 179-192, 1996.
[6] D. Jaeggi, “Thermal Converter by CMOS Technology”, Ph. D. thesis ETH
No. 11567, ETH Zurich, 1996.
[7] M. Müller, R. Gottfried-Gottfried, A. Hübel, R. Jähne, and H. Kück, “A
Thermoelectric Infrared Radiation Sensor with Monolithically Integrated
Amplifier Stage and Temperature Sensor”, Digest of Technical Papers
Transducers '95, Vol. 2, pp. 640-643, 1995.
[8] P. Malcovati, “CMOS Thermoelectric Sensor Interfaces”, Ph. D. thesis
ETH No. 11424, ETH Zurich, 1996.
[9] A. Häberli, “Compensation and Calibration of IC Microsensors”,
Ph. D. thesis ETH No. 12090, ETH Zurich, 1997.
[10] C. Menolfi, Q. Huang, and N. Schneeberger, “A Low Noise Thermoelectric
Infrared Detector Microsystem in a Digital CMOS Technology”, Proc.
ESSCIRC '96, Neuchatel, pp. 128-131, 1996.
128
[11] F. Mayer, A. Häberli, H. Jacobs, G. Ofner, O. Paul, and H. Baltes, “Sin-
gle-Chip CMOS Anemometer”, Technical Digest of International Electron
Devices Meeting, IEEE, pp. 895-898, 1997.
[12] R. Dann, “Infrared: Sensing Pollution”, Sensor Review, Vol. 14, No. 3,
pp. 33-35, 1994.
[13] M. Schlesinger, “Infrared Technology Fundamentals”, 2nd Edition, Marcel
Dekker Inc., New York, 1994.
[14] J. D. Vincent, “Fundamentals of Infrared Detector Operation & Testing”,
John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1990.
[15] W. Lang, K. Kühl, and H. Sandmaier, “Absorbing Layers for Thermal In-
frared Detectors”, Digest of Technical Papers Transducers '91, pp. 635-638,
1991.
[16] M. Golay, “A Pneumatic Infra-Red Detector”, Review of Scientific Instru-
ments, Vol. 18, p. 357, 1947.
[17] M. Royer and T. Midavaine, “IR and FIR Sensors”, Sensors, Vol. 6, Eds.
E. Wagner, R. Dändliker, and K. Spenner, VCH Weinheim, 1992.
[18] J. Chevrier, K. Baert, and T. Slater, “Infrared Pneumatic Detector Made by
Micromachining Technology”, J. Micromechanics and Microengineering,
Vol. 5, pp. 193-195, 1995.
[19] T. Kenny, J. Reynolds, J. Podosek, E. Vote, L. Miller, H. Rockstad, and
W. Kaiser, “Micromachined Infrared Sensors Using Tunneling Displace-
ment Transducers“, Rev. Scientific Instruments, Vol. 67, pp.112-28, 1996.
[20] J. Grade, A. Bazilai, J. Reynolds, C. Liu, A. Partridge, H. Jerman, and
T. Kenny, “Wafer-Scale Processing, Assembly, and Testing of Tunneling
Infrared Detectors“, Digest of Technical Papers Transducers '97, Vol. 2,
pp. 1241-1244, 1997.
[21] H. Jerominek, M. Renault, N. Swart, F. Picard, T. Pope, M. Levesque,
M. Lehoux, G. Bilodeou, M. Pelletier, D. Audet, and P. Lambert, “Micro-
machined VO2 Based Uncooled IR Bolometric Detector Arrays with Inte-
grated CMOS Readout Electronics”, SPIE Symposium on Micromachining
and Microfabrication, Proc. SPIE Vol 2882, pp. 111-121, 1996.
129
Appendix
[22] A. Mahrane, M. Djafari-Rouhani, A. Najmi, D. Franques, and D. Esteve,

“P(VDF-TrFE) Copolymer Sensor for Passive IR Detection in Automo-
tives”, Sensors and Actuators A, Vol. 47, pp. 399-402, 1995.
[23] F. Völklein, A. Wiegand, and V. Baier, “High-Sensitivity Radiation Ther-
mopiles made of Bi-Sb-Te Films”, Sensors and Actuators A, Vol. 29,
pp. 87-91, 1991.
[24] S. M. Sze, “VLSI Technology”, McGraw-Hill, Singapore, 1988.
[25] R. Castagnetti, “Integrated Magnetotransistors in Bipolar and CMOS Tech-
nology”, Ph. D. thesis ETH 10751, ETH Zurich, 1994.
[26] P. Sarro, “Sensor Technology Strategy in Silicon”, Sensors and Actuators
A, Vol. 31, pp. 138-143, 1992.
[27] P. French, “Development of Surface Micromachining Techniques Compat-
ible With On-chip Electronics”, J. Micromechanics and Microengineering,
Vol. 6, pp. 197-211, 1996.
[28] W. Lang and K. Kühl, “A Thin Film Polysilicon-Aluminium Thermocou-
ple”, Sensors and Materials, Vol. 2, pp. 247-251, 1991.
[29] G. Lahiji and K. Wise, “A Monolithic Thermopile Detector Fabricated us-
ing Integrated-Circuit Technology”, Technical Digest of International Elec-
tron Devices Meeting, IEEE, pp. 676-679, 1980.
[30] G. Lahiji and K. Wise, “A Batch-Fabricated Silicon Thermopile Infrared
Detector”, IEEE Trans. Electron Devices, Vol. ED-29, pp. 14-22, 1982.
[31] C. Shibata, C. Kimura, and K. Mikami, “Far Infrared Sensor with Thermo-
pile Structure”, Proc. of 1st Sensor Symposium, IEE Japan, pp. 221-225,
1981.
[32] P. Sarro and A. Herwaarden, “Infrared Detector Based on an Integrated Sil-
icon Thermopile”, SPIE Symposium on Passive Infrared Systems and Tech-
nology, Proc. SPIE Vol. 807, pp. 113-118, 1987.
[33] H. Baltes, D. Moser, R. Lenggenhager, and O. Brand, “Thermal Mi-
crotransducers by CMOS Technology Combined with Micromachining”,
Sensors and Actuators A, Vol. 15, pp. 419-422, 1991.
130
[34] R. Lenggenhager, H. Baltes, and T. Elbel, “Thermoelectric Infrared Sensors
in CMOS Technology“, Sensors and Actuators A, Vols. 37-38, pp. 216-220,
1993.
[35] T. Srinivas, P. Timans, R. Butcher, and H. Ahmed, “A Free-Standing Micro-
thermopile Infrared Detector”, Sensors and Actuators A, Vol. 32,
pp. 403-406, 1992.
[36] J. Schieferdecker, R. Quad, E. Holzenkämpf, and M. Schulze, “Infrared
Thermopile Sensor with High Sensitivity and Very Low Temperature Coef-
ficient”, Sensors and Actuators A, Vol. 46-47, pp. 422-427, 1995.
[37] T. Elbel, R. Lenggenhager, and H. Baltes, “Model of Thermoelectric Radi-
ation Sensors made by CMOS and Micromachining”, Sensors and Actua-
tors A, Vol. 35, pp. 101-106, 1992.
[38] F. Völklein and H. Baltes, “Optimization Tool for the Performance Param-
eters of Thermoelectric Microsensors”, Sensors and Actuators A, Vol. 36,
pp. 65-71, 1993.
[39] J. Funk, G. Wachutka, and H. Baltes, “Scaling Laws for Optimized Design
of Integrated Thermopiles”, Digest of Technical Papers Transducers '93,
pp. 742-745, 1993.
[40] U. Dillner, “Thermal Modeling of Multilayer Membranes for Sensor Appli-
cations”, Sensors and Actuators A, Vol. 41-42, pp. 260-267, 1994.
[41] T. Elbel, S. Poser, and H. Fischer, “Thermoelectric Radiation Microsen-
sors”, Sensors and Actuators A, Vol. 41-42, pp. 493-496, 1994.
[42] N. Schneeberger, O. Paul, and H. Baltes, “Optimization of CMOS Infrared
Detector Microsystems”, SPIE Symposium on Micromachining and Micro-
fabrication, Proc. SPIE Vol. 2882, pp. 122-131, 1996.
[43] W. Baer, T. Hull, K. Wise, and K. Najafi, “A Multiplexed Silicon Infrared
Thermal Imager”, Digest of Technical Papers Transducers '91, pp. 631-634,
1991.
[44] R. Lenggenhager and H. Baltes, “Improved Thermoelectric Infrared Sensor
using Double Poly CMOS Technology”, Digest of Technical Papers
Transducers '93, pp. 1008-1011, 1993.
[45] R. Lenggenhager, D. Jaeggi, P. Malcovati, H. Duran, H. Baltes, and
E. Doering, “CMOS Membrane Infrared Sensors and Improved TMAHW
131
Appendix
Etchant”, Technical Digest of International Electron Devices Meeting,

IEEE, pp. 531-534, 1994.
[46] T. Kanno and M. Saga, “Uncooled Infrared Focal Plane Array having 128 x
128 thermopile Detector Elements”, Infrared Technology XX, SPI
Vol. 2269, pp. 450-459, 1994.
[47] A. Oliver, W. Baer, and K. Wise, “A Bulk-Micromachined 1024-Element
Uncooled Infrared Imager”, Digest of Technical Papers Transducers '95,
Vol. 2, pp. 636-639, 1995.
[48] R. Siegel and J. R. Howell, “Thermal Radiation Heat Transfer”,
3rd Edition, Taylor & Francis Inc., Washington, 1992.
[49] G. Kirchhoff, “Über das Verhältnis zwischen Emissionsvermögen und dem
Absorptionsvermögen der Körper für Wärme und Licht”, Annalen der Phys-
ik, Vol. 19, pp. 275-301, 1860.
[50] J. Stefan, “Über die Beziehung zwischen der Wärmestrahlung und der Tem-
peratur”, Sitzungsber. Akad. Wiss. Wien 79, Teil 2, pp. 391-428, 1879.
[51] L. Boltzmann, “Ableitung des Stefanschen Gesetzes, betreffend die Abhän-
gigkeit der Wärmestrahlung von der Temperatur aus der elektromagnetis-
chen Lichttheorie”, Annalen der Physik, Serie 2, Vol. 22, pp. 291-294,
1884.
[52] M. Planck, “Über das Gesetz der Energieverteilung im Normalspektrum”,
Annalen der Physik, Vol. 4, pp. 553-563, 1901.
[53] M. D. Mikahilov and M. N. Özisik, “Unified Analysis and Solutions of
Heat and Mass Diffusion”, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1984.
[54] W. Thielmann, “Physik der Halbleiter”, Akademie-Verlag, Berlin, 1974.
[55] M. Riedl, “Optical Design Fundamentals for Infrared Systems“, SPIE Opti-
cal Engineering Press, Vol. TT20, Bellingham, 1995.
[56] J. Vincent, “Fundamentals of Infrared Detector Operation & Testing”, John
Wiley & Sons, New York, 1989.
[57] M. von Arx, “Thermal Properties of CMOS Thin Films”,
Ph. D. thesis ETH, ETH Zurich, to be published, 1998.
132
[58] O. Paul, M. von Arx, and H. Baltes, “Process-Dependent Thermophysical
Properties of CMOS IC Thin Films”, Digest of Technical Papers
Transducers '95, Vol. 1, pp. 178-181, 1995.
[59] H. Baltes, O. Paul, and J. Korvink, “Simulation Toolbox and Material Pa-
rameter Data Base for CMOS MEMS”, Proc. 7th International Symposium
on Micro Machine and Human Science, pp. 1-8, 1996.
[60] J. Brice, “Semiconductor Silicon”, H. Ruff and R. Burgess, The Electro-
chemical Society Softbound Proceedings Series, Princeton, p. 339, 1973.
[61] J. Reismann, M. Berkenblit, S. Chan, F. Kaufman, and D. Green, “The
Controlled Etching of Silicon in Catalyzed Ethylene-Diamine-Pyrocatechol
Water Solutions”, J. Electrochemical Society, Vol. 126, pp. 1406-1415,
1979.
[62] R. Finne and D. Klein, “A Water-Amine-Complexing Agent System for
Etching Silicon”, J. Electrochemical Society, Vol. 114, p. 965, 1967.
[63] X. Wu, Q. Wu, and W. Ko, “A Study on Deep Etching of Silicon Using
EPW”, Digest of Technical Papers Transducers '85, pp. 291-294, 1985.
[64] M. Parameswaran and H. Baltes, “Oxide Microstructures Fabrication: A
Novel Approach”, Sensors and Materials, Vol. 3, pp. 115-122, 1988.
[65] D. Jaeggi, H. Baltes, and D. Moser, “Thermoelectric AC Power Sensors by
CMOS Technology”, IEEE Electron Device Letters, Vol. 13, pp. 366-368,
1992.
[66] D. Moser, “CMOS Flow Sensors”, Ph. D. thesis ETH No. 10059,
ETH Zurich, 1993.
[67] H. Seidl, L. Csepregi, A. Heuberger, and H. Baumgärtl, “Anisotropic Etch-
ing of Crystalline Silicon in Alkaline Solutions, Orientation Dependence
and Behavior of Passivation Layers”, J. Electrochemical Society, Vol. 13,
pp. 3612-3626, 1990.
[68] O. Dorsch, A. Hein, E. Obermeier, “Effect of Silicon Content of Aqueous
KOH on Etching Behavior of Convex Corners in (100) Single Crystal Sili-
con”, Digest of Technical Papers Transducers '97, Vol. 1, pp. 683-686,
1997.
[69] S. Linder, “Chip Stacks for Memory Applications”, Ph. D. thesis ETH No.
11347, ETH Zurich, 1996.
133
Appendix
[70] U. Münch, D. Jaeggi, N. Schneeberger, A. Schaufelbühl, O. Paul, and

H. Baltes, J. Jasper, “Industrial Fabrication Technology for CMOS Infrared
Sensor Arrays“, Digest of Technical Papers Transducers '97, Vol. 1,
pp. 205-208, 1997.
[71] R. Lenggenhager, “CMOS Thermoelectric Infrared Sensors”,
Ph. D. thesis ETH No. 10744, ETH Zurich, 1994.
[72] J. Müller, U. Dillner, and R. Gütttich, “Thermoelectric and Bolometric In-
frared Microsensors”, Sensors Update, Vol. 3, Eds. H. Baltes, W. Göpel, and
J. Hesse, Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, 1998.
[73] P. Klocek, “Handbook of Infrared Optical Materials“, Marcel Dekker Inc.,
New York, 1991.
[74] I. Choi, K. Wise, “A Linear Thermopile Infrared Detector Array with
On-Chip Multiplexing“, Digest of Technical Papers Transducers '85,
pp. 132-135, 1985.
[75] P. Sarro, H. Yashiro, A. Herwaarden, and S. Middelhoek, “An Integrated
Thermal Infrared Sensing Array“, Sensors and Actuators, Vol. 14,
pp. 191-201, 1988
[76] B. Cole, C. Han, R. Higashi, J. Ridley, and J. Holmen, “Monolithic
512x512-CMOS Microbridge Arrays for Infrared Scene Projection“, Digest
of Technical Papers Transducers '95, Vol. 2, pp. 628-631, 1995.
[77] A. Tanaka, S. Matsumoto, N. Tsukamoto, S. Itoh, T. Endoh, A. Nakazato,
Y. Kumazawa, M. Hijikawa, H. Gotoh, T. Tanaka, and T. Teranishi, “Sili-
con IC Process Compatible Bolometer Infrared Focal Plane Array“, Digest
of Technical Papers Transducers '95, Vol. 2, pp. 632-635, 1995.
[78] O. Trapp, R. Blanchard, and L. Lopp, “Semiconductor Technology Hand-
book”, Sixth Edition, Technology Associates, Portola Valley, 1992.
[79] L. Landau and E. Lifschitz, “Theory of Elasticity“, Course of Theoretical
Physics, Vol. 7, 3rd Edition, Pergamon, Oxford, 1986.
[80] W. L. Wolfe and G. J. Zissis, “The Infrared Handbook”, Office of Naval Re-
search, Washington DC, 1978.
[81] A. Gouffé, “Corrections d’ Ouvertures des Corps-Noirs Artificiels Compte
Tenu des Diffusions Multiples Internes”, Revue d’Optique, Vol. 24, Mas-
son, Paris, p. 1, 1945.
134
[82] M. Meade, “Lock-In Amplifiers: principles and applications”, Peregrinus,
London, 1983.
[83] J. Korvink, J. Funk, and H. Baltes, “IMEMS Modeling”, Sensors and Mate-
rials, Vol. 6, pp. 235-243, 1994.
135
Appendix
Acknowledgments
First of all I would like to thank Prof. Dr. Henry Baltes for making this work pos-
sible, for creating a professional, friendly and productive atmosphere at the Phys-
ical Electronics Laboratory (PEL), for introducing me to microsystems, and for
his generous support of my work, from drafting the original research plan to the
critical review of this thesis.
It is my pleasure to thank Prof. Dr. Oliver Paul, now with the University of
Freiburg im Breisgau, who was my supervisor throughout this work. To meet his
standards has always been a challenge, and I learned a lot trying to do so. I want
to thank him for his guidance and readiness to assist whenever needed. I also want
to thank him for uncompromisingly proof-reading this thesis like so many of my
texts before.
I wish to thank Dr. Ulrich Dillner for co-examining and proof-reading this thesis.
I want to thank Dr. René Lenggenhager for his work on CMOS thermoelectric IR
sensors which was the starting point of my work.
I am indebted to Dr. Dominik Jaeggi, Dr. Piero Malcovati, Christian Menolfi,

Ulrich Münch, Andri Schaufelbühl, and Marc Wälti who worked with me on the
thermoelectric IR sensor microsystems. Many of the results presented in this
thesis are a result of their work and their support of my work.
I owe special thanks to my office-mate and friend Felix Mayer for his support
during periods of frustration or hard work and for sharing the good times.
It was a pleasure to share the office with Dr. Johannes Bühler, Michael Mayer, and
Rolf Frei.
I want to thank Donat Scheiwiler for his work on the demonstrator systems and
the outstanding performance in keeping the equipment up and running. I would
like to thank Max Schlapfer for his friendly companionship and assistance in
image editing.
I am grateful to Dr. Christophe Fumeaux for assisting me with his IR laser.
136
I would like to thank Serge Déteindre, Verena Dubacher, Kristian Haller, Marcel
Hübscher, Phillip Ludwig, Karl Przibilla, and Marcel Vogel for the contribution
they made to this thesis during their student projects, which I had the pleasure to
supervise.
I am indebted to the staff of our industrial partners, notably Dr. P. Ryser, Dr. M.
Forster, Dr. K. Müller, and Dr. M. Loepfe of Cerberus AG, and Mr. E. Doering
and Dr. A. Descombes of EM Microelectronic-Marin SA and P. Sagnol of Atmel
ES2.
I want to thank my colleagues at PEL whose enthusiasm and friendship make this
laboratory a very special place to work. These are Dr. Martin Bächtold, Dr. Daniel
Bolliger, Dr. Thomas Boltshauser, Dr. Frank Bose, Dr. Oliver Brand,
Dr. Ruggero Castagnetti, Christian Cornila, Dr. Michael Dammann, Dr. Jörg
Funk, Markus Emmenegger, Liselotte Glasl, Dr. Andreas Häberli, Dr. Egon Herr,
Erna Hug, Mark Hornung, Andreas Koll, Stefan Koller, Prof. Dr. Jan Korvink,
Dirk Lange, Dr. Stefan Linder, Igor Levak, Christoph Maier, Matthias Metz,
Heidi Moser, Dr. David Moser, Thomas Müller, Luca Plattner, Dr. Concetta Ric-
cobene, Jaques Robadey, Dr. Berthold Rogge, Michael Schneider,
Dr. Franz-Peter Steiner, Ralph Steiner, Stefano Taschini, Dr. Stephan Traut-
weiler, Yelena von Allmen, Martin von Arx, Dr. Rolf Vogt, Prof. Dr. Gerhard
Wachutka, Dr. Rolf Wohlgemuth, Volker Ziebart, and Martin Zimmermann.
I owe special thanks to my parents and to my wife Flavia. Through their ongoing
support, love, and understanding they have contributed substantially to my work.
This work has been supported by the LESIT and MINAST priority programs of
the Board of the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology and the ESPRIT project
DEMAC of the European Community.
137
Appendix
Curriculum Vitae
Niklaus Werner Schneeberger

Born December 24, 1967
Citizen of Schoren bei Langenthal, BE, Switzerland
Married
Apr. 1984 - Sept. 1987 Technical Gymnasium Thun.
Oct. 1987 Matura type C.
Feb. 1988 - Nov. 1988 Swiss army service.
Nov. 1988 -Nov. 1993 Student of physics at ETH Zurich. Diploma thesis on
mechanical material properties of dielectric CMOS
thin films.
Nov. 1993 Dipl. Phys.ETH.
Sept. 1995 Marriage with Flavia Camastral.
Nov. 1993 - Apr. 1998 Work towards a doctoral degree at the Physical
Electronics Laboratory directed by Prof. Dr. H. Baltes
at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH)
Zurich.
138
List of Abbreviations
alp1mv Analog, Low-Power, 1 µm, Medium Voltage
alp2lv Analog, Low-Power, 2 µm, Low Voltage
CMOS Complementary Metal Oxide Semiconductor
ECPR Electrically Calibrated Pyroelectric Radiometer
EDP Ethylene-Diamine Pyrocatechol
FEM Finite Element Method
FET Field Effect Transistors
IC Integrated Circuit
IPHT Institut für Physikalische Hochtechnologie
IR Infrared
KOH Potassium hydroxide
LED Light Emitting Diode
MEMS Micro Electro Mechanical System
MOS Metal Oxide Semiconductor
NEP Noise Equivalent Power
NETD Noise Equivalent Temperature Difference
PCB Printed Circuit Board
PMMA PolyMethyl-Methacrylat
PSD Phase Sensitive Detector
VLSI Very Large Scale Integration
139

ETH Diss 12675

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

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

ETH Diss 12675

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

DISS. ETH No.

CMOS Microsystems for

A thesis submitted to the

for the degree of

NIKLAUS WERNER SCHNEEBERGER

accepted on the recommendation of

PROF. DR. H. BALTES, examiner

Copyright © 1998 by Niklaus Schneeberger, Physical Electronics Laboratory

Physical Electronics Laboratory

7 Summary and Outlook 126

In this thesis we report the development, fabrication, characterization, and model-

Diese Dissertation befasst sich mit der Entwicklung, Herstellung, Charakterisie-

1.1 Infrared Radiation

Fig. 1.1: Atmospheric transmittance over 2 km at sea level [12].

1.2 Infrared Sensor Types

Type Excited state Sensor property

Tab. 1.1: Popular types of photonic sensors.

detectivity in the range of 1010 to 1012 cm√Hz/W. Their sensitivity strongly

Type Measured property

Tab. 1.2: Types of thermal IR sensors

In a bolometer temperature changes are measured via the temperature dependent

with sizes down to 40 µm have been fabricated. By operating specialized materi-

In pyroelectric sensors, a film of material with a spontaneous electrical polariza-

where α is the relative Seebeck coefficient of the two thermocouple materials.

Fig. 1.2: Schematic view of a thermopile consisting of several thermocouples

Normalized detectivities of 108 cm√Hz/W have been reported [23]. Thermopiles

• Consumer products characterized by large volume production (>10’000 per

Sensors Optics Surveyed Areas

Fig. 1.3: Typical application of a motion detector.

1.4 CMOS Fabrication of IR Sensors

1.5 Previous Art

• Meggitt Avionics, Inc., Manchester, New Hampshire, USA.

1.6 Outline of the Thesis

2.1 Infrared Radiation

A fundamental concept of radiometry is the spectral intensity i'λ. It describes the

relative to the surface, of a specific wavelength λ. If the radiation from a surface

e' λ(ϑ, ϕ) = i' λ cos ϑ (2.1)

e'(ϑ, ϕ) = ∫ e'λ(ϑ, ϕ) dλ , (2.2)

the hemispherical spectral emissive power eλ given by

eλ = ∫ ∫ e' λ(ϑ, ϕ) dϑ dϕ , (2.3)

and the hemispherical total emissive power e, i.e.,

The absorptivity or absorptance α'λ of a surface is defined as the ratio of the

The hemispherical reflectivity ρλ is defined as the ratio of the radiation intensity

e λ(λ, T ) = α λ(λ, T ) ⋅ e bλ(λ, T ) . (2.9)

Emissive power [W/m2µm]

where the approximation is valid for

2.2 Sensor Principle

2.3 Heat Transfer

and the initial condition

The general solution then has the form

is the decomposition of the initial condition in terms of the eigenfunctions, and

2.4 Seebeck Effect

where γA is the Seebeck coefficient of the material. Since the temperature is a

Cold contact, T1 Hot contact, T2

Fig. 2.3: Schematic view of a thermocouple.

a voltage UC is generated between two points on materials A and B at temperature

With the relative Seebeck coefficient

2.5 Imaging Optics

Entrance window Optics Sensor

2.6 Sensor Characteristics and Figures of Merit

It can be used to describe the signal quality of a stand-alone sensor or an entire

Noise Equivalent Power

defined as the incident radiation power producing a signal-to-noise ratio equal to

Noise Equivalent Temperature Difference