Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-16T11:44:12.522Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Oxide thin films for nanometer scale electron beam lithography

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2011

J.L. Hollenbeck  and
R.C. Buchanan
J.L. Hollenbeck
Affiliation:
Ceramics Division, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois 61801
R.C. Buchanan
Affiliation:
Ceramics Division, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois 61801
Get access

Abstract

The exposure response of high resolution oxide resist materials has been examined under high intensity irradiation conditions (∼1 ⊠ 105 A/cm2) to determine the relationships among film characteristics, exposure requirements, and ultimate resolution, and to explore further the processes responsible for ablative exposure. Amorphous films of Al2O3, Y2O3, Sc2O3, 3Al2O3·2SiO2, and MgO·Al2O3 were deposited by rf sputtering onto substrates cooled to –196°C and found to require an exposure dose of approximately 5 ⊠ 103 C/cm2 to complete exposure. Amorphous film structure was found to be necessary to achieve rapid removal of material during exposure. Material properties also found to influence irradiation response and help guide the selection of new materials included ionic character, heat of formation, and melting point. Film thickness was found to influence strongly both exposure requirements and resolution, an optimum thickness occurring at approximately 90 nm in amorphous Al2O3. The dose requirement in 90 nm thick amorphous Al2O3 was determined to be 2.5 ⊠ 103 C/cm2, which is two to three orders of magnitude lower than that of oxide films produced by other techniques. Resolution of the rf sputtered oxide films allowed the production of 5.0 nm holes on 8.1 nm centers. A dedicated STEM was used for exposure studies as well as imaging, microdiffraction analysis, and monitoring of the transmitted beam current, and allowed a qualitative model of the exposure process in rf sputtered oxide resists to be developed.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Materials Research , Volume 5 , Issue 5 , May 1990 , pp. 1058 - 1072
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1990

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1Mochel, M. E., Humphreys, C. J., Eades, J. A., Mochel, J. M., and Petford, A. M., Appl. Phys. Lett. 42 (4), 392–394(1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2Mochel, M.E., Eades, J.A., Metzger, M., Meyer, J.I., and Mochel, J.M., Appl. Phys. Lett. 44 (5), 502–504 (1984).Google Scholar
3Hollenbeck, J. L. and Buchanan, R. C. (Proc. Mater. Res. Soc. Symp.) (Materials Research Society, Pittsburgh, PA, 1986), Vol. 72, pp. 289–294.Google Scholar
4Broers, A. N., in ACS Symposium Series 266, Materials for Microlithography, edited by Thompson, L.F., Willson, C.G., and Frechet, J. M. J., 11–38 (1984).Google Scholar
5Joy, D. C., Microelectron. Eng. 1, 103–119 (1983).Google Scholar
6Kyser, D. F., Vac, J.. Sci. Technol. Bl (4), 1391–1397 (1983).Google Scholar
7Samoto, N., Shimizu, R., Hashimoto, H., Adesida, I., Wolf, E., and Namba, S., Vac., J.Sci. Technol. Bl (4), 1367–1371 (1983).Google Scholar
8Isaacson, M.S. and Muray, A. J., Proceedings of the IEEE, edited by Wolf, E. D., 71 (5), 591 (1983).Google Scholar
9Kratschmer, E. and Isaacson, M., Vac, J.. Sci. Technol. B4 (1), 361–364 (1986).Google Scholar
10Howard, R. E., Skocpol, W. J., and Jackel, L. D., Ann. Rev. Mater. Sci. 16, 441–466 (1986).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11Pope, S., Thesis, M. S., University of Illinois, 1984.Google Scholar
12Berger, S.D., McMullan, D., Macaulay, J. M., and Brown, L.M., Inst. Phys. Conf. Ser. No. 90: Chap.4, 93–96 (1987).Google Scholar
13Mochel, M.E., Humphreys, C. J., Mochel, J.M., and Eades, J.A., Proc. of the 41st Annual Meeting of the Electron Microscopy Society of America, 100–101 (1983).Google Scholar
14Berger, S. D., Salisbury, I. G., Milne, R. H., Imeson, D., and Humphreys, C. J., Phil. Mag. B 55 (3), 341–358 (1987).Google Scholar
15Salisbury, I. G., Timsit, R. S., Berger, S.D., and Humphreys, C. J., Appl. Phys. Lett. 45 (12), 1289–1291 (1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16Hollenbeck, J. L. and Buchanan, R.C., Proc. of the 45th Annual Meeting of the Electron Microscopy Society of America, 396–397 (1987).Google Scholar
17Hollenbeck, J.L. and Buchanan, R.C., “Oxide Thin Films for Nanometer Scale Electron Beam Lithography,” to be published in ACS Symposium Proceedings, Ceramic Thin and Thick Films (1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18Berger, S. D., Macaulay, J. M., and Brown, L. M., Phil. Mag. Lett. 56 (5), 179–185 (1987).Google Scholar
19Knotek, M.L. and Feibelman, P. J., Phys. Rev. Lett. 40 (14), 964–967 (1978).Google Scholar
20Knotek, M. L. and Feibelman, P. J., Surf. Sci. 90, 78–90 (1979).Google Scholar
21Cazaux, J., J. Appl. Phys. 59 (5), 1418–1430 (1986).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22Broers, A. N., Cuomo, J., Harper, J., Molzen, W., Laibowitz, R., and Pomerants, M., Congress on Electron Microscopy, III, 343–354 (1978).Google Scholar