flcc march 19, 2007 cmp 1 flcc seminar title: effects of cmp slurry chemistry on agglomeration of...
TRANSCRIPT
March 19, 2007 CMP
1
FLCC
FLCC Seminar
Title: Effects of CMP Slurry Chemistry on Agglomeration of Alumina Particles and Copper Surface Hardness
Faculty: Jan B. TalbotStudent: Robin IhnfeldtDepartment: Chemical EngineeringUniversity: University of California,
San Diego
March 19, 2007 CMP
2
FLCC
IntroductionIntegrated Circuit manufacturing requires material removal and global planarity of wafer surface – Chemical Mechanical Planarization (CMP)
–Material Removal Rate (MRR) is affected by:
•Abrasive size and size distribution•Wafer surface hardness
–Cu is the interconnect of choice- our research focus
–CMP slurries provide material removal by:
•Mechanical abrasion–Nanometer sized abrasive particles (alumina)
•Chemical reaction–Chemical additives (glycine, H2O2, etc.)
March 19, 2007 CMP
3
FLCC
slurry
waferpolishing pad
platen
polishing pad
wafer
slurry
wafer carrier
P = 1.5-13 psi
(100-300 ml/min)V= 20-90 rpm
(polyurethane)
Particle concentration = 1 - 30 wt% Particle size = 50 - 1000 nm dia
Cu MRR= 50 - 600 nm/minPlanarization time = 1- 3 minRMS roughness = < 1 nm
CMP Schematic
March 19, 2007 CMP
4
FLCC
Motivation– Better process control
• Understand role of slurry chemistry (additives, pH, etc.) • Develop slurries to provide adequate removal rates and global
planarity– Prediction of material removal rates (MRR)
• Predictive CMP models - optimize process consumables• Improve understanding of effects of CMP variables• Reduce cost of CMP
– Reduce defects• Control of abrasive particle size • Control of interactions between the wafer surface and the slurry
March 19, 2007 CMP
5
FLCC
Research Approach
• Experimental study of colloidal behavior of CMP slurries– Zeta potential and particle size distribution measurements
• Function of pH, ionic strength, additives – Alumina particles in presence of common Cu CMP additives– Alumina particles in presence of copper nanoparticles
• Measurement of surface hardness as function of slurry chemistry
• Develop comprehensive model (Lou & Dornfeld, IEEE, 2003)
– Mechanical effects (Dornfeld et al., UCB)– Electrochemical effects (Doyle et al., UCB)
– Colloidal effects (Talbot et al., UCSD)
March 19, 2007 CMP
6
FLCC
Common Cu Slurry AdditivesAdditives Name Concentration
Buffering agent NH4OH, KOHKOH, HNOHNO33 bulk pH 3-8
Complexing agent - bind with partial or fully charged species in solution
Glycine,Glycine,Ethylene-diamine-tetra-acetate(EDTAEDTA), citric acid
0.01-0.1M
Corrosion inhibitor - protect the wafer surface by controlling passive etching or corrosion
Benzotriazole (BTABTA)3-amino-triazole (ATA) KI
0.01-1wt%
Oxidizer - cause growth of oxide film
HH22OO22, KIO3, K3Fe(CN)
citric acid
0-2 wt%
Surfactant - increase the solubility of surface and compounds
Sodium-dodecyl-sulfate (SDSSDS), cetyltrimethyl-ammonium-bromide (CTAB)
1-20 mM
Robin Ihnfeldt and J.B. Talbot. J. Electrochem. Soc., 153, G948 (2006).
Tanuja Gopal and J.B. Talbot. J. Electrochem. Soc., 153, G622 (2006).
March 19, 2007 CMP
7
FLCC
Cu CMP Chemical Reactions
Dissolution:Cu(s) + HL CuL+(aq) + H+ + e Oxidation:2Cu + H2O Cu2O + 2H+ + 2e
Oxide dissolution: Cu2O + 3H2O 2CuO2
2- + 6H+ + 2e
Complexation (to enhance solubility)Cu2+ + HL CuL+ + H+
Cu
CuO, Cu2O, CuL2
CuL+, Cu2+, Cu+
March 19, 2007 CMP
8
FLCC
Chemical Phenomena Chemistry of Glycine-Water System
copper-water system
[CuT]=10-5M
Ref.: Pourbaix (1957); (Aksu and Doyle (2002)
copper-water-glycine system
[LT]=10-1M, [CuT]=10-5M
March 19, 2007 CMP
9
FLCC
Colloidal Aspects of CMP1) Particle – particle
2) Particle – surface
3) Particle – dissolution product
4) Surface – dissolution product
Surface
Abrasive particleDissolution product
March 19, 2007 CMP
10
FLCC
Slurry Abrasives• 40 wt% -alumina slurry (from Cabot Corp.) • 150nm average aggregate diameter – 20nm primary particle diameter
Common Copper CMP Slurry Additives
• Glycine, EDTA, H2O2, BTA, SDS
Copper nano-particles• Added 0.12 mM to simulate removal of copper surface during CMP• <100 nm in diameter (from Aldrich)
Zeta Potential and Agglomerate Size Distribution• Brookhaven ZetaPlus
– Zeta Potential – Electrophoretic light scattering technique (±2%)– Agglomerate Size – Quasi-elastic light scattering (QELS) technique (±1%)
• All samples diluted to 0.05 wt% in a 1 mM KNO3 solution
• Solution pH adjusted using KOH and HNO3 and ultrasonicated for 5 min prior to measuring
Experimental Procedure
March 19, 2007 CMP
11
FLCC
Electrical Double Layer
+ +
++
+
+ + ++
++
++
++
+
+
+
+
++
a
+
+
+
Distance
Pote
ntia
l
1/
Diffuse Layer
Shear Plane
Particle Surface
2/122000
RT
IF
ro
i
ii zcI 2
2
1
/u
•Potential at surface usually stems from adsorption of lattice ions, H+ or OH-
•Potential is highly sensitive to chemistry of slurry
•Slurries are stable when all particles carry same charge; electrical repulsion overcomes van de Waals attractive forces
•If potentials are near zero, abrasive particles may agglomerate
Zeta Potential
= ionic strength
March 19, 2007 CMP
12
FLCC
Zeta Potential - Potential at the Stern LayerElectrophoresis – Zeta potential estimated by applying electric field and measuring particle velocity
-60
-40
-20
0
20
40
60
80
2 4 6 8 10 12
pH
t Z
eta
Po
ten
tia
l (m
V)
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
g A
gg
lom
era
te S
ize
(n
m)
Surface charge on metal oxides is pH dependant:
• IEP at = 0
• Slurries are stable when || > 25 mV
M-OH + OH- → M-O- + H2OM-OH + H+ → M-OH2+
Cabot alumina without additives in 10-3M KNO3 solution (bars indicate standard deviation of
agglomerate size distribution)
Zeta Potential
March 19, 2007 CMP
13
FLCC
Cabot alumina in 10-3M KNO3 solution with and without 0.12mM copper
• IEP ~6.5 with and without copper• IEP~9.2 for -alumina from literature*
• Impurities (NO3-, SO4
2-, etc.) may lower IEP**
• At high pH values magnitude of zeta potential lower with copper than without
*M.R. Oliver, Chemical-Mechanical Planarization of Semiconductor Material, Springer-Verlag, Berlin (2004).
**G.A. Parks, Chem. Tevs., 65, 177 (1965).
-80
-40
0
40
80
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
pH
Ze
ta P
ote
nti
al (
mV
)Without CuWith Cu
Zeta Potential
March 19, 2007 CMP
14
FLCC
Agglomerate Size Distribution
• pH 2 – presence of copper causes decrease in agglomeration
• pH 7 – presence of copper causes increase in agglomeration
Cabot alumina dispersion in 1mM KNO3 solution with (red) and without (blue) 0.12 mM copper and without chemical additives
pH 2
0
10
20
30
0 2 4 Agglomerate size (mm)
% i
n s
olu
tio
n
pH 7
0
10
20
30
40
0 5 10Agglomerate size (mm)
% in
so
luti
on
March 19, 2007 CMP
15
FLCC
Potential-pH for Copper-water System[Cu]=10-4M at 250C and 1atm (M. Pourbaix 1957)
■ Agglomeration behavior is consistent with the Pourbaix diagram
Copper-Alumina-Water System
Average agglomerate size of bimodal distributions in a 1 mM KNO3 solution
IEP of CuO ~ 9.5*
*G.A. Parks, Chem. Tevs., 65, 177 (1965).
Robin Ihnfeldt and J.B. Talbot. J. Electrochem. Soc., 153, G948 (2006).
Small Average (nm)
Large Average (nm)
Small Average (nm)
Large Average (nm)
2 Cu, Cu+ 170 5000 160 8107 Cu, Cu2O, CuO, Cu(OH)2 580 3300 1700 9400
10 Cu, Cu2O, CuO, Cu(OH)2 150 720 300 1600
Without Copper With CopperPossible State of CopperpH
March 19, 2007 CMP
16
FLCC
Zeta PotentialCabot alumina in 0.1M glycine and 10-3M KNO3 solution with and without 0.12mM copper
• IEP ~6.5 without copper • IEP~9.2 increased with copper
*M.R. Oliver, Chemical-Mechanical Planarization of Semiconductor Material, Springer-Verlag, Berlin (2004).
**G.A. Parks, Chem. Tevs., 65, 177 (1965).
-80
-40
0
40
80
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
pH
Zet
a P
ote
nti
al (
mV
) Without CuWith Cu
March 19, 2007 CMP
17
FLCC
Potential-pH for Copper-Glycine-Water System*[Cu]=10-4M, [Glycine]=10-1M at 250C and 1atm
• Agglomeration behavior is consistent with Pourbaix diagram
Average agglomerate size of bimodal distributions in a 1 mM KNO3 solution with various additives
Copper-Glycine-Water System
*S. Aksu and F. M. Doyle, J. Electrochemical Soc., 148, 1, B51 (2006).
Small Average (nm)
Large Average (nm)
Small Average (nm)
Large Average (nm)
2 Cu, CuHL2+ 310 8100 220 7007 Cu, CuL2 2000 1900
10 Cu, CuL2-, CuL2 1030 6300 350 2100
2 Cu, CuHL2+ 130 300 1637 Cu, CuL2 1800 1400
10 Cu, CuL2-, CuL2 1200 1500
Possible State of Copper
Without Copper With CopperSolution
0.1M Glycine
0.1M Glycine+2.0wt%
H2O2
pH
-1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16pH
E, V
vs
. SH
E
Cu2+
CuO/Cu(OH)2
CuCu2O
CuO22-CuHL2+
CuL+
CuL2
CuL2-
March 19, 2007 CMP
18
FLCC
Measuring Wafer HardnessTriboScope Nanomechanical Testing
system from Hysitron Inc.
■ Considerations
– Large applied load will increase indentation depth –
• more likely for underlying layer to affect nanohardness measurements
– Slurry solutions with high etch rates will decrease copper thickness –
• thinner copper layer more likely for underlying layer to affect measurements
•1 cm2 silicon wafer pieces sputter deposited with 30 nm Ta + 1000 nm Cu
•10 min exposure in 100 ml of slurry solution (without abrasives), then removed and dried with air and measured
Robin Ihnfeldt and J.B. Talbot. 210th Meeting Electrochem. Soc., Cancun, Mexico, Oct. 29-Nov. 3, 602, 1147 (2006).
March 19, 2007 CMP
19
FLCC
■ pH 2 – appears that state of surface is Cu metal with increase in nanohardness from underlying layer
■ pH 7 and 12 – hardness less than that of bulk metallic Cu
– Cupric hydroxide, Cu(OH)2, is most likely forming
Copper Surface in Solution
Bulk metallic Cu H~ 2.3 GPa*
Surface nanohardness of Cu on Ta/Si (100uN applied load) after exposure to 1mM KNO3 solution
*S. Chang, T. Chang, and Y. Lee, J. Electrochemical Soc., 152, (10), C657 (2005).
Ta2O5 H~9 GPa
pH Possible State of CopperContact
Depth (nm)Etch Rate (nm/min)
Copper Thickness (nm)
Nanohardness (GPa)
2 Cu, Cu+, Cu2+ 30 16 810 2.97 Cu, Cu2O, CuO, Cu(OH)2 50 9 870 1.2
12 Cu, Cu2O, CuO, Cu(OH)2 43 0 960 1.2
March 19, 2007 CMP
20
FLCC
Glycine• Surface hardness is less than that of bulk Cu at pH 2 and 12 –
– Glycine may interact with surface layer to decrease compactness
• pH 7 appears to be Cu metal with increase due to underlying layer
Glycine + H2O2
• H2O2 increases solubility of Cu-glycinate complex or increases Cu oxidation
• Surface is less than bulk Cu at pH 2 and 7 – decrease in compactness due to glycine
• pH 12 appears to be cuprous oxide, Cu2O
Copper Surface in SolutionSurface nanohardness of Cu on Ta/Si (100uN applied load) after exposure to 1mM KNO3 solution and other additives
Chemistry pHPossible State of
CopperContact
Depth (nm)Etch Rate (nm/min)
Copper Thickness (nm)
Nanohardness (GPa)
2 Cu, CuHL2+ 41 0 960 1.37 Cu, CuL2 62 6 870 2.5
12 Cu, Cu2O, CuL2 81 14 780 0.5
2 Cu, CuHL2+ 135 22 640 0.87 Cu, CuL2 122 55 330 1.1
12 Cu, Cu2O, CuL2 48 -7 1020 3.6
0.1M Glycine
0.1M Glycine + 2.0wt% H2O2
Film Growth Increased Hardness
March 19, 2007 CMP
21
FLCC
CMP Experiments
Toyoda Polishing apparatus
(UC Berkeley)– IC1000 polishing pad pre-
conditioned for 20 minutes with diamond conditioner
– Polished 2 min with Cabot alumina
Silicon wafers (100 mm dia.) with 1 mm copper on 30 nm tantalum– Total of 18 wafers polished with various slurry chemistries and at
various pH values
March 19, 2007 CMP
22
FLCC
Experimental Copper CMP MRR
MRR is <20 nm/min for all pH values without additives, with 0.1M glycine
MRR is >100 nm/min for several pH values where both glycine and H202 are present
0
5
10
15
20
2 4 6 8 10 12pH
MR
R (
nm
/m
in)
No additives
0.1M Glycine
0.01M EDTA, 0.01wt% BTA,1mM SDS, 0.1wt% H2O2
0
100
200
300
400
2 4 6 8 10 12pH
MR
R (
nm
/m
in)
0.1M Glycine, 0.1wt% H2O2
0.1M Glycine, 2wt% H2O2
0.1M Glycine, 0.01wt% BTA,1mM SDS, 0.1wt% H2O2
March 19, 2007 CMP
23
FLCC
Lou and Dornfeld CMP Model
Slurry Concentration C
Average Abrasive Size Xavg
Proportion of Active Abrasives
N
Force F & Velocity
Active Abrasive Size Xact
Wafer hardness Hw/ Slurry Chemicals &
Wafer Materials
Vol
Basic Eqn. of Material Removal: MRR = N x Vol
March 19, 2007 CMP
24
FLCC
ConclusionsColloidal Behavior • pH has greatest effect on colloidal behavior• Glycine acts as a stabilizing agent for alumina• Presence of Cu nanoparticles can increase or decrease
agglomeration depending on the state of copper in solution• Agglomeration behavior with copper is consistent with potential-
pH diagrams Nanohardness of Copper Surface• pH of the slurry affects copper surface hardness• Addition of chemical additives has large effect on the surface
hardness• State of copper on surface is consistent with potential-pH
diagrams• Under certain conditions glycine may cause decrease in copper
surface hardness
March 19, 2007 CMP
25
FLCC
Future Work
• Continue to investigate effect of copper on zeta potential and particle size– Determine state of Cu in solution– Study agglomeration as a function of time
• Initial hardness measurements show large differences in copper surface with pH and chemical addition– Determine reproducibility of hardness measurements– Determine state of Cu on surface
• Modeling – Luo and Dornfeld Model*– Incorporate experimental measurements (hardness and
agglomerate size distribution) into model and compare with experimental CMP data
*J. Luo and D. Dornfeld, IEEE Trans. Semi. Manuf., 14, 112 (2001).
March 19, 2007 CMP
26
FLCC
• Funded by FLCC Consortium through a UC Discovery grant. We gratefully acknowledge the companies involved in the UC Discovery grant: Advanced Micro Devices, Applied Materials, Atmel, Cadence, Canon, Cymer, DuPont, Ebara, Intel, KLA-Tencor, Mentor Graphics, Nikon Research, Novellus Systems, Panoramic Technologies, Photronics, Synopsis, Tokyo Electron
• Prof. Dornfeld and his research group at UC Berkeley for use of the CMP apparatus and model program
• Prof. Talke and his research group at UCSD for the use of the Hysitron Instrument.
Acknowledgments