Paper
27 December 1996 Evaluation criteria for e-beam mask writing systems
Sheldon M. Kugelmass, John T. Poreda, Carl M. Rose
Author Affiliations +
Abstract
Mask makers generally specify Critical Dimension (CD) Uniformity for customer product plates as a composite value. This must include the contributions of machine systematics such as deflection field distortions and stripe butting and external error sources such as resist processing and measurement. This broad definition requires that a line at any location within the quality area must be within spec. Manufacturers of electron beam lithography equipment have traditionally taken a more component-based approach: separating CD Uniformity from other lithography error sources by using a test pattern in which features are written at the center of the writing stripe. This approach removes the effect of field distortion and stripe butting error. These intrastripe and interstripe errors are evaluated in terms of their impact on placement accuracy but not CD control. Another issue that clouds the evaluation of CD Uniformity is the definition of the specification itself. Some in the industry represented CD Uniformity in terms of range while others use a 3(sigma) value. Rarely does a specification include the data sample size. Lepton has adopted a new approach to the evaluation of CD Uniformity for EBES4: CD Uniformity is evaluated in terms of both global and local performance. Global CD Uniformity incorporates effects of beam stability, depth of focus and materials effects while Local CD Uniformity addresses the impacts of deflection distortion and stripe butting. This paper focuses on Local CD Uniformity and the contribution of Stripe Butting to that specification. A methodology will be presented which makes use of a test cell containing features not fractured by stripe or cell boundaries (off-boundary) as well as features bisected by these boundaries (on-boundary). The data for a number of plates are analyzed in terms of range and 3(sigma) as well as being evaluated as a function of sample size. In addition, traditional butting evaluation techniques such as the placement based, `railroad track' method and the `point by point' CD method are used for purposes of comparison.
© (1996) COPYRIGHT Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE). Downloading of the abstract is permitted for personal use only.
Sheldon M. Kugelmass, John T. Poreda, and Carl M. Rose "Evaluation criteria for e-beam mask writing systems", Proc. SPIE 2884, 16th Annual BACUS Symposium on Photomask Technology and Management, (27 December 1996); https://doi.org/10.1117/12.262822
Lens.org Logo
CITATIONS
Cited by 2 scholarly publications.
Advertisement
Advertisement
RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS
Get copyright permission  Get copyright permission on Copyright Marketplace
KEYWORDS
Critical dimension metrology

Photomasks

Leptons

Lithography

Composites

Electron beam lithography

Materials processing

RELATED CONTENT

Comparison of state-of-the-art lithography tools
Proceedings of SPIE (February 15 1994)
Technical performance of the ALTA-3000 laser writer
Proceedings of SPIE (December 07 1994)
Full-field imprinting of sub-40 nm patterns
Proceedings of SPIE (March 20 2008)
Carbon fiber composite photomask stage component
Proceedings of SPIE (September 28 1999)
Mask lithography assessment for 45 nm node technology
Proceedings of SPIE (November 07 2005)
Lithographic simulation: a review
Proceedings of SPIE (November 09 2001)

Back to Top