• Skip to main content
  • LOG IN
  • REGISTER
Coventor_New_LogoCoventor_New_LogoCoventor_New_LogoCoventor_New_Logo
  • COMPANY
    • ABOUT
    • CAREERS
    • PRESS RELEASE
    • PRESS COVERAGE
    • EVENTS
  • PRODUCTS
    • SEMulator3D®
      Semiconductor Process Modeling
    • CoventorMP®
      MEMS Design Automation
      • CoventorWare®
      • MEMS+®
  • SOLUTIONS
    • SEMICONDUCTOR SOLUTIONS
    • MEMS SOLUTIONS
  • RESOURCES
    • CASE STUDIES
    • BLOG
    • VIDEOS
  • CONTACT
  • SUPPORT
Contact Us
✕
  • Home
  • Coventor Blog
  • A Lego Block Approach to MEMS Design
Example of a 3D NAND flash memory array.
Defect Evolution in 3D NAND Flash
March 12, 2015
MEMS-CMOS Autonomous Switched Oscillator presented by Guilherme Brondani Torr (© imec) [1]
MEMS System Co-Design at DTIP
May 1, 2015

A Lego Block Approach to MEMS Design

Published by Coventor at April 6, 2015
Categories
  • Coventor Blog
Tags
  • CoventorMP
  • MEMS
Jörg Doblaski of XFAB presented this conceptual view of the state of MEMS design vs. CMOS design

Jörg Doblaski of XFAB presented this conceptual view of the state of MEMS design vs. CMOS design

The Smart Systems Integration conference took place in Copenhagen on March 10-12, 2015. We were invited to join a panel discussion with the title “Towards a “Lego block principle” for heterogonous systems design including MEMS and electronics –Choose and put together-fit”. The capital of Denmark felt like the natural place to discuss a “Lego block principle” and so I happily accepted to represent Coventor in the discussion. Several other MEMS and EDA representatives must have felt the same and we ended up with a pretty interesting mix of people from industry and academia, including (from left to right) Prof. Mirco Meiners from the University of Bremen, Anssi Blomqvist from Murata Electronics Oy, myself (and no I’m not sleeping), Ahmed Hussein Osman from Cadence, Prof. Ralf Sommer from the IMMS, and Peter Merz from X-Fab.

The introduction to the panel was given by Tobias Maier from Robert Bosch who emphasized the widely felt frustration about the lack of a standard design methodology for MEMS. The essence of the current MEMS design flow (or lack thereof) was nicely captured in a slide by Jörg Doblaski of XFAB, presented earlier in the conference:

Jörg Doblaski of XFAB presented this conceptual view of the state of MEMS design vs. CMOS design
Jörg Doblaski of XFAB presented this conceptual view of the state of MEMS design vs. CMOS design

The digital and analog CMOS design flow is well defined and well supported by foundry PDK’s and EDA software tools. CMOS designers work in a well-defined environment of different hierarchies and abstraction levels that are all built around the idea, that all complexity can be boiled down to a network of identical building blocks: transistors and lumped passive devices. In essence, CMOS designers use the same set of building blocks to create ever more complicated networks. Of course, CMOS designers don’t actually care about transistors; technology developers do. EDA tools with PDKs shield designers from such “details” and allow them to focus on functional blocks such as differential pairs, current mirrors, common-source, common-gate and common-drain circuits.

So, why is MEMS different? Why do MEMS, now a multi-billion dollar industry, still seem to defy an approach that has proven so successful for CMOS design? Is there a transistor equivalent in MEMS or can MEMS at least be reduced to a set of standard (Lego like) building blocks? … and this is how our panel discussion got started.

The topic surly didn’t feel all that new. As a matter of fact, I clearly remember having had a similar discussion 15 years ago with my former PhD supervisor Reinhard Neul who, funnily enough, happened to sit on the panel as well. He was actually the guy taking the pictures (the empty chair on the right is his). People familiar with my work will understand that my position on this subject is to say the least somewhat “biased”. Starting with my PhD at Robert Bosch and later as lead developer of Coventor’s Architect® and MEMS+® software for MEMS design, I’ve tried to prove that a wide variety of MEMS designs can built up from a library of basic building blocks. No, there is not a single building block such as a transistor in MEMS. But yes, MEMS devices can be assembled from a set of building blocks such as plates, beams, comb drives, electrodes and anchors!

Have we at Coventor fully convinced the MEMS design community that a library-based MEMS design flow is possible or even desirable? I would love to say: YES!
The truth is, as always, more complicated and our panel discussion was a lively proof of that. As a matter of fact there are MEMS designers who cherish and defend their freedom to draw about any idea which comes to mind in a layout editor without concern for restrictions imposed by a MEMS component library. Of course, at the end, even the biggest libertarian needs to submit to the design rules imposed by the fab or foundry. And here comes an interesting twist, nicely highlighted by the already mentioned presentation and paper by Jörg Doblaski of XFAB. Apparently, foundries hate freehand layouts, almost as much as I do. Jörg’s presentation nicely summarizes the foundry’s difficulties with checking designs rules on “freehand” layouts. It’s exceedingly difficult to set up automated DRC’s which in fact are written for MEMS building blocks such as combs, plates and anchors. Design rules clearly limit the width of comb fingers and suspension beams. Anchors and plate perforations are clearly defined as well. So, if design rules are actually written for MEMS building blocks, should MEMS designers not be encouraged to use a library based design approach in the first place? Many design rules would simply be imposed by a restricted set of building blocks and therefore don’t need to be checked after the design is complete. MEMS designs would, at least to a certain degree, be “correct by construction”. Well, at this point, I guess, I can no longer hide what I think about all this and I made my point in the panel discussion. Not surprisingly I found a strong ally in Peter Merz from X-Fab. Actually there is a history to all this. We (XFAB, Coventor and Ahmed Hussein of Cadence) have “conspired” over recent years to create what Jörg announced to be the world first “MEMS-specific design automation enablement based on process design kits (PDK).” I highly recommend reading Jörg’s paper in the Smart Systems Integration conference proceedings.

Share
Coventor
Coventor

Related posts

Figure 1: A virtual model of a GAA FET showing residual SiGe after the channel release step. Process engineers have to make a trade-off between silicon loss and residual SiGe.(b) Variation in residual SiGe as a function of the channel width and etch lateral ratio. The higher the channel width, the higher the lateral ratio needed to etch away all the SiGe. Channel widths are shown as delta values from the nominal value of 30 nm.

Figure 1: A virtual model of a GAA FET showing residual SiGe after the channel release step. Process engineers have to make a trade-off between silicon loss and residual SiGe.(b) Variation in residual SiGe as a function of the channel width and etch lateral ratio. The higher the channel width, the higher the lateral ratio needed to etch away all the SiGe. Channel widths are shown as delta values from the nominal value of 30 nm.

June 14, 2023

Improving Gate All Around (GAA) Transistor Performance using Virtual Process Window Exploration


Read more - Improving Gate All Around (GAA) Transistor Performance using Virtual Process Window Exploration
Figure 1 displays a single cell of a conventional DRAM that consists of 2 Word Lines (WLs), a Bit Line (BL) and 2 Storage Node Contacts (SNC) in Figure 1(a). There are 3 images in the figure. The Saddle Fin is produced during the WL etch step (prior to WL metal deposition) and is located below the cell wordline (Figure 1(b), right center inside a yellow dotted circle). The Saddle Fin structure can be seen in detail by making a vertical cut in the wordline direction (Fig.1(b), right). During device simulation, the Saddle Fin performance can be measured by virtually cropping a transistor and adding ports at the Gate, Source and Drain after an SNC Process (Fig.1(c), showing the gate, source and drain).
May 30, 2023

Improving DRAM Device Performance Through Saddle Fin Process Optimization


Read more - Improving DRAM Device Performance Through Saddle Fin Process Optimization
Figure 6 (left to right): Different profiles using pattern dependence for the antenna and sharp head shapes. a) Antenna shape with POR flow (b) Antenna profile with a gate CD of 26nm (c) Sharp head profile with a gate CD of 28nm (d) Sharp head profile with an etch.

Figure 6 (left to right): Different profiles using pattern dependence for the antenna and sharp head shapes. a) Antenna shape with POR flow (b) Antenna profile with a gate CD of 26nm (c) Sharp head profile with a gate CD of 28nm (d) Sharp head profile with an etch.

April 13, 2023

The Impact of Metal Gate Recess Profile on Transistor Resistance and Capacitance


Read more - The Impact of Metal Gate Recess Profile on Transistor Resistance and Capacitance
Figure 1a (left) displays the process of performing Physical Vapor Deposition (PVD), including Cu bombardment and filling of voids. Figure 1b (right) displays the process of performing Ion Beam Etch (IBE), including ion beam bombardment, mask shadowing and etch regions.

Fig 1a Physical Vapor Deposition (PVD); Fig 1b Ion Beam Etch (IBE)

March 22, 2023

A Deposition and Etch Technique to Lower Resistance of Semiconductor Metal Lines


Read more - A Deposition and Etch Technique to Lower Resistance of Semiconductor Metal Lines

Comments are closed.

Product Information

  • Product Offerings
  • Technical Support & Training
  • Licensing
  • System Requirements

Resources

  • Blog
  • Case Studies
  • Videos
  • 2018 MEMS Design Contest

Company

  • About
  • Press
  • Partners & Programs
  • Contact
© Copyright Coventor Inc., A Lam Research Company, All Rights Reserved
Privacy Policy • Terms of Use
Contact Us
  • LOG IN
  • REGISTER