• 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
  • Understanding Electrical Line Resistance at Advanced Semiconductor Nodes
Using Process Modeling to Enhance Device Uniformity during Self-Aligned Quadruple Patterning
October 27, 2021
Figure 1: Commercial True Wireless Stereo earbuds (Courtesy: Apple, Inc.).
Make your Voice Heard: The Latest Advances in MEMS Voice Sensors
November 18, 2021

Understanding Electrical Line Resistance at Advanced Semiconductor Nodes

Published by Sandy Wen at November 16, 2021
Categories
  • Coventor Blog
Tags
  • DRAM
  • Etch
  • Process Window Optimization
  • SEMulator3D
Figure 2.Cutaway of buried wordline spanning saddle-fin transistors.

Figure 2. Cutaway of buried wordline spanning saddle-fin transistors.

When evaluating shrinking metal linewidths in advanced semiconductor devices, bulk resistivity is not the sole materials property for deriving electrical resistance. At smaller line dimensions, local resistivity is dominated by grain boundary effects and surface scattering. Consequently, resistivity varies throughout a line, and resistance extraction needs to account for these secondary phenomena for improved resistance accuracy.

Metal resistivity at different geometries is associated with feature size ([1], [2]), with a typical relationship shown in Figure 1(a). So, one approach for resistance modeling is to set resistivity as a function of line width, based on empirical data. The results of this resistivity estimation on ideal structures can be seen in Figure 1b; the center of the thick wire displays a resistivity approaching bulk value, whereas the thin wire has a high resistivity throughout.

Figure 1. (a) Resistivity vs line width relationship. (b) Cross-sections showing the resistivity within wires of different dimensions. Bulk resistivity is achieved near the center of a thick wire, whereas resistivity is higher throughout a thin wire.

Figure 1. (a) Resistivity vs line width relationship. (b) Cross-sections showing the resistivity within wires of different dimensions. Bulk resistivity is achieved near the center of a thick wire, whereas resistivity is higher throughout a thin wire.

As a demonstration of resistance modeling, a DRAM buried wordline is modeled and its resistance extracted using the built-in capabilities of SEMulator3D®. The wordline has characteristic bumps on its underside from spanning a series of saddle-fin transistors (Figure 2), with wedge-shaped bottom regions between “saddles”. Due to this irregular shape, geometric-based resistivity has a significant impact on a narrow wordline’s resistance values (Figure 3).  The resistivities along a wordline cross-section reveal near-bulk resistivity in the center, and higher resistivity at the edges and bottom (Figure 3c).

Figure 2.Cutaway of buried wordline spanning saddle-fin transistors.

Figure 2. Cutaway of buried wordline spanning saddle-fin transistors.

 

Figure 3. (a) A buried wordline in isolation. (b) Cross-section showing the current density when voltage is applied across the line. (c) The local resistivities along a wordline cross-section reveal near-bulk resistivity in the center, and higher resistivity at the edges and bottom.

Figure 3. (a) A buried wordline in isolation. (b) Cross-section showing the current density when voltage is applied across the line. (c) The local resistivities along a wordline cross-section reveal near-bulk resistivity in the center, and higher resistivity at the edges and bottom.

 

To explore the impact of process variation on DRAM wordline resistance, a study with 200 virtual fabrication cycles was then completed using Monte Carlo simulation methods in SEMulator3D. This experiment was conducted to identify important process parameters that affect electrical resistance. Based on a linear regression analysis, significant parameters that affect electrical resistance were identified as silicon etch selectivity, mandrel etch lateral ratio, high-k dielectric thickness, and silicon etch when forming the active area (Figure 4). Using the results of this sensitivity analysis, process changes could be initiated to optimize device resistance.  In our example, wordline recess depth and etch selectivity (to active area silicon) have the greatest effect on wordline resistance (Figure 5), and they can be adjusted until a targeted wordline resistance is achieved.

Figure 4. Linear regression model for wordline resistance.

Figure 4. Linear regression model for wordline resistance.

 

Figure 5. Sensitivity analysis for wordline module enables process tuning to reach resistance target.

Figure 5. Sensitivity analysis for wordline module enables process tuning to reach resistance target.

Understanding the relationship between resistivity and device geometry is important when calculating resistance for varying metal structures with small linewidths. This understanding is critical when extracting the resistance of challenging geometries, such as those found in DRAM wordlines. Using accurate resistance extraction techniques and virtual variation studies, process parameters can be optimized to meet electrical resistance targets for DRAM devices and other advanced technologies.

References:

  1. Josell, Daniel, Sywert H. Brongersma, and Zsolt Tőkei. “Size-Dependent Resistivity in Nanoscale Interconnects.” Annual Review of Materials Research39, no. 1 (August 2009): 231–54.
  2. G Steinlesberger, M Engelhardt, G Schindler, J Kretz, W Steinhögl, E Bertagnolli, “Processing technology for the investigation of sub-50 nm copper damascene interconnects”, Solid-State Electronics, Vol. 47, Issue 7, 2003, Pages 1237-1241.
Share
Sandy Wen
Sandy Wen
Sandy Wen is a semiconductor and process integration engineer at Coventor. Previously, she worked at Applied Materials in the Etch business group in various engineering functions, including chamber engineering and yield enhancement solutions. Sandy received her MS in EE from UCLA, and BS in EECS from UC Berkeley.

Related posts

Picture of a young man using virtual reality glasses from the 2018 movie “Ready Player One” from Warner Bros.

An Explanation of the Metaverse and 5 MEMS Technologies Solutions That Will Soon Help Make It Happen

January 18, 2023

An Explanation of the Metaverse and 5 MEMS Technologies Solutions That Will Soon Help Make It Happen


Read more - An Explanation of the Metaverse and 5 MEMS Technologies Solutions That Will Soon Help Make It Happen
Figure 4 displays a single image showing how surface roughness can get transferred to materials etched or deposited later. In this image, the surface roughness has led to scumming, which in turn caused lines to get shorted. The figure shows uneven lines due to surface roughness, with material left behind that crosses two of the lines and creates a short.

Figure 4: Surface roughness can get transferred to materials etched or deposited later. Here, the surface roughness has led to scumming, which in turn caused lines to get shorted.

January 13, 2023

Modeling of Line and Surface Roughness in Semiconductor Processing


Read more - Modeling of Line and Surface Roughness in Semiconductor Processing
Figure 2. Backside power delivery using buried power rails, based on [2] (not to scale).

Figure 2. Backside power delivery using buried power rails, based on [2] (not to scale).

December 19, 2022

The Other Side of the Wafer: The Latest Developments in Backside Power Delivery


Read more - The Other Side of the Wafer: The Latest Developments in Backside Power Delivery
Figure 1:   3D Gyroscope Model example with simulated pressure contours (left), and ambient cavity pressure vs. Q-factor graph with simulated and measured results (right) (courtesy: Murata)

Figure 1:   3D Gyroscope Model example with simulated pressure contours (left), and ambient cavity pressure vs. Q-factor graph with simulated and measured results (right) (courtesy: Murata)

November 28, 2022

Understanding Q-Factors in Gas Encapsulated MEMS Inertial Sensors


Read more - Understanding Q-Factors in Gas Encapsulated MEMS Inertial Sensors

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