Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T02:19:36.778Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Xtem Sample Preparation for Failure Analysis in Semiconductor Devices Using High Energy Ion Beam Thinning

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 February 2011

E. Bugiel
E. Bugiel*
Affiliation:
Institute for Semiconductor Physics, Walter-Korsing-Str. 2, 15230 Frankfurt (Oder), Germany
Get access

Abstract

XTEM investigations are an important tool to characterize the geometry, structure and microchemical composition of semiconductor devices. Over the last 25 years, several thinning procedures have been used, based on Ar ions at about 5 kV. Common to all of them is that the thinning takes several hours, or the ion thinning has to be combined with awkward mechanical preparation steps, like dimpling.

The technique described below uses Ar ions up to 15 keV and with a total ion current of up to 0.2 mA. A maximum sputtering rate of 25 μm/h for Si is reached at an incidence angle of 6°. A low energy thinning step at 3.5 keV is used at the end to reduce the amorphization and heating of the thinnest regions. The combination of this fast ion thinning with simpler mechanical steps requiring only a final lapping step, without the need for dimpling and polishing, results in a yield of nearly 100% and a preparation time of about 3h.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 480: Symposium Z – Specimen Preparation for Transmission Electron Microscopy…IV , 1997 , 89
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1997

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

1. Heitel, B. and Meyerhoff, K., Z. Physik 165, 47, (1965)Google Scholar
2. Bach, H., J. of Non-Crystal Solids 3, 1, (1970)Google Scholar
3. Abrahams, M. S. and Buiocchi, C. J., J. Appl. Phys. 45, 3315, (1974)Google Scholar
4. Sheng, T. T. and Chang, C. C., IEEE Transactions on on Electron Devices ED, 23/6, 531, (1976)Google Scholar
5. Ham, W. E., Abrahams, M. S., Blanc, J., and Buiocchi, C. J., RCA Review 38, 351, (1977)Google Scholar
6. Sheng, T. T. and Marcus, R. B., J. Electrochem. Soc. 127/3, 737, (1980)Google Scholar
7. Henghuber, G., Oppolzer, H., and Schild, S., Siemens Forschungs- und Entwicklungsbericht 9/6, (1980)Google Scholar
8. Föll, , Ho, P.S., and Tu, K.N., J. Appl. Phys. 52/1, 25, (1981)Google Scholar
9. Vanhellemont, J., Bender, H., Claeys, C., van Landuyt, J., Declerck, G., and Amelincks, S., and Overstraeten, R. van, Ultramicroscopy 11, 303, (1983)Google Scholar
10. Bama, A., Proc. of the Eight European Congress on Electron Microscopy, Budapest 1984, 107 Google Scholar
11. Gaboriand, R. J., J Electron. Mater. 12, 837, (1983)Google Scholar
12. Chu, S. N. and Sheng, T. T., J Electrochem. Soc. Solid-State Science and Technology, Nov. 1984, 2663 Google Scholar
13. Klepeis, S., Benedict, J., and Anderson, R., MRS Proc. 115, 197, (1987)Google Scholar
14. Schwander, P., Kisielowski, C., Seibt, M., Baumann, F.H., Kim, Y., and Ourmazd, A., Phys. Rev. Lett. 71, 4150, (1993)Google Scholar
15. Bugiel, E., Zaumseil, P., Lubnow, A., Wehmann, H.-H., and Schlachetzki, A., phys. stat. sol. (a) 132, 115, (1992)Google Scholar
16. Hoppner, W., Bugiel, E., and Haupold, G., EDO Proc. 23, 77, (1990)Google Scholar