Presentation V

A Wafer-Scale CMP Modeling Framework, Extended to Industrial Scale Semiconductor Manufacturing
Gagan Srivastava, C. Fred Higgs III

Carnegie Mellon University Particle Flow & Tribology Laboratory
Annual STLE Meeting May 8, 2013 Detroit, Michigan

Overview

Introduction and motivation Recap of PAML-lite

Modeling of physical interactions Representative results
Model Expansions

Oscillations Industrial Applications
Conclusion
Carnegie Mellon University
Particle Flow & Tribology Laboratory

Core competencies Our strength is that we develop:
Experiments Simulations Predictions
Granular flows
Powder lubrication
One of the most difficult areas of tribology relates to the multi-physics behavior of particulate materials large or small. They can wear and damage relatively sliding materials, or they can be used to protect materials.
Slurry
Motivation
Slurry
Wafer Pad
CMP, often results in defective output. To increase the yield and minimize waste, accurate modeling of CMP is required.
CMP : Feature Scale Non-uniform Fluid Pressure

Affects Dishing and Erosion
Dishing only
Before CMP Copper Copper seed Tantalum Silicon Dioxide Silicon
Erosion only
Ideal CMP
Dishing and Erosion
Higgs, et al., International Asia Tribology Conference, 2002

CMP : Wafer Scale
Differential wear across the wafer
Wafer curvature
Material removal map on a polished wafer Nolan and Cadien (2012)
Variation of mean material removal with wafer radius of curvature Tseng et al. (1999)
History of Chemical Mechanical Polishing Modeling

Empirical
Preston (1927), Zhao and Shi ( ), Boning (1990s) Runnels (1994 ), Sundararajan and Thakurta (1994) Zhao and Chang (2002), Luo and Dornfeld (2001) Shan et al. (2000), Higgs et al. (2005), Jin et al. (2005)
Fluid hydrodynamics based erosion wear
Contact mechanics
EHL / Mixed Lubrication (no wear)
Empirical Models
MRR = k PV H
Zhao and Shi (1998)
Boning and associates (1997)

Empirical Models
Always include an all-purpose, empirical constant 'K'
Fluid Hydrodynamics and Erosion Wear Based Models
Runnels and Eyman (1994) Only load carrying capacity No wear modeling Sundararajan et al. (1999)
11
Fluid Hydrodynamics and Erosion Wear Based Models
Ignored the effect of solid-solid contact between wafer and pad. Unable to capture the effect of using different abrasives and pads
Contact Mechanics Based Models

Particle Mono-layer Model Soft Pad Model
Known Particle Size Distribution
Material Removed Per Particle
Zhao and Chang (2002) Luo and Dornfeld (2001)

13
Contact Mechanics Based Models
Attempt to modify the Preston's equation by calculating Preston's coefficient (k) based on known parameters. Ignored the effect of the slurry.
EHL / Mixed Lubrication Based Models
1-D EHL Model
2-D Mixed Lubrication Model
Shan et al. (2000)
Jin et al. (2005)
15
EHL / Mixed Lubrication Based Models
Ignored the effect of particles. No wear calculation.
16
CMP : A Mixed Lubrication System
18
Slurry Flows: Particles Augmented Mixed Lubrication (PAML)

(a) Other PAML Tribosystems (b)
Bearing wear via lubricant debris
Artificial hip wear
(c) (d)
Teeth wear Disk drive contamination wear

19
CMP Model: Particle Augmented Mixed Lubrication (PAML)

Slurry
Fluid Mechanics Particle Dynamics Contact Mechanics
Tribosurfaces
Wear
20
A deterministic model capturing major physical phenomenon :

Fluid hydrodynamics (3D Navier Stokes Equations) Contact mechanics (Winkler Elastic Foundation) Particle dynamics (Eulerian Lagrangian treatment) Wear (Abrasive wear due to spherical particles) Addresses asperity scale issues: dishing, erosion
21
Computationally very expensive. Could only model very small domains, at a very slow computational speed.
22
Objective
To develop an experimentally validated, computationally efficient framework, without sacrificing major physical phenomenon in action during CMP
Extend the model to industrial scale
PAML lite
(Computations: From Days to Minutes)
23
Virtual CMP
PAML lite
Fluid Mechanics
Film thickness
h = h(r,)
Contact Mechanics
Separation
d = d(r,)
Particle Dynamics
Uniform Concentration Size distribution
Wear
Material Removal Rate MRR = f(,w,,V)
Hydrodynamic Pressure
p = p[h, , ]
Elastic Contact
= (z, F, E)
Active Particles
Nactive=f (G, , )
Equilibrium
Particle Indentation
= f (, Hw*, pd)
PAML-lite is a wafer scale model

PAML - lite : Fluid Mechanics

Reynolds Equation in Polar Coordinates (Beschorner et al. 2009)
25
PAML - lite : Contact Mechanics

o o o
Wafer : A flat rigid punch pressed against the pad Pad : Winkler Elastic Foundation (Johnson, 1983)
Asperities act as independent springs Deformation in the plane of the pad is neglected Normal deformation due to tangential shear loading is neglected
LOAD
WAFE R
PARALLEL SPRINGS RIGID WALL
26
PAML - lite : Contact Mechanics

o o o
Wafer : A flat rigid punch pressed against the pad Pad : Winkler Elastic Foundation (Johnson, 1983)
Asperities act as independent springs Deformation in the plane of the pad is neglected Normal deformation due to tangential shear loading is neglected
LOAD
WAFE R
PARALLEL SPRINGS RIGID WALL
27
PAML - lite : Wear

Soft pad model given by Luo and Dornfeld (2003) is implemented Abrasive wear due to nano-particles getting trapped between a pad asperity and the wafer Total wear at an asperity contact depends on:
o o
Number of active particles (Particles participating in the wear event) Average wear (Material removed by a particle with diameter equal to the average diameter of active particles)
Abrasive particle sizes follow normal distribution
28
PAML - lite : Model Flowchart

START Guess ,,0 Film thickness : h (,,0) Compute new: ,,
Find: fluid pressure p(r,)
Find: contact stress (r,)
Fz,Mx, My = 0 YES Equilibrium orientation {,,}, p(r,), (r,) Calculate Active Particles
NO
Calculate Average Wear
Calculate Total Wear

29
PAML - lite : Model Flowchart

START Guess ,,0 Film thickness : h (,,0)
Reynold's Equation Winkler Foundation
Compute new: ,,
Find: fluid pressure p(r,)

Integrator
Find: contact stress (r,)
Fz,Mx, My = 0 YES Equilibrium orientation {,,}, p(r,), (r,) Calculate Active Particles
NO Root Finder
Calculate Average Wear
Calculate Total Wear

30
Modeling Parameters
Pad Properties Model Simulated Hardness Elastic Modulus Asperity Distribution Pad Thickness Roughness Poissons Ratio IC 1000 5.0 MPa 300 MPa Random Gaussian 1.3 mm 10 m 0.4
Wafer Properties Hardness Elastic Modulus Poissons Ratio 2.0 GPa 110 GPa 0.16
Slurry Properties Particle Material Particle Density Particle Size Distribution Mean Particle Radius Standard Deviation of Particle Radius Fluid Density Fluid Viscosity
Silica 2000 kg / m3 Gaussian 70 m 15 m 1000 kg / m3 0.001 Pa - s

31
Results: Interfacial slurry pressure
(Osorno, 2005) Experiments
33
Results: Interfacial slurry pressure
Increasing from highly negative values
(Osorno, 2005) Experiments
34
Results: Contact Stress on Pad
max = 800 KPa

35
Results: Evolution of Wafer Wear Over Time
t=0
t>0
t = t1
t = 2t1
t = 3t1
Soft-EHL and Wear Modeling of CMP (wafer-scale)

Application: CMP
Virtual CMP
(Multiphysics fluid structure interaction (FSI) & Wear)
Wafer-scale mixed lubrication problem is being computed in silico. The evolution of wear, fluid pressure and contact stress is known.
Soft-EHL and Wear Modeling of CMP (wafer-scale)

Application: CMP
Virtual CMP
(Multiphysics fluid structure interaction (FSI) & Wear)
Wafer-scale mixed lubrication problem is being computed in silico. The evolution of wear, fluid pressure and contact stress is known.
Results: Material Removal Rate

MRR vs Normal Load
Experiments
Terrell and Higgs (2007) The model has excellent predictions for lower loads ( < 15 PSI), but then requires improved accuracy for higher loads.
39
Breadth of Application
PAML lite
Extending to Industrial Scale Manufacturing 1. Oscillating wafer carrier 2. Multi-wafer carrier
40
Oscillating Head
The wafer carrier oscillates to-and-fro with respect to the pad center
commons.wikikmedia.org
Parametric Study: PAML-lite (non-Oscillating Wafer)

Hydrodynamic pressure and wafer wear with varying separation Increased separation Increased average pressure
Increased separation Reduced wear
Parametric Study: PAML-lite (non-Oscillating Wafer)
The eccentricity (separation between the wafer and the pad axis of rotation clearly affects the polishing behavior)
Oscillating Head
Oscillating Head
GnP Poli 300 Polisher

Oscillating Head
PAML-lite GnP Poli 300 Polisher
Oscillating Head: Comparison with stationary head

Variation in MRR with increasing applied load
MRR vs Load for Carrier Oscillation

400 350 300 Non-oscillating Oscillating
MRR (nm/min)
250 200 150 100 50 0 0 2 4 6 8
Oscillation Amplitude: 0.15 m Frequency: 40 Hz
10 12 14 16 18 20
Load (PSI)
Oscillating Head: Effect of oscillations

Variation in MRR with oscillation parameters
MRR vs Oscillation Amplitude

350 300 250
MRR vs Oscillation Angular Frequency

350 300 250
MRR (nm/min)
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25
MRR (nm/min)
200 150 100 50 0
200 150 100 50 0
20
40
60
80
100
Amplitude (m)
Frequency (Hz)
Load : 6 PSI Angular Frequency : 60 Hz

Load : 6 PSI Amplitude : 0.2 m

Multi-wafer carriers
At the industrial scale, it is expensive to polish one wafer at a time Larger carriers are designed to hold multiple wafers to reduce power and slurry usage We observe motion at three places: velocity of the pad (P), velocity of the carrier (C) and the velocity of the wafer (W)
49
Multi-wafer carriers: Pad and the Carrier

Individual Wafers on Pad Animation
Carrier on Pad (Equilibrium Animation)
Individual Wafer Wear Animation
50
Multi-wafer carriers: Effect of Parameters
Normalized MRR vs Load (for multiple wafers)
51
Conclusions
A new multiphysics framework, PAML lite was introduced that

coupled fluid mechanics, contact mechanics and abrasive wear
Wafer-scale phenomena are modeled Wafer scale defects can

be monitored
The flexibility of the model allows expansion to realistic polishing

systems Oscillating carrier and multi-wafer carrier
The expanded model can be used to monitor effects of untouched

parameters, to enhance efficiency
52
THANK YOU
53
53
APPENDIX
54
54

Presentation V

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Presentation V

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Wafer-Scale CMP Modeling Framework, Extended to Industrial Scale Semiconductor Manufacturing

Gagan Srivastava, C. Fred Higgs III

Annual STLE Meeting May 8, 2013 Detroit, Michigan

Modeling of physical interactions Representative results

Oscillations Industrial Applications

Carnegie Mellon University

Particle Flow & Tribology Laboratory

Particle Flow & Tribology Laboratory

Particle Flow & Tribology Laboratory

CMP : Feature Scale Non-uniform Fluid Pressure

Dishing and Erosion

Higgs, et al., International Asia Tribology Conference, 2002

Particle Flow & Tribology Laboratory

CMP : Wafer Scale

Differential wear across the wafer

Material removal map on a polished wafer Nolan and Cadien (2012)

Carnegie Mellon University

Particle Flow & Tribology Laboratory

History of Chemical Mechanical Polishing Modeling

Fluid hydrodynamics based erosion wear

EHL / Mixed Lubrication (no wear)

Carnegie Mellon University

Particle Flow & Tribology Laboratory

Zhao and Shi (1998)

Boning and associates (1997)

Particle Flow & Tribology Laboratory

Always include an all-purpose, empirical constant 'K'

Carnegie Mellon University

Particle Flow & Tribology Laboratory

Fluid Hydrodynamics and Erosion Wear Based Models

Particle Flow & Tribology Laboratory

Fluid Hydrodynamics and Erosion Wear Based Models

Carnegie Mellon University

Particle Flow & Tribology Laboratory

Contact Mechanics Based Models

Material Removed Per Particle

Zhao and Chang (2002) Luo and Dornfeld (2001)

Particle Flow & Tribology Laboratory

Contact Mechanics Based Models

Carnegie Mellon University

Particle Flow & Tribology Laboratory

EHL / Mixed Lubrication Based Models

1-D EHL Model

2-D Mixed Lubrication Model

Shan et al. (2000)

Jin et al. (2005)

Carnegie Mellon University

Particle Flow & Tribology Laboratory

EHL / Mixed Lubrication Based Models

Ignored the effect of particles. No wear calculation.

Carnegie Mellon University

Particle Flow & Tribology Laboratory

CMP : A Mixed Lubrication System

Carnegie Mellon University

Particle Flow & Tribology Laboratory

Slurry Flows: Particles Augmented Mixed Lubrication (PAML)

Bearing wear via lubricant debris

Artificial hip wear

Teeth wear Disk drive contamination wear

Particle Flow & Tribology Laboratory

CMP Model: Particle Augmented Mixed Lubrication (PAML)

Carnegie Mellon University

Particle Flow & Tribology Laboratory