IEEE/SEMI 1998 IEEE/SEMI Advanced Semiconductor Manufacturing Conference and Workshop (Cat. No.98CH36168)
DOI: 10.1109/asmc.1998.731619
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Cu CMP with orbital technology: summary of the experience

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3

Citation Types

0
10
0

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 2 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Under such circumstances, CMP will maintain the feature profile without any further step height reduction. The dishing model by Saka et al [12] follows the approach of Gotkis et al [5] and is also similar to the contact mechanics model due to Vlassak [16]. It can also deliver the complete dishing profile, but will also require an iterative numerical solution procedure.…”
mentioning
confidence: 97%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Under such circumstances, CMP will maintain the feature profile without any further step height reduction. The dishing model by Saka et al [12] follows the approach of Gotkis et al [5] and is also similar to the contact mechanics model due to Vlassak [16]. It can also deliver the complete dishing profile, but will also require an iterative numerical solution procedure.…”
mentioning
confidence: 97%
“…The physical insight for feature scale model based on direct wafer-pad contact is given by Warnock [17] and Gotkis et al [5]. Warnock points out that depending on the pad flexibility, polishing rate at any given point is affected by its surrounding topography, i.e., high area will experience higher removal rate because of higher pressure at that point.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Based on the understanding of the CMP process, researchers have modeled the feature scale surface evolution in two different ways: one group (e.g., Runnels 1996 andYao et al 2000) assumes there is a fluid layer between wafer and pad while the other group assumes direct wafer-pad contact. For the latter, there are also two kinds of models: one implies only high areas on the wafer feature have direct contact with pad and low areas are free of any loading and is not polished (e.g., Elbel et al 1998, Chekina 1998and Saka et al 2001; the other assumes both high and low areas contact with pad (e.g., Gotkis et al 1998, Chen and Lee 1999, Vlassak 2001and Saka et al 2001. The major assumptions in Chen and Lee (1999) model are: (a) the pressure difference between the high area and the low area is proportional to the step height; (b) higher area will experience higher pressure.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the model does not show the effects of wafer feature geometry, such as linewidth, pitch and pattern density, and pad bending influ ence. Gotkis et al (1998) and Saka et al (2001) have the same dishing model and it only con siders the case when the removal rates on metal region and on dielectric region are the same.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation