Nanoimprinting lithography on 200mm wafers for optical applications

Chaix, N.; Landis, S.; Gourgon, C.; Merino, S.; Lambertini, V.; Durand, G.; Perret, C.

doi:10.1016/j.mee.2007.01.132

Cited by 9 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 11 publications

(10 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Nevertheless, figure 7 shows that even for a 10 min imprint, i.e. a configuration very close to a complete filling [37], G for a patterned stamp is only 2.4 larger than G for a flat stamp. This clearly demonstrates that the fracture mechanism related to the feature sidewall is different from pure adhesion.…”

Section: Limitation Of Full Wafer Characterization For a Patterned Stampmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…First, even with a simple stamp design (line arrays in the X and Y directions) a perfect knowledge of both S adh and S fric is required to extract the friction contribution to energy dissipation during stamp removal. Increasing the printing time from 5 to 10 min [37] leads to a better filling of the microscopic frame around the 250 nm dense line array, which is already filled after 2 min. As a consequence both S adh and S fric increase with imprinting time, and therefore the effective release rate energy too.…”

Section: Limitation Of Full Wafer Characterization For a Patterned Stampmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Quantitative characterizations of a nanopatterned bonded wafer: force determination for nanoimprint lithography stamp removal

Landis¹,

Chaix²,

Gourgon³

et al. 2008

Nanotechnology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The nanoimprint lithography process consists of two mechanical steps: molding and stamp removal. While many publications dealing with anti-sticking layer properties or the understanding of polymer flow during imprinting have recently been published, only a few studies have been carried out to deeply characterize the demolding step. Regarding the small amount of theoretical work dedicated to this issue, in this paper both experimental and first theoretical approaches are proposed to characterize the demolding process in a peeling scheme. Full 200 mm stamp and imprinted wafers were used to identify the experimental limitation of such a full wafer peeling demolding scheme. A rectangular stamp and substrate samples with or without nanoscale features combined with an augmented beam theory are proposed to extract quantitative data for the required demolding force as well as the friction stress along the feature sidewall. Therefore both adhesion and friction forces were characterized on single stamp structures.

show abstract

Section: Limitation Of Full Wafer Characterization For a Patterned Stampmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Limitation Of Full Wafer Characterization For a Patterned Stampmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantitative characterizations of a nanopatterned bonded wafer: force determination for nanoimprint lithography stamp removal

Landis¹,

Chaix²,

Gourgon³

et al. 2008

Nanotechnology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is the field for micro-optics, photonics, microfluidics and a vast number of sensory devices (Glinsner et al, 2007). Chaix et al, described how NIL was developed on 200 mm wafers for the fabrication of two optical devices: parts for optical encoders and organic light emitting diodes with enhanced light extraction efficiency (Chaix et al, 2007). NIL is also ideally suited for the fabrication of polymer nanophotonics and waveguide devices with submicron critical dimensions, defined over large areas.…”

Section: Optical Elementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nanoimprint Lithography

Lan¹,

Ding²

2010

Lithography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8] Nanoimprint lithography is one of the most promising low-cost, high-throughput technologies for manufacturing nanostructures. As the inventor Chou reported recently during the 20 th International Microprocess and Nanotechnology Conference MNC2007 in Kyoto (Japan) 9 that the NIL technology could be considered to be in the 1990's in its childhood in the early 2000's and now entering its adolescence.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%