Static capacitance contrast of LSI covered with an insulator film in low accelerating voltage scanning electron microscope

Ura, Katsumi; Aoyagi, Sadao

doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.jmicro.a023780

Cited by 20 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Interestingly, an imaging depth up to 1000 nm was calculated using geometric relations under different stage tilting angles [4]. While it was generally agreed that the contrast of subsurface CNTs originated from variations in secondary electron (SE) yield due to charge contrast [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17], direct SE emission from nanotubes much beyond a few 10 nm depth should not be detectable due to the shallow escape depth of SEs [18]. In general, the depth at which CNTs can be imaged by SEM in polymer composites is still a controversial topic, with estimates ranging from less than 50 nanometers [5], to hundreds of nanometers [6] or several micrometers [7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

New insights into subsurface imaging of carbon nanotubes in polymer composites via scanning electron microscopy

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite many studies of subsurface imaging of carbon nanotube (CNT)-polymer composites via scanning electron microscopy (SEM), significant controversy exists concerning the imaging depth and contrast mechanisms. We studied CNT-polyimide composites and, by three-dimensional reconstructions of captured stereo-pair images, determined that the maximum SEM imaging depth was typically hundreds of nanometers. The contrast mechanisms were investigated over a broad range of beam accelerating voltages from 0.3 to 30 kV, and ascribed to modulation by embedded CNTs of the effective secondary electron (SE) emission yield at the polymer surface. This modulation of the SE yield is due to non-uniform surface potential distribution resulting from current flows due to leakage and electron beam induced current. The importance of an external electric field on SEM subsurface imaging was also demonstrated. The insights gained from this study can be generally applied to SEM nondestructive subsurface imaging of conducting nanostructures embedded in dielectric matrices such as graphene-polymer composites, silicon-based single electron transistors, high resolution SEM overlay metrology or e-beam lithography, and have significant implications in nanotechnology.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

New insights into subsurface imaging of carbon nanotubes in polymer composites via scanning electron microscopy

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In general, the charging effect is caused by the accumulation of static electric charges on the specimen surface, which results in many problems. [8][9][10][11] For example, the negative charge would flip the secondary electron from the surface. The negative charge would also reduce the landing energy of the incident electrons, and it would increase the field between the surface and secondary electron detector.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Charging Effects on SEM/SIM Contrast of Metal/Insulator System in Various Metallic Coating Conditions

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scanning electron microscope (SEM) and scanning ion microscope (SIM) observations were performed to investigate the charging effect and the related contrast variation for images of conductive and non-conductive specimens under electron and Ga þ ion beam irradiations. The contrast variation in the specimens was investigated by changing the coating conditions. It was found that the contrast in conductive specimens was basically caused by differences in atomic number and that the charging effect in conductive specimens is generally smaller than that in nonconductive specimens. On the other hand, the SEM contrast of non-conductive specimens varied widely, depending on the coating conditions. These contrast variations were found to be caused by negative charges accumulated on the surface of the specimens. The SIM contrast of nonconductive specimens changed to dark when the coating condition was insufficient. The contrast variations were found to be caused by the accumulation of positive charges on the surface of specimens.

show abstract

“…Noninvasive tomographic techniques that simultaneously give a sufficiently high resolution, as well as a large enough field of view at depths relevant for semiconductor structures, do not exist. Helium ion microscopy has previously been used to image subsurface features under a thin Si 3 N 4 [3] using static capacitative contrast [4]. Here, we show how helium ion microscopy (HIM) can be used to image the subsurface formation of a Pd-Si alloy at sample depths exceeding 114 nm.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Subsurface analysis of semiconductor structures with helium ion microscopy

Gastel

Hlawacek

Zandvliet

et al. 2012

Microelectronics Reliability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Static capacitance contrast of LSI covered with an insulator film in low accelerating voltage scanning electron microscope

Cited by 20 publications

References 0 publications

New insights into subsurface imaging of carbon nanotubes in polymer composites via scanning electron microscopy

New insights into subsurface imaging of carbon nanotubes in polymer composites via scanning electron microscopy

Charging Effects on SEM/SIM Contrast of Metal/Insulator System in Various Metallic Coating Conditions

Subsurface analysis of semiconductor structures with helium ion microscopy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About