Paper Titles

Impact of RF Oxygen Plasma on Thermal Oxide Etch-Rate
p.125

I: Ultra-Shallow Junction Cleaning: Metrology for Evaluating Dopant Loss and Substrate Erosion
p.129

II: Ultra-Shallow Junction Cleaning: Methodologies for Process and Chemistry Optimization
p.133

Effect of Dopants on the Dissolution Behavior of Silicon Substrates in HF-Based Cleaning Solutions
p.139

The Effect of Various Process Induced Damages on Wet Etching Rate Difference
p.143

How Bubbles (Can) Clean
p.151

Aging Phenomena in the Removal of Nano-Particles from Si Wafers
p.155

Adhesion and Removal of Silica and Ceria Particles on the Wafer Surfaces in STI and Poly Si CMP
p.159

Particle-Substrate Interaction Forces in a Non-Polar Liquid
p.165

HomeSolid State PhenomenaSolid State Phenomena Vol. 134The Effect of Various Process Induced Damages on...

The Effect of Various Process Induced Damages on Wet Etching Rate Difference

Article Preview

Abstract:

You might also be interested in these eBooks

Ultra Clean Processing of Semiconductor Surfaces VIII

Info:

Periodical:

Solid State Phenomena (Volume 134)

Pages:

143-147

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/SSP.134.143

Citation:

Cite this paper

Online since:

November 2007

Authors:

Hyo Geun Yoon, Sang Hyun Lee, Woo Jin Kim, Geun Min Choi, Young Wook Song

Keywords:

Cleaning, Implantation, Projected Range, Surface Damage, Wet Etching Rate

Export:

RIS, BibTeX

Price:

Permissions CCC:

Request Permissions

Permissions PLS:

Request Permissions

Сopyright:

© 2008 Trans Tech Publications Ltd. All Rights Reserved

Share:

Citation:

[1] A. Losavio et al., Appl. Phys. Lett., Vol. 74, No. 17, PP. 2453~2455 (1999).

[2] Nak-Jin Son et al., IEEE Transactions on Electron Devices, Vol. 51, No. 10, PP. 1644~1652 (2004).

[3] Mark N. Kawaguch et al., J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B, Vol. 24, Issue 2, PP. 657~663 (2006).

[4] Bor-Wen Chan et al., Plasma-and Proc-Induced Damage, 2003 8 th International Sys, PP. 73~76 (2003).

[5] R. Chaavel, J. -P. Raskin, Electrochem. And Solid-State Lett. 9(7), PP. G245~G247 (2006).

[6] Lianjun Liu et al, Electron Device Meeting. Vol, Issue, PP. 17~20 (1996).

0.

5.

[1] 0.

[1] 5.

[2] 0.

[2] 5.

[3] 0.

[3] 5 Etching rate Depth 1E16atoms/cm2 5E13atoms/cm2 Non-IMP (Å) Fig. 3. Etching rate vs. Oxide depth Fig. 6. Dopant (B) level vs. Oxide depth Fig. 4. Dopant (Ph) level vs. Oxide depth Fig. 7. Relationship between etching rate and dopant profile(Boron/1e16atoms/cm2) A B C (Å ) 0 200 400 600 800 1000.

DOI: 10.14341/dm9823-3643

[1] 6E19.

[3] 6E21 31P_IMP Energy : 15keV 5E13atoms/cm 2 1E16atoms/cm 2 Depth Intensity(Arb. Units) 0 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800.

0.

5.

[1] 0.

[1] 5.

[2] 0.

[2] 5.

[3] 0 Etching Rate Dopant Profile Depth Etching rate(Å /sec) 0 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800.

5.

[1] 0.

[1] 5.

[2] 0.

[2] 5 Etching rate Depth 1E16atoms/cm 2 5E13atoms/cm 2 Non-IMP (Å /sec) 0 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800.

[7] 5E18.

[1] 6E21 11B_IMP Energy : 15keV 5E13atoms/cm2 1E16atoms/cm2 Depth Intensity(Arb. Units) (Å) (Å /sec).