Does your SEM really tell the truth? How would you know? Part 4: Charging and its mitigation

This is the fourth part of a series of tutorial papers discussing various causes of measurement uncertainty in scanned particle beam instruments, and some of the solutions researched and developed at NIST and other research institutions. Scanned particle beam instruments, especially the scanning electron microscope (SEM), have gone through tremendous evolution to become indispensable tools for many and diverse scientific and industrial applications. These improvements have significantly enhanced their performance and made them far easier to operate. But, the ease of operation has also fostered operator complacency. In addition, the user-friendliness has reduced the apparent need for extensive operator training. Unfortunately, this has led to the idea that the SEM is just another expensive "digital camera" or another peripheral device connected to a computer and that all of the problems in obtaining good quality images and data have been solved. Hence, one using these instruments may be lulled into thinking that all of the potential pitfalls have been fully eliminated and believing that, everything one sees on the micrograph is always correct. But, as described in this and the earlier papers, this may not be the case. Care must always be taken when reliable quantitative data are being sought. The first paper in this series discussed some of the issues related to signal generation in the SEM, including instrument calibration, electron beam-sample interactions and the need for physics-based modeling to understand the actual image formation mechanisms to properly interpret SEM images. The second paper has discussed another major issue confronting the microscopist: specimen contamination and methods to eliminate it. The third paper discussed mechanical vibration and stage drift and some useful solutions to mitigate the problems caused by them, and here, in this the fourth contribution, the issues related to specimen "charging" and its mitigation are discussed relative to dimensional metrology.

[1]  T. E. Everhart,et al.  Recent developments in scanning electron microscopy , 1960 .

[2]  J. Lefebvre,et al.  Charge contrast imaging of suspended nanotubes by scanning electron microscopy , 2008, Nanotechnology.

[3]  David C. Joy Future of e-beam metrology: obstacles and opportunities , 2002, SPIE Advanced Lithography.

[4]  G. Danilatos Foundations of Environmental Scanning Electron Microscopy , 1988 .

[5]  A. Vladár,et al.  Does your SEM really tell the truth?--How would you know? Part 1. , 2013, Scanning.

[6]  L. Reimer,et al.  Charging of bulk specimens, insulating layers and free-supporting films in scanning electron microscopy , 1992 .

[7]  O. Wells Low‐Loss Image for Surface Scanning Electron Microscope , 1971 .

[8]  O. Wells,et al.  Application of the low-loss scanning electron microscope image to integrated circuit technology. Part 1--Applications to accurate dimension measurements. , 2001, Scanning.

[9]  Mark P. Davidson,et al.  Investigation of the effects of charging in SEM-based CD metrology , 1997, Advanced Lithography.

[10]  D. Joy,et al.  Low Voltage Scanning Electron Microscopy , 1996, Microscopy and Microanalysis.

[11]  H. Leamy,et al.  Charge collection scanning electron microscopy , 1982 .

[12]  V. K. b. Zworykin,et al.  Television: The Electronics of Image Transmission , 2013 .

[13]  A. Vladár,et al.  Does your SEM really tell the truth? How would you know? Part 2. , 2014, Scanning.

[14]  B. Lischke,et al.  Material surfaces for electron‐optical equipment , 1983 .

[15]  The Impact of Charging on Low-Energy Electron Beam Lithography , 2004, Microscopy and Microanalysis.

[16]  D. Joy Control of charging in low-voltage SEM , 1989 .

[17]  David C. Joy,et al.  Dynamic Charging in the Low Voltage SEM , 1995, Microscopy and Microanalysis.

[18]  Crawford Ck Ion charge neutralization effects in scanning electron microscopes. , 1980 .

[19]  András E. Vladár,et al.  Nanomanufacturing concerns about measurements made in the SEM Part III: vibration and drift , 2014, Optics & Photonics - NanoScience + Engineering.

[20]  I. Müllerová,et al.  Some approaches to low-voltage scanning electron microscopy , 1992 .

[21]  A. Vladár,et al.  New application of variable‐pressure/environmental microscopy to semiconductor inspection and metrology , 2004 .

[22]  G. Bastin,et al.  Quantitative Electron Probe Microanalysis of Nonconducting Specimens: Science or Art? , 2004, Microscopy and Microanalysis.

[23]  G. A. Morton,et al.  The Secondary Emission Multiplier-A New Electronic Device , 1936, Proceedings of the Institute of Radio Engineers.

[24]  Milos Toth,et al.  Secondary electron contrast in low-vacuum/environmental scanning electron microscopy of dielectrics , 2005 .

[25]  T. J. Shaffner,et al.  'Charging' effects in the scanning electron microscope , 1971 .

[26]  J. Osborn A scanning electron microscope test procedure , 1971 .

[27]  András E Vladár,et al.  Two-dimensional simulation and modeling in scanning electron microscope imaging and metrology research. , 2002, Scanning.

[28]  P. T. Lillehei,et al.  New insights into subsurface imaging of carbon nanotubes in polymer composites via scanning electron microscopy , 2015, Nanotechnology.

[29]  Michael T. Postek,et al.  Submicrometer Microelectronics Dimensional Metrology: Scanning Electron Microscopy , 1987, Journal of Research of the National Bureau of Standards.

[30]  Bryan R. Burnett,et al.  An electro-conductive organic coating for scanning electron microscopy (déjà vu) , 2014, Other Conferences.

[31]  G. Danilatos Introduction to the ESEM instrument , 1993, Microscopy research and technique.

[32]  J. Cazaux,et al.  Some considerations on the electric field induced in insulators by electron bombardment , 1986 .

[33]  J. Sikorski,et al.  A new preparation technique for examination of polymers in the scanning electron microscope. , 1968, Journal of scientific instruments.

[34]  A. Donald,et al.  The use of environmental scanning electron microscopy for imaging wet and insulating materials , 2003, Nature Materials.

[35]  O. Wells Low‐loss electron images of uncoated photoresist in the scanning electron microscope , 1986 .

[36]  H. P. Feuerbaum,et al.  Electron beam testing: Methods and applications , 1983 .

[37]  András E Vladár,et al.  Modeling for accurate dimensional scanning electron microscope metrology: then and now. , 2011, Scanning.

[38]  M. Postek CRITICAL ISSUES IN SCANNING ELECTRON MICROSCOPE METROLOGY , 1994 .

[39]  Michael T. Postek,et al.  Photomask dimensional metrology in the scanning electron microscope, part I: Has anything really changed? , 2004 .