The immersion effects on lithography-system performance have been investigated using a ASML TWINSCAN XT:1250Di immersion-ArF scanner (NA=0.85) and Tokyo Electron CLEAN TRACK ACT12 at IMEC. Effects of immersion-induced-temperature change and effects of material-top surface are discussed in this paper. The wafer-stage temperature is measured during the leveling-verification tests and compared with the observed residual-focus-error change. The results indicate that stage-temperature change under an immersion environment can induce a focus change. In this paper, it was proved that the improved-temperature-control stage is effective to mitigate the immersion-specific focus change. The immersion effect on overlay is also investigated as a function of material top surface. It was demonstrated that the effect of material-receding-contact angles on the grid-residual errors (non-correctable errors) is small in the latest-immersion-hardware configuration of the scanner. However, there was a tendency that material with a smaller-receding-contact angle has a larger-wafer scaling although it is a correctable parameter. This can be caused by the first-layer wafer shrinkage due to more water evaporation on the more-hydrophilic surface. The immersion effect on scanner-dynamic performance is then investigated by changing the material-top surface and the scan speed of the scanner. It was turned out that the scan synchronization is not much affected by differences of material receding-contact-angles for the new configuration of the scanner. Moving-standard deviation of the synchronization error in scanning direction (y-direction) is slightly more affected by increased scanning speed, although it stays within specification even at a maximum scan speed of 500 mm/sec. Finally the immersion effects on resist-profile uniformity are examined. It was found that lower-leaching-film stacks (with a top coat or a lower leaching resist) seem to mitigate the variation of resist-profile uniformity.
[1]
Ralph R. Dammel,et al.
Resist component leaching in 193-nm immersion lithography
,
2005,
SPIE Advanced Lithography.
[2]
Takahiro Matsuo,et al.
Impact of water and top-coats on lithographic performance in 193-nm immersion lithography
,
2005,
SPIE Advanced Lithography.
[3]
Keiko Chiba,et al.
Development of ArF immersion exposure tool
,
2004,
SPIE Advanced Lithography.
[4]
Yuuki Ishii,et al.
Full-field exposure tools for immersion lithography
,
2004,
SPIE Advanced Lithography.
[5]
Frieda Van Roey,et al.
Immersion specific defect mechanisms: findings and recommendations for their control
,
2006,
SPIE Advanced Lithography.
[6]
D. Flagello,et al.
Polarization effects associated with hyper-numerical-aperture (>1) lithography
,
2005
.
[7]
Donis G. Flagello,et al.
Benefits and limitations of immersion lithography
,
2004
.
[8]
Jan Baselmans,et al.
Extending optical lithography with immersion
,
2004,
SPIE Advanced Lithography.
[9]
Jan Mulkens,et al.
Immersion lithography exposure systems: today's capabilities and tomorrow's expectations
,
2004,
SPIE Advanced Lithography.
[10]
B. Lin,et al.
Immersion lithography and its impact on semiconductor manufacturing
,
2004
.
[11]
Shaunee Cheng,et al.
Resist profile control in immersion lithography using scatterometry measurements
,
2004,
SPIE Advanced Lithography.
[12]
N. Stepanenko,et al.
Top coat or no top coat for immersion lithography?
,
2006,
SPIE Advanced Lithography.