No abstract

No abstract

Requalifying semiconductor photomasks remains critically important and is increasingly challenging for 20nm and 14nm node logic reticles. Patterns are becoming more complex on the photomask, and defect sensitivity requirements are more stringent than ever before. Reticle inspection tools are equally important for effective process development and the successful ramp and sustained yield for high volume manufacturing. The inspection stages considered were: incoming inspection to match with Mask Shop Outgoing result and to detect defects generated during transport; requalification by routine cycle inspection to detect Haze and any other defects; and inspection by in-house or Mask shop at the post cleaning. There are many critical capability and capacity factors for the decision for best inspection tool and strategy for high volume manufacturing, especially objective Lens NA, wavelength, power, pixel size, throughput, full-automation inspection linked with Overhead Transport, algorithm application, engineering application function, and inspection of PSM and OMOG . These tools are expensive but deliver differentiated value in terms of performance and throughput as well as extendibility. Performing a thorough evaluation and making a technically sound choice which explores these many factors is critical for success of a fab. This paper examines the methodology for evaluating two different photomask inspection tools. The focus is on ensuring production worthiness on real and advanced product photomasks requiring accurate evaluation of sensitivity, throughput, data analysis function and engineering work function on those product photomasks. Photomasks used for data collection are production reticles, PDM(Program defect Mask), SiN spray defect Reticle which is described that evaluates how the tools would perform on a contaminated plate.

In this paper we evaluate the Reticle Defect Review feature on KLA-Tencor's e-beam review tool, eDR™-7110, and study defect printability of reticle defects on wafer. The RDR feature is able to read KLA-Tencor's reticle inspection results directly without any intermediate format, thus allowing what-you-see-is-what-you-get setup on the wafer review tool. Compared with a conventional reticle to wafer approach using KLA Results Files, Reticle Defect Review provides faster time to results, more accurate defect disposition and increased ease of use, which have been demonstrated by the printability study of reticle defects on a focus exposure matrix wafer.

No abstract