3-D Topography Simulation Using Surface Representation and Central Utilities

Neureuther, A. R.; Wang, R. H.; Helmsen, John Joseph; Sefler, J. F.; Scheckler, E.W.; Gunturi, R.; Winterbottom, Rex

doi:10.1007/978-3-7091-6905-6_3

Cited by 3 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There can be little control over the errors due to the rule-based computations in the L-type method, but the error of the level set method can be formally evaluated [9]. All these considerations are even more critical for 3-D simulation [10]- [11]. Acceleration by using larger time steps is difficult with nodal boundaries in which the grid size often limits the time steps.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Robust, stable, and accurate boundary movement for physical etching and deposition simulation

Hsiau¹,

Kan²,

McVittie³

et al. 1997

IEEE Trans. Electron Devices

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The increasing complexity of VLSI device interconnect features and fabrication technologies encountered by semiconductor etching and deposition simulation necessitates improvements in the robustness, numerical stability, and physical accuracy of the boundary movement method. The volume-meshbased level set method, integrated with the physical models in SPEEDIE, demonstrates accuracy and robustness for simulations on a wide range of etching/deposition processes The surface profile is reconstructed from the well-behaved level set function without rule-based algorithms. Adaptive gridding is used to accelerate the computation. Our algorithm can be easily extended from two-dimensional (2-D) to three-dimensional (3-D), and applied to model microstructures consisting of multiple materials. Efficiency benchmarks show that this boundary movement method is practical in 2-D, and competitive for larger scale or 3-D modeling applications.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Robust, stable, and accurate boundary movement for physical etching and deposition simulation

Hsiau¹,

Kan²,

McVittie³

et al. 1997

IEEE Trans. Electron Devices

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…With the advent of workstations, X-windows and C++ simulation went 3D. The three-dimensional effort was based on using connected triangles to represent the surfaces while they evolved in time [41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49]. Kenny Toh wrote the resist bleaching, development, and plotting codes.…”

Section: Role Of Hardware Infrastructure and Algorithmsmentioning

confidence: 99%

If it moves, simulate it!

Neureuther

2008

Optical Microlithography XXI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the last 35 years modeling of projection printing has undergone many paradigm shifts in physical models, computational engines, algorithms and opportunities. The trigger event for the first quantitative positive resist Dill model was the development and application of automated thin-film measurement equipment. The use of partial coherence which helps imaging also complicates the understanding and necessitates the use of simulation to guide lithography practice. Simulation has also played an important role in discovery (intensity imbalance in phase-shifting masks), invention (self-interferometric mask monitors) and creation of analysis techniques (first-cut accurate fast-CAD). The current challenges and growth areas for simulation include calibration, synergy with metrology, electronic self-testing and linking circuit design and fabrication.

show abstract

“…Not only that successive simulation steps need entirely valid geometry representations (no loop formation), but also the accuracy in growth rate calculation will be lost if ad hoc boundary movement steps are taken for convenience. Traditionally boundary movement is based on motion of discretized surface mesh or nodal envelopes [4]. It suffers from topological degeneration due to boundary collision and shock formation, which is marginally tractable for 2D boundaries (topological 1D) and almost impossible for 3D.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It suffers from topological degeneration due to boundary collision and shock formation, which is marginally tractable for 2D boundaries (topological 1D) and almost impossible for 3D. The cell method for boundary movement also has difficulties in boundary curvature evaluation to calculate physical growth rates [4]. A collision-free boundary movement method based on the level-set approach [l-31 has been implemented in the physical etching/deposition simulator SPEEDIE for both 2D and 3D cases [5].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Physical etching/deposition simulation with collision-free boundary movement

Hsiau

Kan

McVittie

et al.

Proceedings of International Electron Devices Meeting

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We demonstrate that accurate and robust physical simulation of etching and deposition in the semiconductor manufacturing technology can be achieved by using the collisionfree boundary movement method [l-31. Constraints for preserving physical accuracy, treatment of multiple junctions, adaptive gridding by quad/oct-tree meshes and experimental corroboration of void and stringer formation in 2D and 3D structures will be presented.

show abstract

3-D Topography Simulation Using Surface Representation and Central Utilities

Cited by 3 publications

References 26 publications

Robust, stable, and accurate boundary movement for physical etching and deposition simulation

Robust, stable, and accurate boundary movement for physical etching and deposition simulation

If it moves, simulate it!

Physical etching/deposition simulation with collision-free boundary movement

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About