Breaking News
News & Analysis

MIT scientists claim 9-nm e-beam resolution

7/5/2011 01:37 AM EDT
17 comments
NO RATINGS
More Related Links
View Comments: Newest First | Oldest First | Threaded View
Page 1 / 2   >   >>
Diogenes53
User Rank
Rookie
re: MIT scientists claim 9-nm e-beam resolution
Diogenes53   7/9/2011 12:43:49 PM
NO RATINGS
I've watched e-beam and x-ray/EUV (let us keep reminding ourselves that despite the name change, e-beam's birth name was SXPL: soft x-ray projection lithography, and it remains SOFT X-RAY) developments for ~40 years. X-ray has proven to be too difficult, and remains so in its EUV disguise. All e-beam developers have made the classic mistake of pursuing silicon first (where there is no real suction) and mask making in desperation (because direct write on silicon has several key non-ebeam issues) too late. E-beam developers would be wise to pursue mask making first (make masks faster, more precise and cheaper) and silicon as an adjunct.

ebmfuser
User Rank
Rookie
re: MIT scientists claim 9-nm e-beam resolution
ebmfuser   7/8/2011 8:19:38 PM
NO RATINGS
As a followup, I have seen (published) evidence of E-BEAM written structures as small as 100Ang (10nm) in thick resist as far back as 1990. Check out the abstracts of the EIPBN conferences at http://eipbn.org.

ebmfuser
User Rank
Rookie
re: MIT scientists claim 9-nm e-beam resolution
ebmfuser   7/8/2011 8:06:59 PM
NO RATINGS
Even with reduction lithography, the CD of the mask patterns for 9mn lithography will need to be 90nm (for 10X reduction systems) or 45nm (for 5x reduction systems), very unlikely to be achievable, and very costly! At 1X (for EUV or X-RAY systems), it will be prohibitive. It's becoming increasing clearer that E-BEAM is the NGL (Next Generation Lithography). Considering the cost differential of a good E-BEAM system (~$5M) vs. a proposed EUV system ($50M to $100M), why not simply commit to buying multiple E-BEAM systems to make up the offset in volume? The savings in masks alone will be substantial, and the advantage in system redundancy alone would be enormous!!! Add to that, the technology exists right now, and has (in one form or another) for over 30 years!

ebmfuser
User Rank
Rookie
re: MIT scientists claim 9-nm e-beam resolution
ebmfuser   7/8/2011 8:02:18 PM
NO RATINGS
Even with reduction lithography, the CD of the mask patterns for 9mn litho will need to be 90nm (for 10X reduction systems) or 45nm (for 5x reduction systems), very unlikely! It's becoming increasing clearer that E-BEAM is the NGL (Next Generation Lithography). Considering the cost differential of a good E-BEAM system (~$5M) vs. a proposed EUV system ($50M to $100M), why not simply commit to buying multiple E-BEAM systems to make up the offset in volume? The savings in masks alone will be substantial, and the advantage in system redundancy alone would be enormous!!!

ebmfuser
User Rank
Rookie
re: MIT scientists claim 9-nm e-beam resolution
ebmfuser   7/8/2011 7:52:29 PM
NO RATINGS
Charging is a well known issue, and easily eliminated. Spin_on conductive layers or a thin layer of evaporated metal is generally used with the film shunted to ground.

ebmfuser
User Rank
Rookie
re: MIT scientists claim 9-nm e-beam resolution
ebmfuser   7/8/2011 7:49:46 PM
NO RATINGS
E-Beam is in theory a modified SEM, but with heavily modified scan and beam_placement electronics. Most lowK materials are not sensitive to electron-beam bombardment.

resistion
User Rank
CEO
re: MIT scientists claim 9-nm e-beam resolution
resistion   7/6/2011 2:44:30 PM
NO RATINGS
The HSQ thickness was also 15 nm. Such thinness has a lot of issues outside the lithography, like pinholes, etch resistance, underlayer damage, etc.

resistion
User Rank
CEO
re: MIT scientists claim 9-nm e-beam resolution
resistion   7/6/2011 11:04:06 AM
NO RATINGS
Now it makes me wonder, why not use a SEM and low-k as resist?

goafrit
User Rank
Manager
re: MIT scientists claim 9-nm e-beam resolution
goafrit   7/5/2011 9:16:34 PM
NO RATINGS
I have no doubt provided it is from MIT. Those guys are awesome.

anon7584804
User Rank
Rookie
re: MIT scientists claim 9-nm e-beam resolution
anon7584804   7/5/2011 3:34:15 PM
NO RATINGS
go beam go.. thanks for opening doors for future & further

Page 1 / 2   >   >>
Flash Poll
Radio
LATEST ARCHIVED BROADCAST
Join our online Radio Show on Friday 11th July starting at 2:00pm Eastern, when EETimes editor of all things fun and interesting, Max Maxfield, and embedded systems expert, Jack Ganssle, will debate as to just what is, and is not, and embedded system.
Like Us on Facebook

Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)
EE Times on Twitter
EE Times Twitter Feed
Top Comments of the Week