| Zugriffsnummer | 26764 |
| Dokumenttyp | Konferenzartikel in Zeitschrift |
| Sprache | Englisch |
| Titel | Current limitations of SEM and AFM metrology for the characterization of 3D nanostructures |
| Autor(in); Institution |
Häßler-Grohne, Wolfgang; 5.2, Dimensionelle Nanometrologie, PTB-Braunschweig
Hüser, Dorothee; 5.2, Dimensionelle Nanometrologie, PTB-Braunschweig
Johnsen, Klaus-Peter; 5.2, Dimensionelle Nanometrologie, PTB-Braunschweig
Frase, Carl Georg; 5.2, Dimensionelle Nanometrologie, PTB-Braunschweig
Bosse, Harald; 5, Fertigungsmesstechnik, PTB-Braunschweig
|
| Quelle/Jahr | Measurement Science and Technology: 22 (2011), 9, 094003-1 - 094003-8 |
| ISSN | 0957-0233 |
| DOI | |
| URL | |
| Verlag | Bristol: IOP Publ. |
| Konferenzangaben | 5th Seminar on Nanoscale Calibration Standards and Methods and the 9th Seminar on Quantitative Microscopy, Brno, 27-29, October, 2010, Czech Republic |
| Klassifikationscode | PACS: 68.37.Hk ; PACS: 85.40.Hp ; PACS: 81.16.Nd ; PACS: 68.37.Ps |
| Freie Schlagworte | scanning electron microscopy ; nanostructures ; critical dimension ; line width ; tilt contrast ; atomic force microscopy ; single point probing ; inverse problem |
| Zusammenfassung | This contribution discusses the developed approaches as well as the limitations of scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and atomic force microscopy (AFM) to measure topographic details of structures on lithographic masks and wafers aiming at uncertainties in the nanometre range or even below. In the first approximation, the SEM signal, that is the change of secondary electron (SE) yield, is interpreted as being due to the surface tilt contrast and SE diffusion from the sidewall. The signal is biased by the width of the initial electron beam and, in the case of smaller penetration depths of the initial electron beam, also by the corner rounding of the specimen. Oscillation mode AFMs have been operated such that steep edge regions could be resolved better than with standard scanning methods. A single-point probing strategy enables the instrument to approach the surface from any direction and to leave the probe in the interaction region for a minimum of time maintaining the tip geometry. The ambiguity of the AFM measurement due to the changing response behaviour of the oscillating probe at differing geometries is discussed. |
Zitierung
Häßler-Grohne, W., Hüser, D., Johnsen, K.-P., Frase, C. G., & Bosse, H. (2011). Current limitations of SEM and AFM metrology for the characterization of 3D nanostructures. Measurement Science and Technology, 22(9), 094003-1–094003-8. https://doi.org/10.1088/0957-0233/22/9/094003