Home Search Collections Journals About Contact us My IOPscience

SU-8: a photoresist for high-aspect-ratio and 3D submicron lithography

This article has been downloaded from IOPscience. Please scroll down to see the full text article.

2007 J. Micromech. Microeng. 17 R81

(http://iopscience.iop.org/0960-1317/17/6/R01)

View the table of contents for this issue, or go to the journal homepage for more

Download details:
IP Address: 131.170.6.51
The article was downloaded on 30/07/2013 at 12:11

Please note that terms and conditions apply.

IOP PUBLISHING JOURNAL OF MICROMECHANICS AND MICROENGINEERING
J. Micromech. Microeng. 17 (2007) R81–R95 doi:10.1088/0960-1317/17/6/R01

TOPICAL REVIEW

SU-8: a photoresist for high-aspect-ratio

and 3D submicron lithography
A del Campo and C Greiner
Max-Planck-Institut für Metallforschung, Heisenbergstraße 3, 70569 Stuttgart, Germany
E-mail: delcampo@mf.mpg.de

Received 8 November 2006, in final form 13 March 2007

Published 15 May 2007
Online at stacks.iop.org/JMM/17/R81

Abstract
SU-8 has become the favourite photoresist for high-aspect-ratio (HAR) and
three-dimensional (3D) lithographic patterning due to its excellent coating,
planarization and processing properties as well as its mechanical and
chemical stability. However, as feature sizes get smaller and pattern
complexity increases, particular difficulties and a number of material-related
issues arise and need to be carefully considered. This review presents a
detailed description of these effects and describes reported strategies and
achieved SU-8 HAR and 3D structures up to August 2006.

1. Introduction Only recently has attention been paid to the extension

Lithography consists of the transfer of a pattern onto a substrate
by means of an etching process (figure 1). Resist lithography
makes use of an irradiation source and a photosensitive
polymer material to perform the pattern transfer. Selective
irradiation initiates a series of photochemical processes in
the resist which alter the physical and chemical properties
of the exposed areas such that they can be differentiated in a
subsequent image development step. Most commonly, the
solubility of the film is modified by either increasing the
solubility of exposed areas (yielding a positive image after
develop) or decreasing the solubility to yield a negative-tone
image. Development of the imaged substrate reveals a pattern
on the resist layer which corresponds to the geometry of the
mask.
Pushed by the electronic industry, most developments
in lithography have mainly been directed at shrinking the
lateral dimensions of the imaged features [1–10]. The
application of different resolution enhancement approaches
(illumination sources with shorter irradiation wavelength,
projection and immersion optics, phase-shifting masks, etc)
and the development of advanced photoresist materials have
permitted a reduction of lithographic structures down to sub-
100 nm dimensions. Current trends have been predicted
to improve shrinking to at least 45 nm in the year 2010
[5].
of lithographic 2D micro and submicron structures to the
third dimension. HAR and 3D surfaces have become
interesting for the fabrication of high luminosity lighting
panels and photonic crystals [11–16]. When combined with
low cost replication methods, HAR and 3D structured surfaces
enable fabrication of biosensors with increased sensitivity and
throughput due to their high effective surface area [17–22].
Miniaturized drug delivery systems [23], advanced scaffolds
for tissue engineering [24–32], non-biofouling coatings
[33–35] or bioinspired surfaces with controlled adhesion
and haptic properties [36–39] constitute other examples of
appealing applications.
Resist materials for lithography must satisfy stringent
requirements as the lateral feature size shrinks and the aspect
ratio increases [40]. A suitable viscosity is of particular
importance in order to balance opposite requirements involved
in different processing steps. Low viscosity facilitates coating
of uniform, defect and stress free films and, later on, removal
of unsolidified resin during development. However, high
viscosity is required for reducing the lateral flow and obtaining
stable thick resist films needed in HAR patterning. The
resist must also possess high polymerization efficiency upon
light irradiation and adequate reactivity at the irradiation
wavelength to achieve high contrast, high resolution and high
sensitivity. A high Young’s modulus after processing is
important to guarantee mechanical stability of the lithographic

0960-1317/07/060081+15$30.00 © 2007 IOP Publishing Ltd Printed in the UK R81

Topical Review
(1) Spin-coating photoresist
(2) Soft baking
(3) Masked irradiation
(4) Development, baking
Figure 1. Photolitographic steps with the negative photoresist SU-8.
The picture at the bottom shows SU-8 25 micropillars with 5 µm
diameter and aspect ratio 8. (Spin coating 5 s at 500 rpm followed
by 60 s at 900 rpm. Soft bake 3 min at 65 ◦ C, 12 min at 95 ◦ C, slow
cooling. Exposure 30.5 s with Karl Süss MJB3 Mask Aligner,
vacuum contact. Hard bake 1 min at 65 ◦ C and 4 min at 95 ◦ C, slow
cooling. Development 4 min 20 s.)
structures. Low shrinkage during polymerization is necessary
for dimensional accuracy and to avoid film stress. Good
wetting and adhesion of the resist to various substrates, good
solubility in safe solvents for development, high thermal
stability, good storage stability, low health and environmental
hazards, wide process latitudes and low price are also
required.
There are a number of commercially available photoresists
suitable for HAR applications. Diaplate and Ordyl
P-50100 are acrylate-based negative photoresists. A positive
variant is the novolak resin SPR 220-7. These systems are
commercialized in solution form for spin-coating applications.
Alternatively, thick photoresists are available in dry film
format, such as Riston R
[41], Ordyl BF 410 [42], Etertec R
5600 [43], DF 4615 [44] and DFR-15 [45]. Some advantages
and disadvantages of each system have been recently described
[46].
Undoubtedly, the favourite photoresist for HAR
lithography is SU-8 [47]. Although initially formulated
for photolithography, the use of SU-8 has now been
successfully extended as a resist for x-ray, e-beam and
two-photon lithography. Its high chemical and mechanical
stability after processing enables direct application of SU-8
as a mould material for the fabrication of electroplated
structures (LIGA technology [48–51]), and for soft lithography
with thermosetting elastomers, for example in PDMS-based
microfluidics [18]. It can also be used as a mask for prolonged
reactive ion etching of an underlying Si wafer, leading to
features with higher aspect ratios and vertical sidewalls.
Lithographic fabrication of SU-8 low-aspect-ratio
millimetre and micrometre-sized structures is now well
R82
O O O O
O O O O
O O O O
O O O O
Figure 2. Chemical structure of the Bisphenol A Novolak epoxy
oligomer contained in SU-8 formulations. Eight reactive epoxy
functionalities allow a high degree of cross-linking after
photoactivation.
established. However, HAR processing still faces important
challenges, especially when lateral feature dimensions are
shrunk. A good number of works have been recently published
which deeply analyse processing problems, and clever
solutions have been proposed. The following sections present
an overview of the characteristics, processing particularities
and structures obtained with this resist.
2. Chemical characteristics of the SU-8 photoresist
SU-8 is a negative tone, chemically amplified resist. It contains
acid–labile groups and a photoacid generator. Irradiation
generates a low concentration of a strong acid which will
act as a catalyst of the cross-linking process. Subsequent
heating of the polymer activates cross-linking and regenerates
the acid catalyst. As a consequence, the sensitivity of
the resists is significantly increased. In particular, the
main components of SU-8 are a Bisphenol A Novolak
epoxy oligomer (EPON R
SU-8 resin, Shell Chemical) and
up to 10 wt% triarylsulfonium hexafluroantimonate salt
(CYRACURE R
UVI, Union Carbide) photoacid generator.
Upon irradiation, the photoacid generator decomposes to form
hexafluoroantimonic acid that protonates the epoxides on
the oligomer. These protonated oxonium ions are available
to react with neutral epoxides in a series of cross-linking
reactions after application of heat [52]. Each monomer
molecule contains eight reactive epoxy sites (figure 2), and
therefore high degree of cross-linking can be obtained after
photothermal activation giving a negative tone. This results
in high mechanical and thermal stability of the lithographic
structures after processing. In fact, fully cross-linked SU-8 has
a glass-transition temperature around ∼200 ◦ C, degradation
temperature ∼380 ◦ C and a Young’s modulus E ∼4–5 GPa
(table 1).
The first SU-8 products were introduced commercially
by MicroChem in 1996. The resist is available in a wide
range of formulations to cover a film thickness range from
2 to 300 µm in a single coating process or to 3 mm by
multicoating processes [53]. The SU-8 series is formulated
with gamma-butyrolacton as a solvent. SU-8 films with
thickness below 2 µm can be obtained by diluting the resist
solution with the solvent. More recently, a new generation of
SU-8 resist, the SU-8 2000, has also become commercially
available. This series is formulated with cyclopentanone as
 Topical Review

Table 1. Physical properties of the SU-8 photoresist [52], reprinted
with permission, © 2005 AIP.
Property Value
◦
Young’s modulus, E (post-bake at 95 C) 4.02 GPa
Young’s modulus, E (hard bake at 200 ◦ C) 4.95 ± 0.42 GPa
Biaxial modulus of elasticity, E/(1 − ν) 5.18 ± 0.89 GPa
Film stress (post-bake at 95 ◦ C) 16–19 MPa
Maximum stress (hard bake at 200 ◦ C) 34 MPa
Friction coefficient (post bake at 95 ◦ C) 0.19
Glass temperature, Tg (unexposed) ∼50 ◦ C
Glass temperature, Tg (fully cross-linked) >200 ◦ C
Degradation temperature (fully cross-linked) ∼380 ◦ C
Thermal expansion coefficient (post-bake 52 ± 5.1 ppm K−1
at 95 ◦ C)
Polymer shrinkage upon cross-linking 7.5%
solvent and has improved coating and adhesion properties and
faster processing times. This is particularly important in thick
coatings, where one photolithographic cycle may take more
than 2 h. Table 2 shows the typical values of the processing
parameters for the commercially available variants.
3. Lithographic processing with SU-8
Processing of SU-8 starts by selecting the adequate
commercial variant attending to the desired thickness.
Available formulations cover the range from 2 to 250 µm.
These can be spin-coated at 1000–3000 rpm depending on
the formulation viscosity. If film thicknesses below 5 µm
are required, previous dilution of the thinnest formulation is
required. Films with thickness between 250 µm and 1 mm can
be obtained by superposing several spin-coating steps. Films
thicker than 1 mm are usually obtained by casting.
Good wetting of the substrate by SU-8 is crucial
for obtaining homogeneous and stable coatings. This is
determined by the substrate surface energy. Being an
organic material, SU-8 is rather hydrophobic (contact angle
of cured resin 73◦ ), and therefore has difficulties in wetting
hydrophilic inorganic substrates, i.e. oxidized silicon wafers.
A comparative analysis of the adhesion between SU-8 and
different substrates (Si, FeNi, Ni, Cu, Cr, Ti and their oxides)
can be found in the literature. It was found that Ti and TiO2
substrates show the strongest adhesion to cured SU-8, while
Ni substrates show the poorest adhesion [54–57].
Wetting can be improved by applying commercial primers
to the inorganic substrate before spin coating SU-8. Primers
(HMDS, MPTS, OmniCoat from Microchem Inc.) are low
molecular weight organic substances which either strongly
adsorb or react with the inorganic surface forming a thin
organic layer with lower surface energy which can then be
wet by SU-8.
After the coating process, the substrate is soft baked
in order to remove the solvent and improve resist–substrate
adhesion. This process is accompanied by shrinkage of the
film. Soft baking is typically performed by progressive heating
the SU-8 film up to 95 ◦ C on a flat-levelled hotplate. Higher
soft-bake temperatures (T > 137 ◦ C) may initiate thermal
cross-linking even if photoactivation has not taken place [58].
Lower temperatures or short times leave resist films with a high
solvent content which will evaporate and therefore generate
high film stress during post-exposure baking.
Exposure is typically performed by masked irradiation
with a UV lamp or by scanning lasers at wavelengths above
350 nm. Resist’s UV absorption at these wavelengths causes a
non-uniform light intensity distribution across the resist film.
This can be critical in thick layers used in HAR patterning
and may result in lithographic features with pronounced T-
profiles and non-vertical sidewalls. These problems can
be avoided using other irradiation sources, such as x-rays,
electron beam, proton beam or scanning pulsed femtolasers
working at suitable wavelengths for two-photon excitation.
After irradiation, a post-exposure bake increases the cross-
linking degree in the irradiated areas and stabilizes them
against the action of solvents during the posterior development
step. Development is performed by immersing the substrate
in propylene glycol methyl ether acetate at room temperature,
followed by a rinsing step in water or isopropanol. For
applications where the imaged resist forms part of the final
device, a subsequent hard-baking step at temperatures between
150 and 200 ◦ C is recommended.
Removal of SU-8 (if necessary) can be performed in
hot 1-methyl-2-pyrrolidon, followed by cleaning in HNO3 for

Table 2. SU-8 characteristic processing times (in minutes) for different variants and film thicknesses [47].
Viscosity Thickness Soft bake min Soft bake min Post-exposure Post-exposure Development
SU-8 type (cSt) (µm) at 65 ◦ C at 95 ◦ C 65 ◦ C 95 ◦ C (min)
SU-8 2 45 1.5–5 1 1–3 1 1 1
SU-8 5 290 5–15 1 3–5 1 1–2 1–3
SU-8 10 1050 10–30 2–3 5–7 1 2–3 2–5
SU-8 25 2500 15–40 3–5 5–15 1 2–4 3–6
SU-8 50 1250 40–100 5–10 15–30 1 4–10 6–10
SU-8 100 51 500 100–250 10–30 30–90 1 10–20 10–20
SU-8 2002 7.5 2–5 1 2 1 1 1
SU-8 2005 45 6–7 1 2 1 1 1
SU-8 2007 140 8.5–10 1 2 1 1–2 2–3
SU-8 2010 380 13–15 1 2–3 1 2 2–3
SU-8 2015 1250 21–25 1–2 2–5 1 2–3 3–4
SU-8 2025 4500 41–75 1–3 3–9 1 3–7 5–7
SU-8 2035 7000 35–110 2–5 5–20 1 3–10 5–10
SU-8 2050 14 000 50–165 3–5 6–30 1 5–12 6–12
SU-8 2075 22 000 110–225 3–5 9–45 1 7–15 7–12
SU-8 2100 45 000 100–260 5–7 20–60 1 10–15 10–20

R83
Topical Review
10 min. However, removal with this solvent after hard baking
does not work properly as a consequence of the high cross-
linking degree. In such case, removal needs to be performed
by reactive ion etching or laser micromachining.
4. Particularities of HAR lithography with SU-8
The processing steps described in the previous section
represent the standard SU-8 lithographic procedure. However,
processing thick SU-8 films for HAR patterning has particular
difficulties which will be discussed in the next sections.
4.1. Planarization defects
Although SU-8 is specially engineered to render planar
surfaces after spin coating, planarization defects occur
when the viscosity of the resist solution (and therefore the
spin-coated resist film) increases. Typical flatness errors for
the SU-8 system range from 10 to 100 µm in resist thickness
around 1 mm [59, 60]. Other factors such as spinning rims at
the wafer edge (‘edge beads’), unintentional tilt, dirt particles,
curvature of the substrate or mask, etc, also contribute to
reduced surface flatness.
Leaving the film to relax on a very flat-levelled position
for several minutes to hours allows reflowing and enhances
planarization. Mechanical stress generated during spinning
may be also alleviated during this time. Large edge beads may
not reflow completely and need to be removed by bevelling the
edges of the substrate, spraying the periphery of the substrate
with solvent or spraying the removal fluid on the bottom
side of the substrate. Alternatively, the use of new spinning
technologies can also minimize the edge bead and improve the
uniformity of SU-8 thick films. As an example, using a closed
chamber around the chuck of the spin coater which rotates with
the wafer excludes air turbulence and results in more uniform
coatings (GYRSET system from SÜSS Microtech, Germany
[61]).
In contact lithography, flatness errors hinder conformal
contact of the mask and resist during irradiation. The resulting
air gaps cause diffraction effects (Fresnel diffraction). This
result in pattern edges being irradiated with higher doses and,
consequently, pattern enlargement at the top of the features
(T-profile). The diffraction error increases with increasing
resist thickness and gap distance. Figure 3 shows the effects
of Fresnel diffraction for different gap distances and exposure
doses [62, 63]. Whereas vertical sidewalls were obtained
under conformal contact, remarkable T profiles were seen
with increasing gap distance. Asymmetrical air gaps (tilted
mask on the surface of the photoresist) caused asymmetrical
T-profiles with overhanging rims in only one side of the feature.
Estimation models have been recently proposed to predict
the sidewall profiles of SU-8 based on the effects of Fresnel
diffraction and absorption [63].
Different methods have been used to reduce diffraction
effects. Placing a soft cushion beneath the substrate causes
convex bending of the wafer and improves conformal contact
when large edge beads are present (figure 4) [64]. This method
has permitted patterning of 4 in wafers with 145 µm thick and
80 µm wide SU-8 bars separated by 8 µm wide microchannels
(aspect ratio > 18) [64].
R84
Figure 3. The effect of air gaps between mask and resist during
exposure [63], reprinted with permission, © 2006 IOP. T-profiles
instead of vertical walls are obtained. Stronger negatively sloped
sidewall angles are obtained with increasing gap distance at a fixed
exposure dose. Increasing the exposure dose partially compensates
the negatively sloped sidewall, however, at the drawback of an
enlargement of the pattern width.
(This figure is in colour only in the electronic version)
The diffraction error can also be corrected by filling the
gap between the mask and photoresist with an index match
material (refractive index of SU-8: n = 1.668 at λ = 365 nm,
n = 1.650 at λ = 405 nm [47]). Filling with glycerol (refractive
index 1.470–1.475) has shown to improve pattern fidelity [60].
Exposure of a 156 µm thick SU-8 film to irradiation through a
25 µm striped pattern and a 100 µm air gap resulted in a 45%
pattern width error. Filling the gap with glycerol compensated
diffraction effects, and straight walls without appreciable error
were obtained [60]. Perfect match of the refractive index of
the liquid and the SU-8 further reduces diffraction effects.
Using Cargille refractive index matching liquid, patterns with
feature size 6 µm, 1150 µm high (aspect ratio > 190) and
high quality sidewalls have been recently reported (figure 5)
[59]. Microstructures with a thickness up to 2 mm could also
be fabricated [59].
4.2. Film stress and solvent gradients
Solvent removal during soft baking is accompanied by volume
shrinking and mechanical stress. The accumulated stress
increases with increasing film thickness and feature lateral
dimensions and may result in debonding of the resist layer
from the substrate if adhesion is weak. Recent studies have
demonstrated that the soft-baking time is the major factor
contributing to the overall film internal stress during processing
(up to 50%), followed by exposure dose, post-exposure bake
time and development time with a 30, 15 and 5% contribution,
respectively [65].
The soft-baking time determines the final solvent content
of the resist. Short soft-baking times leave a softer resist
film which is less prone to internal stress during subsequent
 Topical Review

Figure 4. Soft cushion technology compensates edge bead effects and improves conformal contact between mask and resist [64], reprinted
with permission from Springer Science and Business Media. The pictures below the diagram show how 145 µm thick and 80 µm wide
SU-8 bars separated by 8 µm wide microchannels (aspect ratio > 18) are successfully obtained with this technology.

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 5. 1150 µm high microcylinders obtained using different matching refractive index liquids for gap compensation [59], reprinted
with permission, © 2005 Elsevier. (a) Microcylinders with 10 µm wall thickness and 45 µm internal diameter obtained using a filtered light
source and no gap compensation. (b) Microcylinders with 8 µm wall thickness and 30 µm internal diameter obtained using broadband
exposure and glycerin gap compensation. (c) Microcylinders with 6 µm wall thickness and 20 µm internal diameter obtained using PMMA
filter and gap compensation with optical index matching liquid. As the wall thickness is reduced, the physical strength becomes too low to
maintain the freestanding positions.

processing steps. However, high levels of solvent after
soft baking may result in (1) formation of bubbles during
post-exposure baking, (2) collapse of features due to lower
mechanical stability at the bottom because of the higher solvent
content and (3) increased lateral diffusion rates of the acid
generator molecules outside of the masked areas during post-
exposure baking and therefore lower contrast between cross-
linked and un-cross-linked areas [66]. If the resist is too
hard, cross-linking in the irradiated areas will be hindered.
Consequently, the optimum soft-baking time needs to be
optimized for each particular thickness and application.
In SU-8 films with thicknesses above 1 mm obtained by
single casting, soft baking typically takes 10–30 h depending
on the film thickness. Residual solvent after soft baking
single cast SU-8 films of 1 mm on a hot plate represents on
average 7%. Solvent content in 3 mm thickness represents
12% [67]. Two strategies have been proposed to reduce the
solvent content of such thick films: multiple casting and dry
casting. In the multiple casting method, a 1 mm thick layer
of SU-8 is soft baked until a solvent content of 7% is reached.
Next, a new layer of SU-8 is cast on top of the previous layer,
and soft baking is repeated. The procedure is repeated until the
desired height is reached. It is expected that minimal diffusion
of solvent occurs from the added layer into the already soft-
baked layer and, as a result, solvent content would be reduced.
However, the results show an average solvent content of 9%
in a 3 mm film after three coating steps and 45 h soft-baking
time. In the dry chip casting method, a 1 mm layer of SU-8
is first soft baked, cut into pieces and reconstituted to form a
thick SU-8 film. Reconstitution is performed at 105 ◦ C, where
SU-8 is melted, and in vacuum. 3 mm SU-8 films fabricated
by this method have average solvent contents of about 7%.
The distribution of solvent across the film thickness is
another crucial factor [68]. In single cast 2 mm thick films,
the solvent content varies typically from 10.4% at the top and
5.4% at the bottom of the resist film. Solvent evaporation
during soft baking is diffusion controlled. The evaporation
rate is determined by the diffusion coefficient of the solvent
in the resist, which increases exponentially with increasing
temperature and free volume. The free volume is determined
by the amount of retained solvent, which acts as a plasticizer.
At the beginning of the soft baking, the solvent evaporates
quickly because of the very high solvent concentration. The
diffusion coefficient is large enough to evaporate solvent from

R85
Topical Review
Figure 6. (a) Transmission spectrum of 1 mm thick unexposed SU-8100 [59], reprinted with permission, © 2005 Elsevier. (b) Transmitted
intensity of an SU-8 film at different wavelengths after increasing exposure times [71], reprinted with permission, © 2006 AIP.
the bottom of the film and, therefore, there is no significant
solvent gradient across the film thickness. The evaporation
rate decreases gradually as the solvent content decreases and,
consequently a solvent gradient appears in the film. If the
soft-baking temperature is high, the solvent near the surface
is evaporated completely while the solvent level of interior is
still high. A ‘skin’ of dried, glassy polymer appears on the
film and hinders diffusion of the solvent from the interior.
Solvent gradients become more pronounced as the
thickness is increased. The length scale of diffusion of the
solvent during the soft baking becomes so large that the solvent
trapped below the surface cannot escape easily. Furthermore,
the problem is not necessarily solved by extending the time
of the soft bake indefinitely because, eventually, the level of
cross-linking that occurs during the soft bake (albeit at a very
low rate) will reach an unacceptable level whereby the SU-8
can no longer completely develop [66].
Solvent content and solvent gradients may also vary
depending on the equipment used for soft baking [69, 70]. Two
baking methods are commonly used: hot plates and ovens. In
an oven, the resist is uniformly heated by convection from all
sides. Skin formation on the resist surface is often observed,
which reduces further solvent evaporation. This phenomenon
can be avoided by hot plate baking. Here, the resist is heated
from below by heat conduction, and a temperature gradient
develops in the resist layer (higher temperature at the bottom
of the resist). This has a favourable effect in thinner resist
layers (convection, quicker solvent remove). However, for
large thickness a uniform bake of the layer is not possible
anymore.
Infrared irradiation has also being used for soft baking
[69]. This method allows a more uniform heating of the
resist layer, permits lower soft-baking temperatures and shorter
baking times, and yields patterns with lower residual stress
and, consequently, higher aspect ratio.
4.3. Resist UV absorption
As a photosensitive organic material, SU-8 absorbs light
in the UV range (figure 6(a)) [59]. Absorption
increases progressively during exposure due to the chemical
changes induced during photoactivation (figure 6(b)) [71].
Consequently, there is a gradual light intensity drop across
the film thickness when an UV beam penetrates the resist
layer from the top to the bottom, and this drop becomes more
R86
pronounced during exposure. This results in the top part of
the resist being irradiated with higher dosage as the bottom
part, and generates T-profiles instead of vertical profiles in
photolithographic SU-8 structures.
The UV absorption spectrum of the unexposed SU-8 resist
shows much higher absorbance at shorter wavelengths than
at longer wavelengths. In addition, the absorbance change
during exposure is also more pronounced at short wavelengths.
This means that the longer wavelength components of the
irradiation source penetrate further down and expose the
bottom part. For this reason, it is recommended to filter out
the wavelengths below 365 nm during exposure. PMMA filters
have shown the best performance [59].
In particular cases, the high absorption of the short
UV wavelengths can be advantageous [72]. Freestanding
structures on the top of SU-8 pillars have been realized by
first exposing a layer of SU-8 at 365 nm to generate the
pillars and subsequently exposing a second SU-8 layer to
313 nm UV to generate the overhangs. Under these conditions,
only the second SU-8 layer is photoactivated in the second
exposure and the underlying photoresist can be removed during
development.
4.4. Long development times
Pattern development involves diffusion of developer molecules
into the non-cross-linked SU-8 regions and diffusion of
solvated polymer chains out of them to the developer
solution. The time required for development is determined
by the exposure dose, soft-baking time and temperature,
the temperature and agitation during development and the
geometry of the pattern. HAR features such as narrow and
deep holes, tubes, or horizontally orientated long channels
are more difficult to develop. This process, if possible at
all, may take many hours and cause dramatic damage of fine
features as a consequence of swelling of cross-linked regions
or debonding of the resist layer from the wafer.
Development has been accelerated by moderately
increasing the temperature of the developing solution, by
reducing the exposure time and consequently the cross-linking
degree or by agitation [73]. Stirring of the developer solution
enhances diffusion, which increases the development rate.
Downward orientation of the wafer during stirring has been
demonstrated to improve development of HAR structures, as
it allows gravitational forces to aid in the removal of resist
[74, 75].
 Topical Review

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 7. Pattern collapse due to capillary forces during drying. When a substance crosses the boundary from liquid to gas, the size of the
liquid decreases. As this happens, surface tension at the solid–liquid interface pulls against any structure that the liquid is attached to. The
acting forces are represented in (a) [81], reprinted with permission, © 1995 AIP. Delicate structures, such as photoresist features, tend to
collapse by this surface tension as the interface (drying front) moves by. (b) Collapsed SU-8 micropillars with 5 µm diameter and aspect
ratio > 8. (c) SU-8 HAR pillars reinforced with bridges for avoiding collapse [79], reprinted with permission from Springer Science and
Business Media. These were fabricated by double exposing an SU-8 layer to x-rays to image HAR pillars and to low dose UV to image the
fine walls connecting neighbouring pillars. The low dose UV exposure is performed so that cross-linking in the SU-8 only occurs to a
shallow depth. After development, 50 µm square pillars separated by 63 µm spacings and connected by 10 µm wide and 113 µm height
bridges were obtained from a 1.5 mm thick resist. The bridges hold the columns in place and collapse is overcome even if the features are
densely packed.

Stirring during development is not always beneficial.
Strong stirring may cause HAR structures to deflect in the
pressure gradient and this may lead to pattern deformation,
debonding, adhesion between nearby structures and finally
pattern loss. Sonic development in its two categories,
ultrasonic and megasonic, can be applied to solve this problem.
Ultrasonic development uses frequencies in the kilohertz range
to agitate the developer. This increases the pressure at the resist
surface and accelerates diffusion and development. However,
ultrasonic waves also cause vibrations in the pattern structure
which may result in cracking and debonding over time. For
this reason, ultrasonic baths are not always beneficial in HAR
processing.
Megasonic agitation, which uses frequencies well above
the vibrational modes of the resist structures (typically 1 to
10 MHz), has been proved to be more effective. SU-8
structures ranging from 20 µm to 1.5 mm in height and
with aspect ratios up to 50 by optical and well over 100 by
x-ray lithography have been reported [76, 77]. Conventional
development restricted the feature’s aspect ratio to 30.
Parameters such as damping capacity, agitation power density,
orientation of the sonic wave relative to the features and
substrate may also influence the process but have not yet been
considered.
4.5. Collapse of structures during rinsing
As the AR of the features increases and their lateral
size decreases, collapse of the SU-8 pattern becomes an
important problem. Collapse occurs when the adhesive forces
between the features in contact overcome the forces required
for bending them. Simple mechanical calculations have
established the dependence of pattern collapse on Young’s
modulus of the resist material, its surface energy and the
pattern geometry (height, width and interfeature distance) [78].
The maximum AR achievable increases with increasing SU-8
stiffness, decreasing SU-8 surface energy and increasing
feature spacing. Increasing SU-8 stiffness may be performed
by adding inorganic fillers to the resist formulation. However,
composite SU-8 exhibits higher viscosity and this may worsen
planarization properties. Alternatively, the cross-linking
degree may also be increased, although this may result in
higher volume shrinkage and increased film stress. Recently,
collapse has been prevented by reinforcing the SU-8 HAR
structures through ‘bridges’ which prevent them from lateral
bending [79]. Figure 7(c) shows an example.
In lithographic processing, there is a more dramatic reason
for pattern collapse. It occurs during development and rinse,
and is a consequence of the capillary forces acting on the
resist walls during solvent evaporation and causing bending
and stiction of neighbouring features [6, 80–83] (figure 7).
Capillary forces increase with increasing surface tension of
the rinsing liquid and decreasing contact angle between liquid
and resist (i.e. increased wetting of the resist by the liquid) [84].
Substitution of the rinse water by water/alcohol mixtures with
lower surface tension (72 mN m−1 for water and 21.8 mN m−1
for isopropanol) has been proposed as an alternative to
avoid collapse during drying [85]. However, this method
has been rejected by other authors because of the strong
wetting of SU-8 by isopropanol (contact angle, θ = 20◦ for
isopropanol and 81◦ for water). Other low-surface-tension
solvents such as perfluorohexane (10 mN m−1) have also been
suggested [86, 87]. However, these solvents lack compatibility
with SU-8 processing chemicals (perfluorocarbon solvents
have poor miscibility with the developer and rinse solution).
Furthermore, the finite value of its surface tension is still not
sufficient to prevent pattern collapse in nanolithography, even
though it is so small.
Freeze drying offers another alternative, but this process
requires large processing times [88]. Supercritical drying
using CO2 after replacement of rinsing water (insoluble
in CO2) by alcohols (soluble in CO2) provides another
route for preventing collapse. In a supercritical liquid, the
surface tension becomes negligible and the capillary force is
nonexistent. However, special equipment to withstand high
pressures and elevated temperatures is required [87]. This
factor renders this method not universally applicable for wet
processing.

R87
Topical Review
5. HAR patterns obtained from SU-8
5.1. By UV exposure
Optimized UV lithography conditions have afforded line
patterns with aspect ratios up to 20 from SU-8 films with
thickness ranging from 200 to 700 µm [89]. Isolated SU-8
structures with up to 1.5 mm height and aspect ratio 15 have
also been reported [90–92]. Carefully optimized post-baking
conditions have improved the aspect ratio of isolated structures
with 1150 µm height up to 40 [93].
5.2. By x-ray exposure
X-rays are a quite convenient exposure method for HAR
lithography, although the difficult access to synchrotron
radiation strongly restricts the use of this lithography to the
broad public. Due to their short wavelengths (7–12 Å), x-rays
are able to deeply penetrate thick photoresist layers without
being absorbed by the material and create HAR structures with
vertical sidewalls. In fact, SU-8 pillars with an 8 µm diameter
and aspect ratio up to 100 have been reported [94].
SU-8 shows high sensitivity to x-rays and therefore
requires low exposure times for patterning [95]. However,
the high-energy x-ray irradiation induces fluorescence when
it penetrates the resist, which can travel laterally into the
masked areas and initiate cross-linking of SU-8 [96, 97]. This
causes blurring of the transferred pattern and decreases lateral
resolution. Better pattern definition has been achieved when
the resist is left in oxygen atmosphere (or in air) for some
hours before soft baking [96, 97]. This has been explained as
a consequence of oxygen molecules diffusing in the film and
inhibiting the subsequent photochemical reaction. Oxygen
is a strong free-radical scavenger and kills the free radicals
generated by fluorescence in the masked areas, providing a
better pattern definition.
5.3. By electron beam lithography
Although SU-8 was initially developed for optical lithography,
it is increasingly used as highly sensitive negative-tone e-
beam resist for nanopatterning. SU-8 offers higher sensitivity
(typically 150 times higher) and therefore faster exposure and
throughput than traditional PMMA-based e-beam resists. A
comparison of the performance of SU-8 in e-beam lithography
against other negative-tone resists has been recently reported
[98]. Note that the electron-beam radiation chemistry can
differ substantially from the photolytic path, and there is poor
correlation between photosensitivity and e-beam sensitivity.
The small penetration depth of low energy electrons
restricts the use of e-beam patterning to resist thickness
below 200 nm and therefore limit the AR of the patterned
features. There are no commercial formulations of SU-8 for
this thickness regime and typically the SU-8 formulation with
the lowest solid content is thinned with cyclopentanone solvent
to obtain solid content values ∼5% and thicknesses below
200 nm [99].
Another limitation of e-beam patterning is that the spatial
distribution of electrons at the resist interface is not confined
to the diameter of the primary electron beam. Instead
the impinging electrons scatter and expose resist molecules
R88
much further from the point of impact, leading to a loss in
resolution known as ‘proximity effect’. Electron wavelengths
on the order of 1 Å can be easily achieved, but electron
scattering limits the attainable resolutions to >10 nm. In
the case of SU-8, being a chemically amplified resist, pattern
broadening also occurs as a consequence of the diffusion of
the photoacid generator during post-exposure baking. In spite
of these limitations, linewidths down to 70 nm with a pitch of
300 nm in a 200 nm thick SU-8 layer [100], linewidths down
to 30 nm in a 150 nm thick SU-8 layer [101] and even
sub-30 nm lines with a pitch down to 300 nm in a 100 nm
thick SU-8 layer [99] have been achieved.
5.4. By proton beam lithography
High-energy ions, such as Ga+, H+ or He+, are able to deeply
penetrate a resist material with well-defined paths. During its
trajectory in the material, the probability that an ion interacts
with an electron is several orders of magnitude larger than
for nuclear scattering. Because of the high mismatch in mass
between the ion and the electron, ion–electron interactions do
not result in any significant deviation in the trajectory of the
ion from the straight-line path. These features allow ion beam
writing to fabricate HAR structures with smooth and vertical
sidewalls and high packing densities [102]. The penetration
depth depends on the ion energy. The minimum lateral size of
the pattern is mainly determined by the size and shape of the
beam spot.
A 2.5 MeV proton beam focused to sizes between 1.5 and
2.5 µm was used to expose SU-8 with thicknesses between
5 and 95 µm [103]. Posts with 1.5 µm in diameter in
40 µm resist layers were obtained. Lines with 60 and
120 nm width supported by pillars with 2 µm diameter
have also been written in 10 µm thick SU-8 films. This
configuration ensures the integrity of the narrow walls with
aspect ratio >160 during development. AFM characterization
of the roughness of these structures gave a sidewall roughness
of 2.5 nm [104].
HAR voids of 100 nm width and 2 µm depth have also
been obtained by proton beam lithography in SU-8 [105].
Tilted structures with sub-micrometre resolution were also
fabricated by varying the incidence angle of the ions [106,
107].
6. 3D patterns obtained from SU-8
Several methods have been developed to lithographically
fabricate 3D structures from SU-8 films. The most
straightforward strategy is based on layer-by-layer processes
where multiple coating/irradiation steps are concatenated or
iterated, each of them defining structures at different levels. In
order to minimize the number of processing steps required in
the layer-by-layer approach, new strategies with intrinsic 3D
structuring capability have been developed.
6.1. By layer-by-layer multiexposure
Lithographic fabrication by superposition of SU-8 coating
and irradiation steps enables 3D fabrication using traditional
2D setups and alignment markers on the mask for guiding

(1) Spin-coating photoresist
(2) Masked irradiation
(3) Spin-coat new photoresist layer
(4) Masked irradiation
(5) Development
Figure 8. Layer-by-layer structuring method and example of
fabricated microstructures with SU-8 25. Base pillars have 50 µm
diameter and 40 µm height. Top pillars have 9 µm diameter and
35 µm height. The negative effects of misalignment can be seen in
the ground collapse of some thin pillars. Processing conditions are
as follows: first spin coating 5 s at 500 rpm and 60 s at 900 rpm, soft
bake 3 min at 65 ◦ C and 12 min at 95 ◦ C, slow cooling, exposure
32.5 s with soft contact using a Karl Süss MJB 3 Mask Aligner, hard
bake 1 min at 65 ◦ C and 4 min at 95 ◦ C, slow cooling, development
5 min; spin coating second layer 5 s at 500 rpm and 60 s at 1750 rpm,
soft bake 3 min at 65 ◦ C and 7 min at 95 ◦ C, slow cooling, exposure
23 s in soft contact mode, alignment of base and top layer using
optical microscope and alignment markers in the mask, hard bake
1 min at 65 ◦ C and 4 min at 95 ◦ C, slow cooling, development 10
min, second hard bake 30 min at 150 ◦ C followed by slow cooling.
superposition. Figure 8 shows a schematic of the process
and an example of SU-8 patterns obtained by this method.
More complex variants combine double-side exposures,
sacrificial photoresist layers and antireflective coatings with
multiexposure [108].
Depending on the final geometry of the pattern, SU-8
development needs to be performed after each irradiation
step, or can be left to the end and performed in a single
step. In the case of HAR structures, single development is
specially recommended because of the risk of pattern collapse
during drying and the difficulty of achieving planar resist
layers over underlying HAR topographies. Using this method,
SU-8 hierarchical patterns comprising features with lateral
dimensions ranging from 5 µm to 2 mm and heights from 10
to 500 µm have been reported. In order to reduce film stress
and avoid SU-8 cracking during the multicoating processing,
SU-8 resists of different viscosities (SU-8 2100 and 2010) were
sequentially processed and simultaneously developed [109].
3D structures with overhanging features have been
fabricated by layer-by-layer exposure through contact printed
Topical Review
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f) (g)
Figure 9. The process sequence for the fabrication of overhanging
cantilevers in SU-8 by layer-by-layer exposure through contact
printed shadow masks [110], reprinted with permission, © 2006
IOP. (a) Contact printing of the mask on an SU-8 substrate
composed of a polymerized bottom layer covered by a non-
polymerized layer. The image shows a schematic cross-section of
the stamp and substrate. (b) Spin-on of a thin SU-8 layer on the top
of the stamped mask. (c) UV-light lithography to define the
cantilever and the microchannel. The embedded mask protects the
underlying resist from light exposure. (d) Polymerization of the
UV-exposed resist by a post-exposure bake. (e) SU-8 development
and mask etching to free the cantilever. Release of the chip from the
substrate. (f ) and (g) Electron microscope images of
microfabricated cantilevers integrated into a microfluidic channel.
The thickness of the beams is 8 µm.
shadow masks which were embedded into the SU-8 multilayer
[110]. The mask protected buried resist from subsequent
UV exposure and enabled fabrication of 4 µm thick and
100 µm long cantilevers integrated into a microfluidic device
(figure 9).
6.2. By inclined/rotated lithography
In conventional lithography the mask and the resist film are
perpendicularly aligned with respect to the irradiation source.
The light is shadowed by the mask for a one-to-one projection
of the pattern on the resist, resulting in vertical, binary-
contrast, lithographic profiles. By tilting the mask and resist
film with respect to the beam using a tilting stage, inclined
structures have been produced [111]. Oblique SU-8 cylinders,
embedded channels, bridges, V-grooves and truncated cones
R89
Topical Review
(a) Single tilted exposure (b) Two tilted exposures
Θ Θ
Figure 10. Tilted and rotated lithography [111], reprinted with permission, © 2004 Elsevier. (a) Tilted SU-8 pillars obtained by tilted UV
single exposure. Tilting angle is 19.5◦ and scale bar corresponds to 100 µm. (b) SU-8 structures obtained by UV double exposure. Scale bar
corresponds to 200 µm. (c) Tapered structures obtained by tilted and rotated UV exposure. Scale bar corresponds to 50 µm. (d) SU-8
structures fabricated by tilted UV on reflective substrates (aluminium-coated silicon). Scale bar corresponds to 50 µm.
with aspect ratios >4 have been fabricated using 100 µm
thick SU-8 layers and a conventional UV mask aligner
(figure 10(a)) [111]. Multiple inclined UV exposures along
different axes can be exploited to generate complex 3D
structures (figure 10(b)) [22, 111, 112]. Tilted exposure can
also be combined with vertical exposure to create asymmetric
pillars with vertical and inclined sidewalls [113].
The fabricated structure angle after tilted exposure is
different from the exposure angle due to different refractive
indices of SU-8, mask and air (nair = 1, nglass = 1.47, nSU-8 =
1.668 at λ = 365 nm and 1.650 at λ = 405 nm) [114].
Structures with smaller tilt angles than the exposure angle
are obtained as a consequence of the refraction of the incident
UV light at the interface of each material. For example, a
light beam projected on the resist at 45◦ propagates at an angle
of 25.24◦ . This imposes a theoretical limit of the fabricated
structure angle which is 38.7◦ for a maximum exposure angle
of 90◦ . In order to improve maximum angle, the mismatch
of the refractive index between exposure medium and SU-8
should be compensated. This has been achieved by using either
glycerol (nglycerol = 1.47) or water (nwater = 1.3) as exposure
medium instead of air [115, 116]. As a result, the maximum
angle of the inclined structure has been increased to 56.2◦ .
If the photomask- and photoresist-coated substrates are
tilted and simultaneously rotated during irradiation, tapered
structures with non-vertical sidewalls can also be generated
(figure 10(c)) [111, 117]. Such tapered structures are
interesting if the SU-8 pattern is needed as master for a
subsequent replication step because they provide a draft angle
and facilitate demoulding [118].
During irradiation, the incident light which penetrates
the resist film is always reflected at the photoresist–substrate
interface. Typically, the energy of the reflected UV is too
low to initiate cross-linking of the resist, and therefore this
effect is usually not considered. However, if the energy of
the reflected UV is increased (by raising exposure times or
by using reflective substrates) cross-linking may be initiated
along the path of the reflected beam [111]. Figure 10(d)
shows the structures obtained after single tilted exposure using
a reflective Al-coated silicon wafer.
6.3. By modulated exposure
Recently, a number of novel approaches to generate multilevel
structures from single resist layers have been demonstrated
R90
(c) Rotated and tilted (d ) Tilted, reflected exposure
Φ
which avoid time-consuming multiexposure strategies. These
are based on special masks and projection optics which allow
modulated exposure doses of the resist film. This results in
multiple depths of the exposed photoresist across the surface
and, consequently, different heights of the photoresist structure
remaining after development.
‘Grey scale’ lithography makes use of special photomasks
which modulate the light intensity according to their grey
levels. Two types of grey scale masks can be used: halftone
chrome masks and high-energy beam sensitive (HEBS) glass
masks. Halftone masks are essentially binary chrome masks
with grey levels simulated by different densities of opaque
pixels on a transparent background. HEBS glass masks are
fabricated by exposing this glass to controlled doses of a high-
energy electron beam, causing the reduction of silver ions
in the glass. Areas of the mask with high concentrations of
reduced silver ions correspond to high levels of grey shading.
This method has been used to produce suspended 10 µm thick
grid structures on the top of 15 to 100 µm high SU-8 pillars
[119, 120].
Grey masks are difficult and expensive to fabricate. Masks
with a topographical pattern of a UV-absorbing photoresist
with features of different heights can also generate differential
UV doses and are more affordable [121]. Due to the absorption
of UV energy by the photoactive and dye ingredients in
the mask, irradiation doses vary according to the height of
the mask features. Such masks have been fabricated by
lithographic structuring of a AZ4620 resist layer on a glass
substrate, followed by reflowing of the resist features to form
hemispheres. Different curvatures were obtained by reflowing
under various geometries, temperatures and time conditions.
UV exposure of the SU-8 layer through such grey mask forms
curved SU-8 structures due to the differential exposure dose.
Photolithographic masks containing scale coloured
patterns printed on transparent films have also been used for
modulated exposure [122]. Exposing an SU-8 layer through
the coloured mask renders features with different heights as
a consequence of the differences in the UV absorption by the
colours, and therefore transmitted intensity to the SU-8 film.
6.4. By holographic lithography
3D patterns can be created on SU-8 films by holographic
lithography (or interference lithography, IL). This exposure
method is based on the interference of coherent laser beams

(a) (c)
(b) (d)
Figure 11. SU-8 structures with fcc symmetry fabricated with
four-beam holographic lithography using decreasing exposure
dosage [126], reprinted with permission, © 2003 AIP: (a) 160,
(b) 130, (c) 100 and (d) 60 mJ cm−2.
to form a periodic, sinusoidal intensity pattern in space. By
exposing SU-8 to this illumination pattern, periodic structures
are obtained after development. Different symmetry patterns
can be generated by controlling the number, amplitude, phase,
wave vector and polarization of the interfering beams. Two-
beam IL creates 1D surface relieves. 2D gratings can be
produced by overlaying two sequential exposures at 90◦ or
by interfering three beams. Using additional beams in a
single exposure or overlaying multiple exposures, 3D periodic
structures can also be fabricated.
Theoretical works have predicted the appropriate laser
beam configurations to achieve different periodic 3D structures
(e.g. bcc, fcc, gyroid or diamond symmetries) [123, 124].
Among them, only a few have been manufactured [125–132].
Four-beam IL has proved to give fcc [126, 127] (figure 11),
simple cubic, bcc [128] and diamond-like [129, 130] SU-8
patterns. The interference pattern of six equally spaced
circumpolar linearly polarized side beams and a circularly
polarized central beam has been used to fabricate spiral
microstructures [131]. The pitch and separation of the spirals
were varied by changing the angle between the side beams
and the central beam. Ten-beam IL has produced 3D periodic
quasicrystals [132].
The spatial light intensity distribution within the
interference pattern generates a spatial distribution of elastic
and plastic properties of the fabricated structures, with
higher mechanical properties observed at the nodes [133].
3D structures of this kind can be considered as composite
networks with potentially peculiar properties associated with
the nonuniformity of their internal elastic properties. Initial
experiments with 2D patterns have shown their capability of
highly plastic deformation, a property which is not expected
from glassy, highly cross-linked SU-8 films [133].
The periodic structures obtained by IL find preferential
application in photonics. This application requires resist
materials with a refractive index >2 to open omnidirectional
band gaps. Therefore, structures formed from SU-8 (n = 1.6)
are not appropriate for this application. Instead, they have been
used as templates for inorganic structures with a larger index
Topical Review
contrast, whereas the SU-8 pattern is infiltrated with silica
precursors and burned away. The remaining silica negative
is then filled with silicon and the silica is selectively etched
away.
Alternatively, the refractive index of SU-8 layers has been
modulated taking advantage of the higher refractive index of
thermally cross-linked SU-8 (at T > 137 ◦ C) versus that of
cross-linked SU-8 after UV exposure (1.5930 and 1.5858,
respectively) [58]. The 0.0072 refractive index difference
is a consequence of the lower solvent content and therefore
higher density of the thermally cross-linked material due to
the long thermal treatment time. Exposing a 44 µm SU-8
film to UV irradiation through a mask with a pixel size of
15 µm and a mean resolution of 2.11 µm, followed by a post-
exposure baking at 95 ◦ C and a thermal baking at 170 ◦ C (no
development!) yields an SU-8 film with a lateral modulation
of refractive index in exposed/non-exposed regions.
6.5. By stereolithography of resist multilayers
Stereolithography historically refers to the technology of
creating 3D objects from computer aided design patterns by
adding and exposing photoresist layers to scanning UV lasers.
When the process is repeated sequentially after adding new
resin layers on top of the cured one, 3D structures can be
created with micrometre precision [134].
6.6. By laser scanning of single resist layers
Nd:YAG lasers operating at a wavelength of 355 nm have
been used to expose the SU-8 photoresist through a two-
axis scan head and expander lens [135, 136]. This exposure
method produces a nonuniform distribution of laser power
along its incident axis. By this means, in-plane and in-depth
processing is achievable by controlling the current to the pump
diodes and by varying the focus level to yield the desired
exposure energy at the appropriate spot in the photoresist. This
method allows the fabrication of microfluidic components such
as cantilevered valves, embedded channels and other shapes
requiring gaps between layers from a single SU-8 layer. The
reported maximum scan field size is 100 × 100 mm2, while the
minimum spot size is 20 µm. This limits the lateral resolution
of the patterned features.
In the last few years, picosecond and femtosecond
lasers have been used for 3D structuring to achieve
higher precision exploiting two-photon absorption (TPA).
Conventional electronic transitions caused by the absorption
of a single photon of energy hν 1 may be produced
by the simultaneous absorption of two photons, each
photon providing half the energy of the transition (hν 1/2).
The probability of a molecule absorbing two photons
simultaneously (defined by the TPA cross section, δ TPA) is
proportional to the square of the intensity of the input beam.
This implicates that two-photon absorption requires the use of
very powerful lasers and occurs only at the focal plane where
the intensity is maximized. As a consequence, processes based
on TPA present much higher lateral resolution than those based
on single-photon absorption.
Although selection rules for single-photon and two-
photon excitation are different, most resins that polymerize
under UV exposure can undergo similar reactions by TPA,
R91
Topical Review
(a) (b)
Figure 12. (a), (b) 3D structures obtained by TPL using SU-8 [52], reprinted with permission, © 2005 AIP. (c) SEM image of photonic
spiral structures obtained by TPL using SU-8 with a 180◦ phase shift between adjacent spirals [140].
provided that the irradiation intensity is high enough. This
seems to be the case for SU-8, as patterns with pillars, planes
and cage microstructures [52, 137, 138] and 3D nanostructures
with lateral sizes as small as 120 nm [139] have been obtained
by this technique (figure 12). Photonic structures with spiral
architectures have been obtained from SU-8 layers using
a femtosecond Ti:Sapphire laser with a central wavelength
at 800 nm and are shown in figure 12 [140–142]. Other
authors have combined IL to define a periodic host photonic
crystal, and a scanning two-photon excitation laser to create a
waveguide and embedded microcavities at a depth of 5 µm in
a 12 µm layer [143].
A recent report suggests that exposure of SU-8 to
femtosecond lasers may directly induce localized thermal
polymerization as a consequence of a temperature rise at the
focal region [144]. This mechanism allows direct development
after exposure without the need of a post-bake process and
therefore the fabrication of patterns with smaller lateral size.
7. Discussion
SU-8 can be processed with a number of patterning techniques
to render high-aspect-ratio and 3D submicron structures.
The irradiation source and configuration used for processing
determine the maximum lateral resolution, aspect ratio and
geometrical complexity of the patterned features. Simple
SU-8 structures (pillars and walls) with aspect ratio above
100 but a maximum lateral resolution of 8 µm have been
reported after UV exposure. Better lateral resolution (<1 µm)
maintaining high aspect ratios has been achieved using x-rays.
High-energy beams may render even smaller structures, but
with limited aspect ratio. It is worth to mention that these
techniques are not available at any research lab and are not
suitable for industrial implementation due to their high cost
and low throughput.
Photolithographic patterning of complex SU-8 structures
is possible using multiexposure methods. The complexity
of the achievable designs correlates with the number
of coating/exposure steps and this limits the industrial
implementation of these strategies. Interference lithography
provides increased throughput in 3D patterning at the cost
of reduced flexibility of pattern geometry (only symmetric
structures). Two-photon laser scanning overcomes the
flexibility issue and allows serial writing of arbitrary
geometries. However, writing speeds are slow and costly high
intensity laser beams are required.
R92
(c)
Some of the difficulties of SU-8 processing may be
overcome with improved formulations of the system. In this
context, SU-8 based resists containing silica nanoparticles
up to 15 wt% have been recently described [145, 146].
These systems seem to show higher sensitivity and lower
expansion coefficient than the unreinforced SU-8. Particle
loadings below 2.5 wt% result in better resist adhesion to
the substrate, lower stress and less cracks after processing
without compromising the lateral resolution and the vertical
sidewall profiles. Above this value, the resolution decreases
drastically, followed by a difficulty to develop the exposed
parts of the photoresist. The silica particles are abrasive and
therefore decrease the wear rate and frictional coefficient of
the unreinforced SU-8 material.
In addition, novel formulations may expand the
application field of SU-8. As an example formulations of SU-
8 resist with conductive properties have been reported [147,
148]. These contain silver nanoparticles in concentrations
above the percolation threshold (6 vol.%). Depending on the
silver volume fraction, the composite structures show electrical
resistivities between 104 and 10−4  cm. As a consequence,
the conductive photoresist can be used for direct manufacture
of electrically conductive microcomponents.
References
[1] Gates B D et al 2005 New approaches to nanofabrication:
molding, printing, and other techniques Chem. Rev.
105 1171–96
[2] Gates B D et al 2004 Unconventional nanofabrication Annu.
Rev. Mater. Res. 34 339–72
[3] Xia Y N and Whitesides G M 1998 Soft lithography Angew.
Chem. Int. Ed. 37 551–75
[4] Wallraff G M and Hinsberg W D 1999 Lithographic imaging
techniques for the formation of nanoscopic features Chem.
Rev. 99 1801–21
[5] Rothschild M 2005 Projection optical lithography Mater.
Today 8 18–24
[6] Brunner T A 2003 Why optical lithography will live forever
J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B 21 2632–7
[7] Ito T and Okazaki S 2000 Pushing the limits of lithography
Nature 406 1027–31
[8] Willson C G and Trinque B C 2003 The evolution of
materials for the photolithographic process J. Photopoly.
Sci. Technol. 16 621–7
[9] Rothschild M et al 2004 Liquid immersion lithography: why,
how, and when? J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B 22 2877–81
[10] Gil D et al 2004 Immersion lithography: new opportunities
for semiconductor manufacturing J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B
22 3431–8

[11] Ye J-Y et al 2002 Fabrication and optical characteristics of
silicon-based two-dimensional photonic crystals with
honeycomb lattice Opt. Commun. 211 205–13
[12] Cuisin C et al 2000 Fabrication of three-dimensional
photonic structures with submicrometer resolution by
x-ray lithography J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B 18 3505–9
[13] Campbell M et al 2000 Fabrication of photonic crystals for
the visible spectrum by holographic lithography
Nature 404 53–6
[14] Lin S Y et al 1998 A three-dimensional photonic crystal
operating at infrared wavelengths Nature 394 251–3
[15] Heyderman L J et al 2003 High volume fabrication of
customised nanopore membrane chips Microelectron.
Eng. 67–68 208–13
[16] Kee C S et al 2005 Photonic band gaps and defect modes of
polymer photonic crystal slabs Appl. Phys. Lett. 86 051101
[17] Kuwabara K et al 2004 Fluorescence measurements of
nanopillars fabricated by high-aspect-ratio nanoprint
technology Microelectron. Eng. 73–74 752–6
[18] Delamarche E et al 2005 Microfluidics for processing
surfaces and miniaturizing biological assays Adv. Mater.
17 2911–33
[19] Burns M A et al 1998 An integrated nanoliter DNA analysis
device Science 282 484–7
[20] Wagler P F et al 2003 Microfabrication of a BioModule
composed of microfluidics and digitally controlled
microelectrodes for processing biomolecules Smart Mater.
Struct. 12 757–62
[21] Thorsen T et al 2002 Microfluidic large-scale integration
Science 298 580–4
[22] Romanato F et al 2004 X-ray lithography for 3D microfluidic
applications Microelectron. Eng. 73–74 870–5
[23] Pérennès F et al 2006 Sharp beveled tip hollow microneedle
arrays fabricated by LIGA and 3D soft lithography with
polyvinyl alcohol J. Micromech. Microeng. 16 473–9
[24] Brown R A et al 2005 Ultrarapid engineering of biomimetic
materials and tissues: fabrication of nano- and
microstructures by plastic compression Adv. Funct.
Mater. 15 1762–70
[25] Popov V K et al 2004 Laser stereolithography and
supercritical fluid processing for custom-designed implant
fabrication J. Mater. Sci., Mater. Med. 15 123–8
[26] Liu Y et al 2005 3D femtosecond laser patterning of collagen
for directed cell attachment Biomaterials 26 4597–605
[27] Kusakabe H et al 2004 Osseointegration of a
hydroxyapatite-coated multilayered mesh stem
Biomaterials 25 2957–69
[28] Hoque M E et al 2005 Fabrication using a rapid prototyping
system and in vitro characterization of PEG-PCL-PLA
scaffolds for tissue engineering J. Biomater. Sci. Polym.
Ed. 16 1595–610
[29] Martina M et al 2005 Developing macroporous bicontinuous
materials as scaffolds for tissue engineering
Biomaterials 26 5609–16
[30] Jones A C et al 2004 Investigation of microstructural features
in regenerating bone using micro computed tomography
J. Mater. Sci., Mater. Med. 15 529–32
[31] Hutmacher D W 2001 Scaffold design and fabrication
technologies for engineering tissues—state of the art
and future perspectives J. Biomater. Sci. Polym. Ed.
12 107–24
[32] Palmaz J C et al 1999 Influence of surface topography on
endothelialization of intravascular metallic material
J. Vasc. Intervent. Radiol. 10 439–44
[33] Granhag L M et al 2004 Roughness-dependent removal of
settled spores of the green alga Ulva (syn. Enteromorpha)
exposed to hydrodynamic forces from a water jet
Biofouling 20 117–22
[34] Hoipkemeier-Wilson L et al 2004 Antifouling potential of
lubricious, micro-engineered, PDMS elastomers against
zoospores of the green fouling alga Ulva (Enteromorpha)
Biofouling 20 53–63
Topical Review
[35] Callow M E et al 2002 Microtopographic cues for settlement
of zoospores of the green fouling alga Enteromorpha
Biofouling 18 237–45
[36] Geim A K et al 2003 Microfabricated adhesive mimicking
gecko foot-hair Nature Mater. 2 461–3
[37] Jin M et al 2005 Superhydrophobic aligned polystyrene
nanotube films with high adhesive force Adv. Mater.
17 1977–81
[38] Sitti M and Fearing R S 2003 Synthetic gecko foot-hair
micro/nano-structures as dry adhesives J. Adhes. Sci.
Technol. 17 1055–73
[39] Yurdumakan B et al 2005 Synthetic gecko foot-hairs from
multiwalled carbon nanotubes Chem. Commun. 3799–801
[40] Ito H 2005 Chemical amplification resists for
microlithography Adv. Polym. Sci. 172 37–245
[41] http://www.Dupont.com/pcm.
[42] http://www.tok.co.jp/products/products-e2.htm.
[43] http://www.insulectro.com/dryfilm.htm.
[44] http://www.thinktink.com/stack/volumes/voli/
store/specs/4615spec.htm.
[45] http://www.jsits.com/kpr/facility.htm.
[46] Koukharenko E et al 2005 A comparative study of different
thick photoresists for MEMS applications J. Mater. Sci.,
Mater. Electron. 16 741–7
[47] http://www.microchem.com/products/su eight.htm.
[48] Chang H K and Kim Y K 2000 UV-LIGA process for high
aspect ratio structure using stress barrier and C-shaped
etch hole Sensors Actuators A 84 342–50
[49] Kim S-H et al 2002 A high-aspect-ratio comb actuator using
UV-LIGA surface micromachining and (110) silicon bulk
micromachining J. Micromech. Microeng. 12 128–35
[50] Kupka R K et al 2000 Microfabrication: LIGA-X and
applications Appl. Surface Sci. 164 97–110
[51] Liu J-Q et al 2006 A novel method to fabricate complex
three-dimensional microstructures Microsyst.
Technol. 12 786–9
[52] Teh W H et al 2005 Effect of low numerical-aperture
femtosecond two-photon absorption on (SU-8) resist for
ultrahigh-aspect-ratio microstereolithography J. Appl.
Phys. 97 054907
[53] Lorenz H et al 1998 High-aspect-ratio, ultrathick,
negative-tone near-UV photoresist and its applications for
MEMS Sensors Actuators A 64 33–9
[54] Liu J et al 2004 Process research of high aspect ratio
microstructure using SU-8 resist Microsyst. Technol.
10 265–8
[55] Dai W et al 2005 A quantitative study on the adhesion
property of cured SU-8 on various metallic surfaces
Microsyst. Technol. 11 526–34
[56] Conradie E H and Moore D F 2002 SU-8 thick photoresist
processing as a functional material for MEMS applications
J. Micromech. Microeng. 12 368–74
[57] Khoo H S et al 2003 Mechanical strength and interfacial
failure analysis of cantilevered SU-8 microposts
J. Micromech. Microeng. 13 822–31
[58] Ong B H et al 2006 Photothermally enabled lithography for
refractive-index modulation in SU-8 photoresist Opt. Lett.
31 1367–9
[59] Yang R and Wang W 2005 A numerical and experimental
study on gap compensation and wavelength selection in
UV-lithography of ultra-high aspect ratio SU-8
microstructures Sensors Actuators B 110 279–88
[60] Chuang Y J et al 2002 Reduction of diffraction effect of UV
exposure on SU-8 negative thick photoresist by air gap
elimination Microsyst. Technol. 8 308–13
[61] http://www.suss.de.
[62] Tian X et al 2005 Simulation of deep UV lithography with
SU-8 resist by using 365 nm light source Microsyst.
Technol. 11 265–70
[63] Kang W-J et al 2006 Novel exposure methods based on
reflection and refraction effects in the field of SU-8
lithography J. Micromech. Microeng. 16 821–31
R93
Topical Review
[64] Zhang J et al 2005 Reduction of diffraction effect for
fabrication of very high aspect ratio micro-channels in
SU-8 over large area by soft cushion technology
Microsyst. Technol. 11 519–25
[65] Barber R L et al 2005 Optimization of SU-8 processing
parameters for deep x-ray lithography Microsyst.
Technol. 11 303–10
[66] Becnel C et al 2005 Ultra-deep x-ray lithography of densely
packed SU-8 features: II. Process performance as a
function of dose, feature height and post exposure bake
temperature J. Micromech. Microeng. 15 1249–59
[67] Becnel C et al 2005 Ultra-deep x-ray lithography of densely
packed SU-8 features: I. An SU-8 casting procedure to
obtain uniform solvent content with accompanying
experimental results J. Micromech. Microeng. 15 1242–8
[68] Liu G et al 2005 Fabrication of high-aspect-ratio
microstructures using SU8 photoresist Microsyst.
Technol. 11 343–6
[69] Kubenz M et al 2003 Effective baking of thick and ultra-thick
photoresist layers by infrared radiation Microelectron.
Eng. 67–68 495–501
[70] Wang C et al 2005 A novel method for the fabrication of
high-aspect ratio C-MEMS structures
J. Microelectromech. Syst. 14 348–58
[71] Gaudet M et al 2006 Variation of absorption coefficient and
determination of critical dose of SU-8 at 365 nm Appl.
Phys. Lett. 88 024107
[72] Ceyssens F and Puers R 2006 Creating multi-layered
structures with freestanding parts in SU-8 J. Micromech.
Microeng. 16 S19–23
[73] Chan-Park M B et al 2004 Fabrication of large SU-8 mold
with high aspect ratio microchannels by UV exposure dose
reduction Sensors Actuators B 101 175–82
[74] Cheng C-M and Chen R-H 2004 Key issues in fabricating
microstructures with high aspect ratios by using deep
x-ray lithography Microelectron. Eng. 71 335–42
[75] Cheng C-M and Chen R-H 2001 Development behaviors
and microstructure quality of downward-development in
deep x-ray lithography J. Micromech. Microeng.
11 692–6
[76] Meyer P et al 2002 Investigations of the development rate of
irradiated PMMA microstructures in deep x-ray
lithography Microelectron. Eng. 63 319–28
[77] Williams J D and Wang W 2004 Using megasonic
development of SU-8 to yield ultra-high aspect ratio
microstructures with UV lithography Microsyst.
Technol. 10 694–8
[78] Hui C Y et al 2002 Constraints on microcontact printing
imposed by stamp deformation Langmuir 18 1394–407
[79] Peele A G et al 2005 Overcoming SU-8 stiction in high
aspect ratio structures Microsyst. Technol. 11 221–4
[80] Tanaka T et al 1993 Mechanism of resist pattern collapse
J. Electrochem. Soc. 140 L115–6
[81] Namatsu H et al 1995 Dimensional limitations of silicon
nanolines resulting from pattern distortion due to
surface-tension of rinse water Appl. Phys. Lett. 66 2655–7
[82] Cao H B et al 2000 Comparison of resist collapse properties
for deep ultraviolet and 193 nm resist platforms J. Vac. Sci.
Technol. B 18 3303–7
[83] Zhang X et al 2004 Chemical-mechanical photoresist drying
in supercritical carbon dioxide with hydrocarbon
surfactants J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B 22 818–25
[84] Kondo T et al 2006 Reduction of capillary force for
high-aspect ratio nanofabrication Appl. Phys. A 81 1583–6
[85] Tanaka T et al 1993 Mechanism of resist pattern collapse
during development process Japan. J. Appl. Phys.
1 32 6059–64
[86] Yamashita Y 1996 Sub-0.1 µm patterning with high aspect
ratio of 5 achieved by preventing pattern collapse Japan. J.
Appl. Phys. 1 35 2385–6
[87] Namatsu H et al 2000 Supercritical resist dryer J. Vac. Sci.
Technol. B 18 780–4
R94
[88] Tanaka T et al 1993 Freeze-drying process to avoid resist
pattern collapse Japan. J. Appl. Phys. 1 32 5813–4
[89] Dentinger P M et al 2002 High aspect ratio patterning with a
proximity ultraviolet source Microelectron. Eng.
61–2 1001–7
[90] Loechel B 2000 Thick-layer resists for surface
micromachining J. Micromech. Microeng. 10 108–15
[91] O’Brien J et al 2001 Advanced photoresist technologies for
microsystems J. Micromech. Microeng. 11 353–8
[92] Lin C H et al 2002 A new fabrication process for ultra-thick
microfluidic microstructures utilizing SU-8 photoresist
J. Micromech. Microeng. 12 590–7
[93] Williams J D and Wang W J 2004 Study on the postbaking
process and the effects on UV lithography of high aspect
ratio SU-8 microstructures J. Microlithogr. Microfabr.
Microsyst. 3 563–8
[94] Bogdanov A L and Peredkov S S 2000 Use of SU-8
photoresist for very high aspect ratio x-ray lithography
Microelectron. Eng. 53 493–6
[95] Wong D et al 2006 Study of x-ray lithographic conditions for
SU-8 by Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy
Microelectron. Eng. 83 1912–7
[96] Shew B Y et al 2004 Oxygen quenching effect in ultra-deep
x-ray lithography with SU-8 resist J. Micromech.
Microeng. 14 410–4
[97] Shew B-Y et al 2005 X-ray micromachining SU-8 resist for a
terahertz photonic filter J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys.
38 1097–103
[98] Bilenberg B et al 2006 Comparison of high resolution
negative electron beam resists J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B
24 1776–9
[99] Bilenberg B et al 2006 High resolution 100 kV electron beam
lithography in SU-8 Microelectron. Eng. 83 1609–12
[100] Pepin A et al 2004 Exploring the high sensitivity of SU-8
resist for high resolution electron beam patterning
Microelectron. Eng. 73–74 233–7
[101] Aktary M et al 2003 High-resolution pattern generation using
the epoxy novolak SU-8 2000 resist by electron beam
lithography J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B 21 L5–7
[102] van Kan J A et al 2004 Proton beam writing: a progress
review Int. J. Nanotechnol. 1 464–79
[103] Auzelyte V et al 2006 Exposure parameters for MeV
proton beam writing on SU-8 Microelectron. Eng.
83 2015–20
[104] van Kan J A et al 2003 Three-dimensional nanolithography
using proton beam writing Appl. Phys. Lett. 83 1629–31
[105] Ansari K et al 2004 Fabrication of high aspect ratio 100 nm
metallic stamps for nanoimprint lithography using proton
beam writing Appl. Phys. Lett. 85 476–8
[106] Munnik F et al 2003 High aspect ratio, 3D structuring of
photoresist materials by ion beam LIGA Microelectron.
Eng. 67–68 96–103
[107] Osipowicz T et al 2000 The use of proton microbeams for the
production of microcomponents Nucl. Instrum. Methods
Phys. Res. B 161 83–9
[108] Chuang Y J et al 2003 A novel fabrication method of
imbedded micro-channels by using SU-8 thick-film
photoresist Sensors Actuators A 103 64–9
[109] Mata A et al 2006 Fabrication of multi-layer SU-8
microstructures J. Micromech. Microeng. 16 276–84
[110] Haefliger D and Boisen A 2006 Three-dimensional
microfabrication in negative resist using printed masks
J. Micromech. Microeng. 16 951–7
[111] Han M et al 2004 3D microfabrication with inclined/rotated
UV lithography Sensors Actuators A 111 14–20
[112] Sato H et al 2004 Three-dimensional micro-structures
consisting of high aspect ratio inclined micro-pillars
fabricated by simple photolithography Microsyst.
Technol. 10 440–3
[113] Mekaru H et al 2002 Quasi-3D microstructure fabrication
technique utilizing hard x-ray lithography of synchrotron
radiation Microsyst. Technol. 9 36–40

[114] Sato H et al 2004 In-channel 2D micromesh structures using
maskless multi-angle exposures and their microfilter
application Sensors Actuators A 111 87–92
[115] Yang R et al 2005 Microfabrication and test of a
three-dimensional polymer hydro-focusing unit for flow
cytometry applications Sensors Actuators A 118 259–67
[116] Sato H et al 2006 Improved inclined multi-lithography using
water as exposure medium and its 3D mixing microchannel
application Sensors Actuators A 128 183–90
[117] Park J-Y et al 2005 3D optical microstructure fabrication and
its bonding to micro IR detector using elastomeric
polymer Microsyst. Technol. 11 168–78
[118] Turner R et al 2003 Tapered LIGA HARMs J. Micromech.
Microeng. 13 367–72
[119] Galas J C et al 2004 Fabrication of three-dimensional
microstructures using standard ultraviolet and
electron-beam lithography J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B
22 1160–2
[120] Kudryashov V et al 2003 Grey scale structures formation in
SU-8 with e-beam and UV Microelectron. Eng.
67–68 306–11
[121] Hung K-Y et al 2005 Application of 3D gray mask for the
fabrication of curved SU-8 structures Microsyst.
Technol. 11 365–9
[122] Taff J et al 2006 Fabricating multilevel SU-8 structures in a
single photolithographic step using colored masking
patterns J. Vac. Sci. Technol. A24 742–6
[123] Chan T Y M et al 2005 Photonic band gap templating using
optical interference lithography Phys. Rev. E 71 046605
[124] Li E et al 2006 Predication of multi-dimensional photonic
crystal structures generated by multi-beam interference in
holographic lithography Smart Mater. Struct. 15 S158–64
[125] Kondo T et al 2001 Femtosecond laser interference technique
with diffractive beam splitter for fabrication of
three-dimensional photonic crystals Appl. Phys. Lett.
79 725–7
[126] Wang X et al 2003 Three-dimensional photonic crystals
fabricated by visible light holographic lithography Appl.
Phys. Lett. 82 2212–4
[127] Wu L et al 2005 Fabrication of large area two- and
three-dimensional polymer photonic crystals using single
refracting prism holographic lithography Appl. Phys.
Lett. 86 241102
[128] Ullal C K et al 2004 Photonic crystals through holographic
lithography: simple cubic, diamond-like, and gyroid-like
structures Appl. Phys. Lett. 84 5434–6
[129] Zhong Y C et al 2005 Photonic crystal with diamond like
structure fabricated by holographic lithography Appl.
Phys. Lett. 87 061103
[130] Sharp D N et al 2003 Holographic photonic crystals
with diamond symmetry Phys. Rev. B
68 205102
Topical Review
[131] Pang Y K et al 2005 Chiral microstructures (spirals)
fabrication by holographic lithography Opt. Express
13 7615–20
[132] Wang X et al 2006 Realization of optical periodic
quasicrystals using holographic lithography Appl. Phys.
Lett. 88 051901
[133] Choi T et al 2006 The elastic properties and plastic behavior
of two-dimensional polymer structures fabricated by laser
interference lithography Adv. Funct. Mater. 16 1324–30
[134] Bertsch A et al 1999 3D microfabrication by combining
microstereolithography and thick resist UV lithography
Sensors Actuators A 73 14–23
[135] Li B et al 2004 Rapid three-dimensional manufacturing of
microfluidic structures using a scanning laser system Appl.
Phys. Lett. 85 2426–8
[136] Li B et al 2006 Thickness management in three-dimensional
laser manufacturing of suspended structures in a
single SU-8 layer Rev. Sci. Instrum. 77 065103
[137] Teh W H et al 2004 SU-8 for real three-dimensional
subdiffraction-limit two-photon microfabrication Appl.
Phys. Lett. 84 4095–7
[138] Juodkazis S et al 2005 Two-photon lithography of nanorods
in SU-8 photoresist Nanotechnology 16 846–9
[139] LaFratta C N et al 2004 Replication of
two-photon-polymerized structures with extremely high
aspect ratios and large overhangs J. Phys. Chem. B
108 11256–8
[140] Seet K K et al 2005 Three-dimensional spiral-architecture
photonic crystals obtained by direct laser writing Adv.
Mater. 17 541–5
[141] Seet K K et al 2006 Three-dimensional circular spiral
photonic crystal structures recorded by femtosecond
pulses J. Non-Cryst. Solids 352 2390–4
[142] Seet K K et al 2006 Three-dimensional horizontal circular
spiral photonic crystals with stop gaps below 1 mm Appl.
Phys. Lett. 88 221101
[143] Scrimgeour J et al 2006 Three-dimensional optical
lithography for photonic microstructures Adv. Mater.
18 1557–60
[144] Seet K K et al 2006 Feature-size reduction of
photopolymerized structures by femtosecond optical
curing of SU-8 Appl. Phys. Lett. 89 024106
[145] Jiguet S et al 2006 Effect of filler behavior on nanocomposite
SU8 photoresist for moving micro-parts Microelectron.
Eng. 83 1273–6
[146] Jiguet S et al 2006 SU-8 nanocomposite photoresist with low
stress properties for microfabrication applications
Microelectron. Eng. 83 1966–70
[147] Jiguet S et al 2006 SU8-silver photosensitive nanocomposite
Adv. Eng. Mater. 2006 719–24
[148] Jiguet S et al 2005 Conductive SU8 photoresist for
microfabrication Adv. Funct. Mater. 15 1511–6
R95