Optimization of etch process using Jmp software

1 Objective of Assignment 2

2 Description of input and output parameters

The description of major process steps used in generation of nanopattern with metal oxides on a substrate
is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Schematic description of process controllable factors.

Time, temperature, pressure, RIE power, ICP power, gas flow and gas composition are the input param-
eters which are described below:

• Time (min) affects pillars through the depth. Longer etches lead to the deeper pillars. The etch
rate decreases as the etch proceeds (reactive species and byproducts cannot diffuse as effectively
when the pillars are very deep.)

• Temperature (◦ C) effect is related to the water cooling of a RIE electrode where the sample. He
backside cooling gives thermal contact between the electrode and the sample. Currently, the wa-
ter cooling on the RIE is not used. Our recipe uses relatively gentle plasma conditions and the
substrate doesn’t get noticeably hot, even after long processing times.

• Pressure (mTorr) affects the mean free path of the charged particles, and it also affects the retention
time of the species on the surface. Low pressure tends toward anisotropic etch profiles.

1
 • RIE power (W) controls the kinetic energy of the impinging particles. It might the most influencing
parameter on the etch process.

• ICP power (W) controls the plasma density.

• Gas flow combines total gases.

• Gas composition (cm2 ) is a mixture of CHF3 and O2 gases, whereas O2 is necessary for the
removal of a floropolymer passivation layer that forms during etch.

The output that the etch tool provides during etch is the in-built bias. Under typical conditions, our recipe
creates a bias of around 160 V. The bias is sensitive to all the plasma conditions, and it is a measure of
the kinetic energy of the plasma. It was suggested that RIE and pressure have the largest effect on the
bias.

3 Experimental parameters and simulation startup

The experimental data is shown in Figure 2. The difference parameter is defined as a difference between
material height before etch treatment and the height after etches.

Figure 2: Experimental parameters of Riley’s work.

The experimental data was provided and the detailed explanation of each experiment was saved in a
column "Nickel etch rate 3".

4 Simulation results
The preliminary results showed that the R square Adj. is slightly negative (-0.03862) meaning that the
model does not help to predict the response. R square below 0.8 means that the experimental results
are not suitable to establish a sufficient model for the accurate prediction of parameters, as shown in
Figure 3.

2
 Figure 3: The predicted "height after" using Jmp simulation.

However, Jmp simulation was conducted to find the variablity of such parameters as time, O2 , ICP
power, RIE power and Bias voltage. The results were shown as variability for the height of pillars after
and difference between the pillar height and original material. Figure 4(a) shows that probably the most
approriate parameters are located in the third next to the last column that is marked with the purple
arrow. Figure 4(a) also shows that RIE power and bias voltage are the most influencing parameters due
to the greatest value of parameter "height after". Therefore, the design of experiment was based using
the parameters from the purple marked cell using the most influencing parameters such as RIE power
and bias voltage. Time and O2 concentration have less effect on the pillar height than other parameters.
Figure 4(b) shows again that RIE Power and Bias voltage are dominating parameters and both parameters
should not exceed 85 W and 300 V.

(a) Variability chart for height after (b) Variability chart for the difference in pillar’s height

Figure 4: Variability charts for (a) height after and (b) difference in pillar’s height.

3
The design of expiments include 2 and 3 the most important parameters is shown in Figure 5. The factor
that reduced the accuracy of the model that is shown in Figure 3 is related to the presence of only one
dataset. For the more successful design of experiments, it is recommended to repeat 2-3 experiments us-
ing the following parameters: time (20 min), O2 (10 %), ICP power (700 W), RIE power (49 W) and Bias
voltage (199 V). If the result will be reproducible, the following experimental matrix is recommended to
minimize the number of experiments.

Figure 5: DOE model using 2 parameters and 4 layers.

If the time and cost can be handled in a reasonable way, the DOE model 2 is recommended, whereas the
ICP power parameter is added and the number of layers is decreased from 4 to 3. The DOE model seems
to be longer than the DOE model 1 because the DOE model 2 includes the repeatability of experiment at
least twice. In the DOE model 1, all experiments suggested from 1 to 16 must be repeated at least twice
with the measurement of parameter "height after".

4
Figure 6: DOE model using 3 parameters and 3 layers.