This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been
fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSM.2020.3037937, IEEE
Transactions on Semiconductor Manufacturing
TSM-20-0165.R1
Process optimization and modeling of the silicon
growth in trichlorosilane-hydrogen gas mixture
in a planetary CVD reactor
Zaher Ramadana, Ik-Tae Ima, Chan Woo Park,a,b*
 In the CVD process, the wafer or substrate is heated and
Abstract— In this study, the effect of operating conditions of the
chemical vapor deposition process on the silicon growth rate in a
trichlorosilane-hydrogen (TCS- H2) system was evaluated. The
influence of five parameters, including wafer rotation, TCS
fraction, pressure, temperature, and mass flow rate was
investigated. Response surface methodology (RSM) based on
three-dimensional CFD simulations were used to analyze the
coupled effect of the process parameters. A second-order
polynomial model was used to predict the response. Analysis of
variance showed that the model is statistically significant and only
1.22% of the total variations are not explained by the regression
model. According to the RSM results, the growth rate increases as
a function of the TCS fraction, pressure, and temperature.
Additionally, the coupled effect of the TCS fraction and pressure
has a significant effect on the growth rate while the coupled effect
of wafer rotation speed and mass flow rate had the lowest effect.
Finally, four confirmation tests were executed for a random
combination of factors to verify the accuracy of the regression
model. The maximum deviation between the CFD and regression
model values of the silicon growth rate was found to be 4.4 %.
Index Terms —: Chemical vapor deposition; Computational
fluid dynamics; Response surface methodology; Silicon thin films;
Trichlorosilane
I. INTRODUCTION
C HEMICAL vapor deposition (CVD) is one of the most
promising methods for producing high-quality thin films.
Recently, silicon epitaxial films grown by CVD have received
significant attention. Silicon has recently become one of the
most preferred materials in the development of flexible
semiconductors. Silicon-based semiconductors have several
uses in various applications, such as in power electronics
devices, biosensors, telecommunications, optoelectronics
devices, memory devices, and so on [1-6].
a
School of Mechanical Design Engineering, Jeonbuk National University,
567, Baekje-daero, Deokjin-Gu, Jeonju-City, Jeonbuk 561-756, Republic of
Korea
b
Department of Energy Storage/Conversion Engineering, Jeonbuk National
University, Deokjin-dong, Jeonju-si, Jeonbuk 54896, Republic of Korea
*
Corresponding Author: Chan Woo Park, Email: cw-park@jbnu.ac.kr
0894-6507 (c) 2020 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Centurion university of tehnology and management. Downloaded on December 19,2020 at 05:13:47 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
1
exposed to a gas mixture of precursor and carrier gas. The
precursor reacts and/or decomposes on the wafer to produce a
designated thin film. The byproducts produced during this
process are exhausted from the reactor, along with unreacted
precursor gases. Hydrogen, helium, nitrogen, and argon are
used as carrier gases in CVD. Carrier gas has a
considerable effect on the growth rate and film properties.
According to previous experimental investigations, silicon
deposition, using hydrogen as a gas carrier, has been found to
cause a higher deposition rate compared to using nitrogen or
argon [7, 8]. Precursors are the deposit source materials.
Silicon-containing precursors, such as silane [9, 10],
dichlorosilane[11, 12], trichlorosilane [13-15], and silicon
tetrachloride [16, 17] are widely used in CVD reactors to
produce silicon epitaxial films.
Silicon deposition in the CVD reactor depends on various
parameters. The interaction between these parameters has a
significant influence on the growth rate of silicon. Several
studies have been conducted to study the effects of individual
parameters on the deposition. Del Coso et al. [18] examined the
effects of gas velocity, gas composition at the inlet, reactor
pressure, and surface temperature on the growth rate and
determined the favorable range of these operating parameters
for silicon growth rate and deposition efficiency. Wu et al. [19]
studied the effect of H2 flow rate, TCS flow rate, and input
power on the growth rate of silicon in a mesoplasma CVD
reactor. The authors found that increasing the H2/TCS ratio has
a significant influence on the film purity and deposition
efficiency. At a high concentration of H2, the deposition
efficiency decreases but the film quality improves. Wu et al.
also reported that a high deposition rate and a better film quality
can be achieved by increasing the input power. Makino et al.
[20] studied the effect of different process parameters on the
deposition of silicon from a TCS-H2 gas mixture in a vertical
rotating-disk reactor. In our previous study [12], we conducted
a parametric analysis to predict the effects of rotation,
temperature, pressure, species concentration, and flow rate on
the silicon growth rate in a large-scale CVD reactor. In all the
previously mentioned studies, the effect of one process
parameter on the growth rate was investigated independently of
the other parameters, which were maintained constant.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSM.2020.3037937, IEEE
Transactions on Semiconductor Manufacturing
TSM-20-0165.R1
Response surface methodology (RSM) is considered a suitable
technique for evaluating the interaction between parameters
and the corresponding effect. RSM uses a collection of
mathematical and statistical techniques to produce a robust
experimental design and reduces the cost of the expensive
analysis method in a situation where multiple parameters
influence the system performance. RSM has been widely used
for optimizing CVD processes [21-24]. Li et al. [21] used
numerical simulations and RSM to optimize the uniformity and
quality of thin-film growth in an MOCVD planetary reactor.
The rotation speeds of the substrate and wafers are the variable
parameters and other conditions remain unchanged. Li et al.
demonstrated that the non-uniformity of film thickness across
the substrate was reduced from 5 to 1.87 %. In our previous
study [25], RSM was used to examine the interaction effect of
the process variables on the silicon deposition uniformity in a
planetary CVD reactor. Four factors, including substrate
temperature, pressure, rotation, and DCS fraction, were chosen
in this analysis. The model equation that relates the response to
the independent variables is verified against the CFD results.
The RSM findings demonstrated that the influences of the
susceptor temperature and DCS mole fraction were the most
significant parameters, followed by the operating pressure; the
wafer rotation had the least influence.
The primary purpose of this study is to investigate the effect
of the main parameters in the CVD process, including wafer
rotation, TCS fraction at inlet, pressure, temperature, and mass
flow rate on the growth rate. This was achieved by the
following steps. First, a numerical simulation of the chemical
reaction was performed using the ANSYS Fluent software and
verified against the results by Yamada et al. Second, this model
was applied to planetary CVD reactors. Finally, based on the
CFD model of the planetary CVD reactor, 31 experimental runs
were analyzed using RSM to identify significant contributing
factors, or combinations of factors, on growth rate.
II. NUMERICAL MODELING
Many kinetic models have been developed based on
experimental measurements for the epitaxial growth of silicon
in a SiHC13-H2 system. The detailed models include both
gas-phase and surface reactions. In the present study, a compact
reaction model was implemented based on the work of [26-29].
The overall reaction and rate equation are as follows.
(1)
[ ][ ] (2)
[ ] [ ]
where R is the silicon epitaxial growth rate, is the
chemisorption rate constant of SiHCl3, and is the
silicon deposition rate constant. The rate constants, and
obey the Arrhenius law and are determined in the temperature
range of 1073 – 1398 K as follows:
0894-6507 (c) 2020 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Centurion university of tehnology and management. Downloaded on December 19,2020 at 05:13:47 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
2
( ) (3)
( ) (4)
At a very low concentration of TCS gas at the substrate, the rate
equation is simplified as follows.
[ ] (5)
For a very high SiHCl3 surface concentration, the growth rate
does not depend on the SiHCl3 concentration and the rate
equation can be written as follows.
[ ] (6)
To evaluate the gas flow, heat, and gas species transport in
the reactor, the governing equations of mass, momentum,
energy, and chemical species are numerically calculated using
the software Fluent 18. The ideal gas law is used and the flow is
modeled as laminar. The physical properties of the mixture
were calculated using kinetic theory. The specific heat
capacity, thermal conductivity, and viscosity were determined
based on the mass-weighted mixing law. The mass diffusivity
and thermal diffusion coefficient were calculated using kinetic
theory. The required Lennard-Jones parameters, shown in
Table 1, were obtained from the CHMEKIN database [30]. The
transport phenomenon is considered to be steady in this study
as the change in wafer thickness due to silicon deposition is
negligible compared to the original thickness of the wafer.
The Semi-Implicit Method for Pressure-Linked Equations
(SIMPLE) algorithm [31] was used for pressure-velocity
coupling and correlation and the second-order upwind scheme
was employed for the spatial discretization of the advection
terms of the governing equations. To obtain converged results,
the default convergence target of 10-6 was used for all
quantities, and the area-weighted average of the surface
deposition rate of silicon was monitored during the simulations.
The simulations were considered at a steady state when the
area-weighted average of the surface deposition remained
constant.
Table 1: Lennard-Jones parameters used in the computation
Species ε/k (K) σ (Å)
TCS 436.4 5.64
HCl 344.7 3.339
H2 38 2.92
III. CASE DESCRIPTION AND VERIFICATION OF THE REACTION
KINETICS
In this study, the overall reaction of silicon epitaxial growth
in TCS-H2 was verified against the available results acquired
via the Minimal CVD reactor (Fig. 1 (a)) [29]. This model was
then applied to a planetary CVD reactor that was used for
growing silicon from dichlorosilane in our previous work [12].
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSM.2020.3037937, IEEE
Transactions on Semiconductor Manufacturing
TSM-20-0165.R1 3

The planetary CVD reactor is shown in Fig. 1 (b). The

temperature of susceptor and wafer was set to 1123 K. The
temperature of the top ceiling was considered to be 80 K less
than the wafer temperature. The wafer rotates at a speed of 10
rpm in the counterclockwise direction, while the susceptor’s
rotational speed is kept at 5 rpm in the clockwise direction. In
our previous work [12], a detailed description of the reactor
design and numerical modeling can be found.
A schematic of the Minimal CVD reactor is shown in Fig. 1
(a). The gas mixture of TCS and H2 enters the inlet at
atmospheric pressure. The inlet velocity changes from 0.008 to
0.3. m/s. The TCS concentration was 1%. The wafer was heated
to 1073 K by infrared light emitted from the halogen lamps.
The simulation results of the temperature distribution and gas Fig. 3. Silicon growth rate at a wafer rotation of 0 rpm
mixture velocity vectors in the Minimal Fab reactor, at inlet gas
velocities of 0.3 m/s, are shown in Fig. 2. The gas mixture was
introduced from the inlet and flowed towards the outlet. Similar IV. EFFECT OF THE INTERACTION BETWEEN
to Yamada’s results, the mainstream of the gas flows straight PARAMETERS ON SILICON GROWTH RATE USING RSM
and no circulation was observed. The flow pattern explains the
temperature distribution in the entire reactor. Fig. 3 shows the
calculated Si epitaxial growth rates in the present work against RSM is utilized to study the effect of various CVD process
Yamada’s results. It can be observed that the maximum parameters on the growth rate. RSM is a statistical technique,
deviation between the predicted growth rate and Yamada’s useful for evaluating the effects of several process variables and
results is approximately 6%. their interactions on response variables with a minimum
number of runs.

In the present study, five parameters — wafer rotation, TCS

concentration, pressure, temperature, and mass flow rate —
were selected as input factors. The growth rate of silicon was
selected as the output or response. Three levels of each input
parameter were determined for the RSM, as listed in Table 2. In
RSM, natural variables are transformed into coded variables
that have been defined as dimensionless, with a mean of zero
and the same spread or standard deviation [32]. A set of 31
coded conditions was obtained by the design of experiment
(DOE) method, as listed in Table 3. The 31 sets of data were
simulated using the CFD model to calculate the response
(a) (b) (growth rate of silicon).
Fig. 1. Schematic of (a) CVD reactor for Minimal Fab and (b) RSM is employed to predict a correlation for the response
factor as a function of the input variables and the interaction
CVD planetary reactor.
effects of these variables. For this correlation, a second-order
model is adopted and given as follows:

(7)
∑ ∑ ∑∑

where y is the response of the system (growth rate), xi and x j

are dimensionless coded values for the independent factors; k
is the number of variables;  0 ,  i ,  ii , and ij ( i = 0, 1, 2, …
k ; j = 0, 1, 2, … k ) are the regression coefficients for the
(a) Temperature distribution (b) Gas velocity vectors intercept, linear, quadratic, and interaction terms, respectively;
and  is the statistical error.
Fig. 2. Simulation results for Minimal Fab reactor at inlet
gas velocities of 0.3 m/s, wafer temperature of 1073 K, and
TCS concentration of 1%.

0894-6507 (c) 2020 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Centurion university of tehnology and management. Downloaded on December 19,2020 at 05:13:47 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSM.2020.3037937, IEEE
Transactions on Semiconductor Manufacturing
TSM-20-0165.R1 4

Table 2: The values of the independent variables used in the Table 3: Experimental design
design of experiment. E:
Factor Name Unit Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 mass
A: B: TCS C: D: Growth
(-1) (0) (1) flow
Run rotation fraction pressure temperature rate
rate
A Wafer rotation rpm 0 20 40 (rpm) (%) (torr) (K) (kg/m2 s)
(×10-6
B TCS fraction % 0.5 1 1.5 kg/ s)
C pressure torr 30 60 90 1 20 0.5 90 1148 2 1.27×10-7
D temperature K 1123 1148 1173 2 0 0.5 30 1123 2 9.64×10-9
-6
E mass flow rate (10 ) kg/s 2 4 6 3 0 1 30 1173 2 3.93×10-8
4 0 0.5 90 1173 4 2.12×10-7
5 0 1.5 90 1173 4 5.81×10-7
IV. RSM RESULTS 6 20 1 60 1173 6 1.89×10-7
7 20 1 90 1173 6 4.09×10-7
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to predict the 8 20 1 60 1173 2 1.52×10-7
applicability of the quadratic model and the significance of
each item in the equation. The validity of the model involved 9 40 0.5 60 1123 6 4.94×10-8
tests for the significance of the regression model, coefficients, 10 0 0.5 90 1123 2 1.02×10-7
and test for lack of fit to ensure the adequacy of the model. The 11 20 0.5 60 1123 4 4.36×10-8
ANOVA results of the quadratic model for the silicon growth 12 0 1.5 30 1123 4 1.89×10-8
rate are listed in Table 4. The F-value is the ratio of the mean
square of the model to the residual error. F-values greater than 13 40 1 30 1123 4 2.33×10-8
4 indicate that the model is a good predictor of the results. 14 0 1 90 1123 6 2.23×10-7
According to the ANOVA results, the F-value of the present 15 40 1 90 1123 2 1.39×10-7
model is 40.50, indicating that most of the variations in the
16 0 1.5 90 1123 2 2.37×10-7
response can be explained by the regression model. P-values
less than 0.05 indicate significant model terms. Since the 17 0 0.5 30 1173 2 1.45×10-8
P-value of the present model is <0.05, the model is statistically 18 20 0.5 60 1123 4 4.83×10-8
significant and B, C, D, BC, B², and C² are significant model 19 40 1.5 90 1173 2 3.47×10-7
terms. The lack of fit F-value is 5.29, i.e., the lack of fit is
20 40 0.5 30 1123 2 1.03×10-8
non-significant compared to the pure error. A non-significant
lack of fit is another indicator of the goodness of fit of the 21 0 1 30 1123 2 1.9×10-8
quadratic model. The R-squared value was also checked to 22 20 1.5 60 1148 2 1.19×10-7
ensure the compatibility of the regression model with the CFD 23 20 0.5 30 1148 6 1.62×10-8
numerical model. R-squared values range from 0 to 1.
R-squared values close to 1 indicate that the model is adequate. 24 20 1 90 1173 4 3.64×10-7
A high R-squared value of 0.9878 for this analysis implies that 25 0 1.5 30 1173 6 7.73×10-8
the regression model is significant and only 1.22 % of the total 26 20 1.5 60 1148 2 1.6×10-7
variations are not explained by the model. Moreover, ―adequate 27 0 0.5 60 1173 6 1×10-7
precision,‖ which compares the range of predicted values at the
design points to the average prediction error, is 22.19. A ratio 28 0 1.5 90 1173 6 6.24×10-7
greater than 4 is acceptable [33]. 29 40 1.5 30 1173 4 6.63×10-8
30 40 0.5 60 1173 2 8.12×10-8
31 20 1 30 1123 6 2.44×10-8
The predicted versus actual values of the silicon growth rate
are plotted in Fig. 4. The actual values were obtained from the
CFD model and the predicted values were obtained from the
regression model. Fig. 4 also indicates a good correlation ( )
between the predicted and actual data. Thus, the regression (8)
model developed using RSM can be utilized to predict the
silicon growth rate in the CVD reactor. The mathematical
equation generated by RSM to estimate the response based on
input variables is depicted by the following equation:

0894-6507 (c) 2020 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Centurion university of tehnology and management. Downloaded on December 19,2020 at 05:13:47 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSM.2020.3037937, IEEE
Transactions on Semiconductor Manufacturing
TSM-20-0165.R1
In this equation, the levels should be specified in the original
units for each factor. This equation should not be used to
determine the relative impact of each factor as the coefficients
are scaled to accommodate the units of each factor and the
intercept is not at the center of the design space.
Fig. 5 shows the perturbation plot of the silicon growth rate.
Perturbation analysis examines the effect of all process
parameters on the response changes as each factor moves from
the chosen reference point while the other factors are held
constant at the reference value. The reference point is set at the
middle of the design space (coded zero level of each factor). It
can be observed from the plot that not all factors have a
significant effect. The wafer rotation and mass flow rate show a
lower effect on the growth rate. The figure also shows that the
TCS fraction, pressure, and temperature have a significant
effect on the growth rate.
Fig. 4. Predicted versus actual values of the silicon growth
rate.
Fig. 5. Perturbation plot of the silicon growth rate.
0894-6507 (c) 2020 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Centurion university of tehnology and management. Downloaded on December 19,2020 at 05:13:47 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
5
Fig. 6 shows the three-dimensional response surface model
diagram, which illustrates the effect of the interaction of two
parameters on the growth rate, with the other factors held
constant. The combined effect of the rotation speed and TCS
fraction is shown in Fig.6 (a). From the figure, it can be
observed that at any particular value of rotation speed, the
highest growth rate of silicon is achieved when the TCS
fraction is somewhere in the middle of its range. The same
behavior can be observed in Fig. 6 (f), which shows the
combined effect of the TCS fraction and temperature. This is
consistent with the fact that the quadratic term (B2) of the TCS
fraction is significant. Fig. 6 (f) also shows that the silicon
growth rate increases as the temperature rises. Increasing the
temperature promotes the formation of silicon. Fig. 6 (b) and
(c) show the coupled effects of pressure-rotation and
temperature-rotation, respectively. It can be observed from the
3D surface plot of the two cases that the pressure and
temperature are dominant factors, while the rotation has an
insignificant but considerable influence on the growth rate. It
can be observed from Fig.6 (b) and (c) that the rotation starts to
have an effect when the values of pressure and temperature
approach the maximum values. The coupled effect of wafer
rotation speed and mass flow rate had the lowest effect on the
silicon growth rate, as can be observed from Fig. 6(d). ANOVA
analysis showed that the linear, quadratic, and interaction terms
of the TCS fraction and pressure are significant. The interaction
between the operating pressure and TCS fraction is shown in
Fig. 6 (e). The 3D surface plot displays the significant
interaction between the two variables and their coupled effect
on the growth rate. This significant impact can be explained by
the fact that increasing pressure has a direct effect on the
precursor (TCS) decomposition, and as a consequence of
increasing the pressure, the growth rate of silicon increases.
Fig. 6(h) shows the significant impact of both pressure and
temperature on promoting the chemical reaction and increasing
the deposition rate. The 3D response surface plot in Fig. 6 (g, i,
and j) shows that the mass flow rate within the range
investigated, has no pronounced effect on the growth rate.
Four confirmation tests were conducted for a random
combination of factors to verify the accuracy of the regression
model. The silicon growth rates and comparison of the four
tests obtained by the regression and CFD model are shown in
Table 5. From this table, it can be observed that the maximum
deviation between the CFD and the regression model values of
the silicon growth rate is 4.4%, which is within an acceptable
limit. Hence, the results predicted by the regression can be used
for predicting the silicon growth rate, within the range of
parameters given in this study.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSM.2020.3037937, IEEE
Transactions on Semiconductor Manufacturing
TSM-20-0165.R1 6

Table 4: Analysis of variances for the fitted model

Sum of
Source df Mean Square F-value p-value
Squares
Model 1.940E+08 20 9.698E+06 40.50 < 0.0001 significant
A-rotation 1.393E+05 1 1.393E+05 0.5817 0.4633
B-TCS 4.740E+06 1 4.740E+06 19.79 0.0012
C-pressure 5.517E+07 1 5.517E+07 230.36 < 0.0001
D-temperature 8.566E+06 1 8.566E+06 35.77 0.0001
E-mass flow rate 2.179E+05 1 2.179E+05 0.9100 0.3626
AB 1.191E+05 1 1.191E+05 0.4973 0.4968
AC 8.063E+05 1 8.063E+05 3.37 0.0964
AD 1228.12 1 1228.12 0.0051 0.9443
AE 188.94 1 188.94 0.0008 0.9781
BC 2.504E+06 1 2.504E+06 10.46 0.0090
BD 5.040E+05 1 5.040E+05 2.10 0.1775
BE 1.609E+05 1 1.609E+05 0.6719 0.4315
CD 1.147E+06 1 1.147E+06 4.79 0.0535
CE 8.270E+05 1 8.270E+05 3.45 0.0928
DE 53895.76 1 53895.76 0.2251 0.6454
A² 1.208E+05 1 1.208E+05 0.5046 0.4937
B² 1.657E+06 1 1.657E+06 6.92 0.0251
C² 3.612E+06 1 3.612E+06 15.08 0.0030
D² 4565.95 1 4565.95 0.0191 0.8929
E² 93.31 1 93.31 0.0004 0.9846
Residual 2.395E+06 10 2.395E+05
Lack of Fit 2.287E+06 8 2.858E+05 5.29 0.1687 not significant
Pure Error 1.081E+05 2 54048.49
Cor Total 1.964E+08 30

Table 5: Confirmation runs

Confirmation Operating parameters Growth rate
test
Rotation TSC Pressure Temperature Mass flow rate RSM Fluent Error
(rpm) (%) (torr) (K) 10-6 (kg/s) Kg/m2s Kg/m2s (%)
1 30 0.75 50 1155 6 7.67e-8 7.54e-8 -1.7
2 25 0.6 80 1160 5 1.51e-7 1.58e-7 4.4
3 30 1.2 40 1130 2.5 3.54e-8 3.63e-7 2.4
4 25 0.7 70 1140 5.5 1.2e-7 1.18e-7 -1.6

0894-6507 (c) 2020 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Centurion university of tehnology and management. Downloaded on December 19,2020 at 05:13:47 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSM.2020.3037937, IEEE
Transactions on Semiconductor Manufacturing
TSM-20-0165.R1 7

(a) Effect of rotation and TCS (b) Effect of rotation and (c) Effect of rotation and
pressure temperature

(d) Effect of rotation and mass (e) Effect of TCS and pressure (f) Effect of TCS and
flow rate temperature

(g) Effect of TCS and mass (h) Effect of pressure and (i) Effect of pressure and mass
flow rate temperature flow rate

(j) Effect of temperature and

mass flow rate
Fig. 6 Three-dimensional response surface plots of the coupled effect of operating condition on the growth rate.

0894-6507 (c) 2020 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Centurion university of tehnology and management. Downloaded on December 19,2020 at 05:13:47 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSM.2020.3037937, IEEE
Transactions on Semiconductor Manufacturing
TSM-20-0165.R1 8

to Monolithically Integrate Photosensors with Chip

VI. CONCLUSION Technology," Advanced Functional Materials, vol.
29, p. 1808182, 2019.
The growth of silicon from the TCS-H2 gas mixture in a [6] S. Ray, S. Maikap, W. Banerjee, and S. Das,
planetary CVD reactor was investigated. To accurately predict "Nanocrystals for silicon-based light-emitting and
the complex interaction between the CVD process parameters memory devices," Journal of Physics D: Applied
and growth rate, the CFD model and RSM design were Physics, vol. 46, p. 153001, 2013.
developed. Different statistical tests, including P- and F- [7] Y. Ohshita, A. Ishitani, and T. Takada, "Surface
values, lack of fit, and R-squared were used to test the reaction mechanism of SiCl2 with carrier gas H2 in
significance and adequacy of the model. The output of these silicon vapor phase epitaxial growth," Journal of
tests revealed that the predicted model is significant and only crystal growth, vol. 108, pp. 499-507, 1991.
1.22 % of the total variations are not explained by the [8] Y. Ohshita and N. Hosoi, "In-situ monitoring of
regression model. RSM showed that TCS fraction, pressure, surface reactions in Si vapor phase epitaxial growth by
and temperature significantly affected the growth rate. The surface photo-absorption method," Journal of crystal
three-dimensional response surface plots revealed a significant growth, vol. 131, pp. 495-500, 1993.
interaction between the pressure and TCS fraction and their [9] G. Valente, C. Cavallotti, M. Masi, and S. Carrà,
coupled effect on the growth rate. The results also showed that "Reduced order model for the CVD of epitaxial silicon
the interaction between the rotation speed and mass flow rate from silane and chlorosilanes," Journal of Crystal
had the lowest effect on the silicon growth rate. Finally, four Growth, vol. 230, pp. 247-257, 2001/08/01/ 2001.
confirmation tests were performed to compare the growth rate [10] S.-S. Liu and W.-D. Xiao, "CFD–PBM coupled
results of the RSM and CFD simulations. The results of the simulation of silicon CVD growth in a fluidized bed
confirmation runs showed that the maximum deviation reactor: Effect of silane pyrolysis kinetic models,"
between the CFD and the regression model values of the silicon Chemical Engineering Science, vol. 127, pp. 84-94,
growth rate was 4.4 %. Therefore, the predicted model can be 2015/05/04/ 2015.
used to define the relationships between the operating [11] I. Zaidi, Y.-H. Jang, D. G. Ko, and I. T. Im,
conditions and their effect on the growth rate. "Numerical modeling study on the epitaxial growth of
silicon from dichlorosilane," Journal of Crystal
Growth, vol. 483, pp. 1-8, 2018.
[12] Z. Ramadan, H. M. Abdelmotalib, and I.-T. Im,
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
"Modeling of Epitaxial Silicon Growth From the
This work was supported by the Korea Institute of Energy DCS-H 2-HCl System in a Large Scale CVD
Technology Evaluation and Planning (KETEP) and the Reactor," IEEE Transactions on Semiconductor
Ministry of Trade, Industry, and Energy (MOTIE) of the Manufacturing, vol. 31, pp. 363-370, 2018.
Republic of Korea (20192010107020, P0002131) and by the [13] H. Ni, S. Lu, and C. Chen, "Modeling and simulation
National Research Foundation of Korea funded by the Korean of silicon epitaxial growth in Siemens CVD reactor,"
Government (2019R1A2C2010607). Journal of Crystal Growth, vol. 404, pp. 89-99,
2014/10/15/ 2014.
[14] H. Habuka, J. Suzuki, Y. Takai, H. Hirata, and S.-I.
REFERENCES Mitani, "Silicon epitaxial growth process using
trichlorosilane gas in a single-wafer high-speed
[1] C. Buttay, D. Planson, B. Allard, D. Bergogne, P. substrate rotation reactor," Journal of Crystal Growth,
Bevilacqua, C. Joubert, et al., "State of the art of high vol. 327, pp. 1-5, 2011/07/15/ 2011.
temperature power electronics," Materials Science [15] H. Habuka, A. Sakurai, and A. Saito, "By-product
and Engineering: B, vol. 176, pp. 283-288, 2011. formation in a trichlorosilane-hydrogen system for
[2] G.-T. Hwang, D. Im, S. E. Lee, J. Lee, M. Koo, S. Y. silicon film deposition," ECS Journal of Solid State
Park, et al., "In vivo silicon-based flexible radio Science and Technology, vol. 4, p. P16, 2014.
frequency integrated circuits monolithically [16] Y. Huang, "Modeling and analysis of SiO2 deposition
encapsulated with biocompatible liquid crystal during high-purity fused silica glass synthesis by
polymers," Acs Nano, vol. 7, pp. 4545-4553, 2013. SiCl4 chemical vapor deposition," Ceramics
[3] G. Roelkens, U. D. Dave, A. Gassenq, N. Hattasan, C. International, vol. 45, pp. 10740-10745, 2019/06/01/
Hu, B. Kuyken, et al., "Silicon-based photonic 2019.
integration beyond the telecommunication wavelength [17] T. Choi, H. Kim, D. Kim, T. Cheon, and S. Kim,
range," IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Quantum "Synthesis of Si nanowires by using atmospheric
Electronics, vol. 20, pp. 394-404, 2014. pressure chemical vapor deposition with SiCl4,"
[4] G. Masini, L. Colace, and G. Assanto, "Si based Journal of the Korean Physical Society, vol. 59, pp.
optoelectronics for communications," Materials 485-488, 2011.
Science and Engineering: B, vol. 89, pp. 2-9, 2002. [18] G. Del Coso, C. Del Cañizo, and A. Luque, "Chemical
[5] W. Yang, J. Chen, Y. Zhang, Y. Zhang, J. H. He, and vapor deposition model of polysilicon in a
X. Fang, "Silicon‐Compatible Photodetectors: Trends trichlorosilane and hydrogen system," Journal of the

0894-6507 (c) 2020 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Centurion university of tehnology and management. Downloaded on December 19,2020 at 05:13:47 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSM.2020.3037937, IEEE
Transactions on Semiconductor Manufacturing
TSM-20-0165.R1 9

Electrochemical Society, vol. 155, pp. D485-D491,
2008.
[19] S. Wu, M. Kambara, and T. Yoshida, "Superhigh-rate
epitaxial silicon thick film deposition from
trichlorosilane by mesoplasma chemical vapor
deposition," Plasma Chemistry and Plasma
Processing, vol. 33, pp. 433-451, 2013.
[20] S. Makino, M. Inagaki, K. Nakashima, T. Kozawa,
and N. Horinouchi, "A simplified reaction model and
numerical analysis for Si deposition from the
SiHCl3-H2 system in vertical rotating disk reactors,"
Journal of Crystal Growth, vol. 454, pp. 156-163,
2016.
[21] J. Li, Z.-y. Fei, Y.-f. Xu, J. Wang, B.-f. Fan, X.-j. Ma,
et al., "Study on the optimization of the deposition rate
of planetary GaN-MOCVD films based on CFD
simulation and the corresponding surface model,"
Royal Society open science, vol. 5, p. 171757, 2018.
[22] V. Sivamaran, V. Balasubramanian,
Gopalakrishnan, V. Viswabaskaran, and A.
Gouravrao, "Optimizing chemical vapor deposition
parameters to attain minimum diameter carbon nano
tubes by response surface methodology," Journal of
Advanced Microscopy Research, vol. 13, pp. 181-189,
2018.
[23] G. Allaedini, S. M. Tasirin, and P. Aminayi, "Yield
optimization of nanocarbons prepared via chemical
vapor decomposition of carbon dioxide using response
surface methodology," Diamond and Related
Materials, vol. 66, pp. 196-205, 2016.
[24] S. Kasap, M. B. Acar, and D. Çakıroğlu,
"Optimization of CVD parameters on 3D graphene
foam structures with response surface methodology
(RSM)," Materials Research Express, vol. 6, p.
095604, 2019.
[25] Z. Ramadan and I.-T. Im, "Optimization of Operating
Parameters in a Planetary CVD Reactor Using
Response Surface Methodology," Silicon, vol. 11, pp.
2067-2074, 2019.
[26] H. Habuka, T. Nagoya, M. Mayusumi, M. Katayama,
M. Shimada, and K. Okuyama, "Model on transport
phenomena and epitaxial growth of silicon thin film in
SiHCl3 H2 system under atmospheric pressure,"
Journal of Crystal Growth, vol. 169, pp. 61-72, 1996.
[27] H. Habuka, M. Katayama, M. Shimada, and K.
Okuyama, "Nonlinear increase in silicon epitaxial
growth rate in a SiHCl3 H2 system under
atmospheric pressure," Journal of Crystal Growth,
vol. 182, pp. 352-362, 1997/12/02/ 1997.
[28] H. Habuka, Y. Aoyama, S. Akiyama, T. Otsuka, W.-F.
Qu, M. Shimada, et al., "Chemical process of silicon
epitaxial growth in a SiHCl3–H2 system," Journal of
crystal growth, vol. 207, pp. 77-86, 1999.
[29] A. Yamada, N. Li, M. Matsuo, M. Muroi, H. Habuka,
Y. Ishida, et al., "Transport phenomena in a slim
vertical atmospheric pressure chemical vapor
deposition reactor utilizing natural convection,"
M. Materials Science in Semiconductor Processing, vol.
71, pp. 348-351, 2017/11/15/ 2017.
[30] R. Kee, G. Dixon-Lewis, J. Warnatz, M. Coltrin, J.
Miller, and H. Moffat, "Transport: a software package
for the evaluation of gas-phase, multicomponent
transport properties," Chemkin Collection, 1999.
[31] S. Patankar, "V. and Spalding, DB," Heat and Mass
Transfer in Boundary Layers, Intertext Books, 1970.
[32] R. H. Myers, D. C. Montgomery, and C. M.
Anderson-Cook, Response surface methodology:
process and product optimization using designed
experiments: John Wiley & Sons, 2016.
[33] A. Vohra and T. Satyanarayana, "Statistical
optimization of the medium components by response
surface methodology to enhance phytase production
by Pichia anomala," Process Biochemistry, vol. 37,
pp. 999-1004, 2002.

0894-6507 (c) 2020 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Centurion university of tehnology and management. Downloaded on December 19,2020 at 05:13:47 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.