Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-v2bm5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-28T23:31:32.077Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Stress in Copper thin Films With Barrier Layers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 February 2011

Richard P. Vinci  and
John C. Bravman
Richard P. Vinci
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305
John C. Bravman
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305
Get access

Abstract

Wafer curvature and grazing incidence x-ray scattering (GIXS) techniques were used to investigate the biaxial stresses induced in blanket Cu films during a thermal cycle to 460°C and back to room temperature. Cu was deposited by DC sputtering at ambient temperature. Several different barrier layer materials — SiO2, W, Ta, TiN, and Si3N4 — were used to compare any effect barrier choice might have on Cu microstructure evolution and mechanical behavior. Ta and Si3N4 encouraged a strong (111) Cu texture. A W barrier led to an untextured microstructure which underwent large, uneven grain growth during thermal cycling. Several samples were capped with a Ta layer which affected the stress behavior during cooling by inhibiting dislocation motion. An inverse relationship between strength and thickness was also documented.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 309: Symposium M2 – Materials Reliability in Microelectronics III , 1993 , 269
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Pai, P. and Ting, C., VMIC Conf. Proc., 258 (1989).Google Scholar
2. Ohmi, T. et al. , Int. Elec. Dev. Meeting, 8, (1991).Google Scholar
3. Borgesen, P. et al. , Appl. Phys. Lett., 60(14), 1706, (1992).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Vinci, R. et al. , presented at Spring MRS Meeting, Thin Film Reliability Symp. (1993).Google Scholar
5. Gardner, D. et al. , VMIC Conference, 99 (1991).Google Scholar
6. Hu, C.-K. et al. , VMIC Conf. Proc., 181 (1986).Google Scholar
7. Holloway, K and Fryer, P., MRS Symp. Proc., 181,41 (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Nix, W., Met. Trans. A, 20A, 2217 (1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Flinn, P. et al. , IEEE Trans. on Electron Devices, ED–34, 689 (1987).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Doerner, M. and Brennan, S., J. Appl. Phys., 63, 126 (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Flinn, P. and Waychunas, G., J. Vac. Sci. and Tech., B6, 1749 (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Flinn, P., J. Mater. Res., 6(7), 1498, (1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Townsend, P., PhD Dissertation, Stanford University, Stanford CA (1987).Google Scholar
14. Lahiri, S., J. Appl. Phys.,41, 3172 (1970)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15. Doemer, M. et al. , J. Mater. Res., 1, 845 (1986).Google Scholar
16. Besser, P. et al. , presented at Spring MRS Meeting, Synch. Radiation Symp. (1993).Google Scholar