![]() |
||||
|
Home
Process Simulation
Device Simulation
Interactive Tools
Virtual Wafer Fab
Licensing
Platforms
Services
Design Flows
Technical Library
Downloads and Support
Corporate
Contact Us
Learn more
|
CNET Physical Diffusion Model Included in ATHENADaniel Mathiot, France Telecom, CNET Grenoble Introduction With the growing complexity of integrated circuit manufacturing technology, process and device simulators have become nowadays essential tools for the design of small geometry devices. The ultimate goal of an ideal simulator is to compute the electrical characteristics of a given device, by using only process-related data as input parameters. Since the device electrical characteristics depend drastically on the distribution of the electrically active impurity (dopants), resulting from the entire thermal processing sequence, it is of prime importance for the process simulator to use diffusion models as accurate as possible. This is particularly important for deep sub-micron processes. Indeed, for these emerging technologies, 2-D or even 3-D phenomena are expected to be of growing importance, whereas there is at the present time no accurate technique to measure multi-dimensional dopant profiles. As a consequence, the active dopant 2-D distributions can only be obtained by simulations, which have to be based on models as reliable as possible. In the last decade, it has become clear that the various "abnormal" behaviors of dopant diffusion in Si are caused by the existence of non-equilibrium point defects, either induced by the diffusion process itself (emitter push effect caused by high concentration P diffusion), or injected into the substrate by external treatments, such as oxidation or nitridation, or resulting from the ion implantation used to introduce the dopants into the Si substrate. With the necessary decrease of the thermal budget linked to the shrinkage of the device dimension, these transient phenomena become key points for accurate dopant diffusion simulation. About one year ago (January 1995) SILVACO and CNET-Grenoble (France Telecom) signed a cooperation agreement, the purpose of which was to implement into ATHENA the dopant diffusion model developed at CNET. In this article we briefly describe this model, emphasizing on the differences with the standard full.cpl model of ATHENA, and we present some typical simulations obtained with a Beta version of ATHENA (3.1.8.B) including this model.
Model Description The basic formalism to describe the coupled dopant/point defects system has been laid out at CNET by D. Mathiot and J.C. Pfister(1). This formalism is also the base of the standard full.cpl model of ATHENA, and thus the complete CNET model is actually an extension of the full.cpl model, allowing a better description of the diffusion phenomena particularly at very high dopant concentration. We describe below the main physical points taken into account in the model, evidencing when necessary the special features of the CNET model: i) Dopant diffusion of all the dopants is assisted by both the vacancies (V) and the self-interstitials (I). These point defects exist in various charge states, the relative concentrations of which depend on the local Fermi level position, i.e. on the local dopant concentration. ii) Both I and V have strong binding energies with the dopant atoms, and as a consequence the diffusing species are dopant/defect pairs (the isolated substitutional dopants are immobile). These impurity/ defect pairs, in their various charge states, are assumed to be in local equilibrium with the free substitutional dopant atoms and the free defects. In the CNET model, at high dopant concentrations, the concentrations of these pairs are not considered as negligible with respect to the substitutional (active) dopant concentration. In consequence, their concentrations are explicitly taken into account to compute the total dopant concentration and the Fermi level position (i.e. carrier concentration). A direct consequence is a partial self-compensation at high doping concentration, contributing to the differences between total and active concentrations, and affecting the variations of the extrinsic diffusivities as a function of the total doping. iii) In the case of As and B at concentrations approaching the solid solubility limit, neutral and immobile complexes (As2V or B2I) are formed, which decrease the effective diffusivity and contributes to the inactive dopant concentration. At the present time, these complexes are assumed to be in local equilibrium with the other species. An extension of the model accounting for a dynamic clustering(3) is foreseen. iv) When the dopant concentration exceeds a few 10 v) The flux of each diffusing species (dopant/defect pairs and free defects) include drift terms caused by the built-in electric field due to the dopant gradients. vi) (I) and (V) are not considered at local equilibrium, but they can annihilate by bimolecular recombination. A specific feature of CNET model is that these annihilations take place not only between the free defects, but also involve the impurity defects pairs, which play the role of recombination centres. As a consequence the I-V recombination rate is strongly enhanced at high dopant concentration. Examples To illustrate the improvements given by the CNET
model, we show simulations of phosphorus predeposition profiles
at high and intermediate surface concentrations. Figures 1 to 3
compare the curves calculated with the CNET model to the experimental
data set of Yoshida and Matsumoto and Niimi [4,5], which covers
the 900 - 1100
Figure 1. Comparison between
experimental and simulated
Figure 2. As in Figure 1, but
at 1000
Figure 3. As in Figure 1, but
at 1100
Finally let us comment on the CPU time used by
this model. In fact the simulation time depends strongly on the
conditions, and increases when the couplings between the point defects
and the dopant become stronger (i.e. when a physical description
of the diffusion requires this full model). Nevertheless, the CPU
time remain quite reasonable. For example, on a SUN Sparc 10-40
workstation, the simulations reported on Figure 2 take about 13
min for the highest concentration (1 hour, 1000
Reference [1] D.Mathiot and J.C.Pfister, J. Appl. Phys. 55, 3518 (1984) [2] D.Mathiot and J.C.Pfister, J. Phys. Lettres (Paris) 43, L-453 (1982) [3] D.Mathiot and P.Scheiblin, "ULSI Science and Technology / 1995"
E.M. [4] M.Yoshida, Japan. J. Appl. Phys. 18, 479 (1979) [5] S.Matsumoto and T.Niimi, Japan. J. Appl. Phys. 15, 2077 (1976)
|
|||
|
© 1984 -
Silvaco Data Systems Inc. -
Trademarks - Privacy Policy
|
||||