Loading…

Charging and discharging of electron beam resist films

Pattern placement imprecision due to charging of the workpiece is believed to be a significant contribution to the total positional error in electron beam lithography. In an earlier work, Liu et al. [J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B 13, 1979 (1995)] reported that the surface potential of exposed resist could...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of Vacuum Science & Technology B: Microelectronics and Nanometer Structures 1999-11, Vol.17 (6), p.2893-2896
Main Authors: Bai, M., Pease, R. F. W., Tanasa, C., McCord, M. A., Pickard, D. S., Meisburger, D.
Format: Article
Language:English
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Pattern placement imprecision due to charging of the workpiece is believed to be a significant contribution to the total positional error in electron beam lithography. In an earlier work, Liu et al. [J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B 13, 1979 (1995)] reported that the surface potential of exposed resist could be negative or positive according to the resist thickness and the electron energy. In that work the authors were constrained to use a flood beam. In this study, we report a new independent approach using a Kelvin probe electrometer to measure the surface potential after exposure by a focused beam. There is a qualitative agreement with the earlier work in that the surface potential tends to be less positive at lower electron energies and for thicker resists. We observed positive surface potentials at 10 and 20 keV beam irradiation. This positive charging is much more evident in polybutene sulfone than in UV5.
ISSN:0734-211X
1071-1023
1520-8567
DOI:10.1116/1.591091