Editorial
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
S
The Changing Role of Metrology and Inspection in Lithography Metrology and inspection have been called “non-valueadded” operations in the past, but it is clear that any fab that does not use these tools effectively will see significant losses in yield, bin-sort performance, scrap, and rework. Inspection and metrology’s role has become one of “non-value-subtracted,” as well as one of real value added. Like defect inspection, metrology is a strategic weapon for competitiveness, and for process capability and viability. Especially in lithography, where the small and shrinking process window creates challenges in manufacturability, a fab must view metrology as part of the overall lithography system.1 Metrology provides the visibility to understand where the optimum process lies, and where it is moving. Inspection and measurement provide information that helps engineering to map out the process’s response surface, and also provides confidence in the shape of that surface. This provides the context for yield learning, which is defined as yield improvement rate, or the change in average yield over a period of time, typically one month. (This may also be applied to rework or scrap.) To positively and predictably impact yield, the process engineer must understand the components which contribute to yield loss. The best practices among fabs include a prioritization of the yield detractors, and then focussing on improving or fixing the top detractors. It is only by reducing the impact of each 1 Ashkenaz, Scott, editorial in YMS Summer 2000, Vol 2, Issue 3
4
Fall 2001
Yield Management Solutions
(and moving it to the end of the Pareto chart) that predictable progress can be made. In the case of metrology, it is also essential to define a budget. For example, many fabs are struggling to fit their process into a 40 nm or 50 nm overlay budget, without a full understanding of each component of the budget. As described above, with the budget defined (along with the proper way to statistically combine the components), it then becomes easy and obvious where to focus improvement resources. This issue of the Yield Management Solutions magazine illustrates many of the ways that inspection and metrology are used in lithography and other process modules to bring the process into focus, and to assist in improving it, with great economic benefit for the fab. Overlay is proving to be one of the major challenges for 0.13 µm design rules (not to mention for 0.18 µm). KLA-Tencor, working with several fabs, has identified the impact of improper sampling for overlay estimation. In some cases, common (improper) sampling across a wafer can consume 25 nm out of a 40 nm budget, and can cause several percentage points of yield loss! However, by doing a proper systematic analysis, this sampling bias can be reduced below 10 nm or less. Defect issues in the litho cell are well beyond the point where manual inspection can provide useful information. While defect reduction methodologies are well established in all other process modules in the fab, lithography has lagged in best practices for defect yield learning;
Yield Management
S O L U T I O N S
EDITOR-IN-CHIEF Uma Subramaniam MANAGING EDITOR Siiri Tuckwood
this is in part due to the ongoing reliance on manual inspection. Fabs that have implemented photocell monitoring (PCM) and macro ADI, along with defect reduction methods, have seen dramatic improvements in overall manufacturing costs. Another area where metrology can provide significant cost benefit is in offloading time-consuming and costly self-test operations of process tools. KLA-Tencor and ASML have worked together to provide a solution that reduces the non-productive time of the stepper/scanner, resulting in higher litho cell productivity, without significant impact on metrology productivity. While inspection and metrology do help to identify and lessen the impact of process excursions by providing quick response, they also are now essential in making progress with yield learning. It is through the intelligent application of cost-optimized sampling and the structure of proper process models, that the process engineer may identify critical defects or variation sources, identify their causes, and move them lower in the Pareto chart. Without these tools, analyses and actions, manufacturing costs would be higher. The best-known methods described in this issue show how inspection and metrology have become “non-value-subtracted.”
C ONTRIBUTING EDITORS Scott Ashkenaz Aparjot Dehal Indira Rangarajan Dave Hattorimanabe Tom Salinas A R T DI R E C T O R A N D P RODUCTION MANAGER Carlos Hueso D E S I G N C O N S U LTA N T Michael Garnica C I R C U L AT I O N E D I T O R Rolando Gonzalez
KLA-Tencor Worldwide C O R P O R AT E H E A D Q U A RT E R S
KLA-Tencor Corporation 160 Rio Robles San Jose, California 95134 408.875.3000 I N T E R N AT I O N A L O F F I C E S
KLA-Tencor France SARL Evry Cedex, France 33 16 936 6969 KLA-Tencor GmbH Munich, Germany 49 89 8902 170
The Editors
KLA-Tencor (Israel) Corporation Migdal Ha’Emek, Israel 972 6 6449449 KLA-Tencor Japan Ltd. Yokohama, Japan 81 45 335 8200 KLA-Tencor Korea Inc. Seoul, Korea 822 41 50552 KLA-Tencor (Malaysia) Sdn. Bhd. Johor Bahru, Malaysia 607 557 1946 KLA-Tencor (Singapore) Pte. Ltd. Singapore 65 782 6788 KLA-Tencor Taiwan Branch Hsinchu, Taiwan 886 35 335163 KLA-Tencor Limited Wokingham, United Kingdom 44 118 936 5700
Fall 2001
Yield Management Solutions
5