Class Handout #14 1999

EE212 1999-00 1 JDP, MDD, PBG

EE 212 FALL 1999-00
ION IMPLANTATION - Chapter 8
Basic Concepts
Ion implantation is the dominant method of
doping used today. In spite of creating enormous
lattice damage it is favored because:
Large range of doses - 10
11
to 10
16
/cm
2
Extremely accurate dose control
Essential for MOS V
T
control
Buried (retrograde) profiles are possible
Low temperature process
Wide choice of masking materials
There are also some significant disadvantages:
Damage to crystal
Anomalous transiently enhanced diffusion
(TED) upon annealing this damage
Charging of insulating layers
V
V
Ion
source
Analyzing magnet
Pump
Resolving
aperature
Accelerator
Focus
Neutral
beam gate
Neutral
trap
X & Y
scan
plates
Wafer
Faraday cup
Q
0-30keV
0-200keV
Class Handout #14 1999
EE212 1999-00 2 JDP, MDD, PBG
A. Implant Profiles
At its heart ion implantation is a random process.
High energy ions (1-1000keV) bombard the
substrate and lose energy through nuclear
collisions and electronic drag forces.
Range
R
Projected range
R
P
Vacuum Silicon
Profiles can often be described by a Gaussian
distribution, with a projected range and standard
deviation. (200keV implants shown below.)
10
21
10
20
10
17
10
19
10
18
C
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n

(
c
m
-
3
)
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Depth (m)
Sb
As
P
B
0.606 C
P
R
P
R
P
Class Handout #14 1999
EE212 1999-00 3 JDP, MDD, PBG
C x C
x R
R
P
P
P
( ) exp

( )

_
,

2
2
2
(1)
Q C x dx ( )

or Q R C
P P
2 (2)
where Q is the dose in ions cm
-2
and is measured by
the integrated beam current.
The ranges and standard deviation Rp of the
common dopants in randomly oriented silicon are
shown below.
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0 40 80 120 160 200
D
e
p
t
h

(

m
)
Energy (keV)
B
P
Sb
As
Class Handout #14 1999
EE212 1999-00 4 JDP, MDD, PBG
0
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.1
0.12
0 40 80 120 160 200
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

D
e
v
i
a
t
i
o
n

(

m
)
Energy (keV)
B
P
Sb
As
Monte Carlo simulations of the random
trajectories of a group of ions implanted at a spot
on the wafer show the 3-D spatial distribution of
the ions. (1000 phosphorus ions at 35 keV.)
Implant
Beam
x
y
z
80
40
0
-40
0
50
-100
-50
0
40
80
120
This appears as an elongated ellipse because most
of the high energy ions undergo only small angle
collisions.
Class Handout #14 1999
EE212 1999-00 5 JDP, MDD, PBG
Side view shows Rp and Rp while the beam
direction view shows the lateral straggle.
z
Beam direction
80
40
0
-40
y
0 50 100 -100 -50

y
-40
0
40
80
x
Side view
0 40 80 120
The two-dimensional distribution is often assumed
to be composed of just the product of the vertical
and lateral distributions.
C x y C x
y
R
vert
, exp ( ) ( )

_
,

2
2
2
(3)
Now consider what happens at a mask edge - if
the mask is thick enough to block the implant, the
lateral profile under the mask is determined by the
lateral straggle. (35keV and 120keV As implants
at the edge of a poly gate from Alvis et al.)
Class Handout #14 1999
EE212 1999-00 6 JDP, MDD, PBG
The description of the profile at the mask edge is
given by a sum of point response Gaussian
functions, which leads to an error function
distribution under the mask.
B. Masking Implants
How thick does a mask have to be?
C
P
*
R
P
*
Depth
x
m
C
*
(x
m
)
C
B
C
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
For masking,
C x C
x R
R
C
m P
m P
P
B
* *
*
*
exp ( )

( )

_
,

2
2
2
(4)
Calculating the required mask thickness,
x R R
C
C
R m R
m P P
P
B
P P
+

_
,

+
* *
*
* *
ln 2 (5)
Class Handout #14 1999
EE212 1999-00 7 JDP, MDD, PBG
The dose that penetrates the mask is given by
Q
Q
R
x R
R
dx
Q
erfc
x R
R
P
P
P
P
x
m P
P
m

1
]
1
1

_
,

2 2
2
2
2


*
*
*
*
*
exp
(6)
Real structures may be more complicated because
mask edges or implants are not vertical.
30 Degree Tilt
D
i
s
t
a
n
c
e

(

m
)
Distance (m)
30 tilt
0 0.2 0.4
0.6
0.8 1.0
0.2
0
-0.2
-0.4
C. Profile Evolution During Annealing
Comparing Eqn. (1) with the Gaussian profile
from the last set of notes, we see that Rp is
equivalent to 2 Dt . Thus
C x t
Q
R Dt
x R
R Dt
P
P
P
, exp ( )
+
( )


( )
+
( )

_
,

2 2
2 2
2
2
2


(7)
Class Handout #14 1999
EE212 1999-00 8 JDP, MDD, PBG
R
P
Implanted
After Diffusion
2Dt
Thus if the implanted profile is Gaussian, later
thermal cycles produce a Gaussian profile as well
(assuming the surface doesn't come into play).
The only other profile we can calculate
analytically is when the implanted Gaussian is
shallow enough that it can be treated as a delta
function and the subsequent anneal can be treated
as a one-sided Gaussian. (Recall example in
diffusion notes.)
10
20
10
19
C
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n

(
c
m
-
3
)
10
18
10
17
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
Depth (m)
Antimony 360 keV
Boron
38 keV
Class Handout #14 1999
EE212 1999-00 9 JDP, MDD, PBG
Real implanted profiles are more complex.
Light ions backscatter to skew the profile
upwards.
Heavy ions scatter deeper.
4 moment descriptions of these profiles are often
used (with tabulated values for these moments).
Range: R
Q
xC x dx
P
( )

1
(8)
Std. Dev: R
Q
x R C x dx
P P

( )

( )

1
2
(9)
Skewness:

( )
( )

x R C x dx
Q R
P
P
3
3

(10)
Kurtosis:

( )
( )

x R C x dx
Q R
P
P
4
4

(11)
D. Implants in Real Silicon - Channeling
At least until it is damaged by the implant, Si is a
crystalline material.
Channeling can produce unexpectedly deep
profiles.
Class Handout #14 1999
EE212 1999-00 10 JDP, MDD, PBG
Screen oxides and tilting/rotating the wafer can
minimize but not eliminate these effects. (7 tilt is
common.)
0 0. 1 0. 2 0 . 3 0 . 4 0. 5 0. 6 0 . 7 0 . 8
Depth (m)
C
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n

(
c
m
-
3
)
2 x 10
13
cm
-2
scaled
2 x 10
13
cm
-2
2 x 10
15
cm
-2
10
21
10
20
10
19
10
18
10
17
10
16
10
15
Sometimes a dual Pearson profile description is
useful.
Class Handout #14 1999
EE212 1999-00 11 JDP, MDD, PBG
Modeling of Range Statistics
The total energy loss during an ion trajectory is
given by the sum of nuclear and electronic losses
(these can be treated independently).
dE
dx
N S S
n e
+
( )
(12)
R dx
N
dE
S E S E
R
n e
E

0 0
1
0
( ) ( )
(13)
A. Nuclear Stopping
An incident ion scatters off the core charge on an
atomic nucleus, modeled to first order by a
screened Coulomb scattering potential.
V r
q Z Z
r
r
a
( ) exp

_
,
2
1 2
4
(14)
Target
Recoil
Incident
ion
Scattered
Ion
This potential is integrated along the path of the
ion to calculate the scattering angle. (Look-up
tables are often used in practice.)
Class Handout #14 1999
EE212 1999-00 12 JDP, MDD, PBG
S
n
(E) in Eqn. (13) can be approximated by
S E x
Z Z
Z Z
m
m m
n
( ) .
/ /
/

+
( )
+

2 8 10
15
1 2
1
2 3
2
2 3
1 2
1
1 2
eV- cm
2
(15)
where Z
1
, m
1
= ion and Z
2
, m
2
= substrate.
B. Non-Local and Local Electronic Stopping
Drag force caused by charged ion in "sea" of
electrons (non-local electronic stopping).
Dielectric Medium
Retarding E-field
V
ion
Collisions with electrons around atoms transfers
momentum and results in local electronic
stopping.
V
ion
Target
e-
Class Handout #14 1999
EE212 1999-00 13 JDP, MDD, PBG
To first order,
S E cv kE
e ion
( )
/

1 2
, k x

0 2 10
15
. ev cm
1/2 2
(16)
C. Total Stopping Power
E
n
e
r
g
y

l
o
s
s

(
k
e
V

m
-
1
)
10
100
1000
10 100 1000
Energy (keV)
As
N
B
N
S
E
P
N
The critical energy E
c
when the nuclear and
electronic stopping are equal is
B: 17keV
P: 150keV
As, Sb : > 500keV
Damage Production
Consider a 30keV arsenic ion, which has a range
of 25 nm, traversing roughly 100 atomic planes.
Class Handout #14 1999
EE212 1999-00 14 JDP, MDD, PBG
The number of displaced particles created by an
incoming ion is given by
n
E
E
ions
n
d

2
30 000
2 15
1000
,
(17)
300 eV Si Knock-on
30 keV
As ion
100 atomic planes
Damage cylinder
t = 0.1 ps
t = 0.5 ps
t = 6.0 ps
Molecular dynamics simulation of a 5keV Boron
ion implanted into silicon [de la Rubia, LLNL]
Class Handout #14 1999
EE212 1999-00 15 JDP, MDD, PBG
Amorphization
For high enough doses, the crystal becomes
amorphous and loses all long range order. At this
point, the arrangement of lattice atoms is random
and the damage accumulation has saturated.
1E15 1.5E15
2E15 4E15
5E15 1E16
0.2m
C
r
y
s
t
a
l
l
i
n
e
A
m
o
r
p
h
o
u
s
Surface
Cross sectional TEM images of amorphous layer
formation with increasing implant dose (300keV
Si -> Si) [Rozgonyi]
Damage Annealing
Goals:
Remove primary damage created by the implant
and activate the dopants.
Restore silicon lattice to its perfect crystalline
state.
Restore the electron and hole mobility.
Do this without appreciable dopant redistribution.
Class Handout #14 1999
EE212 1999-00 16 JDP, MDD, PBG
10
-8
10
-6
10
-4
10
-2 1 100
0.1
1
10
100
Surface V
recombination
Bulk I&V
recombination
Surface I
recombination
Initial excess I & V
A
n
n
h
i
l
a
t
e
d

I

&

V

p
e
r

i
m
p
l
a
n
t
e
d

i
o
n
Seconds
Bulk and surface recombination take place on a
short time scale.
"+1" I excess remains. These I coalesce into
{311} defects which are stable for longer periods.
{311} defects anneal out in sec - min at moderate
temperatures (800 - 1000C) but eject I TED.
<311>
<110>
311 Capture radius
I-dimer
R
i
b
b
o
n
-
l
i
k
e

d
e
f
e
c
t
Stable dislocation loops can form when the
damage is greater (amorphizing implant - see
below).
Class Handout #14 1999
EE212 1999-00 17 JDP, MDD, PBG
Solid Phase Epitaxy
If the substrate is amorphous, it can regrow by
SPE.
5 min 10 min 15 min
20 min
Amorphous
100 nm
EOR
damage
Cross sectional TEM images of amorphous layer
regrowth at 525C, from a 200keV, 6e15 cm
-2
Sb
implant [Fletcher].
SPE regrowth
EOR loops
Residual
damage
Max damage
below
amorphization
threshold
a/c interface
Implanted Profile
C
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
Depth
Surface
BUT - the tail of damage beyond the a/c interface
can nucleate stable, secondary defects and cause
transient enhanced diffusion (TED).
Class Handout #14 1999
EE212 1999-00 18 JDP, MDD, PBG
Dopant Activation
When the substrate is amorphous, SPE provides
an ideal way of repairing the damage and
activating dopants.
At lower implant doses, activation is much more
complex because stable defects form.
400
500 600
700 800
900
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
T
A
(C)
Sub Amorphous
Amorphous
3 x 10
12
cm
-2
1 x 10
15
cm
-2
1 x 10
14
cm
-2
F
r
a
c
t
i
o
n


A
c
t
i
v
e
8 x 10
12
cm
-2
2.5 x 10
14
2 x 10
15
Reverse
Annealing
1.0
0.1
0.01
400 500 600
700 800 900 1000
T
A
(C)
F
r
a
c
t
i
o
n

A
c
t
i
v
e
Class Handout #14 1999
EE212 1999-00 19 JDP, MDD, PBG
Plot (above) of fractional activation versus anneal
temperature for Boron. The intermediate
temperature range represents reverse annealing.
Reverse annealing is though to occur because of a
competition between the native interstitial point
defects and the boron atoms for lattice sites.
Transient Enhanced Diffusion
0 0.08 0.16 0.24 0.32 0.4
Depth (m)
10 sec 1000C
2 min 800C
C
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n

(
c
m
-
3
)
10
19
10
18
10
17
10
16
TED is the result of interstitial damage from the
implant enhancing the dopant diffusion for a brief
transient period.
It is the dominant effect today that determines
junction depths in shallow profiles.
It is anomalous diffusion, because profiles can
diffuse more at low temperatures than at high
temperatures for the same Dt.
Class Handout #14 1999
EE212 1999-00 20 JDP, MDD, PBG
The basic model for TED assumes that all the
implant damage recombines rapidly, leaving only
1 interstitial generated per dopant atom when the
dopant atom occupies a substitutional site (the +1
model) [Giles].
C
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n

(
c
m
-
3
)
10
19
10
18
10
17
10
16
10
20
10
21
As profile
Boron profiles
Initial
Final
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4
Depth (microns)
TED effects may be very non-local. Here the As
profile recrystallizes by SPE without much TED.
The buried boron layer is drastically affected by
the +1 interstitials in the As tail region.
Atomic Level Understanding Of TED
{311} clusters form rapidly and then are stable for
extended periods (sec - min), driving TED by
emitting I while they shrink.
Class Handout #14 1999
EE212 1999-00 21 JDP, MDD, PBG
10
11
10
13
10
15
S
i


S
e
l
f
-
I
n
t
e
r
s
t
i
t
i
a
l

D
e
n
s
i
t
y

(
c
m
-
3
)
10
17
10
19
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Depth (m)
+1 Initial Damage
10
-6
sec
10
-5
10
-4
10
-3
10
-2
10
-1
By 0.1 sec (750C), the {311} defects have
formed and C
I
is down to 10
13
cm
-3
(SUPREM).
But C
I
*
10
8
cm
-3
at 750C, so the enhancement is
> 10
5
!
S
i


S
e
l
f
-
I
n
t
e
r
s
t
i
t
i
a
l

D
e
n
s
i
t
y

(
c
m
-
2
)
815C
738C
705C
670C
1
10
2
10
4
10
6
10
11
10
12
10
13
10
14
10
15
Time (seconds)
Class Handout #14 1999
EE212 1999-00 22 JDP, MDD, PBG
This enhancement decays over a time period of
sec - min as the {311} clusters break up.
Given this picture, we can model the {311}
behavior as follows:
I Cl Cl
n n
+
+1
(18)
where Cl
n
is a cluster with n interstitials.

C
t
Cl
t
k C Cl k Cl
growth shrinkage
I
f I r
(19)
The most important part of the transient is while
the {311} clusters are evaporating I, maintaining
a constant supersaturation of I.
During this period, dopant diffusivity
enhancements are constant and given by (see
text):
C
C a C
E E
kT
I
I I
b F
max
*
exp

_
,
1
4
3 0

(20)
Class Handout #14 1999
EE212 1999-00 23 JDP, MDD, PBG
500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200
Temperature C
10
6
10
5
10
4
10
2
10
3
I
n
t
e
r
s
t
i
t
i
a
l

S
u
p
e
r
s
a
t
u
r
a
t
i
o
n

C
I
m
a
x
/
C
I
*
Estimating the Duration of TED
Over time the interstitial supersaturation decays to
zero and TED ends.
10
21
10
20
10
19
10
17
10
18
C
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n

(
c
m
-
3
)
10
16
10
5
10
4
As-implanted
1
10
100
1000
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Depth (m)
I
n
t
e
r
s
t
i
t
i
a
l

S
u
p
e
r
s
a
t
u
r
a
t
i
o
n

R
a
t
i
o
1 min, 750C
10 min, 750C
Example - Boron TED. Note that C
I
/ C
I
*
has
dropped from 10
4
to 10
2
in 10 min at 750C.
Class Handout #14 1999
EE212 1999-00 24 JDP, MDD, PBG
The excess I diffuse into the bulk and recombine
at the surface.
R
P Diffusion
flux
Surface
C
I
max
Surface
Recombination
Flux
Dose Q
The flux towards the surface is d C R
I I P
max
/ where
R
P
is the range of the implant.
The time to dissolve the clusters is given by the
dose divided by the flux (see text):

enh
P
I
b
a R Q
d
E
kT

_
,
4
3
exp (21)
500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200
Temperature C
10
6
10
4
10
2
10
-2
1
T
i
m
e

(
s
e
c
o
n
d
s
)
Class Handout #14 1999
EE212 1999-00 25 JDP, MDD, PBG
Thus the general picture of TED that emerges is:
Q
P

enh
Time
E
n
h
a
n
c
e
m
e
n
t
10
100
1000
10,000
1
{311} s decay
Steady-state
Rapid
exponential
decay
C
I
m
a
x
/
C
I
*
Because the {311} clusters exist for longer times
at low T, there can actually be greater dopant
motion during low T anneals.
10
21
10
20
10
19
10
18
C
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n

(
c
m
-
3
)
10
17
10
16
10
4
10
5
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Depth (m)
700C
800C
700C
800C
900C
900C
I
n
t
e
r
s
t
i
t
i
a
l

S
u
p
e
r
s
a
t
u
r
a
t
i
o
n

R
a
t
i
o
1000
100
10
1