Jin-Hoon Kim1, Hye-Jun Kil2, Sangjun Lee2, Jinwoo Park3, Jin-Woo Park2. 1. Media Lab, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, United States. 2. Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Yonsei University, Seoul 03722, Korea. 3. Computational Science Engineering Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Hwaseong 18448, Korea.
Abstract
With the evolution of semiconducting industries, thermomechanical failure induced in a multilayered structure with a high aspect ratio during manufacturing and operation has become one of the critical reliability issues. In this work, the effect of thermomechanical stress on the failure of multilayered thin films on Si substrates was studied using analytical calculations and various thermomechanical tests. The residual stress induced during material processing was calculated based on plate bending theory. The calculations enabled the prediction of the weakest region of failure in the thin films. To verify our prediction, additional thermomechanical stress was applied to induce cracking and interfacial delamination by various tests. We assumed that, when accumulated thermomechanical-residual and externally applied mechanical stress becomes larger than a critical value the thin-film cracking or interfacial delamination will occur. The test results agreed well with the prediction based on the analytical calculation in that the film with maximum tensile residual stress is the most vulnerable to failure. These results will provide useful analytical and experimental prediction tools for the failure of multilayered thin films in the device design stage.
With the evolution of semiconducting industries, thermomechanical failure induced in a multilayered structure with a high aspect ratio during manufacturing and operation has become one of the critical reliability issues. In this work, the effect of thermomechanical stress on the failure of multilayered thin films on Si substrates was studied using analytical calculations and various thermomechanical tests. The residual stress induced during material processing was calculated based on plate bending theory. The calculations enabled the prediction of the weakest region of failure in the thin films. To verify our prediction, additional thermomechanical stress was applied to induce cracking and interfacial delamination by various tests. We assumed that, when accumulated thermomechanical-residual and externally applied mechanical stress becomes larger than a critical value the thin-film cracking or interfacial delamination will occur. The test results agreed well with the prediction based on the analytical calculation in that the film with maximum tensile residual stress is the most vulnerable to failure. These results will provide useful analytical and experimental prediction tools for the failure of multilayered thin films in the device design stage.
Since the invention of
field-effect transistors in the 1920s, one
of the main issues in the semiconductor industry has been the fabrication
of faster and smaller transistors.[1] Currently,
for highly integrated devices, the channel width of the device has
decreased to less than 10 nm.[2,3] However, the processing
technology is limited in terms of further decreasing the channel width.[2,4] Hence, semiconductor devices with multilayered structures have evolved
to increase the degree of integration.[4,5] Such multilayered
devices have the advantages of high density, low cost, and low power
consumption.[3]For multilayered semiconductor
devices, various nanostructures
with high aspect ratios, such as nanoplates, nanopillars, and nanowires,
should be fabricated.[6] Among the various
nanostructures, nanoplates with oxide or nitride/nitride/metal multilayers
are one of the essential components in thin-film transistors since
oxide, nitride, and metal layers are used as the gate dielectric,
adhesion layer, and gate metal in metal/insulator/semiconductor (MIS)
structures, respectively.[4] For smaller
channel widths and higher stacks, the thickness of the thin films
should be decreased,[7] which makes the thin
films more vulnerable to various thermomechanical failures, such as
bending, cracking, and, particularly, interfacial delamination.[8,9] These factors eventually lead to the catastrophic failure of the
devices.[4]As stated previously, the
interfacial delamination between thin
films has become the most critical device failure mode because more
complex residual stresses are induced by increasing the number of
layers in the multilayered films during deposition processes and operations.
Heat release during device operation has increased with the number
of layers in the multilayered films due to thermal cycling.[10−13] Upon the cyclic heating and cooling during the deposition process
and operation of the devices,[4] thermomechanical-residual
stress is induced in the films and substrates due to mismatches in
the coefficient of thermal expansion (CTE), Young’s modulus,
and Poisson’s ratio of the constituent film materials and the
substrate, which is the well-known cause of failure in thin-film devices.[14]Simple analytical calculation methods
for the residual stresses
in the single film deposited on a thick substrate, which can be readily
used in industries, have been well developed and can be readily used
in industries.[15,16] Hence, the prediction of the
weakest region to undergo thermomechanical failure can be readily
made if the thermomechanical processing conditions and material properties
are known.[17] However, the above-mentioned
simple prediction process cannot be applied to the multilayer thin
films, and the experimental verification process should be carefully
designed accordingly.[4,18] Also, comprehensive analytical
and experimental methods that could consider the effect of CTE and
Young′s modulus mismatch in the multilayered system are required.[19] However, current methods that use analytical
tools such as finite element modeling to predict fracture behavior
by thermal stress used mechanical experiments such as four-point bending
tests to verify their prediction.[20,21] The main parameter
affecting fracture behavior in these mechanical analyses was mechanical
properties such as Young′s modulus and Poisson′s ratio.
Hence, it was unsuitable for thermomechanical analysis in which the
CTE mismatch also should be considered.In this work, the residual
stress distribution throughout the multilayer
thin films and the substrate induced due to the temperature changes
during the deposition was modeled analytically based on plate bending
theory.[18,22] Plate bending theory has been widely used
to model the residual stress distribution in multilayered structures.[23,24] The detailed structures and material properties of two multilayer
specimens are summarized in Figure and Tables and 2.
Figure 1
(a) Schematic description
that thin-film failure occurs beyond
a critical stress. (b) Real specimen image and the multilayered structure.
“Photograph courtesy of “Hye-Jun Kil.” Copyright
2022.” (c) Schematic descriptions of strain components in the
multilayer system after heating or cooling. (d) Schematic descriptions
of the thermomechanical tests performed in this study.
Table 1
Descriptions of Specimens A and B
Si
SiO2
SiN
TiN
W
specimen A
770 μm
100
nm
15 nm
40 nm
specimen B
770 μm
100 nm
15 nm
40 nm
Table 2
Properties of the Materials Used in
This Work
materials
α (10–6/K)
E (GPa)
Si
2.6[25]
130[25]
SiO2
0.7[26]
70[27]
SiN
3.27[28]
149[29]
TiN
9.4[30]
250[31]
W
4.3[32]
410[33]
(a) Schematic description
that thin-film failure occurs beyond
a critical stress. (b) Real specimen image and the multilayered structure.
“Photograph courtesy of “Hye-Jun Kil.” Copyright
2022.” (c) Schematic descriptions of strain components in the
multilayer system after heating or cooling. (d) Schematic descriptions
of the thermomechanical tests performed in this study.We focused on the external stresses such as significant
temperature
change during the operation as the main reason for the device failure,
because the device did not show any failure after the deposition process.
Hence, we assumed that the residual stresses during deposition processes
were much lower than the critical stress for the device failure, as
schematically shown in Figure a. The multilayered structures were deposited based on optimized
processes to minimize defects, and residual stress occurred during
fabrication processes.The experimental investigation of the
failure modes was simultaneously
performed by four different thermomechanical test methods, including
thermal annealing, laser irradiation, scratch test, and four-point
bending test. Especially, the four-point bending test has been frequently
used for calculating interfacial fracture energy in various thin-film
structures.[21] To identify the location
of delamination, analyses by field-emission scanning electron microscopy
(FE-SEM) and transmission electron microscopy (TEM) were performed.
The experimental results clearly verified that the tensile residual
stresses induced at the film are the primary factor for the interfacial
delamination and cracking.
Analytical Calculation and Experimental Procedures
All of the experiments were carried out using multilayered specimens
with thin films deposited in the order of 100 nm silicon oxide (SiO2) or silicon nitride (SiN), 15 nm titanium nitride (TiN),
and 40 nm tungsten (W) on a 770 μm thick silicon (Si) wafer.
A schematic description of the samples is shown in Figure a,b and Table . First, 100 nm SiO2 or SiN was
deposited on a Si wafer using chemical vapor deposition (CVD), then,
15 nm TiN was deposited using atomic layer deposition (ALD), and finally,
40 nm W was deposited using CVD. The largest temperature change (ΔT) during deposition processes is 490 °C.The
residual stress distribution in the multilayers during the
deposition process was calculated using plate bending theory.[18,22] The distribution of thermomechanical-residual stress within the
multilayered thin films was theoretically predictable through the
following calculations. Strain due to heating and cooling of a multilayer
system with n thin film is[22]where c is the uniform strain
component, z is the bending axis, tb is the bending strain component, 1/r is the curvature of the sample, ts is
the thickness of the Si wafer, and h is
the thickness of the entire n films. Stress distribution
on the Si wafer substrate is calculated as[22]where Es is Young’s
modulus of the Si wafer, αs is the CTE of the Si
wafer, and ΔT is the temperature difference
during heating or cooling. Stress distribution on each thin film (ith from the interface with the substrate) can be expressed
as[22]where E is Young’s modulus and α is the CTE of the ith thin film. Based on
the above equation, a general solution can be obtained. The uniform
strain component (eq ) and bending strain component (eq ) can be obtained from the force balance equation (eq ), and the curvature (eq ) can be obtained from
the momentum balance equation (eq ).[22]Since ts is much
thicker than the thickness of the thin film, the first-order approximation
can be applied,[22] and eqs , 7, and 9 are simplified as eqs –12, respectively. Finally, σs and σ can be calculated as in eqs and 14, respectivelywhere ts, t, t, Es, E, E, αs, α, and ΔT are the thicknesses of the Si substrate,
the jth thin film, and the ith thin
film; Young′s modulus values of the Si substrate, the ith thin film, and the jth thin film; CTE
of the Si substrate and the ith thin film; and the
temperature change during post thermal annealing, respectively.To verify our calculation result based
on eq , we applied
the well-known assumption that
there is a critical stress over which a material fails.[34] If the critical stress is known, and we can
measure the external stress initiating the failure, the residual stress
can be calculated (Figure a). Herein, we focused on the situation in which failure occurs
as the device without failure operates. That is, the residual stress
is a level that does not reach the critical stress, and a value equal
to or higher than the threshold stress is applied by the external
stress generated while the device is operating, thus causing failure.
A specimen having a very low defect density through an optimized manufacturing
process could be used to implement a state in which there was no failure
before operating.In this study, external stress was imposed
on the samples by four
different methods: thermal annealing and quenching, laser irradiation,
scratching, and four-point bending tests. For the thermal annealing
and quenching test, the specimens in Table were put into a thermal furnace at 800 °C
for 75 s. Since the annealing time was quite long, we could ignore
the thermal diffusion throughout the specimen. Then, the annealed
samples were quenched to room temperature using an aluminum heat sink.
As ΔT in the thermal test is larger than that
of the deposition process (490 °C), greater residual stresses
than those during the deposition were induced in the thin films.For laser irradiation tests, a pulsed ND:YAG laser with a wavelength
of 1064 nm and a pulsed width of 6 ns was used. For irradiation, one
shot of the laser beam was irradiated on the specimen surface. By
the irradiation, ΔT is expected to be around
9500 °C.[35] The heating and cooling
cycle will be significantly shorter than the thermal test. Since the
pulse duration of the laser was relatively long, and the thickness
of each layer was less than 100 nm, we could assume that the absorption
length of the laser energy in the multilayered structure was smaller
than the thickness of each layer. Hence, thermal diffusion was not
considered in the laser irradiation analysis.[36,37] During the laser irradiation, external stresses due to significant
temperature change overcome the critical stress, resulting in the
failure of the multilayered structures.A scratch test was conducted
in accordance with ISO 20502 and ASTM
C1624.[38] A nanoscale scratch tester (CSM,
USA) with a sharp diamond tip was used. The diamond tip is 2 μm
in radius. The vertical load at the start is 0.5 mN, and the end force
is 120 mN. During the scratch test, the diamond tip scratches the
surface of the specimen with a constant increase in the vertical load
at a rate of 2 mN/s. Hence, the adhesion force of the thin film could
be verified by measuring the vertical loads where delamination occurs.For the four-point bending test, specimens were cut into 50 mm
by 8 mm rectangles using a laser dicing machine. Two specimens were
bonded together using an epoxy, with the thin films facing each other
(Figure d). Additionally,
in one of the bonded specimens, a notch was formed on the opposite
side of the deposited thin films using a dicing saw. The four-point
bending test was performed using a universal testing machine (CT-UTM101E,
CoreTech, Korea). The displacement velocity was 10 mm/min, and the
inner pin and outer pin distances were 20 and 45 mm, respectively
(Figure d). During
the four-point bending test, tensile stress was applied to the specimen.
The crack initiated at the notch propagated through the layers. When
the crack reached the interface with weak interfacial adhesion strength,
the crack would propagate through the interface. Otherwise, the crack
would propagate throughout the layers further, which would result
in surface crack propagation.[21] Hence,
in the four-point bending test, the interfacial adhesion strength
is critical for determining the crack propagation path.The
cross sections of the failed specimens were analyzed using
FE-SEM (JSM-6701F, JEOL, Japan), and the crack location and site of
delamination were identified. The delaminated or cracked area was
milled using a focused ion beam (FIB, crossbeam 540, ZEISS, Germany),
and, using TEM (JEM-F200, JEOL, Japan), materials were identified
with energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) mapping.
Results and Discussion
Calculation of the Residual Thermal Stress
Based on Plate Bending Theory
The cross sectional TEM images
of Specimen A and B are shown in Figure a,b. TiN was deposited between SiO2 or SiN and W to improve adhesion. As shown in Figure a,b, defects and blisters were not observed
after deposition. The properties of the materials used in this work
are summarized in Table . To calculate the residual stress induced in the multilayered systems
during the deposition process, plate bending theory was used, as described
in detail in Section .[18,22] Based on plate bending theory, the residual
stress induced in the Si substrate (σs) with n thin films is expressed in eq . The thermal residual stress induced in
the ith thin film from the interface with the Si
substrate is expressed in eq .
Figure 2
Cross sectional TEM images of (a) SiO2 and (b) SiN-based multilayered systems. Stress distribution
in the Si substrate of the (c) Specimen A and (d) Specimen B. Stress
distributions in the deposited thin films of (e) Specimen A and (f)
Specimen B. Schematic stress distributions of (g) Specimen A and (h)
Specimen B after cooling. A Pt layer shown in Figure a,b was deposited for TEM analysis, which
is irrelevant to the multilayered systems.
Cross sectional TEM images of (a) SiO2 and (b) SiN-based multilayered systems. Stress distribution
in the Si substrate of the (c) Specimen A and (d) Specimen B. Stress
distributions in the deposited thin films of (e) Specimen A and (f)
Specimen B. Schematic stress distributions of (g) Specimen A and (h)
Specimen B after cooling. A Pt layer shown in Figure a,b was deposited for TEM analysis, which
is irrelevant to the multilayered systems.In Specimens A and B in Figure a,b, the thermomechanical-residual stresses
were calculated
using eqs and 14, and the results are plotted in Figure c–f. As shown in Figure c,d, a neutral plane
is located at 513 μm from the surface of the Si substrate both
in Specimens A and B, which is approximately 2/3 of the total thickness
of the Si substrate.As shown in Figure e,f, the residual stresses in the thin films
are much higher than
those in the Si substrates. In the thin films, the sign of the stress
is determined by the CTE mismatches between the Si substrate and the
thin films. CTE of SiO2 is lower than that of the Si substrate;
hence, compressive stress is generated in the SiO2 layer
(Table ). On the other
hand, tensile stress is induced in the SiN, TiN, and W layers since
their CTEs are higher than that of the Si substrate (Table ). According to the stress distribution
in the thin films shown in Figure e,f, the strain mismatch is largest at the interfaces
between SiO2 and TiN and between SiN and TiN for Specimen
A and B, respectively. Based on the stress distributions, TiN where
the largest tensile stress is induced and for which the stiffness
is the lowest due to the smallest thickness seems to be the most vulnerable
layer to cracking and delamination.
Thermal Annealing and Laser Irradiation
To verify the prediction made in Section , additional thermomechanical stresses
were applied by thermal annealing and laser irradiation. First, samples
were thermally annealed at 800 °C and quenched to room temperature.
This ΔT is larger by 375 °C than that
induced during deposition. An Al heat sink was used to quench the
heated samples, and an IR camera was used to confirm that the temperature
was immediately reduced to room temperature. As shown in the FE-SEM
images in Figure a,c,
a delaminated area was observed on the multilayered samples. According
to the cross sectional TEM images and EDS mapping results in Figure e,g, TiN layers were
delaminated or cracked under the thermomechanical stresses in both
Specimens A and B, respectively. This agrees very well with the theoretical
prediction made in Section . The void formation shown in Figure g is that quenching was performed in the
atmosphere after thermal annealing. The difference between Young’s
modulus and Poisson’s ratio causes thermal expansion mismatch
between layers, resulting in delamination. At this point, microcracks
occurred, and voids were created between TiN and SiN.[39]
Figure 3
Field-emission scanning electron microscopy (FE-SEM) images of
the delaminated surfaces of (a), (b) Si/SiO2/TiN/W and
(c), (d) Si/SiN/TiN/W induced by thermal annealing ((a) and (c)) and
laser irradiation ((b) and (d)). The red rectangular area in Figure a–d is the
location where cross sectional sampling for TEM was performed using
FIB. Cross sectional TEM and EDS mapping images of the (e) Si/SiO2/TiN/W system and (g) Si/SiN/TiN/W system after thermal annealing
and quenching. Cross sectional TEM and EDS mapping images of the (f)
Si/SiO2/TiN/W system and (h) Si/SiN/TiN/W system after
laser irradiation.
Field-emission scanning electron microscopy (FE-SEM) images of
the delaminated surfaces of (a), (b) Si/SiO2/TiN/W and
(c), (d) Si/SiN/TiN/W induced by thermal annealing ((a) and (c)) and
laser irradiation ((b) and (d)). The red rectangular area in Figure a–d is the
location where cross sectional sampling for TEM was performed using
FIB. Cross sectional TEM and EDS mapping images of the (e) Si/SiO2/TiN/W system and (g) Si/SiN/TiN/W system after thermal annealing
and quenching. Cross sectional TEM and EDS mapping images of the (f)
Si/SiO2/TiN/W system and (h) Si/SiN/TiN/W system after
laser irradiation.In the laser irradiation test (Figure d), the laser heat was focused
on a small
area of specimen surfaces for a very short time, and the specimens
were cooled in air.[40] First, the critical
pulse energy for delamination was investigated by observing the irradiated
surface using an optical microscope (OM). As shown in Figure S1 (Supporting Information), when the
pulse energies were 57 and 90 mJ, delamination and cracking occurred
on the surfaces of Specimens A and B, respectively. When the laser
power was higher than this critical power, the total delaminated area
increased, as shown in Figure S1. The detailed
delaminated surface at the critical laser power is shown in Figure b,d. The main reason
for the delamination or cracking of the specimens′ surface
by this laser irradiation is the difference between Young’s
modulus and Poisson’s ratio between the multilayers. The difference
between the two values causes a difference in the degree of expansion
of the layers, and it causes the occurrence of strain by this mismatch,
occurring delamination. Based on the cross sectional images shown
in Figure f,h, delamination
occurred at the interfaces between SiO2 and TiN and between
SiN and TiN, respectively, which corresponds very well with the thermal
annealing tests as well as the calculation result in Section .
Nanoscratch and Four-Point Bending Tests
Additional mechanical stresses were imposed on the two specimens
by nanoscratch and four-point bending tests to verify the relationship
between the residual stresses and the thin-film failure. The mean
critical forces of the tangential force at which delamination occurred
were measured as 7 mN for Specimen A and 15 mN for Specimen B. As
in the laser irradiation test, a larger energy was required to delaminate
Specimen B than Specimen A. Also, the delaminated films by the nanoscratch
test were TiN as in the thermal annealing and laser irradiation tests.
The interfacial delamination at SiO2/TiN in Specimen A
and SiN/TiN interfaces in Specimen B was confirmed by OM, TEM images,
and EDS mapping, as shown in Figure .
Figure 4
OM surface images of the (a) Specimen A and (b) specimen
B after
the scratch test. Cross sectional TEM and EDS mapping images of the
(c) Specimen A and (d) Specimen B after scratch tests.
OM surface images of the (a) Specimen A and (b) specimen
B after
the scratch test. Cross sectional TEM and EDS mapping images of the
(c) Specimen A and (d) Specimen B after scratch tests.Finally, the four-point bending test was performed
to further verify
the layer that is most vulnerable to failure in the multilayered systems.
A notch was formed at the bottom of the Si wafer, as shown in Figure a, and two samples
were bonded using epoxy as in Figure d. When the mechanical bending was induced, a crack
was generated at the notch, and it was propagated to the bonded interfaces.
Then, the crack propagated along the interface or through the layer
if the summation of the mechanical stress and the residual stress
becomes larger than a critical value for failure.[17]
Figure 5
(a) OM image of the notch induced on the opposite surface of the
thin-film-deposited Si wafer. “Photograph courtesy of “Jin-Hoon
Kim.” Copyright 2022.” (b) FE-SEM image of the Si/SiN/TiN/W
system after the four-point bending test. The yellow dotted line represents
the point where the cohesive failure of the epoxy occurred.
(a) OM image of the notch induced on the opposite surface of the
thin-film-deposited Si wafer. “Photograph courtesy of “Jin-Hoon
Kim.” Copyright 2022.” (b) FE-SEM image of the Si/SiN/TiN/W
system after the four-point bending test. The yellow dotted line represents
the point where the cohesive failure of the epoxy occurred.First, the cross sections of the delaminated surface
after the
four-point bending test were analyzed. As shown in Figure a,c, delamination occurred
at the interface between SiO2 and TiN in Specimen A, which
matches well with the previous test and calculation results in Sections and 3, respectively. In Specimen B, interfacial delamination was
observed at the interface between SiN and TiN, and the interfacial
crack detoured through the W layer rapidly. As shown in Figure a, the branching of cracks
was not observed in specimen A because cracks propagated through the
weak SiO2/TiN interface, as shown in Figure c. Whereas, as shown in Figure b, branching of cracks was
observed on the surface of Specimen B because propagated cracks detoured
through the W layer.
Figure 6
Surface and cross sectional FE-SEM images of the (a) Si/SiO2/TiN/W system and (b) Si/SiN/TiN/W system after the four-point
bending test. Cross sectional TEM and EDS mapping images of the (c)
Si/SiO2/TiN/W system and (d) Si/SiN/TiN/W system after
the four-point bending test, respectively. (e) Force–displacement
curves of the Si/SiO2/TiN/W system obtained during the
four-point bending test.
Surface and cross sectional FE-SEM images of the (a) Si/SiO2/TiN/W system and (b) Si/SiN/TiN/W system after the four-point
bending test. Cross sectional TEM and EDS mapping images of the (c)
Si/SiO2/TiN/W system and (d) Si/SiN/TiN/W system after
the four-point bending test, respectively. (e) Force–displacement
curves of the Si/SiO2/TiN/W system obtained during the
four-point bending test.Based on fracture mechanics, if the interfacial
strength was stronger
than the intrinsic material′s strength, the crack propagated
through the thin film in the vertical direction. Whereas when the
interfacial strength was weaker than the intrinsic material′s
strength, the crack propagated through the weak interface in the lateral
direction.[41] Crack branching occurred due
to rapid rupture of the brittle materials. In specimen B, since the
crack propagated through films (vertical direction to the specimen),
the crack rapidly reached the surface. Hence, the branching was observed,
as shown in Figure b. Whereas in specimen A, since the crack propagated through the
interface (lateral direction), it took longer for cracks to reach
the surface. Hence, we could not observe the branching in specimen
A, as shown in Figure a. Also, as shown in Figure e, we could observe a plateau in the stress–displacement
curve, which indicates slow crack propagation through the interface.
Such differences in crack propagation behavior observed after four-point
bending tests strongly indicate that the SiN/TiN interface has stronger
adhesion strength compared with SiO2/TiN, also shown in
the analytical calculation, laser irradiation, and scratch tests.The interfacial fracture energy, which is the critical strain energy
release rate (G), can be calculated from the force–displacement
curve obtained from the four-point bending test, which is expressed
as[42]where M is the bending moment,
which can be expressed as M = PL/2b in the plate beam; P is the
bending load; L is the spacing between loading pins; b is the width of the specimen; ν is Poisson′s
ratio of the Si substrate; E is Young′s modulus
of the Si substrate; and h is the thickness of the
specimen.The force–displacement curve obtained from
the four-point
bending test is shown in Figure e, revealing that the force was linearly increased
first, which is the overall deformation of the specimen. Then, a crack
was formed at the notch and propagated through the bonded interface.
The crack at the notch led to the formation of a spike in the force–displacement
curve, as shown in Figure e. After the spike was formed, the load was relaxed and then
showed linear-elastic behavior. When the displacement increased further,
a plateau was formed, where delamination started. The force value
at the plateau was used to calculate G using eq , and the calculated G value was 19 J/m2 in Specimen A, which is comparable
to the reported G values of thin films deposited
on the Si substrate.[43−45] After the crack was formed at the notch, the bending
of the specimen mostly occurred to the un-notched side of the specimen
(schematically shown in Figure d), which is independent of the notch′s depth. Hence,
in the four-point bending test, the effect of notch depth is known
to be negligible.[46]Kim et al. measured
the G of a photosensitive
dielectric/Ti/Cu multilayered system deposited on a Si wafer using
the four-point bending test, and they reported that interfacial delamination
occurred at the photosensitive dielectric/Ti interface; the G value was approximately 17.3 J/m2.[43] Völker et al. measured the G value of a borophosphosilicate dielectric glass (BPSG)/Ti/W/AlSiCu
multilayered system on a Si wafer using the four-point bending test.[44] They also reported that delamination occurred
at the BPSG/Ti interface, and the G value was approximately
11.7 J/m2.[44] Ma et al. analyzed
the adhesion property of a Si/SiO2/AlCu/TiN/SiO2 multilayered system on a Si wafer using the four-point bending test.
They also reported that delamination occurred at the SiO2/TiN interface, but the interfacial fracture energy was not measured.[45]
Conclusions
In this study, the film
failure that occurred in oxide/nitride/metal
or nitride/nitride/metal multilayer systems for semiconductor devices
was analyzed theoretically and experimentally. Based on plate bending
theory, the largest tensile residual stress was predicted to be induced
at the TiN layer in two different specimens, which makes the TiN layer
and its interfaces with TiN most vulnerable to cracking and delamination,
respectively. To verify the theoretical prediction, thermal annealing
and laser irradiation tests were performed to induce additional thermomechanical
stresses. In addition, external mechanical stress was also induced
using the scratch test and four-point bending test. The four test
results all agreed well with the theoretical prediction that the TiN
layer and the interfaces with it are the weakest region to failure.
These agreements clearly confirm that the region of failure in multilayered
thin films can be predicted based on the residual stresses that are
calculated analytically. In conclusion, the analytical model and experimental
test methods proposed in this work will be useful tools to evaluate
the mechanical stability of a designed multilayer thin-film system
on Si before fabrication and during operation.
Authors: Marco Sebastiani; Edoardo Rossi; Muhammad Zeeshan Mughal; Alessandro Benedetto; Paul Jacquet; Enrico Salvati; Alexander M Korsunsky Journal: Nanomaterials (Basel) Date: 2020-04-28 Impact factor: 5.076