Continue to Site

Welcome to EDAboard.com

Welcome to our site! EDAboard.com is an international Electronics Discussion Forum focused on EDA software, circuits, schematics, books, theory, papers, asic, pld, 8051, DSP, Network, RF, Analog Design, PCB, Service Manuals... and a whole lot more! To participate you need to register. Registration is free. Click here to register now.

Dual implant processs - which one will come first

Status
Not open for further replies.

iliyana

Newbie level 3
Newbie level 3
Joined
Apr 22, 2010
Messages
4
Helped
0
Reputation
0
Reaction score
0
Trophy points
1,281
Activity points
1,307
Dual implant

Hi all,

I need some advises from the mosfet expert. I would like to know on the sequence of the energy for the dual implant process. Which one will come first, low energy / high energy? What is the main concern/ effect if the sequence is not correct?

Thanks in advance.
 

Re: Dual implant

The HV implants (high energy, the deep ones) are the first, s. the drawing below. Because - with the reverse sequence - the high energy implant(s) would disturb the doping distribution of the low energy implant(s).
 

Re: Dual implant

iliyana said:
I need some advises from the mosfet expert. I would like to know on the sequence of the energy for the dual implant process. Which one will come first, low energy / high energy? What is the main concern/ effect if the sequence is not correct?

The first implant changes the crystalline structure of the semiconductor (silicon), which might affect the implantation profile of the second implant. For example, the first implant may amorphise (partially or fully) the surface of silicon, and since implantation profile strongly depends on whether semiconductor is crystalline or amorphous, this might affect the second implant profile. The higher energy implant will leave less damage at the surface and thus will have a smaller effect on the subsequent low energy implant.

You may be able to simulate these effects using TCAD (technology computer-aided design) tools, with appropriate (empirical) settings in the input deck.
 

Re: Dual implant

thanks for the opinions
ya, i'm thinking of doing the TCAD simulation for this n also to run the energy sequence evaluation, then measure the Rs & see if there's any difference or not.
 

Re: Dual implant

iliyana said:
thanks for the opinions
ya, i'm thinking of doing the TCAD simulation for this n also to run the energy sequence evaluation, then measure the Rs & see if there's any difference or not.

I would advise against relying on TCAD process simulation results - unless you know what you are doing. There are hundreds of fitting, empirical parameters in process simulation tools (SUPREM-4, DIOS, FLOOPS, etc.), and their default values are not "tuned" to your process or equipment conditions, so you will be getting a garbage if you do not do a proper calibration - and this requires a lot of expertise. If you can get technical support from some of the vendors - that would be the best option (technical TCAD support at both Synopsys and Silvaco is very good). ANother option is to talk to process integration or process people - they should be able to tell you what to do without doing any simulations, the practical experience is very important for this sort of things. (device simulations are much more "scientific" and physics-based, so if your doping profiles and other parameters are set right, the simulation results should be close to the reality).
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Part and Inventory Search

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top