How did you solve each of the issues you encountered as the actual development progressed? For starters, could you tell us about the resist coating process?
Shinichi ShudoWith the equipment we had been using up until then, we had to coat resist evenly across the entire flat surface of the wafer.
However, with nanoimprinting, we only need to apply liquid resist on the sections that need to be imprinted. Of course, controlling to make sure the resist is dispensed in just the right places was no easy task, but we were able to use the inkjet technology used in Canon printers for measuring and controlling the quantity and form of the resist to be dispensed.
What about the imprinting?
Masaki OgasawaraOne issue is when air gets in between the wafer and the mask during imprinting. I’m sure anyone who has ever tried to put a protective cover on a smart phone screen knows what I’m talking about; it’s not easy to do it nice and neatly. The same applies to nanoimprinting: if any air gets trapped between the wafer and mask, we cannot imprint the circuit correctly.
Takahiro NakayamaWhile masks are in general very thick and hard, we decided to make the center part of our masks slightly thinner than the outer section, and to slightly bend the shape of the mask itself. Because of these changes, when the mask is stamped, the center part sticks to the wafer first, and then the adhered area spreads out radially until the entire mask is stuck. This means we let any air escape through the edges.
Regardless of the state of the wafer, each imprint needs to be made at exactly the intended position. Even if all the wafers look the same to the naked eye, minute variations caused by some part of their manufacturing process will create significant differences at the nanometer level. During the development process, we realized that an attempt to imprint exactly the same pattern using one single mask on these slightly different wafers would not be possible. However, this would create problems for the customer, who might complain that “We could do it with the conventional equipment, but why not with nanoimprinting?” Then, we came up with a method of applying heat to the wafer only at the moment of imprinting in order to transform the wafer partially, on the nanometer scale, so that they match the mask exactly. In semiconductor lithography, conventional wisdom says that transforming the wafer with heat is something to be avoided, so this was quite a revolutionary idea.
How did you go about adjusting the position and size of the pattern, which is essential for a clean overlay with no distortion?
Atsushi KusakaSemiconductor devices are manufactured using a number of processes across a variety of equipment.
New circuit patterns are drawn over the patterns produced in the previous step, and for more elaborate devices, these processes might be repeated dozens of times. If the circuit patterns on the upper layers do not precisely align with those of the lower layers, the finished device will not function as intended. Furthermore, the lower layers of circuit patterns do not always maintain their ideal shape; they may have undergone numerous transformations during the manufacturing process. Therefore, the imprinting mechanism must be adaptable enough that it can be used regardless of the state of the lower layers. This precision combined with flexibility is called “overlay control,” and it is one of the important performance indices for the equipment used.
First, we try to adjust the size and shape of the overall pattern. In the event that this fails to increase the precision, we must find the root of the problem. For instance, once the equipment has been running for a while, it may start to heat up or cool down, which will in turn cause the masks or wafers to expand or contract. Naturally, we try to account for this when designing the equipment, but when the actual results do not match our expectations, we increase the number of measurement points and re-check the obtained data. From there, we experiment by changing this condition or that, and keep feeding the data back into the process until we eventually find the optimal conditions.
Masaki OgasawaraWhen the sizes were not matching well, we looked into whether there was a difference between the preset and actual temperatures.
We control the temperature within a 0.02 degrees Celsius margin of error.
I remember once being asked “Is the temperature really what you expected it to be?” We couldn’t just say “Yes, it is” and drop the subject. Instead, we intentionally tried changing the temperature and the measurement points, systematically zeroing in on the real cause of the problem by eliminating false ones.
Atsushi KusakaWe place special marks on the masks and wafers to measure and adjust the overlay positioning.
Since resist is viscous, it moves and transforms due to the force of coming into contact with the mask. This transformation also varies slightly according to the type and condition of the resin used. So, precisely compensating for these effects requires sophisticated techniques.
Finally, please tell us about mold separation.
Masaki OgasawaraIdeally, we would just pull the mask off the wafer all at once, keeping it parallel with the wafer’s flat surface. However, doing so would mean applying an extremely strong force when pulling off the mask, which might damage the wafer. So, we had to think of a way to pull off the mask without causing damage. We thought about peeling the stamp off diagonally, like flipping a page in a notebook, but doing this might cause the pattern, which was just imprinted on the wafer, to be flattened out by the mask’s movement.
Nanoimprint Lithography(3 minutes 39 seconds)
Masaki OgasawaraHere again, we decided to go against conventional wisdom: by intentionally lifting parts of the wafer up while tilting it, we were able to make the wafer and mask move like a pair of gears, allowing the two to separate while keeping the imprinted circuit pattern intact. We had always thought that the wafer should never be lifted, but this method, almost literally, flipped that idea upside down.
What’s more, we have to be careful so as not to destroy the mask when eliminating particles.
What exactly are particles, and why do they matter so much?
Shinichi ShudoEarlier, we discussed how air could prevent a pattern from being correctly imprinted?another thing we have to worry about is the presence of particles.
Particles are tiny bits of debris that could get in between the wafer and mask when the two are pressed together. This could destroy the pattern on the mask.
Takahiro NakayamaAt a minimum, we must completely eliminate the presence of any particles with a diameter of 100 nm or greater. This is a much stricter standard than that used for conventional equipment. With our target set at such an extreme level, no measuring device even exists that can evaluate the target value. Therefore, our practical goal for now is to reduce the levels to slightly less than the lower-limit value that the most sensitive equipment available today can detect.
Particles are eliminated using high-performance filtering and cleaning technology(34 seconds)
Shinichi ShudoYou can’t see them, but you know they’re there. So, we had to figure out a way to get rid of them. That’s even harder than it sounds!
Takahiro NakayamaWe started by trying to figure out exactly where the particles were coming from. The mechanical design team and I considered the potential sources of particles and whether we could eliminate them. Then we painstakingly set about reducing them one by one.
Shinichi ShudoFor instance, in order to add an air conditioning mechanism to reduce particle levels, you first have to secure enough room to accommodate that mechanism within the limited amount of space available. This means having to move other components to other places, and even reposition the pipes. If that results in reducing particles, then great. But if doesn’t work out, then you’re back to square one. Ultimately, you’ve got to redraw those design blueprints again and again.
Takahiro NakayamaEvery time we changed the design, the people at the factory were the ones who would actually have to put the new design together. This created a lot of extra work for everyone involved. Even so, when we were having trouble, we could explain what we were trying to do, and they would help us realize that and make progress.
We also worked more closely with our subcontractors than ever before. Since this task was uncharted territory for everyone involved, such details as the selection of materials and methods of processing components might lead to an unexpectedly large increase in particles. Also, since these subcontractors often had their own subcontractors, we even had these sub-subcontractors share their materials lists and operation manuals with us.
That really does sound like painstaking work!
Shinichi ShudoThrough this, we found ways to reduce the presence of particles, but it was always by 1/100 or 1/1000 of the total amount. There were a lot of issues that couldn’t just be solved through dramatic technological breakthroughs.
Takahiro NakayamaIncreasing the precision always meant running a simulation, then verification to see if the simulation results could actually be achieved; it was a cycle of painstaking work. Even so, before conducting a simulation you need an idea like, “Maybe doing this will improve that,” which will hopefully lead to the sort of revolutionary and innovative ideas we mentioned earlier.
We repeated this cycle many times: finding a new issue, thinking about what we could do about it on our own while also sharing it with the related teams, and ultimately working out a solution with everyone’s help. We really felt like we were all in it together. Every day, we aimed higher than the day before, but we were able to keep working toward our goals by constantly giving each other advice and feedback.
During the development process, you worked with Canon Nanotechnologies (CNT) in the U.S. What was the nature of this collaboration?
Meeting with the Canon Nanotechnologies staff
Masaki OgasawaraCNT’s role was to develop the base nanoimprinting technology, while Canon worked on adapting it for mass-production equipment. CNT worked quickly and were flexible in their thinking. Working with them provided us with many opportunities to realize how hardheaded we were, and how liable we were to get trapped in the confines of conventional wisdom!
Shinichi ShudoWorking with a company with a fast decision-making process like CNT was a very stimulating experience for us. Personally, I also found it very interesting to be involved in a project that could serve as a model case for Canon as it focuses on strengthening new businesses through M&A and collaboration with Canon Group companies.