Premium
Line‐Profile resist development simulation techniques
Author(s) -
Jewett R. E.,
Hagouel P. I.,
Neureuther A. R.,
Van Duzer T.
Publication year - 1977
Publication title -
polymer engineering and science
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.503
H-Index - 111
eISSN - 1548-2634
pISSN - 0032-3888
DOI - 10.1002/pen.760170610
Subject(s) - resist , lithography , etching (microfabrication) , electron beam lithography , tracing , optics , string (physics) , enhanced data rates for gsm evolution , materials science , perpendicular , ray tracing (physics) , line (geometry) , point (geometry) , algorithm , projection (relational algebra) , surface (topology) , computer science , geometry , nanotechnology , physics , mathematics , computer vision , layer (electronics) , operating system , quantum mechanics
The relative advantages and disadvantages of three different algorithms are compared for simulating the time evolution of two‐dimensional line‐edge profiles produced by a locally rate dependent surface etching phenomenon. Simulated profiles typical of optical projection printing and electron‐beam and X‐ray lithography of micron‐sized lines in resist and etching of ion‐implanted SiO 2 are used as a basis of comparison. One of the algorithms is a cell‐by‐cell removal model used earlier by Neureuther and Dill. One of the newly developed algorithms employs ray tracing; it can be shown that the path followed by a point on a front between the developed and undeveloped regions can be calculated using ray‐optic equations. The other new algorithm uses a string of points initially on the surface of the exposed resist. The points on the string advance perpendicular to the local direction of the string; with time the string of points moves down into the resist, replicating the action of a developer. We compare the computing cost, convenience, and accuracy of the algorithms.