Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x24gv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-12T09:32:42.545Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Correlation of Electrical and Physical Properties of SIMOX BOX Affected by Various Implantation Parameters

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 February 2011

J. U. Yoon
Affiliation:
Mxassachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139
G. N. Kim
Affiliation:
Mxassachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139
J‐H Y. Krska
Affiliation:
Mxassachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139
J. E. Chung
Affiliation:
Mxassachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139
L. P. Allen
Affiliation:
Ibis Technology Corp, Danvers, MA 01923
K. Goodson
Affiliation:
Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305
K. Nauka
Affiliation:
Hewlett‐Packard, Palo Alto, CA 94304
Get access

Abstract

The impact of two implant parameters, namely the implant substrate temperature and implant beam current, on the physical and electrical properties of SIMOX buried oxide are investigated. Three implant substrate temperatures, 540 °C, 590 °C, and 640 °C and three beam current, 45 mA, 55 mA, 65 mA, are investigated. Results from thermal conductivity and surface photovoltage measurements show no apparent differences between samples. Results from interface roughness shows a decreasing trend as the substrate temperature and beam current increases. For the samples with different implant temperatures, the high‐field conduction shows an opposite dependence for top‐interface versus substrate injection. This behavior can be explained by the conservation of silicon in the buried oxide. Correlation of surface photovoltage and high‐field conduction shows weak positive dependency while that of interface roughness and high‐field conduction shows dependency only when the sets of temperature variation and beam current variation are decoupled.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Auberton‐Herve, A., Wittkower, A., and Aspar, B., “SIMOX ‐ a new challenge for ion implantation”, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B, Vol. B96, p. 420, 1995 Google Scholar
2 Wilson, S. R., Wetteroth, T., Hong, S., Shin, H., Hwang, B.‐Y., Foerstner, J., Racanelli, M, Huang, M., and Shin, H. C., “Thin film silicon on insulator substrates and their application to integrated circuits”, Journal of Electronic Materials, Vol. 25, No. 1, p. 13, 1996 Google Scholar
3 Mendicino, M. A., Vasudev, P. K., Maillot, P., Hoener, C., Baylis, J., Bennett, J., Boden, T., Jackett, S., Huffman, K., and Godwin, M., “Silicon‐on‐insulator material qualification for low‐power complementary metal‐oxide semiconductor application”, Thin Solid Films, Vol. 270, p. 578583, 1995 Google Scholar
4 Kading, O. W., Skurk, H., and Goodson, K. E., “Thermal conduction in metallized silicon‐dioxide layers on silicon”, Applied Physics Letters, 65 (13), p. 1629, 1994 Google Scholar
5 Goodson, K. E., Flik, M. I., Su, L. T., and Antoniadis, D. A., “Annealing‐temperature dependence of the thermal conductivity of LPCVD silicon‐dioxide layers”, IEEE Electron Device Letters, Vol. 14, p. 490, 1993 Google Scholar
6 Nauka, K., Cao, M., and Assaderaghi, F., “Surface photovoltage monitoring of the Si‐buried oxide interface charges”, IEEE International SOI Conference, p. 52, 1995 Google Scholar
7 Krska, J. Y., Yoon, J. U., Nee, J. T., Roitman, P., Campisi, G. J., Brown, G. A., and Chung, J. E., “A Model for SIMOX buried‐oxide high‐Field conduction”, IEEE Transactions on Electron Devices, Vol. 43, No. 11, p. 1956, 1996 Google Scholar