Practical DTCO through design/patterning exploration

Neal Lafferty; Jason Meiring; Mohamed Bahnas; Joseph O'Neill; Toshikazu Endo; Dan Schumacher; James Culp; Glenn Wawrzynski; Gurpreet Singh Lamba; Kostas Adam; John Sturtevant; Chris McGinty

doi:10.1117/12.2086355

18 March 2015 Practical DTCO through design/patterning exploration

Neal Lafferty, Jason Meiring, Mohamed Bahnas, Joseph O'Neill, Toshikazu Endo, Dan Schumacher, James Culp, Glenn Wawrzynski, Gurpreet Singh Lamba, Kostas Adam, John Sturtevant, Chris McGinty

Author Affiliations +

Proceedings Volume 9427, Design-Process-Technology Co-optimization for Manufacturability IX; 942710 (2015) https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2086355
Event: SPIE Advanced Lithography, 2015, San Jose, California, United States

Abstract

Design Technology Co-Optimization (DTCO) becomes more important with every new technology node. Complex patterning issues can no longer wait to be detected experimentally using test sites because of compressed technology development schedules. Simulation must be used to discover complex interactions between an iteration of the design rules, and a simultaneous iteration of an intended patterning technology. The problem is often further complicated by an incomplete definition of the patterning space. The DTCO process must be efficient and thoroughly interrogate the legal design space for a technology to be successful. In this paper we present our view of DTCO, called Design and Patterning Exploration. Three emphasis areas are identified and explained with examples: Technology Definition, Technology Learning, and Technology Refinement. The Design and Patterning Exploration flows are applied to a logic 1.3x metal routing layer. Using these flows, yield limiting patterns are identified faster using random layout generation, and can be ruled out or tracked using a database of problem patterns. At the same time, a pattern no longer in the set of rules should not be considered during OPC tuning. The OPC recipe may then be adjusted for better performance on the legal set of pattern constructs. The entire system is dynamic, and users must be able to access related teams output for faster more accurate understanding of design and patterning interactions. In the discussed example, the design rules and OPC recipe are tuned at the same time, leading to faster design rule revisions, as well as improved patterning through more customized OPC and RET.

Citation Download Citation

Neal Lafferty, Jason Meiring, Mohamed Bahnas, Joseph O'Neill, Toshikazu Endo, Dan Schumacher, James Culp, Glenn Wawrzynski, Gurpreet Singh Lamba, Kostas Adam, John Sturtevant, and Chris McGinty "Practical DTCO through design/patterning exploration", Proc. SPIE 9427, Design-Process-Technology Co-optimization for Manufacturability IX, 942710 (18 March 2015); https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2086355

ACCESS THE FULL ARTICLE

INSTITUTIONAL
Select your institution to access the SPIE Digital Library.

SELECT YOUR INSTITUTION

PERSONAL
Sign in with your SPIE account to access your personal subscriptions or to use specific features such as save to my library, sign up for alerts, save searches, etc.

PERSONAL SIGN IN

No SPIE Account? Create one

PURCHASE THIS CONTENT

SUBSCRIBE TO DIGITAL LIBRARY

50 downloads per 1-year subscription

Members: $195

Non-members: $335 ADD TO CART

25 downloads per 1 - year subscription

Members: $145

Non-members: $250 ADD TO CART

PURCHASE SINGLE ARTICLE

Includes PDF, HTML & Video, when available