| AVS 58th Annual International Symposium and Exhibition | |
| Helium Ion Microscopy Focus Topic | Tuesday Sessions |
| Session HI+AS-TuA |
| Session: | Basics of Helium Ion Microscopy |
| Presenter: | Paul Alkemade, Delft University of Technology, Netherlands |
| Authors: | K. van Langen, Delft University of Technology, Netherlands E.W.J.M. van der Drift, Delft University of Technology, Netherlands E. van Veldhoven, TNO, Netherlands D.J. Maas, TNO, Netherlands P.F.A. Alkemade, Delft University of Technology, Netherlands |
| Correspondent: | Click to Email |
Since the launch of the novel sub-nanometer helium ion microscope by Zeiss / Alis in 2006 nanofabrication with this tool has gained a lot of interest [1]. Key characteristic in this matter is the directional interaction of the helium ion with matter with negligible backscattering. In ion milling it enables very steep structuring when compared to the Ga+ ion equivalent [2]. In a similar comparison helium ion beam-induced deposition in a precursor gas ambient yields tall and smooth nanostructures [3], partially also because the sputtering by helium ions is at least an order of magnitude lower than by gallium ions.
The present contribution deals with scanning helium ion beam lithography (SHIBL). Thusfar two initial SHIBL studies on hydrogensylsesquioxane (HSQ) resist were reported [4,5]. In the present work performance of SHIBL is compared with state-of-the-art electron beam lithography (EBL). As resist materials we explored HSQ, polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA), and the inorganic resist of aluminumoxide. The latter material choice is motivated by the need for enhanced mask selectivity in pattern transfer in the sub-10-nm area.
The results for HSQ and PMMA can be summarized as:
- smallest feature size of 5 nm, equivalent to the best EBL performance [6]
- clear pattern densities up to 10 nm full-pitch, which is better than in EBL
- sensitivity 1-2 orders of magnitude better than in EBL.
As for the inorganic resist, 5-nm features have been realized.
In a semi-quantitative and comparative approach the results will be explained and future prospects will be outlined.
1 R. Hill, F.H.M. Faridur Rahman, Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A (2010), doi:10.1016/j.nima.2010.12.123, in press
2 L. Scipioni, D. C. Ferranti, V. S. Smentkowski, R.A. Potyrailo, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B (2010) 28: C6P18
3 P. Chen, E. van Veldhoven, C.A. Sanford, H.W.M. Salemink, D.J. Maas, D.A. Smith, P.D. Rack, and P.F.A. Alkemade, Nanotechnol. (2010) 21: 455302
4 V. Sidorkin, E. van Veldhoven, E. van der Drift, P. Alkemade, H. Salemink, D. Maas, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B (2009) 27: L18
5 D. Winston, B.M. Cord, B. Ming, D.C. Bell, W.F. DiNatale, L.A. Stern, A.E. Vladar, M.T. Postek, M.K. Mondol, J.K.W. Yang, K.K. Berggren, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B (2009) 27: 2702
6 H. Duan, D. Winston, J.K.W. Yang, B.M. Cord, V.R. Manfrinato, and K.K. Berggren, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B. (2010) 28: C6C58