1 / 25

Evaluation of the Low Resistance Strip Sensors (Low-R) Fabricated at CNM

Evaluation of the Low Resistance Strip Sensors (Low-R) Fabricated at CNM. CNM (Barcelona), SCIPP (Santa Cruz), IFIC (Valencia) Contact person: Miguel Ullán. Outline. Motivation Proposed solution Design First batch Second batch tests Alternative technological solutions Conclusions.

shada
Download Presentation

Evaluation of the Low Resistance Strip Sensors (Low-R) Fabricated at CNM

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Evaluation of the Low Resistance Strip Sensors (Low-R) Fabricated at CNM CNM (Barcelona), SCIPP (Santa Cruz), IFIC (Valencia) Contact person: Miguel Ullán

  2. Outline • Motivation • Proposed solution • Design • First batch • Second batch tests • Alternative technological solutions • Conclusions

  3. “Far” end, no plateau. V(far) V(near) Motivation • In the scenario of a beam loss there is a large charge deposition in the sensor bulk and coupling capacitors can get damaged • Punch-Through Protection (PTP) structures used at strip end to develop low impedance to the bias line and evacuate the charge But… • Measurements with a large charge injected by a laser pulse showed that the strips can still be damaged • The implant resistance effectively isolatesthe “far” end of the strip from the PTP structure leading to the large voltages H. F.-W. Sadrozinski, et al. “Punch-through protection of SSDs in beam accidents” NIMA 658, Issue 1, pp. 46-50, 2011.

  4. Proposedsolution • To reduce the resistance of the strips: “Low-R strip sensors” • Deposition of Aluminum on top of the implant: R□(Al) ~ 0.04 W/□  20W/cm (Drastic reduction of strip resistance!) • Metal layer deposition on top of the implant (first metal)before the coupling capacitance is defined (second metal). • Double-metal processing to form the coupling capacitor • A layer of high-quality dielectric is needed between metals for the coupling cap. • Deposited on top of the first Aluminum (not grown) • Low temperature processing needed not to degrade Al: T < 400 ºC • Plasma Enhanced CVD (PECVD) process at 300-400 ºC • Triple-layer (oxide (1000 Å)+ Si3N4 (1000 Å) + oxide (1000 Å)): to avoid pinholes  Yield

  5. s Bias rail p d s Poly gate Implant Design • PTP design: • Design of experiments (DOE): varying p, s  d • Wafer design: • 10 ATLAS-barrel-like sensors: “LowR sensors” • 64 channels, ~2.3 mm long strips • First metal connected to the strip implant to reduce Rstrip • Each sensor with a different PTP geometry (with polysiliconbridge) • 10 extra standard sensors for reference (no metal in implant). Identical design to the LowR but without metal strip on top of the implant

  6. Bias pad0 V DC pad20 V ~ 0 V ~ 20 V PTP zone Bias pad0 V DC pad40 V Breakdown zone ~ 0 V ~ 40 V PTP zone Breakdown zone Firstbatch • PTP tests showed unexpected behavior: • Irreversible breakdown • Breakdown voltage independent of PTP structure geometry • at ~40 V in standard sensors and at ~20 V in LowR sensors • Oxide breakdown at a different place in the strip occurs before PTP is activated. • Thin oxides overlooked during fabrication • Only critical when PTP structures are present and tested Standard Low R

  7. Secondbatch • New batch processed correcting these problems: • Thicker thermal oxide between implant and polysilicon Rbiasto avoid breakdown in standard sensors  Thicker coupling capacitor in standard sensors (~1000 A) • Thicker oxide deposited between polysilicon Rbiasand Metal1 in LowR sensors to avoid breakdown in LowRsensors • In some extra sensors new metal mask (METAL-B) with no metal on top of polysilicon Rbiasarea to avoid the possibility of breakdown in that area • Some wafers have a reduced p-stop doping to make sure we have PTP • Design of Experiments:

  8. General performance • IV, CV • Normal behaviour • VFD ~ 70 V • Higherleakagecurrentsaftercut(understudy) • Stripresistance • ~3 orders of magnitudereduction

  9. General performance • Couplingcapacitance • Standard sensors: 31 ± 2 pF/cm • LowR sensors: 28 ± 1 pF/cm • ATLAS12 specs: > 20 pF/cm. • InterstripResistance • Interstripresistance > 1 GΩ

  10. PTP structuretests • IV sweeps • Reversible breakdown (=> PT) • PTP voltage ~ 30 V • No evidentcorrelationbetween PTP distance and PTP voltage

  11. PTP structuretests • PT effectiveresistance • Thereseems to be a correlationbetween final effectiveresistanceand PTP distance, althoughnotevidentwithinthesamewafer

  12. PTP structuretests • Channel-to-channel • Punch-Through activation voltage (Vpt) is not stable among channels, geometry dependence seems to be low. • Final effective resistance value is stable among channels.

  13. Laser tests • We use Alessi LY-1 “cutting” IR laser (1064 nm) to inject a largeamount of chargelocally in the sensor. • The total amount of chargeisabout 3x107 MIPS, spread overfewmm. • Weinjectthe laser at eithernear and farlocations to assessthe sensor vulnerability to largecharges, since PTP(near) is superior to PTP(far). Injectionscheme Injectionregionsize

  14. Laser scanresults Standard 70 umPTP • When laser isinjectednext to thenear DC pad, peakvaluesonVfar are similar to theonesonVnear. • As seenbefore, when laser isinjectednext to thefar DC pad, peakvaluesonVfar are higherthanonVnear. • No plateauup to ~180 V. • Strange“bump” at 140 V bias. • At 250 V, sensor currentvaluejumps.

  15. Laser scanresults LowR 70 um PTP • ForLowRsensors, Vfar and Vnearpeakvalues are similar. • Peakvoltagesonbothnear and farendstend to stabilizeat ~180 V bias. But no evidentplateauisobserved. • Sensor leakagecurrentjumped at 250 V

  16. Laser scanresults Standard 20 um PTP • When laser isinjectedonnearside, plateuisobservedafter 150 V bias. • No differenceisobservedbetweenVnear and Vfarwhenlaser isinjected in thenearside. • No plateauobserved in Vfarafterchargeinjectiononfarside • Peakvoltages are similar to previousresultson HPK sensorswith p-stop isolation. • Sensor biascurrentjumpedoneorder of magnitudewhen sensor biasreached 200 V.

  17. Laser scanresults LowR 20 um PTP • Vfar = Vnear • A plateauisobservedforbothnear and far laser injectionsonVfar and onVnear. • Whenlaser isfiredonthenearside, plateuisseenafter 100 V bias. Forthefarside case, plateauisobservedafter 120 V.

  18. Alternative technological solutions • Other methods to obtain LowR sensors being studied: • TiSi2: allows the use of high temperature steps after the oxide deposition  oxide densification  higher yield • Highly doped polysilicon: allows the growth of thermal oxide after it  high quality oxide • back to “standard” process • A small batch of sensors currently being fabricated at CNM

  19. TitaniumSilicide (TiSi2) • TiSi2 processing technology at CNM • Good formation of TiSi2 layer • Low sheet resistance: ~1.2 Ω/ • Densification at 900 ºC , 30 min • Self aligned process ( No mask) • TiSi2MiM capacitors fabricated • 98-100 % yield up to 100 V (not enough statistics: 1-2 cap failing out of 62 measured)

  20. HighlydopedPoly-Si • Polysilicon layerdopedwithliquidsource (POCl3, “Phosphorylchloride”) in contactwiththesiliconimplant (substitutesthe metal layer) • High doping levelsreached at hightemperatures (1050ºC) and long times • Possibility to grow a thermal oxide on top of the polysilicon layer to formthecoupling capacitor • Muchhigherquality oxide • Althoughrisk of lowerbreakdownvoltages • Higherthermal load of theprocess • Risk of dopantprecipitateslater in theprocess • MIM capacitors • Goodconductance (~2-3 Ohm/sq) • 98-100 % yield up to 20 V • Breakdown @ 40-50 V (2000 A ox. thickness)

  21. Conclusions & futurework • Low-resistancestripsensors (LowR) proposed to extendtheprotectionaffordedby PTP structure to theentire active area of the sensor • Implementationwith Aluminum layer in contactwiththeimplant to drastically reduce stripresistance • LowRsensors show similar general characteristics as standard sensors • PTP behaviourvariesfordifferentstructures(problems of firstbatchsolved), althoughstillsomefeatures to be fullyunderstood. • Laser tests show aneffectivereduction of theimplantvoltage at bothnear and farsides of thestrip, and forchargeinjection at eitherstripside. • New possibleimplementationsbeingtriedwithTiSi2 and polysilicon to assure a better coupling capacitor formation, and a more standard processing • Future work • Irradiations • Test new deviceswith TiSi2 and highlydopedPoly-Si

  22. Thankyou

  23. Extra slides

  24. Interstripresistancemeasurement • HP4156 • Voltage sweep: -1 V to 1 V (P4) • Voltage step: 0.05 V • Bias voltage: -100 V (chuck) • Expected value: • Rinterstrip> 10 x Rbias @ Full depletion • Rbias: <2.5 – 3.0> MΩ • Rinterstrip= 2 / (∂INeighbour/∂Vtest) P1 Ground P2 Ground Vtest Ground P4 P3

  25. Punch-Throughmeasurement HP4156 Voltage sweep: 0 V to 70 V (P4) Voltage step: 0.25 V Bias voltage: -100 V (chuck) • For Vbias < -100 V • Use K2410 for -300 V, -200 V bias Effective resistance: Reff= 1 / (∂Itest/∂Vtest) = Rbias // RPTP zone Vtest P4 P3

More Related