html5-img
1 / 9

“Carbon Nanotubes for Interconnect Applications”

“Carbon Nanotubes for Interconnect Applications”. Franz Kreupl, Andrew P. Graham, Maik Liebau, Georg S. Duesberg, Robert Seidel, Eugen Unger Presented at IEDM 2004. EE C235 Presentation by Zachery Jacobson March 5, 2007. Outline. Overview of Interconnects Why Carbon Nanotube interconnects?

davin
Télécharger la présentation

“Carbon Nanotubes for Interconnect Applications”

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. “Carbon Nanotubes for Interconnect Applications” Franz Kreupl, Andrew P. Graham, Maik Liebau, Georg S. Duesberg, Robert Seidel, Eugen Unger Presented at IEDM 2004 EE C235 Presentation by Zachery Jacobson March 5, 2007

  2. Outline • Overview of Interconnects • Why Carbon Nanotube interconnects? • Growth strategies • Results • Issues • Conclusions

  3. Overview of Interconnects • Increased resistance and decreased current carrying capability due to electromigration are two critical issues affecting the use of copper interconnects Ron Ho, SLIP 2005 ITRS Roadmap, 2005

  4. Why Carbon Nanotube Interconnects? • Metallic Carbon Nanotubes are potentially viable for use as interconnects due to their large mean-free path (which leads to low resistance) and low electromigration (which increases current carrying capability) A. Naeemi, et al, IEDM 2004 F. Kreupl, et al, IEDM 2004

  5. Growth Strategies • Two major growth strategies • Bottom-up, where CNTs are grown before ILD deposition • Buried catalyst, where CNTs are grown after ILD deposition J. Li, et al, Appl. Phys. Lett. 82, 2491 (2003) F. Kreupl, et al, IEDM 2004

  6. Results • Nanotube quality is better than PECVD grown nanotubes, but variability is still high F. Kreupl, et al, IEDM 2004

  7. Results • Relatively high annealing temperature needed to reduce resistance due to contact issues • Large variability in resistance between vias F. Kreupl, et al, IEDM 2004

  8. Issues • Contact resistance eliminates any advantage seen versus “bulk” Cu interconnects • To make a good low resistance contact, high annealing temperatures are required which exceed the thermal budget • Variability of grown nanotubes continues to be an issue • Large diameter nanotubes underperform Cu vias even under ideal conditions F. Kreupl, et al, IEDM 2004

  9. Conclusions • Carbon Nanotubes have theoretically higher performance than Copper interconnects in some applications • Using a buried catalyst method, vias were fabricated using single MWCNTs down to 20 nm in diameter • Variability was high among the nanowires grown, which has a strong effect on performance • If good contacts can be achieved with a low temperature process, carbon nanotubes have a chance at replacing copper vias at very small process nodes Thank you for your time! Questions?

More Related