Jump to content

Talk:Electron-beam lithography

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit]

This www.nanodaddy.com link is popping up in a lot of nanotechnology-related articles. It appears to be a legitimate source of nanotechnology news, but shouldn't be added to articles which focus on a particular topic. Guiding light 14:46, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

system cost

[edit]

The article lists system costs for commercial units, but doesn't say anything about the costs for the kind of equipment used for prototyping in schools etc.. Does anyone know what the rough costs are? Zuiram 19:03, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is a good article but I see room for improvements. I would like to suggest this list, please leave your comments below: Mhesselb (talk) 18:43, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good suggestions, I'll try to incorporate them where I can, e.g., if they involve my previous writes. Thanks.Guiding light (talk) 04:23, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Definition

[edit]

The definition says "the practice of using a beam of electrons to generate patterns on a surface.[1]".

  • I would narrow this down and say 'to create patterns in a resist'.
  • If the application of the resist is defined to be part of the process one could say 'to create resist patterns on a surface' but I would in favor of the first (the word lithography refers to the writing itself).

Guiding light (talk) 04:42, 1 April 2008 (UTC): What about the case of direct removal of material by electron beam? This may be called "nanosculpting" in some articles recently.Guiding light (talk) 04:30, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Resist & development

[edit]
  • I would say this IS part of EBL. The article is quite detailed on electron processes but does not mention polymer chain scission in positive resists, crosslinking in negative resists, the developer, development rate(dose) function, contrast and resolution. I think a section could be dedicated to resists so that the remark about ZEP can go there and the article can say that the resolution of the process is 10-15 nm.

Guiding light (talk) 04:42, 1 April 2008 (UTC):[reply]

Some work along these lines was started in the photoresist article. However, it was suggested in the talk there to possibly separate out the electron beam resist as another topic.

One reason including the resist-specific process is more complex than just considering the electron beam incidence itself is due to their different mechanisms. There are at least three:

  • Chain scission or crosslinking: PMMA, ZEP, HSQ, calixerene, etc.
  • Chemical amplification: NEB, KRS, etc. (the acids diffuse to speed up the sensitizing to developer)
  • Physical removal of atoms or ions: inorganic binary compounds (fluorides or oxides)

The electron scattering is relatively independent of the resist, but the way the resist responds varies greatly. In the case of the chemical amplification, the resist process result does injustice to the resolution capability of the beam. Guiding light (talk) 04:42, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stage, stitching & alignment

[edit]

EBL is not just a matter of focussing and scanning a beam. Typically, for very small beam deflections electrostatic deflection 'lenses' are used, larger beam deflections require electromagnetic scanning. Because of the inaccuracy and because of the finite number of steps in the exposure grid the writing field is of the order of 100 micron - 1 mm. Larger patterns require stage moves. An accurate stage is critical for stitching (tiling writing fields exactly against each other) and pattern overlay (aligning a pattern to a previously made one). Apparatus should have its own section or article (electron beam pattern generator).

Proximity effect

[edit]
  • Is not about adjacent 'features' but adjacent 'pixels'. It also takes place inside 1 feature (the electrons do not know what feature they are from). This is why a small feature requires more dose, electrons 'leak away' because the PSF integral has not reached its large area value yet.

New frontiers

[edit]
  • Having a section with this name does not necessitate the rest to be called 'conventional'
  • EBID (electron beam induced deposition) is a new frontier
  • scanning tunneling microscope requires conducting resist, otherwise tip crashes. For insulating resists: conducting AFM.
  • Some of these are a bit far fetched...

Do you want to mention complementary EBL here? Multibeam is not proposing full EBL, just parallel line cuts and vias, which drastically reduces the requirements. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.194.141.222 (talk) 21:27, 13 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

TOC

[edit]
  • Introduction
  • Apparatus (electron beam pattern generator)
  • Exposure process, Electron energy deposition, Proximity effect
  • Resists & development
  • New frontiers

Recipes

[edit]

What does people think of having different recipes listed at Wikipedia? E.g. to make wafer marks on a thermally grown SiO2 wafer of 400 nm spin coat MMA(8.5)MAA-EL10 at 3000 rpm for 1 min, bake at 160 C,... , expose with 600 uC/Cm2 dose... Those kind of things?

I believe this would be very appreciated by many users... --129.16.110.105 (talk) 08:19, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Recipes are explicitly covered by WP:WWIN. I love to see recipes on the web, but I am afraid that Wikipedia is not the right place for them. --DrTorstenHenning (talk) 06:54, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sentence in intro needs work

[edit]

This sentence in the intro isn't clear (at least to me). "Also, the turn-around time for reworking or re-design is lengthened unnecessarily if the pattern is not being changed the second time." Additionally, there is no further discussion of the topic below. If it isn't introducing something that is discussed below, it shouldn't be in the introduction IMHO. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.126.151.201 (talk) 18:03, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"For thicker electrons," ... seriously? Thicker electrons ... not thicker resist? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.47.252.2 (talk) 01:12, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

EBL vs photolithography

[edit]

This article is too commercial, that is it puts too much emphasis on highlighting disadvantages and has an unnecessarily negative tone, apparently due to someone happy with a micronic maskless optical tool. EBL has a significantly higher resolution and is also a pattern generating technique. It is uniquely suited for certain R&D and mask writing applications. It is clearly not a mass production technique and should not be compared to those. I'll make changes to restore neutrality. Focus should be on information, not product comparisons. Mhesselb (talk) 18:07, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Electron-beam lithography. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:01, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Electron-beam lithography. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:20, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cheap, prototyping?

[edit]

From ACE magazine issue 10 (1998): Flare One's custom chips... made-to-measure RISC processors... Until recently, prototype custom chips have been produced by photographic methods at intial cost of around 20000$ per design. New techniques meant that Cambridge firm Qudos could knock them out at tenth of the price by using an E-beam to cut the pattern directly into the silicon. Setenzatsu.2 (talk) 22:08, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Explaining resolution

[edit]

This article regularly refers to the abilities of EBL to print features at resolutions in nanometers, but nowhere in the article is there an explanation or link to an explanation of what resolution measured in nanometers means. As a layman regarding micro lithography, an explanation would be much appreciated! Electrogoblin (talk) 04:24, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Electron-beam_lithography&oldid=1245464218"