Chemistry: electrical and wave energy – Apparatus – Coating – forming or etching by sputtering
Reexamination Certificate
1998-01-20
2001-01-09
McDonald, Rodney (Department: 1753)
Chemistry: electrical and wave energy
Apparatus
Coating, forming or etching by sputtering
C204S298090, C204S298110, C204S298140, C204S298190, C204S298120
Reexamination Certificate
active
06171461
ABSTRACT:
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to the field of vacuum sputter coating apparatus and particularly relates to an improved sputtering process and apparatus, and more particularly, to the construction of an improved cathode/anode assembly which provides faster deposition rates, better uniformity in the material deposited and longer lasting targets which in turn permit longer run times between periods of downtime.
2. Description of the Prior Art
The present invention is directed to an improved magnetron sputtering apparatus. A typical magnetron sputtering device includes a vacuum chamber having an electrode contained therein, wherein the electrode includes a cathode portion, an anode portion and a target. A vacuum is drawn in the vacuum chamber followed by the introduction of a process gas into the chamber. Electrical power supplied to the electrode produces an electronic discharge which ionizes the process gas and produces charged gaseous ions from the atoms of the process gas. The ions are accelerated and retained within a magnetic field formed over the target, and are propelled toward the surface of the target which is composed of the material sought to be deposited on a substrate. Upon striking the target, the ions dislodge target atoms from the target which are then deposited upon the substrate. By varying the composition of the target, a wide variety of substances can be deposited on various substrates. The result is the formation of an ultra-pure thin film deposition of target material on the substrate.
What is termed the electrode above (which includes both a cathode portion and anode portion) is sometimes simply called a cathode by those skilled in the art. While the inventor recognizes that convention, the discussion below does not follow this convention because calling the electrode a cathode will only cause confusion in the following discussion which discusses separately the cathode and anode portions of the electrode.
Several problems exist with respect to known magnetron sputtering devices.
First, the sputtering process produces intense heat. In order to prolong the life of both the target and the sputtering device, the sputtering cathode, particularly the area behind the target, is typically cooled with water. In the known prior art sputtering devices, water simply enters a water chamber associated with the cathode and circulates around the circumference of the water chamber, and exits the water chamber. This method and apparatus for cooling the cathode is not particularly effective, and provides a significant limitation on the prior art magnetron sputtering devices because the power supplied, and in turn, deposition rates, must be held at a reduced level to avoid overheating the cathode assembly. Alternatively, if the power supplied exceeds this threshold, at substantially high operating temperatures due to inefficient cooling, cracks will form in highly stressed target materials, such as ceramics and brittle metals. Also, the heat buildup causes higher electrical resistance which impedes the flow of electrons which yields lower deposition rates than would otherwise have been possible if such heat were not present.
Typically in the prior art, an electrical power cable was attached to the water chamber base plate, and an electrical circuit to a cathode body traveled from the base plate through the water chamber sidewalls to the cathode body. The interface of the base plate and the sidewall, while sealed with an O-ring seal, still resulted in the formation of corrosion and poor electrical contact degrading the electrical circuit due in part to an oxidation buildup at the base plate/sidewall interface. This resulted also in unsteady process parameters and difficulty in obtaining RF matching.
Targets of the prior art are typically held within or adjacent to the electrode by one or more target clamps. In the prior art, such clamping mechanisms were quite bulky, resulting in a much larger diameter electrode than would have otherwise been necessary to accommodate the bulky clamping mechanism. Further, prior art clamping mechanisms are not able to adjust to a wide range of target thicknesses and many involved the use of small screws to hold the clamping mechanism in place, which screws were difficult to start, and easy to strip and/or lose.
Further, in electrodes of the prior art, an anode shield was employed which was also bulky in design, also resulting in a much larger overall size than the given target area. Typically, the prior art anode shield was fixed to a water chamber base plate, and a clamping mechanism was attached at the opposite end with screws or welds to provide an anode shield. Further, the anode-to-cathode spacing was fixed and not adjustable. A smaller overall size is desirable because for a given target size it permits closer proximity of the cathode to the substrate, which yields more uniform depositions on the substrate. The lack of welds is desirable, as welds can cause fluctuations in the magnetic fields which is undesirable. Eliminating the screws permits smaller overall dimensioning and eliminates the starting, stripping and/or misplacement of screws.
Prior art electrodes were maintained in a gas chamber, in which a process gas was injected which could then be ionized. Higher gas pressures and more volume of gas were required than were truly necessary because the ionizing gas was really necessary only over the target area, and not within the entire chamber. An additional limitation with the prior art electrodes included the fact that the use of higher volumes of gas also resulted in a higher ratio of gas inclusions and defects on the substrate during the coating operation resulting in films with less than desired uniformity.
Prior art magnets were comprised of a series of separate individual magnetic pieces. These individual magnetic pieces resulted in magnetic field fluctuations between the pieces, which resulted in less than uniform magnetic fields and an inefficient use of the target area because the magnetic field was not sufficiently uniform to use all or nearly all of the target area.
In addition, the use of individual magnetic pieces further required the use of an additional device known as a magnetic “shaping ring” that increased the size and cost of the electrode. This ring, placed between the magnets and the target area, functioned in the prior art to shape and unify the magnetic field. However, it also weakened the field in doing so and moved the magnets further away from the target.
Elimination of the shaping ring would permit a much closer target-to-magnet distance which would allow more magnetic field to “passivate” or flow through the target area and the stronger magnetic field would permit much higher deposition rates and greater plasma density. Plasma density here refers to the number of gaseous ions retained within the magnetic field. The higher the field strength, the fewer gaseous ions can escape the magnetic field, or conversely, the more ions are retained within the field. Increasing the number of ions within the magnetic field is referred to as increasing the plasma density. With increased plasma density, higher power can be supplied allowing higher deposition rates.
In addition to increasing the target-to-magnet distance, the magnetic shaping ring has the additional disadvantage of “soaking up” or dissipating the magnetic field which reduces the strength of the overall magnetic field. The weaker magnetic field permits the undesirable consequence of the escape of both gaseous ions and secondary electrons from the magnetic field. Secondary electrons are created during the ionizing process when the gaseous atom is ionized to form the gaseous ion and accompanying secondary electrons according to standard charge balancing theory.
Importantly, the presence of the magnetic shaping ring substantially limited the prior art's ability to sputter magnetic materials to only very thin magnetic materials, such as foils and the like, on the order of 3 to {fraction (7/1000)}ths in th
McDonald Rodney
Webb Zieisenheim Logsdon Orkin & Hanson, P.C.
LandOfFree
Sputtering cathode does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.
If you have personal experience with Sputtering cathode, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Sputtering cathode will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-2505745