Hubbry Logo
Copper interconnectsCopper interconnectsMain
Open search
Copper interconnects
Community hub
Copper interconnects
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Copper interconnects
Copper interconnects
Copper interconnects
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Copper interconnects are used in integrated circuits to reduce propagation delays and power consumption. Since copper is a better conductor than aluminium, ICs using copper for their interconnects can have interconnects with narrower dimensions, and use less energy to pass electricity through them. Together, these effects lead to ICs with better performance. They were first introduced by IBM, with assistance from Motorola, in 1997.[1]

The transition from aluminium to copper required significant developments in fabrication techniques, including radically different methods for patterning the metal as well as the introduction of barrier metal layers to isolate the silicon from potentially damaging copper atoms.

Although the methods of superconformal copper electrodeposition were known since late 1960, their application at the (sub)micron via scale (e.g. in microchips) started only in 1988-1995 (see figure). By year 2002 it became a mature technology, and research and development efforts in this field started to decline.

Patterning

[edit]

Although some form of volatile copper compound has been known to exist since 1947,[2] with more discovered as the century progressed,[3] none were in industrial use, so copper could not be patterned by the previous techniques of photoresist masking and plasma etching that had been used with great success with aluminium. The inability to plasma etch copper called for a drastic rethinking of the metal patterning process and the result of this rethinking was a process referred to as an additive patterning, also known as a "Damascene" or "dual-Damascene" process by analogy to a traditional technique of metal inlaying.[citation needed]

In this process, the underlying silicon oxide insulating layer is patterned with open trenches where the conductor should be. A thick coating of copper that significantly overfills the trenches is deposited on the insulator, and chemical-mechanical planarization (CMP) is used to remove the copper (known as overburden) that extends above the top of the insulating layer. Copper sunken within the trenches of the insulating layer is not removed and becomes the patterned conductor. Damascene processes generally form and fill a single feature with copper per Damascene stage. Dual-Damascene processes generally form and fill two features with copper at once, e.g., a trench overlying a via may both be filled with a single copper deposition using dual-Damascene.[citation needed]

With successive layers of insulator and copper, a multilayer interconnect structure is created. The number of layers depends on the IC's function, 10 or more metal layers are possible. Without the ability of CMP to remove the copper coating in a planar and uniform fashion, and without the ability of the CMP process to stop repeatably at the copper-insulator interface, this technology would not be realizable.[citation needed]

Barrier metal

[edit]

A barrier metal layer must completely surround all copper interconnect, since diffusion of copper into surrounding materials would degrade their properties. For instance, silicon forms deep-level traps when doped with copper. As the name implies, a barrier metal must limit copper diffusivity sufficiently to chemically isolate the copper conductor from the silicon below, yet have high electrical conductivity in order to maintain a good electronic contact.

The thickness of the barrier film is also quite important; with too thin a layer, the copper contacts poison the very devices that they connect to; with too thick a layer, the stack of two barrier metal films and a copper conductor have a greater total resistance than aluminium interconnects, eliminating any benefit.

The improvement in conductivity in going from earlier aluminium to copper based conductors was modest, and not as good as to be expected by a simple comparison of bulk conductivities of aluminium and copper. The addition of barrier metals on all four sides of the copper conductor significantly reduces the cross-sectional area of the conductor that is composed of pure, low resistance, copper. Aluminium, while requiring a thin barrier metal to promote low ohmic resistance when making a contact directly to silicon or aluminium layers, did not require barrier metals on the sides of the metal lines to isolate aluminium from the surrounding silicon oxide insulators. Therefore scientists are looking for new ways to reduce the diffusion of copper into silicon substrates without using the buffer layer. One method is to use copper-germanium alloy as the interconnect material so that buffer layer (e.g. titanium nitride) is no longer needed. Epitaxial Cu3Ge layer has been fabricated with an average resistivity of 6 ± 1 μΩ cm and work function of ~4.47 ± 0.02 eV respectively,[4] qualifying it as a good alternative to copper.

Electromigration

[edit]

Resistance to electromigration, the process by which a metal conductor changes shape under the influence of an electric current flowing through it and which eventually leads to the breaking of the conductor, is significantly better with copper than with aluminium. This improvement in electromigration resistance allows higher currents to flow through a given size copper conductor compared to aluminium. The combination of a modest increase in conductivity along with this improvement in electromigration resistance was to prove highly attractive. The overall benefits derived from these performance improvements were ultimately enough to drive full-scale investment in copper-based technologies and fabrication methods for high performance semiconductor devices, and copper-based processes continue to be the state of the art for the semiconductor industry today.

Superconformal electrodeposition of copper

[edit]
log(N+1) number of patent families (worldwide) and non-patent publications per year about superconformal copper electrodeposition
Fig.A Schematic showing different scenarios in electroplating. (a) faster deposition rate at the top, (b) uniform deposition rate and (c) faster deposition rate at the bottom (superfill).

Around 2005 the processor frequency reached 3 GHz due to continuous decrease in the on-chip transistor size in the previous years. At this point, the capacitive RC coupling of interconnects became the speed(frequency)-limiting factor.[5]

The process of reducing both R and C started in the late 1990's, when Al (aluminium) was replaced with Cu (copper) for lower R (resistance), and SiO2 was replaced with low-κ dielectrics for lower C (capacitance). Cu was selected as the replacement for Al, because it has the lowest electronic resistance among low-cost materials at room temperature, and because Cu shows a slower electromigration than Al. Noteworthy, in the case of Al interconnects was patterning process involves selective Al etching (i.e. subtractive manufacturing process) in uncoated areas, followed by deposition of a dielectric. Since no method of spatially-selective etching of copper was known, etching (patterning) of the dielectric was implemented instead. For the Cu deposition (i.e. an additive manufacturing process), the IBM team in the late 1990's selected electroplating. This started the 'copper revolution" in the semiconductor / microchip industry.

The copper plating starts with coating the walls of a via with a protective layer (Ta, TaN, SiN or SiC), that prevents Cu diffusion into silicon. Then, physical vapor deposition of a thin seed Cu layer on the via walls is performed.[6] This "seed layer" servers as the promoter for the next step of electrodeposition. Normally, due to slower mass-transport of Cu2+ ion, the electroplating is slower deep inside the vias. Under such conditions, via filling results in a formation of a void inside. In order to avoid such defects, bottom-up filling (or superconformal) filling is required, as shown in Fig. A.

Liquid solutions for superconformal copper electroplating typically comprise several additives in mM concentrations: chloride ion, a suppressor (such as polyethyleneglycol), an accelerator (e.g. bis(3-sulfopropyl)disulfide) and a leveling agent (e.g. Janus Green B).[7] Two main models for superconformal metal electroplating have been proposed:

1) curvature enhanced adsorbate concentration (CEAC) model suggests, that as the curvature of the copper layer on the bottom of the via increases, and the surface coverage of the adsorbed accelerator increases as well, facilitating kinetically limited Cu deposition in these areas. This model emphasizes the role of accelerator.

2) S-shaped negative differential resistance (S-NDR) model claims instead, that the main effect comes from the suppressor, which due to its high molecular weight/slow diffusion does not reach the bottom of the via and preferentially adsorbs at the top of the via, where it inhibits Cu plating.

There is experimental evidence to support either model. The reconciliatory opinion is that in the early stages of the bottom-up via filling the higher rate of Cu plating at the bottom is due to the lack of the PEG suppressor molecules there (their diffusion coefficienct is too low to provide a fast enough mass-transport). The accelerator, which is a smaller and faster diffusing molecule, reaches the bottom of the via, where it accelerates the rate of Cu plating without the suppressor. At the end of plating, the accelerator remains in a high concentration on the surface of the plated copper, causing the formation of a final bump.

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Copper interconnects

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Copper interconnects are the conductive wiring structures in integrated circuits (ICs) that link transistors, capacitors, and other components, primarily fabricated from metal to enable efficient signal transmission and power distribution in devices. Adopted as the industry standard starting in the late 1990s, interconnects replaced aluminum due to their lower electrical resistivity of 1.68 μΩ·cm (compared to aluminum's 2.65 μΩ·cm), which reduces resistance-capacitance (RC) delays and supports higher densities in advanced nodes. This technology forms the backbone of the backend-of-line (BEOL) processing in modern , facilitating the performance gains essential for processors, , and system-on-chip designs. The transition to copper interconnects marked a pivotal advancement in semiconductor manufacturing, pioneered by in the mid-1990s to overcome the limitations of aluminum wiring, which suffered from high resistance and as feature sizes scaled below 0.25 μm. announced the breakthrough in September 1997, leveraging the dual-damascene process—developed from early 1980s research—to enable reliable copper deposition, and began high-volume production in 1998 at its facility for PowerPC microprocessors. By 1999, copper-enabled chips powered 's S/390 G6 enterprise servers, delivering a 50% performance increase over aluminum counterparts, and the material quickly became ubiquitous across the industry, driving through the 2000s. Fabrication of copper interconnects typically employs the damascene or dual-damascene technique, where insulating low-k layers (such as SiCOH with dielectric constants of 2.2–3.2) are deposited, followed by patterning trenches and vias via . A thin diffusion barrier, often (TaN) capped with (Ta), is then sputter-deposited to prevent copper atoms from migrating into the silicon substrate and causing reliability failures, after which a copper layer is applied and the structures are filled using electrochemical (ECP). Excess material is removed via (CMP), which uses oxidizers like and inhibitors to achieve planar surfaces without dishing or erosion, ensuring multilevel stacking for complex IC architectures. Key advantages of copper include approximately 40–45% lower resistivity than aluminum, enabling 15% faster speeds, up to 30% reduced power consumption at equivalent frequencies, and over 100 times greater resistance to for enhanced durability in high-current applications. These benefits have sustained 's dominance from the 180 nm node through advanced nodes such as 3 nm and 2 nm as of 2025, though scaling challenges—such as grain boundary scattering increasing effective resistivity and the need for thinner barriers—have prompted ongoing innovations like self-forming barriers and low-k integration to maintain performance. Recent innovations, such as ruthenium-based liners, have enabled further scaling to the 2 nm node as of 2025.

Overview

Definition and Role in Integrated Circuits

Copper interconnects consist of thin copper wires or lines embedded within insulating dielectrics, forming multilevel wiring structures during the back-end-of-line (BEOL) processing of integrated circuits (ICs). These structures serve as the essential conductive pathways that distribute clock signals, power, ground, and data signals across transistors and functional blocks in CMOS-based ICs. In their role within ICs, copper interconnects facilitate efficient signal propagation between active devices, mitigating resistance-capacitance (RC) delays that could otherwise limit circuit speed and efficiency. By enabling low-resistance conduction and integration with low-k dielectrics, they support high-bandwidth, low-power operation critical for advanced microprocessors, memory chips, and logic devices in modern electronics. Copper interconnects are integrated via damascene or dual damascene architectures, in which fills pre-etched trenches and vias within low-k materials to form isolated, multilevel networks that minimize and . For instance, in technologies at 5 nm nodes and beyond, these interconnects comprise up to 10-15 metal layers, allowing complex hierarchies essential for high-density scaling. This multilevel approach evolved from the late-1990s transition from aluminum interconnects to address scaling limitations in earlier generations.

Advantages over Aluminum

Copper interconnects offer significant electrical advantages over aluminum due to copper's lower bulk resistivity of 1.68 μΩ·cm compared to aluminum's 2.65 μΩ·cm, allowing for reduced resistance in wiring and enabling faster signal propagation speeds. This lower resistance translates to decreased power dissipation in integrated circuits, as less energy is lost to heat during signal transmission. In practice, the approximately 40% reduction in resistance provided by copper has resulted in about a 15% improvement in overall performance. Thermally, copper provides superior conductivity at 401 W/m·K versus aluminum's 237 W/m·K, which aids in more efficient dissipation and reduces localized heating in dense interconnect structures. Additionally, copper exhibits substantially higher resistance to —up to 100 times greater than aluminum—allowing it to withstand higher current densities without void formation or failure, thereby enhancing long-term reliability under operational stresses. The scalability of copper interconnects surpasses that of aluminum, particularly for feature sizes below 100 nm, where aluminum's higher resistivity leads to excessive resistance increases that degrade . Copper's material properties support continued scaling without proportional resistance growth, making it essential for advanced nodes. Early implementations of copper interconnects reduced RC time constants by up to 30%, contributing to dramatic clock speed improvements from around 300 MHz with aluminum to over 1 GHz in subsequent generations.

Historical Development

Early Research and Challenges

During the 1960s and 1970s, researchers at Bell Laboratories and conducted initial experiments exploring as an alternative metallization material for integrated circuits, attracted by its lower electrical resistivity compared to aluminum. However, these efforts were hampered by 's poor adhesion to and its tendency to diffuse rapidly into substrates, leading to contamination of active devices. A primary challenge was copper's high diffusivity in both and , which introduced deep-level traps that degraded performance and reliability. Unlike aluminum, which forms a stable layer that limits , copper's weak, non-adherent offered no such protection, necessitating the development of barrier layers to prevent poisoning of junctions. Further complicating adoption, copper lacked compatible dry etching processes for patterning, as it resisted the reactive ion etching techniques effective for aluminum due to its chemical inertness. Studies in the 1980s, including work by McBrayer et al., quantified these issues by measuring copper's diffusion coefficient in SiO₂ at approximately 1.2 × 10^{-13} cm²/s at 450°C with an activation energy of 1.82 eV, revealing it to be orders of magnitude higher than aluminum's negligible diffusivity in SiO₂ under similar conditions and underscoring the need for innovative process solutions.

IBM's Breakthrough and Industry Adoption

In 1997, , in collaboration with , achieved a major breakthrough in manufacturing by developing the first viable copper interconnect technology for integrated circuits, announced at the International Devices Meeting (IEDM) for the 220 nm technology node. This innovation addressed longstanding challenges in copper diffusion and deposition, enabling reliable integration into processes. The key advancements included the development of Ta/TaN diffusion barriers to prevent copper migration into surrounding dielectrics, thin copper seed layers to facilitate uniform nucleation, and electroplating techniques that ensured void-free filling of high-aspect-ratio trenches and vias. These elements allowed for up to six levels of copper wiring at a minimum pitch of 0.63 μm, significantly reducing resistance compared to aluminum while maintaining reliability. Following the IEDM presentation, entered high-volume manufacturing of copper interconnects in 1998, initially for PowerPC processors fabricated at their facility. This marked the transition from research to commercial production, with the first chips shipping in September 1998. A notable example was the 400 MHz PowerPC 750 (also known as the G3 processor), which delivered a 33% performance increase over its 300 MHz aluminum predecessor and powered the 1998 Macintosh G3 computers, representing the first commercial CPU with copper interconnects. By integrating copper into enterprise systems like the S/390 G6 server in 1999, which featured 14 microprocessors and 1.4 billion transistors for a 50% performance boost, demonstrated the technology's scalability for high-end applications. The industry's adoption accelerated rapidly after IBM's lead, with Intel announcing its copper-based 0.13 μm ( in November 2000, incorporating up to nine layers of copper interconnects alongside low-k dielectrics. This followed IBM's model and entered production for processors by 2001-2002. By 2005, copper interconnects had become the standard for all advanced integrated circuits at nodes below 90 nm, driven by gains of 15-20% in speed and power over aluminum, and were universally adopted by major foundries like and manufacturers including and . This widespread shift solidified copper's role in enabling progression into the mid-2000s.

Material Properties

Physical and Electrical Properties of Copper

Copper possesses several intrinsic physical properties that render it highly suitable for use as an interconnect in integrated circuits. Its is 8.96 g/cm³, providing a balance of mass and structural integrity in thin-film applications. The of copper stands at 1085°C, allowing it to withstand the high-temperature processing steps involved in semiconductor fabrication without degrading. Furthermore, copper's exceptional facilitates the production of high-purity films exceeding 99.99% via electrodeposition, enabling the formation of uniform, void-free deposits essential for reliable interconnects. Electrically, copper exhibits a bulk resistivity of 1.68 μΩ·cm at 20°C, significantly lower than that of aluminum (approximately 2.65 μΩ·cm), which contributes to reduced power losses and improved in circuits. The of electrons in bulk copper is approximately 39 nm at , a parameter that underscores the material's high conductivity but also highlights potential limitations as interconnect dimensions approach this scale. These electrical characteristics stem from copper's free-electron-like behavior in its face-centered cubic lattice. Thermal properties further enhance copper's appeal for interconnects, with a thermal conductivity of 401 W/m·K that efficiently dissipates generated during device operation. The coefficient of is 16.5 × 10^{-6}/K, aiding compatibility with substrates (around 2.6 × 10^{-6}/K) through careful process control to minimize stress-induced failures. Additionally, copper's of approximately 7 eV plays a key role in determining thresholds, as it governs the energy landscape for atomic diffusion under current stress.

Interfacial Effects and Resistivity Scaling

In nanoscale copper interconnects, interfacial effects significantly degrade electrical performance as dimensions shrink to approach or fall below the electron mean free path of approximately 39 nm in bulk copper. Surface scattering at the sidewalls and top interfaces, along with grain boundary scattering within the polycrystalline structure, dominates the increase in effective resistivity, deviating markedly from bulk values. These phenomena are captured by semiclassical models that account for the probability of electron reflection or diffusion at boundaries, leading to reduced mean free paths and higher resistance in advanced nodes. The Fuchs-Sondheimer (FS) model describes surface in thin films and nanowires by incorporating a parameter pp, which represents the fraction of electrons specularly reflected at the surface ( p=1p = 1 for perfect , p=0p = 0 for complete ). For rough interfaces typical in damascene-processed lines, pp is approximately 0.5, resulting in diffuse that elevates resistivity. The effective resistivity due to surface is approximated by ρeff=ρbulk[1+3λ8d(1−p)],\rho_\text{eff} = \rho_\text{bulk} \left[ 1 + \frac{3\lambda}{8d} (1 - p) \right], where ρbulk≈1.7 μΩ⋅cm\rho_\text{bulk} \approx 1.7 \, \mu\Omega \cdot \text{cm} is the bulk resistivity, λ\lambda is the bulk electron mean free path, and dd is the line width or thickness. This formulation highlights how resistivity scales inversely with dimension, with contributions becoming prominent when d≲4λd \lesssim 4\lambda. Experimental evaluations of copper lines with widths down to 24 nm confirm the model's applicability, though adjustments for surface roughness (effective p<0p < 0) are needed for sub-20 nm features. Grain boundary scattering is modeled by the Mayadas-Shatzkes (MS) framework, which treats boundaries as planar arrays of dislocations that partially reflect electrons, parameterized by a grain boundary reflection coefficient RR (typically 0.16–0.17 for copper). The model predicts an additional resistivity term ρGB=ρbulk[1+32λDR1−R],\rho_\text{GB} = \rho_\text{bulk} \left[ 1 + \frac{3}{2} \frac{\lambda}{D} \frac{R}{1 - R} \right], where DD is the average , often comparable to the line height in narrow interconnects. Combined FS-MS analyses of annealed copper films and lines show that these interfacial mechanisms can increase resistivity by 50–100% for dimensions below 20 nm, with grain boundaries contributing more at larger grains and surfaces dominating in confined geometries. As interconnect widths scale below 10 nm, sidewall and top-interface intensify, pushing effective resistivity to 5–10 μΩ⋅cm\mu\Omega \cdot \text{cm}, a 3–6-fold rise over bulk values due to the reduced conductive cross-section and enhanced diffuse . In 3 nm nodes, representative of 2025 technology, lines exhibit 2–3 times the bulk resistivity, constraining signal speed and elevating power dissipation in high-performance logic devices. These scaling challenges underscore the need for interface engineering, such as smoother liners or alternative metals, to mitigate performance limits.

Fabrication Methods

Dual Damascene Process

The dual damascene process represents a cornerstone in the fabrication of copper interconnects, enabling the formation of both vias and trenches through sequential and steps (such as via-first or trench-first approaches) in low-k dielectrics, such as oxycarbide (SiCOH), to minimize process steps and costs while supporting high-density integration. This approach, originally developed for dielectrics but adapted for low-k materials to reduce , etches both vertical vias and horizontal trenches in one workflow, followed by copper filling and planarization. Introduced by in 1997 as part of their manufacturable copper-CMOS , it addressed key challenges in scaling interconnects beyond aluminum, facilitating reliable multilevel structures with up to 15 metal layers and aspect ratios greater than 10:1 for deep features. The process commences with the deposition of a hard mask, typically silicon carbide nitride (SiCN), over the low-k stack, such as SiCOH with a dielectric constant around 2.7–3.0, to serve as an etch stop and protect underlying layers. Patterning begins with via definition using photoresist lithography, followed by trench patterning in a via-first scheme, where the resist is exposed and developed to outline the interconnect features. proceeds via reactive ion (RIE) with a CF₄/O₂ plasma chemistry, which selectively removes the dielectric material to form high-aspect-ratio vias and trenches while halting at the hard mask or etch stop layer, ensuring precise control over feature dimensions. Post-etch cleaning removes polymer residues and contaminants from the plasma process, typically using wet or dry methods to expose clean surfaces for subsequent metallization. After patterning and cleaning, a thin barrier/liner layer is deposited conformally into the etched features, followed by a copper seed layer to enable electrodeposition. is then electroplated to overfill the vias and trenches, providing void-free metallization; this step relies on deposition techniques for uniform coverage in high-aspect-ratio structures. The layer is completed by (CMP), which removes excess and dielectric above the field regions, achieving global planarization essential for stacking multiple interconnect levels without topography-induced defects. This iterative sequence allows for the construction of complex, multilevel interconnects critical to modern integrated circuits.

Copper Deposition Techniques

The primary technique for depositing into damascene features is electrochemical deposition (ECD), commonly performed using an acid sulfate bath composed of (CuSO₄) and (H₂SO₄), with applied current densities typically in the range of 20–50 mA/cm². This process enables bottom-up filling of trenches and vias, starting from the seed layer at the feature bottom and proceeding upward to avoid voids. The bath chemistry, often including chloride ions as accelerators, ensures uniform deposition rates and high purity films with low resistivity, making ECD the industry standard since its adoption in the late 1990s. Prior to ECD, a thin copper seed layer is required to facilitate and provide electrical conductivity for the process. This seed layer is conventionally deposited via (PVD) , achieving thicknesses of 5–20 nm to balance coverage and resistance while minimizing material usage in scaled features. For improved conformality in high-aspect-ratio structures, alternatives such as (ALD) of copper have been developed, offering superior sidewall coverage and reduced discontinuity risks compared to traditional PVD. While ECD dominates for full feature filling, other methods like PVD sputtering are used for initial thick film deposition on flat surfaces, though they provide limited bottom coverage—typically less than 50% in high-aspect-ratio damascene trenches due to line-of-sight limitations. (CVD) offers low-temperature options for seed layers or partial fills, but similarly achieves filling efficiencies below 50% in narrow features, necessitating a hybrid approach with ECD for complete metallization. A key advantage of ECD is its ability to achieve greater than 95% step coverage in high-aspect-ratio features (aspect ratios up to 10:1 or higher), ensuring void-free interconnects critical for reliable signal propagation in integrated circuits. This high coverage stems from the electrochemical kinetics that favor deposition at recessed areas, integrated after dual damascene patterning to fill etched trenches and vias seamlessly.

Barrier Layers

Purpose and Diffusion Prevention

Barrier layers are essential in copper interconnects to mitigate the rapid diffusion of atoms into underlying substrates and surrounding materials, which can severely compromise device performance. exhibits high diffusivity in due to its interstitial mechanism, with an as low as 0.42 eV, enabling fast migration even at moderate processing temperatures. This introduces deep-level recombination centers within the lattice, acting as traps for charge carriers and leading to reduced minority carrier lifetimes, increased leakage currents, and overall degradation of characteristics. In , proceeds with a higher but still concerning of approximately 1.8 eV, particularly under thermal annealing conditions encountered during fabrication. These barrier layers serve dual roles as effective barriers and promoters, ensuring robust interfacial bonding between the metallization and the , while preventing intermixing that could lead to electrical or reliability failures. To accommodate the aggressive scaling in advanced integrated circuits, barriers must be highly conformal to uniformly coat high-aspect-ratio features and remain ultrathin, typically less than 5 nm at sub-10 nm nodes, to minimize their contribution to overall interconnect resistivity. Without such barriers, can penetrate dielectrics extensively. This ingress has been shown to induce significant shifts in MOSFETs, alongside reductions in due to interface state generation and charge trapping. The preventive efficacy of barriers stems from their ability to impose a high for copper permeation, often exceeding 2 eV—such as approximately 2.2 eV in effective configurations—thereby slowing atomic migration to negligible rates under operational conditions. Additionally, certain barrier compositions act as oxygen getters, scavenging residual oxygen to inhibit copper oxidation at interfaces and maintain metallization integrity during deposition and annealing. These mechanisms collectively ensure long-term stability, with failure times extended by orders of magnitude compared to unbarriered systems.

Materials and Deposition Methods

The most widely used barrier materials for copper interconnects are and in a bilayer configuration, typically with a total thickness of 10-20 nm to ensure effective prevention while accommodating process margins. The Ta layer, often deposited as the liner adjacent to , exhibits a resistivity of approximately 180 μΩ·cm in its beta phase and maintains thermal stability up to 600°C, allowing it to withstand typical backend-of-line annealing conditions without significant degradation. TaN, serving as the primary barrier, provides robust adhesion to the underlying and complements Ta by forming a stable interface that inhibits migration. For advanced nodes below 10 nm, alternative materials such as (TiN), tungsten nitride (WN), and (Ru) enable thinner barriers, typically under 10 nm, to reduce parasitic resistance in scaled structures. TiN and WN offer good conformality and thermal endurance, with TiN demonstrating barrier efficacy up to 700°C in copper metallization tests. Ru stands out for its superior copper adhesion due to favorable wetting properties and low resistivity of about 7 μΩ·cm, making it suitable for hybrid or barrierless schemes in sub-10 nm interconnects. Deposition techniques for these materials prioritize uniformity and step coverage in high-aspect-ratio trenches and vias. Physical vapor deposition (PVD) via magnetron sputtering is the standard for Ta layers, providing dense films with controlled thickness, though it suffers from limited conformality in narrow features. For TaN, atomic layer deposition (ALD) using precursors like tert-amylimidotantalum (TAIMATA) enables highly conformal coatings with growth rates around 0.4 Å per cycle, ideal for complex geometries. In 7 nm nodes, ALD TaN barriers as thin as 2 nm have been integrated to minimize resistance contributions while preserving electromigration reliability. Silicon nitride (SiN) caps, deposited atop copper lines to seal against oxidation and drift, are commonly applied via plasma-enhanced chemical vapor deposition (PECVD) for low-temperature compatibility and effective encapsulation. These methods collectively ensure barrier integrity across fabrication flows, with ongoing refinements focusing on scalability and reduced thermal budgets.

Reliability Issues

Electromigration Mechanisms

Electromigration in interconnects arises from the momentum transfer between high-momentum conduction s and atoms, inducing a directed atomic along the direction of flow. This is governed by the atomic , expressed as vd=DFkBTv_d = \frac{D F}{k_B T}, where DD is the of atoms, FF is the effective electromigration force (primarily Z∗eρjZ^* e \rho j, with Z∗Z^* as the effective valence, ee the charge, ρ\rho the resistivity, and jj the ), kBk_B is Boltzmann's constant, and TT is the . The divergence of this at sites of flux discontinuity, such as vias or line ends, leads to characteristic failure modes: voids nucleate and grow at the end due to metal depletion, while hillocks or extrusions form at the end from metal accumulation. A key mitigating phenomenon is the Blech length effect, where short interconnect segments exhibit immortality to below a critical threshold. In copper lines shorter than approximately 10–30 μm, the electromigration-induced stress gradient generates a back-stress force that opposes the electron wind force, halting net atomic diffusion when the product of and line length (jLj L) falls below a critical value. This effect is particularly relevant for nanoscale interconnects, as it defines a minimum length for electromigration susceptibility. For copper interconnects, the for is approximately 1.0 eV, higher than aluminum's 0.7 eV, enabling significantly longer lifetimes under comparable conditions. Beyond the threshold, rapid degradation occurs at high current densities under accelerated test conditions. In bamboo-grained structures, where grains span the line width to minimize transverse boundaries, lifetimes are extended compared to polycrystalline structures; however, in narrow lines, residual grain boundaries can degrade lifetime by providing fast diffusion paths.

Other Degradation Modes

Stress migration in copper interconnects arises from thermal expansion mismatches between copper and surrounding dielectric or barrier materials, leading to the buildup of hydrostatic stress during temperature changes. This stress induces atomic diffusion, primarily along interfaces or grain boundaries, resulting in void formation and potential cracks that degrade interconnect integrity. The process is particularly prominent during thermal cycling in multilevel interconnect stacks, where voids can form in 10-20% of lines after cyclic annealing tests between 150°C and 250°C, causing resistance shifts up to 10%. An activation energy of approximately 1.2 eV governs the grain boundary diffusion mechanism responsible for this voiding. Time-dependent dielectric breakdown (TDDB) represents a critical failure mode in copper/low-k interconnects, where electric fields drive copper ion drift into the low-k , creating conductive paths that culminate in breakdown. This degradation weakens the , reducing the time-to- under operational stress; for instance, without adequate barrier layers, TDDB lifetimes can fall below 10 years at electric fields of 3-5 MV/cm due to accelerated ion migration. Models based on Cu ion drift predict that reliable operation requires field-to-breakdown strengths exceeding 4.2 MV/cm to ensure over a of at typical use conditions around 0.2-0.5 MV/cm. Corrosion and oxidation of copper interconnects occur through interaction with in non-hermetic packaging environments, where facilitates electrolytic reactions such as anodic oxidation of Cu to Cu ions and cathodic reduction of , forming oxides and potentially dendritic growth that shorts lines. High humidity levels above 50% exponentially increase leakage currents, exacerbating these effects and leading to metallization degradation. Mitigation strategies, including () caps, effectively limit ingress and contaminant access, reducing susceptibility by factors of up to 5 under accelerated 85°C/85% RH conditions.

Advanced and Future Developments

Superconformal Electrodeposition

Superconformal electrodeposition enables void-free filling of high-aspect-ratio interconnect features through a bottom-up growth mechanism driven by organic additives in the bath. Suppressors, such as (PEG), adsorb preferentially on the sidewalls and field regions to inhibit deposition there, while accelerators like bis(3-sulfopropyl) disulfide (SPS) activate growth at the feature bottoms by catalyzing reduction. Levelers, exemplified by , further enhance this process by promoting deposition at regions of high , such as concave surfaces, thereby suppressing over on convex areas and ensuring seamless seam-free filling. The enhanced adsorbate coverage (CEAC) model describes how deposition rates vary with surface geometry during electrodeposition. In this framework, the local growth rate increases at concave surfaces due to the enrichment of accelerator coverage, which is influenced by depletion gradients in the that favor accumulation at feature bottoms. The model posits that as the interface evolves, changes in surface area lead to compressive effects on concave regions, boosting accelerator adsorption and thus accelerating bottom-up fill. The local growth rate uu is given by u=kθaccu = k \theta_{\text{acc}} where kk is the rate constant and θacc\theta_{\text{acc}} is the fractional coverage of the accelerator, which is higher at feature bottoms owing to these depletion gradients. This technique has demonstrated void-free filling of trenches 90 nm wide and 500 nm deep at current densities of 5–20 mA/cm², making it essential for copper interconnects in sub-10 nm technology nodes where conformal deposition alone fails to prevent voids.

Scaling Challenges and Alternatives

As copper interconnects scale below 10 nm, their effective resistivity increases sharply—often by a factor of 10 relative to bulk values—primarily due to intensified from surfaces, grain boundaries, and thin-film effects. Diffusion barriers and liners, which cannot scale below 3-4 nm without compromising reliability, occupy 50-70% of the cross-sectional volume in such narrow lines, leaving limited space for conductive and further elevating line resistance. Via resistance exacerbates this, accounting for over 20% of total interconnect resistance at these dimensions, as the small contact areas amplify scattering and depletion effects. Integrating air gaps to enable ultra-low-k dielectrics (k < 2.0) for reduction remains difficult, as the selective and sealing processes in damascene flows risk mechanical instability and yield loss in porous structures. Recent advancements include - (RuCo) alloy liners, which reduce liner thickness by approximately 33% compared to traditional materials, enabling reliable copper interconnects at 2 nm nodes. At 2 nm nodes as of 2025, copper continues as the primary material for both local and global interconnects, with increasing use of (Co) or (Ru) liners to mitigate ; these liners enhance EM lifetime by a factor of 2-3 compared to traditional barriers by improving and reducing void formation. Emerging alternatives address these limitations. , with a bulk resistivity of 7.1 μΩ·cm, requires no additional diffusion barrier due to its , enabling fuller use of the interconnect volume and lower overall resistance below 17 nm critical dimensions. For two-dimensional scaling, and carbon nanotubes offer ballistic transport with resistivities below 1 μΩ·cm at nanoscale widths, allowing horizontal or vertical stacking without the volume loss from barriers. Optical interconnects, using waveguides and photonic integration, serve as viable options for long-distance chip signaling, providing terabit-per-second bandwidth and reduced power dissipation over distances beyond 1 mm where incurs excessive . Industry roadmaps and analyses as of 2025 project partial replacement of in local interconnects with materials like by the early 2030s, potentially yielding up to 40% RC performance gains at 3 nm nodes through minimized and barrier-free designs.

References

  1. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/326220373_Copper_Metal_for_Semiconductor_Interconnects
  2. https://www.ibm.com/history/copper-interconnects
  3. https://www.electrochem.org/dl/interface/spr/spr99/IF3-99-Pages32-37.pdf
  4. https://newsroom.lamresearch.com/Tech-Brief-An-Introduction-to-Interconnects
  5. https://ir.appliedmaterials.com/news-releases/news-release-details/applied-materials-unveils-chip-wiring-innovations-more-energy
  6. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/5872228/
  7. https://eps.ieee.org/images/files/Roadmap/ITRSIntercon2015.pdf
  8. https://spectrum.ieee.org/a-better-way-to-measure-progress-in-semiconductors
  9. https://web.stanford.edu/class/ee311/NOTES/Interconnect_Havemann.pdf
  10. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/223309308_Comparison_of_copper_damascene_and_aluminum_RIE_metallization_in_BICMOS_technology
  11. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/2401817_Copper_Interconnects_for_High-Speed_Low-Power_Static_Memories
  12. https://research.ibm.com/blog/20years-cuwires
  13. https://www.cnet.com/tech/tech-industry/ibm-joins-the-1000-mhz-club/
  14. https://nepp.nasa.gov/docuploads/A2D5D15B-6378-47E6-81C8C2DE12699E17/Reliability_of_Cu_metallization.pdf
  15. https://scispace.com/pdf/the-many-faces-of-absorptive-capacity-spillovers-of-copper-5dd1r03gor.pdf
  16. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/1521-3951%2528200011%2529222%253A1%253C261%253A%253AAID-PSSB261%253E3.0.CO%253B2-5
  17. https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1149/1.2108827
  18. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/200691409_Diffusion_of_18_elements_implanted_into_thermally_grown_SiO2
  19. https://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/2000/cn110700.htm
  20. https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9292/14/5/894
  21. https://physics.nist.gov/cgi-bin/Star/compos.pl?029
  22. https://webbook.nist.gov/cgi/cbook.cgi?ID=C7440508&Mask=2
  23. https://www.copper.org/publications/newsletters/innovations/2001/08/intro_toc.html
  24. http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Tables/rstiv.html
  25. https://pubs.aip.org/aip/jap/article/119/8/085101/143910/Electron-mean-free-path-in-elemental-metals
  26. https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/thermal-conductivity-metals-d_858.html
  27. https://us.misumi-ec.com/blog/thermal-expansion-coefficients/
  28. https://web1.eng.famu.fsu.edu/~dommelen/quantum/style_a/cboxfe.html
  29. https://ewh.ieee.org/r5/denver/sscs/References/2009_09_Gambino.pdf
  30. https://engineering.case.edu/sites/default/files/akolkar_reference_module_interfacechemelectrochem_2018.pdf
  31. https://www.eetasia.com/ibm_copper_interconnects_here_to_stay/
  32. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10342836/
  33. https://repository.gatech.edu/bitstreams/65deb7c5-c0fe-434a-8634-21c403d1e43b/download
  34. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/5389288
  35. https://www.electrochem.org/dl/ma/203/pdfs/0675.pdf
  36. https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/11/20/9702
  37. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/5424775
  38. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0167931700004561
  39. https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1149/2.0101901jes
  40. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S004060900401692X
  41. https://pubs.aip.org/aip/acp/article-pdf/550/1/215/11602769/215_1_online.pdf
  42. https://pubs.aip.org/aip/apl/article-pdf/79/18/2937/18561536/2937_1_online.pdf
  43. https://hwpi.harvard.edu/files/gordon/files/aldwn2.pdf
  44. https://pubs.aip.org/aip/apl/article-pdf/74/1/37/18538866/37_1_online.pdf
  45. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/3254371_Effects_of_localized_contamination_with_copper_in_MOSFETs
  46. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0167931707006053
  47. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-56796-y
  48. https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0022-3727/44/7/075302
  49. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0040609004006649
  50. https://pubs.aip.org/aip/jap/article/135/21/215302/3295941/Material-screening-for-future-diffusion-barriers
  51. https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6740/11/5/204
  52. https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1149/2.0281901jes
  53. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7664900/
  54. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/1219732/
  55. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/363491240_Galvanic_Corrosion_Effect_of_Co_Liner_on_ALD_TaN_Barrier
  56. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/1269410/
  57. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/electromigration-in-metals/electromigration-in-cu-interconnect-structures/630C72C07FDD4D9967266A6BBC8C5853
  58. https://pubs.aip.org/aip/apl/article/77/21/3355/515639/Electromigration-drift-velocity-in-Cu
  59. https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1149/1.3114550
  60. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/996682/
  61. https://www.ifte.de/books/em/em_chap2.pdf
  62. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/5173297/
  63. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/3066006_Dominant_Factors_in_TDDB_Degradation_of_Cu_Interconnects
  64. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/258683896_Time_Dependent_Dielectric_Breakdown_in_Copper_Low-k_Interconnects_Mechanisms_and_Reliability_Models
  65. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/230944335_Corrosion-induced_degradation_of_microelectronic_devices
  66. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsomega.4c01707
  67. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0013468613000960
  68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electacta.2007.03.025
  69. https://semiengineering.com/the-end-of-copper-interconnects/
  70. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589004224026877
  71. https://pubs.aip.org/aip/jap/article/138/9/090902/3361546/Prospects-and-challenges-of-compound-conductors
  72. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/258283270_Alternatives_to_nano-porous_materials_Low-k_dielectric_air-gap_integration
  73. https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9292/11/18/2914
  74. https://www.imec-int.com/en/articles/promise-hybrid-graphenemetal-structures-advanced-interconnects
  75. https://ayarlabs.com/blog/demystifying-optical-i-o-12-key-terms-to-know/
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.