Dr. Willem van Mierlo Profile

Dr. Willem van Mierlo

at ASML Netherlands BV

SPIE Involvement:

Author

Publications (5)

Proceedings Article | 9 July 2024 Poster + Paper

E-beam metrology and defect inspection study of thin photoresist using ASML’s eP5

Mahmudul Hasan, Willem van Mierlo, Jeff Hsia, Natalia Davydova, Andreas Frommhold, Christophe Beral, Anne-Laure Charley

Proceedings Volume 12955, 129552S (2024) https://doi.org/10.1117/12.3010445

KEYWORDS: Scanning electron microscopy, Metrology, Photoresist materials, Image quality, Defect inspection, Semiconducting wafers, Bridges, Extreme ultraviolet lithography, Defect detection, Inspection

Read Abstract +

Proceedings Article | 10 April 2024 Poster + Paper

Local variables measured using large field of view SEM images

Salman Mokhlespour, Ellaheh Barzegar, Willem van Mierlo, Zoi Dardani, Peter Sprau

Proceedings Volume 12955, 129551Y (2024) https://doi.org/10.1117/12.3006277

KEYWORDS: Line edge roughness, Line width roughness, Semiconducting wafers, Scanning electron microscopy, Distortion, Stochastic processes, Metrology, Bias correction, Error analysis

Read Abstract +

Proceedings Article | 12 May 2020 Presentation + Paper

Extending EUV lithography for DRAM applications

Gijsbert Rispens, Claire Van Lare, Dorothe Oorschot, Rik Hoefnagels, Shih-Hsiang Liu, Willem Van Mierlo, Nadia Zuurbier, Zoi Dardani, Ziyang Wang, Mark John Maslow, Jo Finders, Roberto Fallica, Andreas Frommhold, Eric Hendrickx, Ardavan Niroomand, Scott Light

Proceedings Volume 11323, 113230U (2020) https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2552067

KEYWORDS: Critical dimension metrology, Semiconducting wafers, Nanoimprint lithography, Extreme ultraviolet lithography, Finite element methods, Optical lithography, Photomasks, Extreme ultraviolet, Stochastic processes, Inspection

Read Abstract +

Proceedings Article | 26 March 2019 Presentation

Massive metrology and failure identification for DRAM applications (Conference Presentation)

Harm Dillen, Dorothe Oorschot, Marleen Kooiman, Willem van Mierlo, Ziyang Wang, Kang-San Lee, Jin-Woo Lee, Ruochong Fei, Shu-Yu Lai, Marc Kea, Inhwan Lee, Hwan Kim, Junghyun Kang, Jaehee Hwang, Chang-Moon Lim

Proceedings Volume 10959, 109591K (2019) https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2515487

KEYWORDS: Failure analysis, Critical dimension metrology, Metrology, Extreme ultraviolet lithography, Printing, Semiconducting wafers

Read Abstract +

Introduction and problem statement Given that EUV lithography allows printing smaller Critical Dimension (CD) features, it can result in non-normal distributed CD populations on ADI wafers [Civay SPIE AL 2014], leading to errors in predicted failure rates [Bristol SPIE AL 2017]. As a result, there is a need to quantify the actual behavior of the CD population extremes by means of massive metrology [Dillen EUVL 2018]. Not only allows this to study the CD distribution, we can in parallel also evaluate pattern quality and the failure mechanisms leading to defects. This massive metrology method provides an accurate failure rate based on CD, and enables new possibilities to define a failure rate based on different metrics in a single measurement. Method We analyze the CD uniformity of pillars in polar coordinates using a global waveform based thresholding strategy. In conjunction with this CD information, we also evaluated the print quality of each individual measured feature. Fig 1. In line detected anomalies and failure definitions As we gather this information during the measurement of CD, we can limit the additional measurement overhead to neglectable levels. Application and outlook We will show how we can leverage this to determine a defect based process window and relations of failure mechanisms through process conditions (see figure 2). When we take failures in a CH dataset into account, we illustrate the effect on the shape of a large dataset distribution in figure 3. Fig 2. Defect identification for a through exposure dose experiment of pillars. For each condition >13k pillars where measured. The plot clearly shows an asymmetric behavior due to different failure mechanisms at low and high energy. The 2 vertical lines at relative energies 0.93 and 1.05 times nominal indicate the low defect process window. Fig 3. A distribution of measured regular grid dense CH. The red line is the unfiltered CD data, the blue line is the shape of the distribution after filtering individual CH measurements that have a much lower contrast than expected.

Proceedings Article | 20 March 2018 Paper

In-resist pattern shift metrology

Anita Bouma, Bart Smeets, Lei Zhang, Thuy T. Vu, Peter de Loijer, Maikel Goosen, Willem van Mierlo, Wendy Liebregts, Bart Rijpers

Proceedings Volume 10587, 105871G (2018) https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2304364

KEYWORDS: Overlay metrology, Diffraction, Wavefront aberrations, Optical aberrations

Read Abstract +

View contact details

UPDATE YOUR PROFILE

Is this your profile? Update it now.

Sign into your SPIE.org account

Don’t have a profile and want one?

Create an account on SPIE.org

Keywords/Phrases

Search In:

Publication Years