Electrostatic Chuck Coating for Charge Trap and Carbon Control

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

ElectroStatic Chucks (ESCs) face issues with charge traps and reduced clamping force due to fluorine exposure and residual carbon, which conventional Protective Electrostatic Covers (PECs) attempt to address but introduce complexity and maintenance challenges.

Innovation Solution

A method involving a coating of silicon oxide (SiO2) or silicon nitride (Si3N4) on the chucking surface of ESCs, which can be readily deposited and removed in situ within the processing chamber, protecting against wear and contamination, and improving electrostatic clamping performance.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If a Protective Electrostatic Cover (PEC) is used to protect the chucking surface from fluorine exposure and carbon contamination, then the reliability of the ESC is improved, but the device complexity increases and maintenance becomes more challenging

Engineering Contradiction:
ImproveESC performance stabilityVSAvoidPEC mechanism complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent extracts the protective function from a separate PEC component and integrates it directly into the chucking surface through a coating layer. This eliminates the need for a separate movable cover mechanism while maintaining the protective function against fluorine exposure and carbon contamination.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Solution Approach 2:

The coating on the chucking surface provides self-contained protection without requiring external protective covers. The coating inherently resists fluorine exposure and carbon adhesion, making the system self-protecting and eliminating complex PEC mechanisms.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

2Object-affected harmful factors

If a PEC is used to protect the chucking surface, then contamination is reduced, but ease of operation deteriorates due to maintenance challenges

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecarbon contaminationVSAvoidmaintenance ease
Core Design Contradiction:
Object-affected harmful factorsVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The protective function is extracted from a separate PEC component and integrated into the chucking surface itself through a coating layer, eliminating the need for separate cover installation and removal operations.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Solution Approach 2:

The coating provides continuous protective action without requiring periodic installation and removal of PEC covers. The coating remains in place throughout operation, providing ongoing protection against carbon contamination and fluorine exposure.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #19Periodic action

3Reliability

If the chucking surface is exposed to fluorine and residual carbon, then electrostatic clamping force decreases due to charge traps, but adding protective mechanisms increases device complexity

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveelectrostatic clamping forceVSAvoidprotective mechanism complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

A coating layer is introduced as an intermediary between the chucking surface and the harmful environment (fluorine and carbon). This coating acts as a barrier that prevents charge trap formation while maintaining the electrostatic clamping force without requiring complex protective mechanisms.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent uses a composite structure consisting of the chucking surface and a protective coating layer. This composite material approach provides both the electrostatic functionality and the protective function in a single integrated structure, avoiding the need for separate complex protective mechanisms.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #40Composite materials

Applied Scientific Principles

This section explains which scientific principles are used to turn an abstract innovation direction into a practical engineering solution.

Function Achieved in This Case

The silicon oxide and silicon nitride coating enhances the durability and electrostatic clamping force of ESCs by preventing charge traps and carbon contamination, allowing for in situ maintenance and reducing the need for complex PEC mechanisms.

Implementation Method 1

The chucking surface includes at least a portion covered with a coating of either silicon oxide (SiO2), silicon nitride (Si3N4), or a combination of both

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectCoating: Coatings

Implementation Method 2

ESCs operate by applying a charge of one polarity onto a chucking surface and a charge of the opposite polarity on a substrate. Since opposite charges attract, the substrate is held or clamped in place by the resulting electrostatic force

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectElectrostatic force: Electrostatics

Implementation Method 3

a method of depositing a coating onto a chucking surface of an ESC within a processing chamber of a substrate processing tool

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectPlasma deposition: Plasma Enhanced Chemical Vapour Deposition

Implementation Method 4

a method for (a) using a halogen-based cleaning agent to remove a first coating formed on a chucking surface of an ESC pedestal

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectChemical etching: Oxidation

Data Source

PatentUS11835868B2Protective coating for electrostatic chucks
Publication Date: 2023.12.05 LAM RES CORP
  • US11835868B2 patent drawing
  • US11835868B2 patent drawing
  • US11835868B2 patent drawing

AI summary

An ElectroStatic Chuck (ESC) including a chucking surface having at least a portion covered with a coating of silicon oxide (SiO2), silicon nitride (Si3N4) or a combination of both. The coating can be applied in situ a processing chamber of a substrate processing tool and periodically removed and re-applied in situ to create fresh coating.