Two-Stage Buried Power Rail for Tight Cell Spacing
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
The challenge of forming buried power rails in semiconductor devices is exacerbated by the shrinking cell-to-cell space, leading to increased resistance and degraded circuit performance due to limited BPR size and resistance issues.
Innovation Solution
A two-stage buried power rail (BPR) structure is formed, where the lower stage has a larger critical dimension than the upper stage, connected through a via-to-buried power rail contact and a backside power delivery network via a backside nano through-Si-via, with the method involving etching, deposition, and isotropic silicon etching to enlarge the lower stage from the backside of the wafer.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Productivity
If the cell-to-cell space is reduced to increase integration density, then the integration density is improved, but the buried power rail size is reduced leading to increased resistance
Solution Approach 1:
The patent extends the buried power rail formation process to the backside of the substrate, utilizing the third dimension (depth/backside access) to create enlarged BPR structures. Through backside etching and isotropic silicon etching, the BPR is expanded vertically and laterally from the backside, allowing larger critical dimensions without increasing frontside cell-to-cell spacing. This dimensional transition resolves the contradiction by maintaining high integration density while achieving low resistance through three-dimensional BPR structuring.
Solution Approach 2:
The buried power rail is divided into two distinct stages: a first stage formed through the substrate thickness with standard dimensions, and a second stage formed from the backside with enlarged critical dimensions. The first BPR section connects to frontside power delivery networks, while the second BPR section provides low-resistance connection to backside power delivery networks. This segmentation allows each stage to be optimized for its specific function, resolving the contradiction between small frontside footprint and large BPR cross-section.
2Reliability
If the buried power rail critical dimension is increased to reduce resistance, then the resistance is reduced, but the cell-to-cell space must be increased
Solution Approach 1:
The patent transitions from two-dimensional BPR expansion (lateral only) to three-dimensional expansion by accessing the backside of the substrate. The second BPR stage is formed with larger critical dimensions through backside etching and isotropic silicon etching, which expand the BPR volume without increasing the frontside lateral footprint. This allows reduced resistance through larger BPR cross-section while maintaining tight cell-to-cell spacing on the frontside.
Solution Approach 2:
Instead of forming the enlarged BPR section from the frontside (which would require increased cell-to-cell space), the patent inverts the approach by forming the second BPR stage from the backside of the substrate. The backside access allows lateral and vertical expansion of the BPR without interfering with frontside cell layout, effectively inverting the conventional BPR formation sequence and direction to resolve the space-resistance contradiction.
3Device complexity
If a single-stage buried power rail is formed, then the process is simpler, but the resistance cannot be sufficiently reduced at tight cell-to-cell space
Solution Approach 1:
The BPR formation process is segmented into two distinct stages: first BPR formation through the substrate thickness using conventional frontside processes, and second BPR formation from the backside using backside access etching and isotropic silicon etching. Each stage serves a specific function - the first stage provides connection to frontside power networks, while the second stage provides low-resistance connection to backside power networks. This segmentation enables resistance reduction that cannot be achieved with a single stage, while maintaining reasonable process complexity through modular fabrication steps.
Solution Approach 2:
The two-stage approach enables three-dimensional BPR structuring that combines frontside and backside formation processes. The first stage creates the initial BPR structure through the substrate, and the second stage adds volume and reduces resistance from the backside. This multi-dimensional approach achieves superior resistance characteristics compared to single-stage processes, while the modular nature of the two stages keeps process complexity manageable.
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
This approach effectively increases the BPR size, reducing resistance and improving circuit performance by allowing for larger critical dimensions and direct contact with the power delivery network.
Implementation Method 1
isotropically etching the substrate to enlarge the backside power rail trench
Implementation Method 2
a first etch stop layer, a second etch stop layer spaced apart from the first etch stop layer
Data Source
AI summary
A semiconductor device includes a first buried power rail (BPR) disposed through etch stop layers and a second BPR disposed in direct contact with the first BPR, where the first BPR has a larger critical dimension (CD) than the second BPR. A bottom surface of the first BPR directly contacts a via-to buried power rail (VBPR) contact. Source/drain contacts (CA) are disposed adjacent the VBPR contact and source/drain regions collectively defining middle-of-line (MOL) components. Back-end-of-line (BEOL) components are then constructed adjacent to the MOL components, and the MOL and BEOL components bond to a carrier wafer. The second BPR is then constructed on the carrier wafer.


