Selecting Centric vs. Aplanatic RSIL Larry Ross SEMICAPS Pte Ltd. 28 Ayer Rajah Crescent #03-01 Singapore 139959 Tel: +1 (408) 206-8225 E-mail:
[email protected] Website: www.semicaps.com 26 January 2009
Centric vs. Aplanatic RSIL, EUFANET, Slide 1 SEMICAPS
Diffraction Limited Resolution
Laser wavelength: 1340nm Objective NA: 0.6 Spatial resolution: ≈ 1.36µm
(r) = 0.61λ / NA NA = 0.6 Centric vs. Aplanatic RSIL, EUFANET, Slide 2 SEMICAPS
Rayleigh Limit
2
RSIL – Centric
A
Centric – Light from A of any wavelength exits RSIL normal to the surface with magnification of 3.5X Centric vs. Aplanatic RSIL, EUFANET, Slide 3 SEMICAPS
RSIL – Aplanatic
A
C
Aplanatic – Light appears to emit from point C Centric vs. Aplanatic RSIL, EUFANET, Slide 4 SEMICAPS
RSIL – Aplanatic Point
A B C
Aplanatic – B is the Aplanatic Point and is aberration-free Centric vs. Aplanatic RSIL, EUFANET, Slide 5 SEMICAPS
RSIL – Magnification Centric mag = 3.5X Aplanatic mag = 12.25X
A B
Aplanatic: 100X lens with 0.7NA • 12.25 X 100 = 1225X mag • 12.25 X 0.7 = 3.5NA (max.) Centric vs. Aplanatic RSIL, EUFANET, Slide 6 SEMICAPS
C
Centric: 100X lens with 0.7NA • 3.5 X100 = 350X mag • 3.5 X 0.7 = 2.47NA
Shaping an RSIL
Si
Centric vs. Aplanatic RSIL, EUFANET, Slide 7 SEMICAPS
Shaping an RSIL Centric
Sample 100μ Target Centric vs. Aplanatic RSIL, EUFANET, Slide 8 SEMICAPS
Shaping an RSIL Centric
Centric vs. Aplanatic RSIL, EUFANET, Slide 9 SEMICAPS
Shaping an RSIL Centric
Centric vs. Aplanatic RSIL, EUFANET, Slide 10 SEMICAPS
Aplanatic
Shaping an RSIL Centric
Centric vs. Aplanatic RSIL, EUFANET, Slide 11 SEMICAPS
Aplanatic
Selecting an RSIL Centric
Aplanatic
Centric
R Aplanatic
R
Which to Choose? Centric vs. Aplanatic RSIL, EUFANET, Slide 12 SEMICAPS
TIVA Spot Size – RSIL vs. Air-gap Line profile
Normalized line profile
Ref.: SH Goh, et al
Ref.: SH Goh, et al
Selected: 1. RSIL
Centric vs. Aplanatic RSIL, EUFANET, Slide 13 SEMICAPS
TIVA RSIL • Higher Signal • Smaller Spot Size 13
Signal Strength vs. Objective Size Line profile
Normalized line profile
Signal strength
Ref.: SH Goh, et al
Ref.: SH Goh, et al
Selected: 1. RSIL 2. 20X objective Centric vs. Aplanatic RSIL, EUFANET, Slide 14 SEMICAPS
14
Signal Strength vs. Sample Thickness Line profile
Normalized line profile
Sample thickness (loss)
Ref.: SH Goh, et al
Ref.: SH Goh, et al
Selected: 1. RSIL 2. 20X objective 3. Correct part thickness Centric vs. Aplanatic RSIL, EUFANET, Slide 15 SEMICAPS
15
Resolution vs. Sample Thickness Mag=3.5
At Aplanatic Point 20X = 100X
Mag=12.5
Aplanatic : ≈142 µm
Selected:
Ref.: SH Goh, et al
Centric vs. Aplanatic RSIL, EUFANET, Slide 16 SEMICAPS
1. 2. 3. 4.
RSIL 20X objective Minimum part thickness Aplanatic + 20X (cost)
16
Signal Strength vs. Sample Thickness At Aplanatic Point 20X>>100X
Selected: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Centric vs. Aplanatic RSIL, EUFANET, Slide 17 SEMICAPS
RSIL 20X objective Minimum part thickness Aplanatic 20X Aplanatic 20X 17
Centric vs. Aplanatic RSIL Centric RSIL Aberration-free No refraction at lens curvature Resolution improved by 3.5X Magnification increase 3.5X No chromatic aberrations
Good for PEM Applications
Centric vs. Aplanatic RSIL, EUFANET, Slide 18 SEMICAPS
Aplanatic RSIL Aberration-free Refraction at lens curvature Resolution improves by > 3.5X Magnification increase up to 12X Single λ only
Good for TIVA and LTP
Centric vs. Aplanatic Centric RSIL
Centric vs. Aplanatic RSIL, EUFANET, Slide 19 SEMICAPS
Aplanatic RSIL
IPFA 2008 Effect of Refractive Solid Immersion Lens Parameters on the Enhancements of Laser Induced Fault Localization Techniques SH Goh, ACT Quah Centre for Integrated Circuit Failure Analysis and Reliability, National University of Singapore
CJR Sheppard Bioimaging Laboratory, Div of Bioengineering, National University of Singapore
CM Chua, LS Koh, JCH Phang SEMICAPS Pte Ltd, Singapore Centric vs. Aplanatic RSIL, EUFANET, Slide 20 SEMICAPS
end
Centric vs. Aplanatic RSIL, EUFANET, Slide 21 SEMICAPS
