Journal of Applied Electrochemistry

, Volume 46, Issue 1, pp 39–46 | Cite as

Rapid screening of plating additives for bottom-up metallization of nano-scale features

Research Article
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Electrodeposition


An improved test for rapid determination of the efficacy of additives systems for use in bottom-up copper metallization of micro- and nano-scale features is introduced as a replacement for the classical injection technique. The conventional injection test is based on measuring the polarization response to the injection of an additive into a solution in which a rotating disk electrode is plated at a moderate constant current density of about 10 mA cm−2. The inaccurate assumptions underlying this test and its limitations are discussed. The modified screening technique introduced here is based on the recognition that bottom-up metallization of micro- and nano-scale features is carried out at a constant overpotential where the current density at the inhibited regions of the feature is significantly lower, on the order of 1 mA cm−2. A single polarization measurement at this low current density in an electrolyte containing the tested suppressors is suggested. The suppressors exhibiting the largest overpotentials are considered promising and should be selected for further characterization.


Electroplating Additives Copper metallization Bottom-up fill 

List of Symbols


Standard potential


Faraday’s constant


Current density


Current density at feature bottom


Limiting current density


Current density at feature rim and top of wafer


Feature depth


Number of electrons transferred


Radius of working electrode


Feature radius


Universal gas constant




Applied potential


Activation overpotential


Concentration overpotential


Ohmic overpotential


Overpotential at feature bottom


Overpotential at feature rim and top surface


Electrolyte conductivity


Electrostatic potential in solution


Electrostatic potential in solution at feature bottom


Electrostatic potential in solution at feature top



The authors gratefully acknowledge support from Atotech for this work. Coupon plating studies were assisted by Jun Wu (Atotech).


  1. 1.
    Andricacos PC, Uzoh C, Dukovic JO, Horkans J, Deligianni H (1998) Damascene copper electroplating for chip interconnections. IBM J Res Dev 42:567–574CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Healy JP, Pletcher D, Goodenough M (1992) The chemistry of the additives in an acid copper electroplating bath. 1. Polyethylene-glycol and chloride-ion. J Electroanal Chem 338:155–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kelly JJ, West AC (1998) Copper deposition in the presence of polyethylene glycol—I. Quartz crystal microbalance study. J Electrochem Soc 145:3472–3476CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kelly JJ, West AC (1998) Copper deposition in the presence of polyethylene glycol—II. Electrochemical impedance spectroscopy. J Electrochem Soc 145:3477–3481CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Feng ZV, Li X, Gewirth AA (2003) Inhibition due to the interaction of polyethylene glycol, chloride, and copper in plating baths: a surface-enhanced Raman study. J Phys Chem B 107:9415–9423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Doblhofer K, Wasle S, Soares DM, Weil KG, Ertl G (2003) An EQCM study of the electrochemical copper-(II)/copper(I)/copper system in the presence of PEG and chloride ions. J Electrochem Soc 150:C657–C664CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kondo K, Matsumoto T, Watanabe K (2004) Role of additives for copper damascene electrodeposition experimental study on inhibition and acceleration effects. J Electrochem Soc 151:C250–C255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hebert KR (2005) Role of chloride ions in suppression of copper electrodeposition by polyethylene glycol. J Electrochem Soc 152:C283–C287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cao Y, Taephaisitphongse P, Chalupa R, West AC (2001) Three-additive model of superfilling of copper. J Electrochem Soc 148:C466–C472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Georgiadou M, Veyret D, Sani RL, Alkire RC (2001) Simulation of shape evolution during electrodeposition of copper in the presence of additive. J Electrochem Soc 148:C54–C58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    West AC, Mayer S, Reid J (2001) A superfilling model that predicts bump formation. Electrochem Solid-State Lett 4:C50–C53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Moffat TP, Wheeler D, Huber WH, Josell D (2001) Superconformal electrodeposition of copper. Electrochem Solid-State Lett 4:C26–C29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Josell D, Wheeler D, Huber WH, Bonevich JE, Moffat TP (2001) A simple equation for predicting superconformal electrodeposition in submicrometer trenches. J Electrochem Soc 148:C767–C773CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Akolkar R, Landau U (2004) A time-dependent transport-kinetics model for additive interactions in copper interconnect metallization. J Electrochem Soc 151:C702–C711CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Moffat TP, Wheeler D, Edelstein MD, Josell D (2005) Superconformal film growth: mechanism and quantification. IBM J Res Dev 49:19–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Dow WP, Yen MY, Lin WB, Ho SW (2005) Influence of molecular weight of polyethylene glycol on microvia filling by copper electroplating. J Electrochem Soc 152:C769–C775CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Akolkar R, Landau U (2009) Mechanistic analysis of the “bottom-up” fill in copper interconnect metallization. J Electrochem Soc 156:D351–D359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mendez J, Akolkar R, Landau U (2009) Polyether suppressors enabling copper metallization of high aspect ratio interconnects. J Electrochem Soc 156:D474–D479CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Adolf J, Landau U (2011) Predictive analytical fill model of interconnect metallization providing optimal additives concentrations. J Electrochem Soc 158:D469–D476CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Huang Q, Baker-O’Neal BC, Kelly JJ, Broekmann P, Wirth A, Emnet C, Martin M, Hahn M, Wagner A, Mayer D (2009) Suppressor effects during copper superfilling of sub-100 nm lines. Electrochem Solid-State Lett 12:D27–D31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Huang Q, Liu J, Baker-O’Neal B (2014) An electrochemical method of suppressor screening for Cu plating in sub-100 nm lines. J Electrochem Soc 161:D207–D213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ryan K, Dunn K, van Eisden J (2012) Development of electrochemical copper deposition screening methodologies for next generation additive selection. Microelectron Eng 92:91–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bard AJ, Faulkner LR (2001) Electrochemical methods: fundamentals and applications, 2nd edn. Wiley, New York, p 339Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Newman J (1966) Resistance for flow of current to a disk. J Electrochem Soc 113:501–502CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Boehme L, Landau U (2013) Screening techniques for selecting improved additives for bottom-up copper metallization. Abstract #2087, 224th ECS Meeting, San Francisco, CAGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Boehme L (2014) Additives screening techniques and process characterization for electroplating semiconductor interconnects. PhD Dissertation, Case Western Reserve UniversityGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Chemical and Biomolecular EngineeringCase Western Reserve UniversityClevelandUSA

Personalised recommendations