4.7 Article

Assessment of Wafer-Level Transfer Techniques of Graphene with Respect to Semiconductor Industry Requirements

期刊

ADVANCED MATERIALS TECHNOLOGIES
卷 8, 期 8, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/admt.202201587

关键词

contamination; graphene; integration; large area transfer; spectroscopy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Wet and semidry transfer methods for graphene were evaluated for wafer scalability, handling, contamination, and electrical performance. Wet transfer showed superior yield, carbon contamination level, and electrical quality, while semidry transfer demonstrated scalability due to existing industrial tools and processes.
Graphene is a promising candidate for future electronic applications. Manufacturing graphene-based electronic devices typically requires graphene transfer from its growth substrate to another desired substrate. This key step for device integration must be applicable at the wafer level and meet the stringent requirements of semiconductor fabrication lines. In this work, wet and semidry transfer (i.e. wafer bonding) are evaluated regarding wafer scalability, handling, potential for automation, yield, contamination, and electrical performance. A wafer scale tool was developed to transfer graphene from 150 mm copper foils to 200 mm silicon wafers without adhesive intermediate polymers. The transferred graphene coverage ranged from 97.9 % to 99.2 % for wet transfer and from 17.2 % to 90.8 % for semidry transfer, with average copper contaminations of 4.7 x 10(13) (wet) and 8.2 x 10(12) atoms/cm(2) (semidry). The corresponding electrical sheet resistance extracted from terahertz time-domain spectroscopy varied from 450 to 550 ohm sq(-1) for wet transfer and from 1000 to 1650 ohm sq(-1) for semidry transfer. Although the wet transfer is superior in terms of yield, carbon contamination level, and electrical quality, wafer bonding yields lower copper contamination levels and provides scalability due to existing industrial tools and processes. Our conclusions can be generalized to all 2D materials.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据