Archive for 'January 2013'

    Questions and answers on FD-SOI

    January 4, 2013 2:56 PM by Pete Singer
    A month or so ago, we implemented (without much fanfare) the ability to comment and rank articles on this site, and more easily use social media tools. I’d like to call your attention to one interesting exchange, and also invite you to start posting comments of your own.


    In mid-December, we posted an article titled “STMicro: 28nm FD-SOI is ready for manufacturing ” which elicited an interesting comment and response. The story noted that ST’s "feature-complete and silicon-verified" 28nm planar FD-SOI Technology Platform, which is now open for preproduction from the Crolles 300mm manufacturing facility, encompasses a full set of foundation libraries (std-cells, memory generators, I/Os, AMS IPs, and high speed interfaces), and a design flow ideally suited for developing high-speed and energy-efficient devices. Measurements on a multi-core subsystem in an ST-Ericsson NovaThor ModAp platform revealed a maximum frequency exceeding 2.5Ghz and delivering 800 MHz at 0.6V, according to Jean-Marc Chery, EVP/GM, digital sector, and CTO/chief manufacturing officer of STMicroelectronics.

    Sang Kim first commented, noting that “IBM had developed FD-SOI technology for the first time, but was not successful in manufacturing up to now because of the following four main reasons: Floating body effect, self-heating, ultra-thin SOI approximately 7nm required for 28nm node, and high SOI wafer costs.” Kim noted that STMicro didn’t mention how it has resolved these four problems.

    In response, STMicro’s Giorgio Cesana, director of technology marketing, posted a follow-on comment that I thought was quite interesting. Here’s what he said:

    “Thank you for those comprehensive questions. Responding gives us a chance to provide details of the advances of UTBB FD-SOI technology and remove any doubts you may still have about it.

    1. Ultra-Thin Body and Buried Oxide (UTBB) FD-SOI technology is very different from Partially-Depleted technologies manufactured before. Those partially-depleted technologies were affected by floating-body effects where the body was subject to an uncontrolled charging/discharging that led transistor behavior to depend on the previous transitions –i.e. making them suffer from a kind of memory effect. In UTBB FD-SOI technology, hybridation lets us contact the body, so it is not left floating, overcoming the problems with PD-SOI technologies.

    2. Self-heating is also a problem that exists with partially-depleted SOI technologies, where the buried oxide thickness (~150nm) was thermally isolating transistors from the substrate, leading to self-heating effects. UTBB FD-SOI technology offers two advantages to overcome this self-heating: The Buried Oxide (BOX) is extremely thin (only 25nm thick in 28nm technology), offering significantly less thermal resistance; The big diodes, the drift MOS, the vertical bipolar, some resistors… are all implemented on the “hybrid” bulk part, eliminating even the thin BOX below them.

    3. Wafer thickness: The ST process specification is for wafers with 12nm thick silicon (+/- 5A). Process manufacturing then “uses” part of the silicon film for the manufacturing of the transistors, leading to a final 7nm film below the transistors.

    4. Wafer costs: UTBB FD-SOI technology manufacturing uses up to 15% fewer steps vs. our bulk planar 28LP HKMG gate-first technology. This process simplification, by itself, is capable of totally compensating for the current substrate cost difference. Then, we expect in high volume production, UTBB FD-SOI die costs should be even better than bulk planar, with substrate-cost erosion and with UTBB FD-SOI improving electrical yield over bulk planar.

    We hope these answers convince you, as they’ve convinced us, of the suitability of FD-SOI technology for sub30nm semiconductor manufacturing.”

    Thanks for the comments, and stay tuned for more of FD-SOI.

Pete100x100_2

Pete's Posts covers topics germane to the semiconductor and related industries, including advanced packaging, MEMS, LEDs, displays and power electronics.  

Previous Posts

Tackling Design for Yield Questions at DAC

Wed May 22 15:39:00 CDT 2013

Join The ConFab discussion

Tue Feb 26 11:27:00 CST 2013

Questions and answers on FD-SOI

Fri Jan 04 14:56:00 CST 2013

Present your ideas at The ConFab in 2013

Mon Nov 26 09:04:00 CST 2012

The ConFab 2013 countdown begins

Thu Aug 09 16:18:00 CDT 2012

The ConFab: Big data is here

Sun Jun 03 19:19:00 CDT 2012

Oh, snap!: Pics from The ConFab

Sun Jun 03 19:09:00 CDT 2012

Funding the future: How best to spend limited R&D dollars?

Thu May 03 16:28:00 CDT 2012

Thirty years ago today

Wed May 02 13:27:00 CDT 2012

The packaging side of The ConFab

Mon Apr 16 14:11:00 CDT 2012

The Bankability of PV Tech: The New Key to Success

Thu Sep 09 06:22:00 CDT 2010

3 Facts from EUPVSEC

Thu Sep 09 06:20:00 CDT 2010

10 million solar roofs in U.S. bill passes

Mon Jul 26 14:57:00 CDT 2010

Where Have All the New Apps Gone?

Wed Jun 16 15:21:00 CDT 2010

Moore's Law: Will Lack of R&D Funding Kill It?

Fri Jan 22 14:27:00 CST 2010



© 2013. PennWell Corporation. All Rights Reserved. PRIVACY POLICY | TERMS AND CONDITIONS