Array
(
    [content] => 
    [params] => Array
        (
            [0] => /forum/index.php?threads/are-canon-going-to-be-back-in-the-game.17076/
        )

    [addOns] => Array
        (
            [DL6/MLTP] => 13
            [Hampel/TimeZoneDebug] => 1000070
            [SV/ChangePostDate] => 2010200
            [SemiWiki/Newsletter] => 1000010
            [SemiWiki/WPMenu] => 1000010
            [SemiWiki/XPressExtend] => 1000010
            [ThemeHouse/XLink] => 1000970
            [ThemeHouse/XPress] => 1010570
            [XF] => 2021171
            [XFI] => 1050270
        )

    [wordpress] => /var/www/html
)

Are CANON going to be back in the game?

nghanayem

Active member
From some quick reading I don't see this "stamping" process being used for anything besides NAND and maybe as a cost cutter for old logic fabs. It seems there is also a lot of attention being paid by the LED and solar cell industry. As for their traditional litho capabilities, Canon is in pretty bad shape since they never made a production immersion tool.
 

Fred Chen

Moderator
From some quick reading I don't see this "stamping" process being used for anything besides NAND and maybe as a cost cutter for old logic fabs. It seems there is also a lot of attention being paid by the LED and solar cell industry. As for their traditional litho capabilities, Canon is in pretty bad shape since they never made a production immersion tool.
From their own statements, yes, they had foregone the ArF and EUV development, focusing on maintaining KrF and I-line equipment (KrF can push down to 90 nm with strained effort), while now pushing the nanoimprint technology. For nanoimprint to meet the same targets as EUV, it has to be at least as good in terms of overlay, defects, CD control. So the burden is on Canon to demonstrate this, possibly with the help of DNP and Kioxia.
 

jmlobert

Member
The Canon Nanotechnologies website is outdated by at least a few years. I doubt very much that imprint can compete with the resolution of EUV, so it really is a competition only for 1193nm, if that. The website doesn't state anything about current resolution achievements and the technology has perpetually been "just about to be finished" for some 20 years now, which is when I first worked with Molecular Imprint people.
 

Fred Chen

Moderator
The Canon Nanotechnologies website is outdated by at least a few years. I doubt very much that imprint can compete with the resolution of EUV, so it really is a competition only for 1193nm, if that. The website doesn't state anything about current resolution achievements and the technology has perpetually been "just about to be finished" for some 20 years now, which is when I first worked with Molecular Imprint people.
In this month's SPIE volume 12293, paper 122930P gives the general update from Canon Nanotechnologies while 122930Q talks about requiring double patterning for the electron beam lithography for the template. Nanoimprint is being sold as an alternative to multipatterning on the wafer but actually the electron scattering is complex enough even at 22nm half-pitch (though it can resolve smaller) to warrant double patterning (beam writing) for better CD uniformity and placement.
 
Top