Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
12675
presented by
1998
Printed in Switzerland
Cover:
Foreground, thermal image of a person aquired with an infrared sensor array
microsystem (cf. chapter 6). Background, scanning electron micrograph of a
micromachined sensor array (cf. chapter 3).
3
Contents
Contents
Contents 4
Abstract 6
Zusammenfassung 7
1 Introduction 8
1.1 Infrared Radiation 9
1.2 Infrared Sensor Types 10
1.3 Applications 13
1.4 CMOS Fabrication of IR Sensors 15
1.5 Previous Art 15
1.6 Outline of the Thesis 17
2 Theory 18
2.1 Infrared Radiation 18
2.2 Sensor Principle 23
2.3 Heat Transfer 25
2.4 Seebeck Effect 27
2.5 Imaging Optics 28
2.6 Sensor Characteristics and Figures of Merit 30
3 Device Fabrication 35
3.1 CMOS Processes 35
3.2 Post-Processing Method 38
3.3 Fabricated Device Types 44
3.4 Post-Processing Restrictions 65
4
4 Characterization 73
4.1 Sensitivity Measurements 73
4.2 Array Characterization 83
4.3 Spectral Absorptance Measurements 85
5 Modeling 100
5.1 Analytical Model 103
5.2 Variational Model 107
5.3 Finite Element Model 108
5.4 Comparison of Models 112
5.5 Device Optimization 112
6 Demonstrators 117
6.1 Presence Detector 117
6.2 Thermal Imager 121
Appendix 128
References 128
Acknowledgments 136
Curriculum Vitae 138
List of Abbreviations 139
5
Abstract
Abstract
6
Zusammenfassung
7
1 Introduction
1 INTRODUCTION
Integrated circuits (IC) are ubiquitous in modern life. They perform various tasks
in credit cards, computers, cars, and communication networks. This has become
possible due to the drastic drop of the price-to-performance ratio of silicon ICs in
the last three decades, enabled by batch fabrication, integration, and miniaturiza-
tion. In the late sixties, silicon IC technology has been expanded by silicon micro-
machining technology, i.e., ways to selectively structure the IC materials. This
added new, mechanical [1] and thermal [2] functionality to previously purely elec-
trical devices; hence the current term “micro electro mechanical systems”
(MEMS). A large variety of such systems is fabricated and investigated using
methods borrowed from silicon IC technology [2-4]. These methods enable high
functionality at a low device cost through miniaturization and mass production.
The devices presented in this thesis were fabricated in commercial IC production
facilities with subsequent post-processing (IC MEMS) [5]. This approach limits
the choice of available process steps, materials, and layer thicknesses. However,
it builds on a mature low-cost technology and benefits from the possibility to coin-
tegrate state-of-the-art circuitry with the sensors [6-10]. This improves perfor-
mance and minimizes system size and cost [11]. Such integrated MEMS systems
are called iMEMS or CMOS MEMS.
This thesis presents the development of thermoelectric infrared sensor microsys-
tems fabricated using commercial CMOS processes with subsequent microma-
chining. These microsystems comprise infrared sensor pairs or sensor arrays coin-
tegrated with dedicated signal conditioning circuitry on a single chip. They are
intended to detect the presence of a person in their vicinity by means of its infrared
radiation. This application is generally referred to as intrusion, motion, or pres-
ence detection. Most intrusion detectors applied today sense only moving persons,
and thus, are also called motion detectors. In contrast, the presence detector sys-
tems presented in this thesis also sense a person at rest. Intrusion detector systems
comprising a two-dimensional array of sensors allow to obtain an infrared image
and are referred to as thermal imagers.
8
1.1 Infrared Radiation
9
1 Introduction
Photonic sensors
In photonic sensors IR photons excite electrons to higher energy states and thus
modulate some electronic property of the sensor. The most important examples
are listed in table 1.1. Photonic sensors are inherently fast and have a normalized
Thermal sensors
Thermal sensors are “two-stage transducers”, including a radiation absorbing
material and a temperature measurement. In the first stage the photon energy is
10
1.2 Infrared Sensor Types
converted to thermal energy in the absorber, which heats up. This temperature
change is converted to an electrical signal by the second stage. A trade-off exists
between the sensitivity and response time of thermal sensors [14]. To maximize
signals for a given radiation power the absorbing structure is thermally isolated
from the ambient. On the other hand, the response time of the device is roughly
proportional to the product of the thermal conductance to the ambient and the ther-
mal mass of the absorber. Shrinking the device dimensions reduces the thermal
mass. Thus miniaturization is very attractive for thermal IR sensors. The spectral
sensitivity of thermal sensors is entirely defined by the properties of the absorber.
Specialized absorbers are available with a uniform spectral absorptance over a
wide wavelength band [15].
The second stage of the device measures the temperature increase of the absorber.
Depending on which physical property is exploited for the measurement, thermal
sensors are grouped in the types listed in table 1.2.
In a Golay cell, gas is confined in a fixed volume [16]. Either the gas itself absorbs
the radiation or it is in thermal contact with an absorber. In both cases the gas heats
up when the cell is irradiated and the pressure in the volume increases. Then pres-
sure is measured. The normalized detectivity of Golay cells is in the range of
109 cm√Hz/W, but the cells are highly sensitive to sound and atmospheric pres-
sure variations [18,19]. These problems are addressed by a very rigid housing and
venting the gas cell through a small leak [20].
11
1 Introduction
U C = α ( T 1 – T 2 ) = α ∆T , (1.1)
12
1.3 Applications
AAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAA
A A A
AAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAA
A A A
AAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAA
A A A
Cold contact
AAAAAAAAAAAA
AA AA AA
Material A
Hot contact
AA AA AA AA
U
C
Material B
T1 T2
AAAAA
Heat sink
AAAAA Absorber
sink to form the so-called cold contacts. The voltage UT of a thermopile contain-
ing N thermocouples is given by
U P = Nα ∆T . (1.2)
1.3 Applications
There are mainly two motives to apply detectors for thermal radiation: Remote
temperature measurement and vision without visible light [16]. In all applications
the detector system contains at least the following parts: Imaging optics, sensors,
electronics, signal output, and housing. The optics collects the radiation and
focuses it on the sensors which convert it into electrical signals. The electronics
processes the signal and feeds it to the output. The housing supports the compo-
nents and protects them from environmental influences. Additional functions may
be necessary such as cryogenic cooling, or radiation chopping. Depending on the
13
1 Introduction
complexity and cost of the components the detector systems can be divided into
three main classes [17]:
2.5 m
10 m
14
1.4 CMOS Fabrication of IR Sensors
of a thermal imager the pixels in the sensor array “stare” at a number of adjacent
areas and their signals are processed individually. Thus they provide information
on the shape, position, and movement of the intruder. The typical working range
of a low-cost intrusion detector is 10 m. With the average surface temperature of
a clad human being of 24°C [17] the total radiation power collected by the optics
and transmitted to the sensors is in the order of 1 µW.
15
1 Introduction
low cost, these have been widely used in motion detectors. However, their inabil-
ity to measure dc radiation signals without mechanical chopping makes them
unsuitable for presence detection. Thermopiles, in contrast, are capable of mea-
suring dc signals and are readily accessible with micromachining technology.
Early research on infrared thermopile sensors using silicon planar technology was
carried out by Lahiji et al. [29,30], Shibata et al. [31], and Sarro et al. [32]. In
1982 Lahiji et al. reported an infrared sensor fabricated on a 2 mm by 2 mm sili-
con membrane with bismuth/antimony thermocouples. In 1982 he proposed the
fabrication of a similar sensor with higher performance using polysilicon and gold
for the thermopile. In 1987 Sarro et al. [32] reported the fabrication of IR detec-
tors using silicon structures with integrated p-doped silicon/aluminium thermo-
piles. The first thermoelectric IR sensor using dielectric thin film membranes was
reported by Völklein et al. [23] in 1991. This sensor consists of a silicon
oxide/nitride membrane with Bi-Sb-Te thermopiles. In the same year
Lang et al. [28] proposed a thermoelectric sensor with dielectric membrane and
polysilicon/aluminium thermopile that can be produced in a CMOS line, while
Baltes et al. [33] reported the fabrication of thermoelectric infrared sensors using
commercial CMOS technology. In 1993 Lenggenhager et al. [34] reported the
fabrication of thermoelectric sensors using n+-poly/p+-poly thermopiles in a com-
mercial CMOS process. Srinivas et al. [35] demonstrated a free-standing cop-
per/constantan thermopile. Today, various infrared thermoelectric sensors are
commercially available. Examples of manufacturers are:
16
1.6 Outline of the Thesis
In the last seven years a significant number of contributions were made to the opti-
mization of thermopile IR sensors in the choice of material [23], geometry
[37-42], and signal conditioning circuitry [8,10]. The cointegration of circuits and
thermoelectric IR sensors was first demonstrated by Baer et al. [43] in 1991. They
fabricated a linear array of 32 sensors with multiplexing circuit. The monolithic
cointegration of circuits for signal conditioning was reported in 1993 by Lenggen-
hager et al. [44,45] and in 1995 by Müller et al. [7]. With integrated addressing
circuit, large two-dimensional arrays of sensors became feasible. In 1994 Kanno
et al. [46] reported an array of 128 by 128 sensor elements, designed for operation
in vacuum and fabricated using a custom silicon process. Later, in 1995,
Oliver et al. [47] reported a sensor array with 32 by 32 pixels, fabricated in a
research CMOS facility.
17
2 Theory
2 THEORY
This chapter summarizes the theoretical background of the work described in the
following chapters. It starts with a discussion of infrared radiation. Then a detailed
description of the sensor principle is given, followed by a discussion of the under-
lying physical effects, viz. heat transfer and the Seebeck effect. Next, imaging
optics is briefly reviewed. Finally, the figures of merit used to characterize the per-
formance of sensors and detector systems are introduced.
Radiometry
In this section a few terms and definitions of radiometry are compiled. Differing
terminologies abound in the literature. The one given here follows Siegel
et al. [48].
In contrast to i'λ the spectral emissive power e'λ usually refers to a point on a sur-
face A. It describes the radiation power density through A, in a specific direction
18
2.1 Infrared Radiation
holds. Such surfaces are called Lambert radiators. Three important quantities are
derived from e'λ by integration over the wavelength spectrum, the hemisphere, or
both. They are, respectively, the directional total emissive power e' defined as
π ⁄ 2 2π
∞ π ⁄ 2 2π
e = ∫ e λ dλ = ∫ ∫ e'(ϑ, ϕ) dϑ dϕ . (2.4)
0 ϑ= 0 ϕ= 0
p abs(λ)
α' λ(T , ϑ, ϕ) = -------------------
-. (2.5)
e' λ(ϑ, ϕ)
As proposed in [48] the ending -ity in absorptivity will be used for the intensive
property, i.e. for opaque materials where α is independent of sample size. The
absorption behavior of a partly transparent sample, in contrast, depends on its spe-
cific size, and thus, is extensive. In this case the ending -ance will be used.
19
2 Theory
Similar to eqns. (2.2), (2.3), and (2.4) the hemispherical absorptivity αλ, total
absorptivity α', and total hemispherical absorptivity α can be defined by respec-
tive integrations over eqn. (2.5). The largest possible absorptivity is unity. In this
case all incident radiation is absorbed. A body with this property is called black,
or a blackbody.
ρ λ = iˆλ ⁄ i λ , (2.6)
where iˆλ denotes the reflected intensity and is integrated over the hemisphere. The
absorptivity and reflectivity of an opaque surface satisfy the energy conservation
condition
αλ + ρλ = 1 . (2.7)
Thermal Radiation
All matter constantly radiates IR radiation. The spectral energy distribution and
intensity depends on the material and its temperature. This phenomenon yields a
connection between electrodynamics and thermodynamics. Its principal laws
were first formulated by Kirchhoff [49] in 1859. They can be understood by con-
sidering a model system of two flat surfaces of equal area A facing each other over
a small gap where radiation is the only means of energy exchange. Let α1, α2 and
e1, e2 denote their total hemispherical absorptivity and emissive power, respec-
tively. Then Ae1 denotes the power emitted from body 1 and the power absorbed
by body 2 is Ae1α2. In thermal equilibrium the equation
e1 α2 = e2 α1 (2.8)
holds. The same argument applies separately for all components of the transmitted
power having different wavelengths λ. From eqn. (2.8) it becomes clear that the
20
2.1 Infrared Radiation
ratio eλi/αλi is a constant ebλ for all surfaces, depending on temperature T and
wavelength only. This leads to Kirchhoff’s law
As a consequence from eqn. (2.9) a blackbody with αλ = 1 has the largest possible
emissive power eλ = ebλ. This leads to the interpretation of ebλ as the emissive
power of a blackbody. The total hemispherical emissive power of a blackbody was
found experimentally by Stefan [50] and theoretically by Boltzmann [51] as
∫ ebλ(T ) dλ = σT
4
eb = , (2.10)
0
where
–8 W
σ = 5.670 ×10 -------------
2 4
- (2.11)
m K
is the Stefan-Boltzmann constant. The spectral emissive power ebλ, however, was
first correctly described by Planck [52] in 1900. It is given by
2
2πhc 1
5
- ⋅ ------------------
e bλ(T ) = -------------- hc
-. (2.12)
λ ----------
kTλ
e –1
where c, k, and h denote the speed of light and Boltzmann’s and Planck’s con-
stants, respectively. Figure 2.1 shows plots of ebλ for T = 300 K and T = 400 K. A
body at “terrestrial” temperatures radiates mostly in the range from 2 µm
to 40 µm. Hence the name thermal radiation.
21
2 Theory
140
120
80
400 K
60
40
20 300 K
0
1 10 100
Wavelength [µm]
Fig. 2.1: Spectral emissive power ebλ of a blackbody at 300 K and 400 K.
Black surfaces are always Lambertian, i.e. eqn. (2.1) holds, and thus e'bλ, and e'
can be deduced from eqn. (2.12). The values are
2
2hc cos ϑ
e' bλ(ϑ, T ) = ----------
5
- ⋅ ------------------
hc
-, (2.13)
λ ---------
kTλ
-
e –1
and
4
σT
e' b(ϑ, T ) = ---------- cos ϑ . (2.14)
π
The emissivity ε of a surface is defined as the ratio of its emissive power e and that
of a blackbody eb
e
ε = ----- . (2.15)
eb
22
2.2 Sensor Principle
By definition (see eqn. (2.9)) the emissivity is equal to the absorptivity of the sur-
face.
As a consequence of eqns. (2.9), (2.10), and (2.15) the net radiative heat transfer
pem from a unit surface area with emittance ε at temperature T1 to the surroundings
at T2 is given by
4 4 3
p em = εσ ( T 1 – T 2 ) ≈ 4εσT 1 ( T 1 – T 2 ) , (2.16)
T1 – T2
- « 1.
-------------------- (2.17)
T1
IR radiation incident on the sensor is absorbed in the membrane. Due to the low
thermal conductivity of the dielectric layers and their small thickness (roughly
4 µm), the free parts of the structure are well isolated from the bulk silicon. Thus
the temperature of the structure is increased with respect to the silicon substrate.
The temperature increase is measured with the thermopiles providing the output
voltage UP given by
N
UT = ∑ γ∆T i , (2.18)
i=1
23
2 Theory
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAA
Thermopile
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAA
A
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Membrane Substrate
Thermopile
Bridge
Substrate
Thermopile
Beam
Substrate
Fig. 2.2: Schematic view of a thin membrane, bridge and cantilever structure
with integrated thermopiles.
where N, γ, and ∆Ti denote the number of thermocouples, their Seebeck coeffi-
cient, and the individual temperature differences between their hot and cold con-
tacts, respectively. A heating resistor may be integrated near the hot contacts. It
allows to dissipate a controlled heating power for test purposes or calibration.
To protect the sensor from mechanical damage, contamination, and stray signal,
the sensor is packaged in a closed housing. An IR transparent filter window inte-
grated in the package provides access for the radiation to be sensed.
24
2.3 Heat Transfer
∂T
ρc V – ∇ ⋅ ( κ ∇T ) = I ( x, t) , (2.19)
∂t
where ρ, cV, and κ, denote the density, heat capacity, and thermal conductivity of
the medium, respectively. The right hand side of eqn. (2.19) is the source term I.
The source term takes into account heat generation due to absorption and heat loss
due to thermal radiation. To describe the behavior of the sensor, eqn. (2.19) has to
be analyzed in the domain of the sensor chip and the surrounding air. The bound-
ary condition is given by the package surface S0 surrounding the sensor and acting
as a heat sink at T0
T ( x, t) = T 0( x, t) for x ∈ S 0 , (2.20)
T ( x, 0) = f ( x) at t = 0 . (2.21)
The typical power incident on the sensor structure of area 1 mm2 is 1 µW. The
resulting temperature increase is in the order of 1 mK. The radiation loss resulting
from this is roughly 5 mW/m2 or 0.5% of the absorbed power density. This rough
estimate shows that the radiation losses can be neglected in the calculation of the
temperature distribution.
The solution of the heat transfer problem (see e.g. [53]) involves an expansion of
the solution of eqn. (2.19) in terms of the orthonormal eigenfunctions Ψi of the
differential operator
2
∇ ⋅ κ∇Ψ i = µ i ρc V Ψ i , (2.22)
25
2 Theory
where the µ i2 denote the respective eigenvalues with the homogenous boundary
condition
Ψi = 0 x ∈ S0 . (2.23)
∞ 2
t 2
–µi t µ i t'
T ( x, t) = ∑e ∫
Ψ i( x) f˜ i + g i(t')e dt' , (2.24)
i=1 0
where
f˜ i = ∫V ρcV Ψi f dv , (2.25)
∂
∫S
g i(t) = – T 0( x, t)κ ∫
Ψ ( x) ds + Ψ i( x)I ( x, t) dv ,
∂n i
V
(2.26)
accounts for the boundary condition and the production term. Evaluating this gen-
eral solution involves finding all the eigenfunctions. In our case, this can be done
only numerically at large computational expense, which makes this direct
approach unpractical. Nevertheless eqn. (2.24) reveals some interesting properties
of the temperature distribution. First, the spatial distribution is a linear combina-
tion of the eigenfunctions, each of which evolves independently with time. Sec-
ond, in the case of steady sources and boundary conditions, individual compo-
nents essentially relax exponentially to the steady-state. Different components
decay with different time constants τm. These are the inverses of the eigenvalues
µ i2 of the associated eigenfunctions.
The response of the sensor to steady radiation is described by the steady state
problem associated with eqn. (2.19)
∇ ⋅ ( κ ∇T ) = I , (2.27)
26
2.4 Seebeck Effect
and the boundary condition (2.20). The steady state problem can be solved, as the
dynamic problem, by the expansion of eqn. (2.27) with the eigenfunctions. The
eigenfunction to the eigenvalue 0 is proportional to the steady-state temperature
distribution. However, solutions can be found more efficiently using the finite ele-
ment method (FEM). Numerical calculation of the temperature distribution with
FEM is discussed in chapter 5.
E = γ A ∇T , (2.28)
Material A
U
C
Material B
27
2 Theory
T2 T1 T2
UC = ∫ γ A dT + ∫ γ B dT = ∫ ( γ A – γ B ) dT . (2.29)
T1 T2 T1
γ AB = γ A – γ B (2.30)
of the two materials, and for sufficiently small temperature differences the voltage
on the thermocouple is
U C = γ AB ( T 1 – T 2 ) = γ AB ∆T . (2.31)
The sensor is placed at the focal distance f from the optical element. This assures
that the image of an object far away from the optical element is sharply defined.
The area in the object space that is imaged onto the sensor is called entrance
28
2.5 Imaging Optics
x’
l f
Fig. 2.4: Schematic view of a optics system with sensor and its entrance window.
window of the sensor. Its size x is related to its distance from the detector l, the
size x' of the sensitive area, and focal length by
x x'
-- = --- . (2.32)
l f
The radiation power P captured by the optics from an object filling the entrance
window of the sensor can be approximated [55] by
2 2 3 2 2
D π x 4εσT ∆T x' D 3
P = ---------
- ⋅ -----------------------------
- = ------------
- ⋅ εσT ∆T , (2.33)
4l
2 π f
2
where D denotes the diameter of the optics or the aperture stop and ε is the objects
emissivity. The first term on the right-hand side in eqn. (2.33) is the spatial angle
of the optics aperture with respect to the object. The second term denotes the
power emitted by the object. The size of the optics aperture is commonly
described by the f-number nf , defined as
f
n f = ---- . (2.34)
D
29
2 Theory
The collected power P is focused on the sensor but reduced by the nonideal trans-
mission efficiency E of the optics. The power available on the sensor P' is then
2
x' 3
P' = E -------2- εσT ∆T . (2.35)
nf
For sensor arrays the x' in eqns. (2.32) through (2.35) refers to the extent of the
sensitive pixel area A rather than the pitch y of the array. The ratio of the area A
and the area y2 occupied in the array is called the fill factor F = A/y2.
The field of view angle Θ covered by an array with n × m quadratic pixels is given
by
y n 2 + m 2
Θ = 2 atan ------------------------- . (2.36)
2f
In the following these sensor characteristics are defined and briefly commented.
The measurement of these characteristics is described in chapter 4.
30
2.6 Sensor Characteristics and Figures of Merit
Sensitivity
The sensitivity S is the most frequently used property. It describes the static
response to radiation. It is defined as the change in signal voltage ∆U per change
in total incident radiation power ∆P on the absorbing sensor area [56]
∆U
S = -------- . (2.37)
∆P
Assuming a linear dependence and neglecting offset, eqn. (2.37) can be simplified
to
U
S = ---- . (2.38)
P
The sensitivity, e.g., depends on the sensor temperature, ambient gas pressure,
radiation wavelength, and incidence angle.
Thermopile Resistance
Besides to being the source of the voltage UP a thermopile is also a resistor. Its
representation in electrical models is a resistor with a thermoelectric voltage
source in series. This model describes both its noise performance and its behavior
when driving a load.
Noise
The noise in thermopile sensors is due to Johnson noise from the thermopile resis-
tance. The frequency spectrum of Johnson noise is white and the spectral noise
voltage density ν of the thermopile resistance RT is
ν = 4kT R T . (2.39)
31
2 Theory
If several noise sources are present in a system’s signal path, such as different sen-
sors or circuits, the noise powers of the different sources superimpose. The result-
ing total spectral noise voltage density is
∑ νi
2
ν = . (2.40)
For white noise and a limited signal frequency bandwidth ∆f the total noise volt-
age V becomes
V = ν ∆f . (2.41)
If the output of such a system is sampled, the measured amplitudes have a gauss-
ian distribution. The mean value of the distribution corresponds to the signal
including offset. The standard deviation of the distribution is V. Thus 68% of the
samples lie within ±V/2 of the mean value.
Signal-to-Noise Ratio
The signal-to-noise ratio Q is a figure to describe the quality of a signal in a spe-
cific situation rather than a sensor property. It is defined as the ratio of the signal
and noise voltages, i.e.,
Q = U ⁄V. (2.42)
32
2.6 Sensor Characteristics and Figures of Merit
V P
NEP = ---- = ---- . (2.43)
S Q
If nothing else is stated, the noise refers to a bandwidth ∆f of 1 Hz. For systems
with a non-white noise spectrum the NEP also depends on frequency.
Normalized Detectivity
Like the NEP the normalized detectivity D* describes the signal quality. It is
derived from the detectivity D which is the inverse of the NEP. The normalized
detectivity is defined as
A ⋅ ∆f
D∗ = ------------------- , (2.44)
NEP
where A is the sensitive sensor area, ∆f refers to the bandwidth used in the defini-
tion of the NEP. The normalized detectivity is applied to compare the performance
of sensors of different size and type. This is possible because in comparison with
D and NEP, the dependence of D* on size is reduced.
2
n f NEP 1
NETD = -------- ⋅ ------------ ---------3- . (2.45)
E A σT
The first term on the right-hand side of eqn. (2.45) depends on the optics only
while the other term describes the performance of the sensor.
33
2 Theory
Response Time
The response time of the sensor characterizes how fast its signal reacts to an abrupt
change in the incident radiation power. As describes in section 2.3 the response
consists of a superposition of exponential relaxations to the new steady state
response. In practice the component associated with the longest relaxation time
has the largest amplitude and all others are neglected. Thus the response U(t) of
the sensor to a sudden change in radiation power ∆P at t = 0 is given by
–t ⁄ τ
U (t) = U (0) + ∆P ⋅ S ( 1 – e ), (2.46)
where U (0) denotes the sensor signal for t ≤ 0 , and τ defines the response time.
The dynamic response can also be described using the response to radiation with
a harmonic time dependence of angular frequency ω
– iωt
P(t) = P ω e . (2.47)
– iωt
U (t ) = U ω e , (2.48)
U 1
------ω- = ------------------------- . (2.49)
Pω 1+ω τ
2 2
This is the typical behavior of a low-pass filter with cut-off frequency (2πτ)-1.
Crosstalk
If a pixel A within an array is irradiated, and therefore heats up, a nearby pixel B
may also heat up due, e.g., to heat conduction. This leads to a signal from pixel B
although it is not irradiated. The ratio of the signals from pixel UB and the irradi-
ated pixel UA is called crosstalk tAB. The crosstalk depends on the relative position
of the two pixels within the array and is usually given in percent.
34
3.1 CMOS Processes
3 DEVICE FABRICATION
The IR sensors and IR sensor arrays in this thesis were fabricated using commer-
cial standard CMOS IC technology with subsequent CMOS compatible post-pro-
cessing. In the following we describe the main fabrication steps. We start with a
description of a general CMOS process followed by the special features of the
three processes we used. Next we discuss CMOS compatible post-processing.
Then a physical description of the devices we fabricated is given. Finally we dis-
cuss the critical steps and pitfalls we encountered in micromachining CMOS pro-
cessed silicon wafers and chips.
35
3 Device Fabrication
AAAAAAAAA Pad
AAAAAAAAA
Passivation
AAAAAAAAA AAAAA
AAAAAAAAA
Metal 2
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAA
AA
AAAAA
AAA
AAAAA
Intermetal oxide
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Contact oxide
Field oxide
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Gate Gate oxide Well Metal 1 Substrate
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Fig. 3.1: Schematic cross-section of a CMOS inverter.
between different conducting layers.The passivation protects the circuit from cor-
rosion and mechanical damage. Openings in the passivation are called pads and
are used for connections between the chip and the package. The layers in the
cross-section 3.1, and their typical materials, thicknesses, and purposes are listed
in table 3.1. While the basic structure is similar for all CMOS processes, a variety
of specialized processes exists. We now describe the special features of the three
processes ECPD 10, alp2lv, and alp1mv used for this thesis.
ECPD10
The ECPD 10 process of Atmel ES2 in Aix-en-Provence, France, is a digital
CMOS process. It features a minimum gate length of 1 µm, two metallization lay-
ers, and one polysilicon layer. The process was derived from the ECPD 10 of Phil-
ips. Table 3.2 lists the materials of the ECPD 10 process that were used for IR sen-
sors with their thickness and thermal conductivity. For the dielectrics, the overall
thickness and their average thermal conductivity are listed. The thermoelectric
properties of the conducting layers are listed in table 3.3. The relative Seebeck
coefficient of polysilicon and metal 1 is given. The data in tables 3.2 and 3.3 were
measured by von Arx [57].
36
3.1 CMOS Processes
Tab. 3.1: Layers contained in the CMOS inverter shown in fig. 3.1 with typical
thicknesses.
Tab. 3.2: Thicknesses and thermal conductivities of the layers of ECPD 10 [57].
37
3 Device Fabrication
Layer Ω/sq]
Sheet resistance Rsq [Ω Seebeck coeff. γ [µV/K]
Metal 2 0.06 -
Metal 1 0.06 -
Poly 30.8 -108
alp2lv
The alp2lv process of EM Microelectronic-Marin SA in Marin, Switzerland, is an
analog, low-power, low-voltage IC process. It features a minimum gate length of
2 µm, two metallizations, and two polysilicon layers. One of these polysilicon
layers is available with three different doping levels, used in capacitors, resistors,
poly-diodes, tunnel-diodes, and EEPROM cells. The process is carried out on
6” wafers. The thermal material properties of alp2lv layers are listed in table 3.4.
An option of the alp2lv process are gold bumps. These are normally used for tape
automated bonding. They are electroplated on top of the passivation or pads to a
height of 25 µm. The electrical parameters of the conducting layers are listed in
table 3.5.
alp1mv
Like the ECPD 10 process of Atmel ES2, the alp1mv process of EM Microelec-
tronic-Marin SA in Marin, Switzerland, was derived from the ECPD 10 of Philips.
The two processes are electrically equivalent and the material data in tables 3.2
and 3.3 were also used for the alp1mv process. Gold bumping is also available for
the alp1mv process.
38
3.2 Post-Processing Method
Tab. 3.4: Thicknesses and thermal conductivities of the layers of alp2lv [58,59].
Layer Ω/sq]
Sheet resistance Rsq [Ω Seebeck coeff. γ [µV/K]
Metal 2 0.03 0
Metal 1 0.044 0
n+-poly 2 29 -88
n-poly 2 2613 -454
p+-poly 2 427 270
n+-poly 1 29 -92
wafer, while EDP is used for beam and bridge type structures etched from the
wafer front. KOH would destroy the metal pads at the front of the wafer, while
they are preserved in EDP.
39
3 Device Fabrication
AAAAAAAA
<111>
Convex corner
Etch mask AAAAAA
AAAAAAAA
AAAAAA
AAAAAAAA
Etch groove
AAAAAA
AAAAAAAA
AAAAA AAAAAA
AAAAAAAA
Undercut
<100> structure
Silicon
AAAAA AAAAAAAA
AAAAAA
AAAAA AAAAAAAA
AAAAAA
Fig. 3.2: Schematic cross-section of an etched groove and top view of a structure
released by the underetching of convex mask corners.
40
3.2 Post-Processing Method
Etch mask
(111)-planes
(100)-plane
Fig. 3.3: SEM picture of a cavity etched into rectangular mask opening. The size
of the mask opening is 1800 µm by 1300 µm.
of such beams. The length and width of these cantilever beams is 300 µm and
100 µm, respectively. Bridges are obtained from the combination of several open-
Fig. 3.4: Array of micromachined beams. The length of the beams is 300 µm.
ings in the etch mask. As shown in fig. 3.5 the individual cavities overlap and join
due to the undercutting. An example is shown in fig. 3.6. It consists of an s-shaped
bridge obtained with two etch mask openings. The size of the bridge is 100 µm by
150 µm.
If the mask opening is large enough the etched cavity eventually reaches the rear
of the wafer and an opening is formed. If the rear of the wafer is protected by an
41
3 Device Fabrication
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAA AAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAA AAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAA AAAAAAAA
Opening Opening
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAA AAAAAAAA
Bridge Bridge
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAA AAAAAAAA
Opening Opening
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Fig. 3.5: Schematic top view of two underetched bridge structures.
Fig. 3.6: S-shaped bridge obtained with two etch mask openings.
etch resistant film, the etching stops at the silicon/film interface. This results in a
closed membrane as shown in fig. 3.7.
Etch mask
Silicon
Membrane
EDP
We used EDP type S [61] at 95°C to fabricate beams and bridges. It contains
1000 ml ethylene-diamine, 160 g pyrocatechol, 133 ml water, and 6 g pyrazine.
42
3.2 Post-Processing Method
The etch rate in (100) direction for fresh solutions at 95°C is 27 µm/h. The etch
behavior varies significantly with water, oxygen, and silicon concentration. To
obtain a predictable etch, the solution has to be kept under nitrogen atmosphere in
a reflux condenser [62]. After 10 g of silicon have been dissolved per liter of solu-
tion, solid reaction products are deposited on the surfaces [63]. The field oxide and
passivation layers are etched more than 104 times more slowly than silicon. This
allows the fabrication of beams and bridges in a maskless post-processing step,
using the CMOS dielectrics as the etch masking layers [64]. The access openings,
where the EDP attacks the silicon, are defined by a cut in the passivation, inter-
metal oxide, contact oxide, and field oxide. The unprotected aluminum of pads is
etched 180 times slower than silicon in the (100) direction. This provides an etch
window of 4 h during which bondable pads are preserved [65]. The details of the
etching procedure are given in [66].
The advantages of EDP are the simplicity of the post-processing procedure and
the possibility to process a single chip for prototype fabrication. However, the size
of the fabricated structures is limited by mechanical stability and maximum etch-
ing time of 4 h. Stress in the dielectric layers causes structures larger than approx-
imately 300 µm to break during fabrication [66].
KOH
We used 6 M solution of KOH at 95°C to fabricate dielectric membranes. Its etch
rate for silicon in (100) direction, silicon nitride, and field oxide are 150 µm/h [6],
0.1 nm/h [67], and 0.12 nm/h [67], respectively. Up to 190 g of silicon per liter
can be dissolved with only a 7% change in (100) etch rate [68]. KOH removes the
pad metallization within seconds, and thus cannot be used in contact with unpro-
tected pads. Thus, KOH is preferentially used for micromachining from the rear
of wafers.
43
3 Device Fabrication
AAAA AAA
AAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAA Wafer
Fig. 3.8: Cross-section through the fixture used for the protection of the wafer
front side during KOH etching.
through broken membranes. We etched until the silicon underneath the mem-
branes was completely removed and the etching stopped at the field oxide, leaving
membranes composed of all dielectric CMOS layers.
The preparation of the wafers for the KOH etch consists of the following steps
[6,70]:
The surface state of the wafer back is crucial for the adhesion of the etch mask.
After the CMOS process the back of the wafers are covered with process residuals
and scratched from handling. An isotropic etch of the wafer back is used to obtain
the required surface quality [6]. After etching, the front protection layer is
removed, the wafers are cleaned, and finally diced.
44
3.3 Fabricated Device Types
fabricated. Sensors of the bridge and membrane type were integrated into arrays
with up to ten rows and columns. Single sensors and arrays were cointegrated with
on-chip signal conditioning electronics, in order to form integrated microsystems.
The devices are reported in the following order:
w2
w1
w1
w0
w2
w0
w0
Material 2
Material 2
Material 1 Material 1
(a) (b)
Fig. 3.9: Layout of stacked (a) and neighboring (b) thermopile layout.
45
3 Device Fabrication
Beams
Beam and bridge type thermoelectric sensors have previously been investigated
by Sarro et al. [32] and Lenggenhager et al. [34,71]. They are obtained by mask-
less bulk-micromachining with EDP. The advantage of these types is that
post-processing is simple and can be done with a single chip for prototype fabri-
cation. However, their size is limited to roughly 300 µm by mechanical stability
and a maximum etching time of 4 h [66].
A series of test structures test1 to test10 was designed to measure the spectral
absorptivity of layer sandwiches applicable for IR sensors. These test structures
are simple thermoelectric IR sensors of the beam type as shown in fig. 3.10. They
Absorber Thermopile
Bulk silicon
were fabricated in the ECPD 10 process. The cantilevers are 300 µm long and
150 µm wide. A 150 µm by 150 µm square area at the tip serves as radiation
absorber. It consists of the layer sandwich under test. Nine versions with different
absorber sandwiches were fabricated. The various layer sandwiches are listed in
table 3.6. These combinations are a complete list of the absorbing sandwiches
which can be fabricated reproducibly using the ECPD 10 process and subsequent
micromachining with EDP. From the seven layers deposited in ECPD 10,127
combinations can be inferred, however, most of them can be excluded as absorber
sandwiches by the following considerations:
46
3.3 Fabricated Device Types
test10
test1
test2
test3
test4
test5
test6
test7
test8
test9
Layer
Passivation ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
Metal 2 ■ ■ ■
Intermetal ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
Metal 1 ■ ■
Contact ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
Poly ■ ■
Field oxide ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
• The fabrication of absorbing stacks by the CMOS process does not allow arbi-
trary layer combinations. During fabrication all layers are first deposited and
then etched away locally, where necessary. Thus, if a layer is to be omitted
from the stack, the underlying layer has to offer a clear etch stop. Otherwise it
is also removed (overetched). As an example, metal 2 may not be omitted on
top of metal 1. Dielectric layers may usually be removed only above conduc-
tors.
As an exception, this rule does not apply to the lowest layer in the stack.
Overetching of this layer attacks the substrate. Since the substrate is removed
by the subsequent micromachining, the overetch does not affect the final
absorber sandwich.
• During the post-processing the top and bottom layer of the stack are exposed to
the etchant. Polysilicon is attacked by EDP and thus has to be sandwiched
between other layers.
• Aluminum with a thickness larger than 100 nm is completely opaque to IR
radiation [73]. Thus, if metal 1 or metal 2 is included in the sandwich, only the
layers on top of the metallization absorb radiation. Sandwiches differing only
in the layers below the metallization, were thus considered as equivalent
absorbers. However, they still may differ by thermal conductance.
Systematic application of these rules results in a list of the nine absorbing layer
sandwiches test1 to test9 listed in table 3.6. The absorber sandwich test10 is
equivalent to test3 according to the last rule. Nevertheless it was included to test
47
3 Device Fabrication
the validity of this rule. A micrograph of the structures test5, test7, and test9 is
shown in fig. 3.11. The different absorber squares can be distinguished by their
different degree of transparency. A thermopile is integrated in the test structure
with cold contacts on the bulk silicon and hot contacts adjacent to the absorber
area. The thermopile consists of 30 thermocouples of poly and metal 1 with a
spacing of 2 µm. The width of the metal 1 thermocouple legs is 1.5 µm. They are
stacked on top of the 2.5 µm wide poly legs. A reference structure without absorb-
ing area was also fabricated. Its schematic is shown in fig. 3.12.
Fig. 3.11: Optical micrograph of the structures test5, test9, and test7.
The sensor named ECPD-I consists of two identical cantilever beams extending
from two opposite sides of an etch cavity as shown in fig. 3.13. The thermopiles
of both beams are connected in series. The beam length and width are 145 µm and
160 µm, respectively. The separation between the tips of the beams is 10 µm. The
width of the lateral etch access openings is 70 µm. Sensor layout data are listed in
table 3.7.
48
3.3 Fabricated Device Types
Bridges
IR sensors of the bridge type are fabricated, like beams, by front-side microma-
chining with EDP. In comparison with beams the doubly supported bridges are
more rugged and can be made larger. Nevertheless, their size is limited by the
maximum etching duration of 4 h [65].
Five types of s-shaped bridge sensors were fabricated. One is based on the ECPD
10 process, the others on the alp1mv technology. When these sensors are used to
create an array, the distinctive s-shape shown in fig. 3.6 has these advantages:
49
3 Device Fabrication
The sensors alp1-I to alpI-IV were fabricated using the alp1mv process. They have
an s-shape similar to that of ECPD-II. In contrast to ECPD-II, they have no inte-
grated reflector. The thermopiles extend to the center of the structure. An SEM
micrograph of alp1-III is shown in fig. 3.14. A polysilicon resistor is integrated in
the middle of the bridge for testing and calibration purposes. The layout data for
50
3.3 Fabricated Device Types
51
3 Device Fabrication
Membrane Sensors
Sensors of the membrane type have been investigated by various authors
[7,33-47]. Their advantage, in comparison with beams and bridges, is the higher
mechanical stability. This allows post-processing on the wafer level for mass pro-
duction and fabrication of larger sensors. Membranes up to 14 by 16 mm were
successfully etched [70].
All membrane sensors discussed in this thesis have the general layout shown in
fig. 3.15. The membrane is rectangular and consists of all the dielectric layers of
the CMOS process, namely field oxide, contact oxide, intermetal oxide, and pas-
sivation. Two identical thermopiles are symmetrically integrated into the mem-
brane. They are connected in series. This layout is highly symmetric and can be
described by a few parameters:
Thirteen different membrane sensor designs were fabricated, three using the
ECPD 10 process, six using the alp2lv technology, and four using the alp1mv pro-
cess. The membrane lengths range from 1500 µm to 200 µm. The membrane
widths are between 800 µm and 200 µm. The sensors larger than 600 µm were
fabricated for motion detector systems. The sensors smaller than 345 µm were
designed for application in arrays.
The sensor ECPD-III is similar to the beam sensor ECPD-I. They have a similar
size, but a different thermopile layout. The ECPD-III has 148 thermocouples with
a 1.5 µm wide poly leg, while ECPD-I has 70 thermocouples with wpoly = 2.5 µm.
All design data are shown in table 3.9.
The two sensors ECPD-IV and ECPD-V are based on large membranes. Their size
is 630 µm by 625 µm and 720 µm by 720 µm, respectively. The detail of their
52
3.3 Fabricated Device Types
Silicon substrate
Membrane
Thermopiles
Resistor
lm wb Marging
wm
layout is given in table 3.9. These sensors were designed to test the feasibility of
large membranes fabricated with the ECPD 10 process.
The sensors alp2-I to alp2-IV are all designed to have the same thermopile resis-
tance of 300 kΩ. However, they vary in size, thermocouple materials, and thermo-
pile layout. The sensors alp2-III to alp2-VI make use of the p+-poly available in
the alp2lv process. The design data are listed in table 3.10.
Three membrane based sensors were fabricated using the alp1mv process. Their
design data are shown in table 3.11. The sensor alp1-V has a size of 1500 µm
by 700 µm. It is intended for a motion detection system. The smaller membranes,
i.e., alp1-VI and alp1-VII, are intended for a sensor array. The sensor alp1-VII was
fabricated in four versions. All versions have the same thermopile layout. How-
53
3 Device Fabrication
Arrays
Linear arrays of integrated thermoelectric sensors have been studied as early as
1985 by Choi et al. [74] and later by Sarro et al. [75]. Two-dimensional arrays
became feasible with the cointegration of sensors and circuitry. In 1994 Kanno
et al. [46] reported an array of 128 by 128 sensor elements designed for vacuum
operation. In 1995 Oliver et al. [47] reported a 32 by 32 element array which
allows operation in air at ambient pressure.
We have fabricated arrays using the ECPD 10 and the alp1mv process. Three dif-
ferent arrays were fabricated with the ECPD-IV membrane sensors. Six different
arrays were fabricated with the alp1-VI and alp1-VII membrane sensors from the
alp1mv process. Another four arrays were made with the bridge sensors alp1-I,
alp1-II, alp1-III, and alp1-IV using the same process. These arrays are periodic
54
3.3 Fabricated Device Types
alp2-III
alp2-IV
alp2-VI
Sensor name
alp2-II
alp2-V
alp2-I
Process alp2lv
Membrane length [µm] 1200 1000 1200 1000 1200 1500
size
width [µm] 800 500 800 500 700 700
Margin width [µm] 100 100 90 90 100 100
Number of th. couples 190 54 40 42 112 118
Thermo- material A n+-poly p+-poly n+-poly n+-poly n+-poly n+-poly
couple
width [µm] 8 27 11 7 3 4
spacing
2.5 2.5 3 3 3 3
width [µm]
material B metal 1 metal 1 p+-poly p+-poly p+-poly p+-poly
width [µm] 2 2 34 26 9 12
layout stacked stacked lateral lateral lateral lateral
Tab. 3.10: Layout data of membrane sensors fabricated using the alp2lv process.
arrangements of the same sensor in columns and rows. Each sensor constitutes a
pixel of the array. The array layout is described by the number of rows and col-
umns and two pitches. Further issues are how to address individual pixels within
the array and how to suppress cross-talk between neighboring pixels. As an exam-
ple, a close-up of an array of alp1-III pixels is shown in fig. 3.16.
The arrays fabricated using the ECPD 10 process are ArrECPD-I to ArrECPD-III.
They consist of two membrane pixels ECPD-III. The two pixels are united on a
single membrane as shown in fig. 3.17. Since they share the same thermally iso-
lated structure a large cross-talk is to be expected. Broad lines of the metal 1 and
2 were thus integrated into the membrane, between the two pixels. These lines
provide a thermal separation between the pixels. To investigate this thermal sep-
aration scheme, different layouts were explored in the three arrays: No metal lines
in ArrECPD-I; one line, 10 µm wide, of stacked metal 1 and 2 in ArrECPD-II.;
two lines, 4 µm wide and 2 µm apart, in ArrECPD-III.
55
3 Device Fabrication
Grooves
Switch
Pixel
Signal line
Bulk silicon rim
56
3.3 Fabricated Device Types
Membrane
Absorber
Thermopile
Thermal
separation
Fig. 3.17: ArrECPD-II with two ECPD-III sensors integrated on one membrane.
Six arrays of membrane sensors were also fabricated using the alp1mv process.
Like ArrECPD-I to ArrECPD-III they consist of pixels integrated on a single
membrane. In contrast to these, however, they are two-dimensional. The thermal
separation is provided by a similar scheme as with ArrECPD-III. A path with high
thermal conductance is provided between the pixels by metal lines. In these
two-dimensional arrays the separation lines also provide a heat sink for the cold
contacts of the thermopiles. Instead of the CMOS metallization, 25 µm thick gold
lines were used as shown in fig. 3.18. These lines are electrochemically grown
using the gold bumping service of the alp1mv process. The signal lines of all indi-
vidual pixels run under the gold lines to the border of the membrane. There,
addressing switches are integrated in the bulk silicon of the membrane support.
The array ArrAlp1-VI consists of alp1-VI sensor pixels. The array consists of three
columns and four rows with pitches of 350 µm. The pixel is square with a width
of 216 µm. The two gold lines are 50 µm wide with a spacing of 34 µm. The array
layout data are listed in table 3.12.
57
3 Device Fabrication
Pixel
Gold lines
Fig. 3.18: SEM micrograph of a pixel in ArrAlp-VII. Double gold lines thermally
separate neighboring pixels.
ration in versions a, b, and c is provided by double gold lines, while versions d and
f have only one line. The layout data of the five arrays are listed in table 3.12. The
total width of the thermal separation varies, but the pitch is constant. Thus the
pixels of the four versions have different sizes. These four versions allow to com-
pare the cross-talk of different thermal separation layouts.
Four additional arrays were fabricated using the alp1mv process. These arrays
consist of front-etched, s-shaped bridge pixels. The array ArrAlp1-I to ArrAlp1-IV
consist of alp1-I to alp1-IV sensors, respectively. Figure 3.16 shows an SEM
micrograph of ArrAlp1-III. Each column in these arrays consists of pixels sus-
pended over a long micromachined groove. The array thus consists of parallel
adjacent grooves. The cold contacts of the pixels are located on the bulk silicon
rim between the columns. A single signal line runs along each column on this rim.
The signals from the columns pixels are selectively connected to this line using
switching transistors integrated in the bulk silicon of the rim. The switches are
controlled by an addressing line as shown in fig. 3.19. For clarity the signal lines
are highlighted in the SEM micrograph. The addressing line runs over the bridges
along the row. By selecting an address line, all pixels of the corresponding row are
connected to their respective column signal line where their signal can be read out.
A schematic of this arrangement is shown in fig. 3.20. This addressing scheme is
58
3.3 Fabricated Device Types
ArrAlp1-VI Arralp1-VII
a b c d f
Pixel name alp1-VI alp1-VII
width [µm] 216 200 240 260 250 250
length [µm] 216 200 240 260 250 250
Columns number 4 7 10
pitch [µm] 350 330 330
Rows number 3 7 10
pitch [µm] 350 330 330
Thermal number 2 2 2 2 1 1
separation width [µm] 50 50 25 20 80 80
lines
spacing [µm] 34 30 40 30
Signal line
Addressing line
Pixel output
Switch
59
3 Device Fabrication
extendable to arrays of arbitrary size. The same addressing scheme has been
applied by Cole et al. [76] and Tanaka et al. [77] for micromachined bolometers
and by Oliver et al. [47] for an array of 32 by 32 micromachined thermoelectric
sensors. The pixels within the arrays are separated from each other by an air gap.
This ensures thermal separation and therefore a relatively small cross-talk.
Address lines
Pixel
Switch
Signal lines
The ArrAlp1-I consists of the smallest pixels alp1-I. Their size is 182 µm by
188 µm. They are arranged in three columns and six rows with a pitch of 210 µm.
The largest array is ArrAlp1-IV. It consists of 240 alp1-IV pixels arranged in six-
teen columns and fifteen rows. The dimensions of alp1-IV are 190 µm by 200 µm.
The pitch of the rows and columns is 217 µm and 243 µm, respectively. The
alp1-IV pixel is similar in layout to alp1-I and alp1-III. The alp1-IV is the newest
version and the small changes were made to improve the post-processing yield.
The pixels alp1-II of the ArrAlp1-II are larger than the others. The dimensions are
258 µm by 325 µm. There are three rows and columns with a pitch of 347 µm and
287 µm, respectively. The layout data of arrays ArrAlp1-I to ArrAlp1-IV are given
in table 3.13.
60
3.3 Fabricated Device Types
Systems
Integrated IR sensor microsystems consist of one or more IR microsensors coin-
tegrated on a chip with signal conditioning circuitry. The first CMOS integrated
microsystem using thermoelectric IR sensors were reported by Lenggenhager
et al. [44] in 1993, and by Müller et al. [7] in 1995.
We report the fabrication of eight IR sensor microsystems using the alp2lv and
alp1mv process. Six systems are designed for motion or presence detection and
consist of two IR sensors connected in parallel to the inputs of a differential
low-noise amplifier. The circuit schematic of this setup is shown in fig. 3.21. The
systems vary in sensors and amplifiers. Some include additional circuit blocks.
Two systems were fabricated for thermal imaging. They consist of a sensor array
cointegrated with addressing circuit and a low-noise amplifier. The block diagram
+ Sensor - -
Amplifier
+ Sensor - +
61
3 Device Fabrication
of these systems is shown in fig. 3.22. Table 3.14 lists all eight systems with their
sensors and low-noise amplifier blocks.
SysAlp2-IV 2 alp2-IV
SysAlp2-V 2 alp2-V 850
Auto-zero 100 317
SysAlp2-VI 2 alp2-VI 600
SysAlp1-IV 1 ArrAlp1-IV 1260
Chopper 100 15
SysAlp1-VII 1 ArrAlp1-VII 1110
Tab. 3.14: Components of the sensor microsystems.
Row Select
Sensor Array
62
3.3 Fabricated Device Types
The systems SysAlp2-V and SysAlp2-VI consist of two sensors alp2-V and
alp2-VI, respectively, and five circuit blocks. These blocks are a low-noise differ-
ential amplifier, low-pass filter, bandgap reference voltage generator, oscillator,
and output stage. The systems are configured as shown in fig. 3.23. The low-noise
+ Sensor - - -
+ +
+ Sensor -
amplifier was designed by Malcovati [8]. It has a MOSFET input stage with a
resistance larger than 100 MΩ, and a gain of 2000. Its size is 920 µm × 590 µm.
To suppress the large flicker noise inherent in FETs it employs the auto-zero tech-
nique in a switched capacitor implementation. A white noise spectrum with
317 nV/√Hz was obtained. To minimize clock feed-through and optimize the
power supply rejection ratio, a fully differential architecture was used. The band-
gap reference generates an analog ground from the power supply of 0 and 3.6 V.
The anti-aliasing filter limits the signal and noise bandwidth of the sensors, which
is necessary for the sampling of the amplifier. The clock for the amplifier and
output stage are provided by the on-chip oscillator with a frequency of 40 kHz.
The output stage converts the differential signal of the primary stage into a sin-
gle-ended output and provides the necessary impedance. Figure 3.24 shows a
63
3 Device Fabrication
Sensors
Filter
Oscillator
Amplifier
The systems SysAlp1-IV and SysAlp1-VII are intended for thermal imaging. They
consist of a sensor array ArrAlp1-IV and ArrAlp1-VII, respectively, with address-
ing and multiplexing circuits and a low-noise amplifier. The amplifier has been
developed by Menolfi [10]. He applied the chopper stabilization technique,
obtaining a low-frequency noise-level of 15 nV/√Hz and an offset below 1 µV
with a transistor-only CMOS implementation. The input impedance is larger than
100 MΩ. To allow operation in a mixed-signal environment the signal path
throughout the amplifier was kept fully differential. The size of the amplifier is
1260 µm by 1110 µm. To take full advantage of the differential architecture of the
amplifier, the signal paths throughout the array and multiplexing circuits were
kept differential.
64
3.4 Post-Processing Restrictions
The system SysAlp1-IV consists of ArrAlp1-IV with 240 alp1-IV pixels in fifteen
rows and sixteen columns. Each individual pixel can be connected to the amplifier
through the multiplexing circuit. The multiplexing is controlled by applying an
eight-bit binary address with four bits each for the row and column address. A
micrograph of the system is shown in fig. 3.25. The size of the chip is 5.5 mm by
6.2 mm.
The system SysAlp1-VII consists of ArrAlp1-VII with 100 alp1-VII pixels in ten
rows and columns. Like in SysAlp1-IV the signals from the pixels are multiplexed
on-chip and directly fed to the amplifier. The chip with the integrated microsystem
is shown in fig. 3.26. Its size is 5.5 mm by 6.2 mm.
65
3 Device Fabrication
for, the fabrication of micromachined structures. Two difficulties arise from this
“misuse” of CMOS technology: broken membranes and stringers in the front
access openings. In the following, we analyse their origin and report possible
methods to avoid them.
Mechanical Stability
In the fabrication of microelectronic circuits the mechanical properties of the
applied materials are a minor issue, but they are crucial for the stability and yield
of micromachined structures. Only the initial stress of the deposited thin films are
routinely monitored in CMOS processes and tuned in view of film adhesion, step
coverage, and electromigration. Generally, a minimal compressive stress is con-
sidered optimal [78]. For beams, bridges, and membranes both the in-plane stress
and the stress gradient perpendicular to the plane are of importance.
Cantilever beams are singly clamped structures. Their in-plane stresses relax by
motion of the unclamped end. Nevertheless, during the release etch the stress may
66
3.4 Post-Processing Restrictions
Fig. 3.27: Beams bending due to a stress gradient in their layer sandwich.
67
3 Device Fabrication
AAAAAAAAAAAAA
with more than 20 alp1-VII pixels. The breaking occurred along the border of the
AAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAA
Silicon remains
Cracks
AAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAA
Etch mask
AAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAA
Dielectric
Membra
AAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAA
ne
AAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAA
Fig. 3.28: Location of the cracks on the etched membranes.
membrane as shown in fig. 3.28. Associated with the crack in the membrane was
a delamination in the dielectric layers. Closer examination showed the following.
In KOH the etching of membranes larger than 1 mm does not proceed uniformly
across the membrane area. The etch rate is higher along the perimeter of the
(100)-etch front and its corners. Figure 3.29 shows the profile of such an etch
front. It is obtained from a 6 mm by 6 mm membrane after 4 h of etching. The
height of this profile is approximately 15 µm. As the etching approaches the end,
the strongly compressive membranes buckled. The buckling introduces a bending
stress along the borders of the membrane. At this stage the remaining silicon in the
middle of the membrane is 10 µm thick, the corners are clear of silicon and little
silicon remains along the sides. Cracks in the silicon occurred in areas where the
bending stress is concentrated due to the thinner silicon. These cracks then prop-
68
3.4 Post-Processing Restrictions
20
Height [µm]
10
0
0
0 1
1 2
2 3
3 4
4 5 y [mm]
x [mm] 5
6
Fig. 3.29: Profile of the etch front from a membrane 6 mm by 6 mm in size.
agated into the dielectric layers as shown in fig. 3.30. They propagated through
the lowest membrane layers, allowing the KOH to attack the intermediate dielec-
trics.
Fig. 3.30: Buckling membrane towards the end of the etching process.
69
3 Device Fabrication
Cavity wall
Membrane
Crack
Si remains
Fig. 3.31: Micrograph of a crack in the silicon and lower dielectric layers.
each side of the crack. Their borderlines are parallel and in equal distance to the
crack.
The problem of breaking dielectrics has been solved by finding an oxynitride layer
which serves both as passivation and stress compensation. Stress in thin film
oxynitride is largely determined by the deposition conditions. This stress can be
controlled over a range from 300 MPa to -300 MPa by appropriate control of pro-
cess parameters [70]. We chose a passivation with a small tensile stress, compen-
sating the compressive stress of the other membrane layers, and achieving flat
membranes.
Two problems may occur when this procedure is used to obtain stacked holes in
dielectric layers. They are schematically shown in fig. 3.32. First, if an opening is
70
3.4 Post-Processing Restrictions
Resist
Insulators
Stringers can be minimized by proper design of the dielectric openings, the result
of which can be seen on fig. 3.14. The layout used to obtain these openings is
shown schematically in fig. 3.33. The contact oxide is not opened by the mask
design. The intermetal oxide opening is shifted with respect to the opening in the
field oxide. With an intentional, long overetch of the passivation the contact oxide
and gate oxide is opened. No stringers occur, and a well defined border of the
etched structure is obtained. A cross-section through the resulting structure is
shown in fig. 3.34.
71
3 Device Fabrication
AA AA AA AA
Contact oxide Intermetal oxide etch Passivation etch
AA AA AA
deposition
AA AA AA AA
AA Contact oxide
AA AA
AA Field oxide
AA AA AA
AA Silicon
AA AA
Fig. 3.33: Staggered openings in the dielectric layers to minimize stringers.
Metal 1
Poly
Field Oxide
Silicon
Fig. 3.34: SEM cross-section through the border of an etch access opening.
72
4.1 Sensitivity Measurements
4 CHARACTERIZATION
This chapter reports the setups used to characterize the sensors and the respective
experimental results. The first part describes sensitivity measurements, the second
the characterization of arrays, and the third spectral absorptance measurements.
Measurement Principle
According to eqn. (2.38) the sensitivity S is defined as
U
S = ---- . (4.1)
P
∆U
S = -------- , (4.2)
∆P
73
4 Characterization
Mirror
Blackbody, T1
Chopper
Blackbody, T2
Aperture Stop
Sensor
blackbody at T1 is reflected from the fixed mirror through the open chopper to the
device under test. With the chopper closed, radiation from the blackbody at T2 is
reflected onto the sensor. The aperture stop is designed in such a way that the
d d
SA AB
Fig. 4.2: Arrangement of sensor, aperture stop, and blackbody with optical axis
unfolded.
74
4.1 Sensitivity Measurements
sensor views only the two blackbodies through the aperture. Figure 4.2 illustrates
this requirement. It can be stated as
rS + rB rS + r A
----------------------- ≤ ---------------- , (4.3)
d SA + d AB d SA
where rA, rB, and rS denote the radii of the aperture, blackbody, and sensor,
respectively. The symbols dSA and dAB denote the distance between sensor and
aperture, and blackbody and aperture, respectively. If condition (4.3) holds, from
the sensor’s point of view the aperture stop is equivalent to a blackbody of alter-
nating temperature. The radiation power density pin incident on the sensor from
the blackbody at T1 is
rA 2 4
p in(d SA, T 1) = εσT 1 -------- , (4.4)
d SA
where ε denotes the emissivity of the blackbody and the last term on the right-hand
side is the spatial angle of the aperture stop with respect to the sensor. The differ-
ence in intensity ∆pin between the open and closed chopper phases results as
4 4rA 2
∆ p in(d SA, T 1, T 2) = εσ ( T 2 – T1 ) -------
- . (4.5)
d SA
Blackbody
In our realization of the blackbodies we followed a standard approach [13,80].
Each blackbody consists of a conical cavity in a massive metal body. The conical
cavity is closed by a flat stop with circular opening as shown in fig. 4.3. This open-
ing acts as the black surface. The inside wall of the cavity is coated with 3M Black
paint. The spectral emissivity of the paint is high and uniform over a wide range
in the infrared [80]. The emissive power of the opening is influenced by the shape
of the cavity as well [80, 81]. The length and radius of the cavity are 93 mm and
50 mm, respectively. The radius of the opening is 25 mm. With this geometry the
theoretical cavity emittance is 0.997.
75
4 Characterization
AA
AAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AA AA AA Housing
AAAAA
AA
AAAAAAAAAAA
AA AA AA
Copper
body
AAAAA
AA
AAAAAAAAAA
A AA
AAAAAAAAA
AA AAAAAA Water
AAAAAAAAAAAA AAAA
channel
AAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAA
AAAA
Hollow
cone
AAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAA
AAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAA AAAA
AAAA
Black
aperture
AAAAAAAAAAAA AAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAA
AA AAAAAA
Temperature
Support sensors
Fig. 4.3: Schematic cross section through the blackbody in its housing.
The cavity was machined from a massive copper cylinder. A spiral channel was
cut into the surface of the cylinder as shown in fig. 4.4. It is used for water circu-
Fig. 4.4: Photographs of the cavity machined from a copper cylinder. The spiral
cut into the cylinder is used for a water channel.
lation. A copper tube, fitting over the cavity cylinder, covers the spiral as shown
in fig. 4.3. The cavity is fixed in its cylindrical steel housing by two supports made
76
4.1 Sensitivity Measurements
out of “Delrine”. The space between the copper body and the housing is filled with
glass wool. Water from a thermalized bath (Julabo HC4) is pumped through the
water channel around the body. The temperature of the bath is regulated using a
temperature sensor directly inserted into the blackbody. After the initial stabiliza-
tion the bath achieves a temperature stability better than ±0.02°C. In addition the
temperature of the copper body is monitored by an independent temperature
sensor with an absolute error smaller than 0.03°C in the range from 0° to 100°C.
Two such blackbodies were made and placed in the measurement setup as shown
in fig. 4.5.
Aperture Stop
Sensor
Mounting Sensor Stop Temperature Monitor
Fig. 4.5: Photograph of the sensitivity measurement setup with two blackbodies.
The optical axis is indicated by a dotted line.
The mirror and the reflecting chopper blade were made from PMMA coated with
chrome and gold. Chrome was used as an adhesion layer between PMMA and
gold. Two openings were machined into the blade in the shape of 90° radial seg-
ments giving it a duty cycle of 50%.
77
4 Characterization
The sensor stop used for the adjustment of the setup is also shown in fig. 4.5. Its
aperture is larger than the sensitive area of the sensor under test. Its distance from
the aperture stop was adjusted to satisfy the condition (4.3). Its validity is checked
by looking through the sensor stop. Keeping the stop fixed in place, the sensor is
then mounted directly behind it.
Characterization
We determined the performance of the measurement setup by characterizing the
temperature stability of the blackbodies, the time used for initial stabilization, and
the achieved emissive power.
The total emissive power e was measured using an electrically calibrated pyro-
electric radiometer (ECPR) as a reference. We compared the measurements with
theoretical values obtained from eqn. (4.5). The ECPR measures the difference in
absorbed power density ∆p between the two chopper phases. This power ∆p is
given by
where αλ denotes the absorptance of the ECPR. This parameter is known for the
range from 0.1 µm to 14 µm. The uncertainty about αλ outside this range leaves a
range of possible power density readings for a given incident spectral power dis-
tribution ∆pλ. The lower bound ∆pmin
14 µm
corresponds to no absorption outside the 0.1 - 14 µm range, and the upper bound
∆pmax corresponds to αλ = 1
78
4.1 Sensitivity Measurements
The radiation intensity was measured with an aperture stop diameter of 9.5 mm
from a distance of 235 mm. The diameter of the ECPR sensor is 8 mm. The tem-
perature of the first blackbody T1 was kept at 24°C and T2 was varied from 24°C
to 74°C. Figure 4.6 shows the comparison of measured ∆p, and the calculated
∆pmax and ∆pmin. The measurements agree with theory and the measured intensity
corresponds to a blackbody emittance of at least 0.98.
J
Power density [kW/m 2]
1.5
∆pmax ∆p
J
1
J
0.5 J ∆pmin
J
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Temperature difference [°]
Fig. 4.6: Measured radiation power density ∆p, and theoretical values ∆pmin
and ∆pmax for T1 = 24°C as a function of temperature difference
∆T = T2 - T1.
Figure 4.7 shows the blackbody temperature after the thermalized bath has been
switched on and set to 30°C and 70°C. The temperature is reached and stable
within 45 min and 140 min respectively. After stabilization, the measured devia-
tions from the mean value are smaller than 0.01°.
79
4 Characterization
80
Temperature [°C]
70°C
60
40
30°C
20
0 60 120 180
Time [min]
Fig. 4.7: Blackbody settling from room temperature to 30°C and 70°C.
Measurement Results
Table 4.1 lists the measured sensor area A, thermopile resistance RT, sensitivity S,
and response time τ of the beam and bridge type sensors. The NEP and D*, calcu-
lated from the measured results according to eqns. (2.43) and (2.44), are also
listed.The measurement error for the sensitivity and response time are estimated
at 5% to 10% due to the small signals(< 1 µV) that are involved. The bridge
alp1-II with the largest area, and the largest thermopile resistance also shows the
largest sensitivity of 30.4 V/W. The best NEP and D* however, is obtained with
the alp1-III bridge sensor. The changes introduced in the design of alp1-III and
Sensor A RT S τ NEP D*
[mm2] [kΩ] [V/W] [ms] [nW] [cm√Hz/W]
ECPD-I 0.090 161 20.9 0.83 2.5 1.21 107
ECPD-II 0.015 9.1 13.1 0.063 0.9 1.31 107
alp1-I 0.034 57 27 0.012 1.14 1.63 107
alp1-II 0.084 181 30.4 0.22 1.80 1.61 107
alp1-III 0.037 7.0 11.6 0.005 0.93 2.08 107
alp1-IV 0.037 7.9 11.1 0.005 1.03 1.88 107
Tab. 4.1: Sensor characteristics of beam and bridge type sensors.
80
4.1 Sensitivity Measurements
alp1-IV with respect to alp1-I decreased the thermopile resistance and sensitivity.
As a consequence of the lower resistance the NEP and D* are improved.
Table 4.2 lists the measured sensor characteristics for the membrane sensors fab-
ricated using the ECPD 10 process. The membrane with the highest resistance,
i.e., ECPD-III shows the highest sensitivity of 20.7 V/W. The better NEP and D*
of 2.5 nW and 2.85 107 cm√Hz/W, respectively, are obtained with ECPD-V
which has a lower sensitivity and resistance.
Sensor A RT S τ NEP D*
[mm2] [kΩ] [V/W] [ms] [nW] [cm√Hz/W]
ECPD-III 0.11 546 20.7 1.8 4.6 0.73 107
ECPD-IV 0.39 100 15.6 6.5 2.7 2.37 107
ECPD-V 0.52 50 11.4 0.72 2.5 2.85 107
Tab. 4.2: Characteristics of membrane sensors from the ECPD 10 process.
Sensor A RT S τ NEP D*
[mm2] [kΩ] [V/W] [ms] [nW] [cm√Hz/W]
alp2-I 0.96 319 21.1 15.4 3.5 2.84 107
alp2-II 0.50 262 26.4 4.8 2.5 2.83 107
alp2-III 0.96 274 29.8 25.4 2.3 4.33 107
alp2-IV 0.50 276 27.5 9.8 2.5 2.88 107
alp2-V 0.84 2700 40.9 19.5 5.2 1.77 107
alp2-VI 1.05 2260 45.8 13.1 4.2 2.43 107
Tab. 4.3: Characteristics of membrane sensors from the alp2lv process.
The sensor membranes listed in table 4.3 are all fabricated in the alp2lv process.
The four sensors with n+-poly/p+-poly thermopiles, alp2-III to alp2-VI, show the
higher sensitivity than alp2-I and alp2-II. The largest membrane, alp2-VI with a
resistance of 2.2 MΩ shows the highest sensitivity of 45.8 V/W. Among the sen-
sors from the alp2lv process the largest D* of 4.33 107 cm√Hz/W is obtained with
the alp2-III sensor. An even higher D* of 6.69 107 cm√Hz/W is obtained with
81
4 Characterization
Sensor A RT S τ NEP D*
[mm2] [kΩ] [V/W] [ms] [nW] [cm√Hz/W]
alp1-V 1.050 10.7 8.7 14.6 13.3 6.69 107
alp1-VI 0.047 91.2 12.0 0.192 10.2 0.67 107
alp1-VII a 0.040 4.1 0.006 5.9 1.07 107
alp1-VII b 0.058 4.1 0.007 5.9 1.28 107
3.6
alp1-VII c 0.068 4.2 0.010 5.8 1.42 107
alp1-VII d 0.063 4.3 0.009 5.0 1.56 107
Tab. 4.4: Characteristics of membrane sensors from the alp1mv process.
alp1-V. The measured sensor characteristics of alp1-V are listed in table 4.4 with
the those from the other sensors fabricated using the alp1mv process. As expected
the four versions of alp1-VII show very similar performance. The version c with
the largest area shows the highest D*. The highest sensitivity is observed for ver-
sion d.
82
4.2 Array Characterization
4
Resistance [kΩ]
Colu s
mns Row
age resistance in ArrAlp1-VII is 3.6 kΩ with a root mean square (rms) deviation
of 1.1%. The sensitivities of these pixels are shown in fig. 4.9. They have a rms
deviation of 5.5% from the average of 4.3 V/W. The pixel yield after post-pro-
cessing and dicing was 98%. The thermopile resistance of the front-etched pixels
in ArrAlp1-IV is shown in fig. 4.10. Their average resistance is 7.9 kΩ with a rms
deviation of 7.2%. The missing values in the figure correspond to pixels that could
not be characterized. The address lines in this array are integrated in the pixels
which are s-shaped bridges (cf. fig. 3.14). If a pixels is damaged the address line
is broken. Therefore a number of other pixels can not be addressed. Hence, the
83
4 Characterization
6
5
Sensitivty [V/W]
4
3
2
1
0
Colu s
mns Row
15
Resistance [kΩ]
10
Colu s
mns Row
84
4.3 Spectral Absorptance Measurements
Cross-Talk
The cross-talk in the arrays was measured by heating a pixel with the integrated
resistor and comparing the response of the heated pixel with that of its neighbors.
The cross-talk in ArrECPD-I, ArrECPD-II, and ArrECPD-III is 5.5%, 4.8%, and
4.7%, respectively. Broad lines of metal 1 and metal 2 are used as thermal sepa-
ration between the pixels of these arrays: No metal lines in ArrECPD-I; one line,
10 µm wide, of stacked metal 1 and 2 in ArrECPD-II.; two lines, 4 µm wide and
2 µm apart, in ArrECPD-III. The large cross-talk and the small difference
between the different versions shows that the thermal separation with stacked
metal 1 and metal 2 is inefficient. In contrast to this, the thermal separation by
gold lines is very effective. A cross-talk of 1% was measured in the version d of
ArrAlp1-VII with one gold line. In the versions a, b, and c with the pairs of thermal
separation lines, the cross-talk was below 0.2%.
In this section the measurement setup, radiation power measurement, test struc-
tures, and evaluation of the acquired data are explained.The section is concluded
with the experimental results, i.e., the relative spectral absorptance of the absorber
sandwiches.
85
4 Characterization
Measurement Setup
The measurement setup consists of a monochromator (Jobin-Yvon HR250), radi-
ation source, radiation chopper, imaging optics, and sample holder as shown in
fig. 4.11. The source, the so-called globar, is a silicon carbide rod heated resis-
AAAAAAAAAAAA
Computer Oscilloscope Amplifier
λ
sin θ' n – sin θ = n --- , (4.9)
d
where θ denotes the angle of incidence on the grating, θ'n the angle of reflection
of order n, and d is the period of the grating. Two gratings are available with
86
4.3 Spectral Absorptance Measurements
Parabolic Mirrors
Mirrors
θ θ’
150 lines/mm and 60 lines/mm, respectively. The second parabolic mirror focuses
the parallel rays forming an image of the entrance slit, with images formed by dif-
ferent wavelength radiation and reflection order separated spatially. Wavelengths
can be chosen by turning the reflection grating, thus varying θ and θ'. For a fixed
orientation of the grating the images of wavelengths λn satisfying
λ
λ n = ----1- . (4.10)
n
are projected onto the exit slit. A long-wavelength-pass filter at the monochroma-
tor exit is used to block all λn with n > 1. Several filters can be chosen for different
wavelength ranges. These are
87
4 Characterization
The lens is used to image the exit slit onto the sample in its test chamber. The
chamber is evacuated to increase the sensitivity of the sample and to eliminate
influence from moving air and sound. The signal of the sample was amplified by
a low noise amplifier and registered by a digital oscilloscope LeCroy 9420. The
signal data is then transferred to a computer for evaluation.
P R(λ) = ∫A R
e λ( x) d A , (4.11)
where x denotes the position in the aperture plane. Assuming no dispersion, the
spectral dependence in eλ(x) can be separated from the spatial variations f(x)
e λ( x) = e λ f ( x) , (4.12)
P R(λ) = e λ ∫A R
f ( x) d A . (4.13)
Thus, the power PS incident on the sample under test with area AS is
P S(λ) = e λ ∫A S
f ( x) d A = CP R(λ) , (4.14)
88
4.3 Spectral Absorptance Measurements
70
60
50
Power [µW]
40
30
20
10
0
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Wavelength [µm]
Fig. 4.13: Radiation power measured with the ECPR as a function of wavelength.
The segments of the spectrum correspond to different filters and grat-
ings applied in the monochromator.
89
4 Characterization
Test Structures
Specialized test structures were devised to measure the spectral relative absorp-
tance αλ of the layer sandwiches applicable for IR sensors. These test structures
and their absorbing sandwiches are described in section 3.3. A list of the sand-
wiches is given in table 3.6.
In view of the small thickness (3 - 5 µm) of the cantilevers the temperature varia-
tions perpendicular to the beam plane are neglected. Heat loss by conduction
through the surrounding gas can also be neglected under the experimental vacuum
conditions. Because of the highly symmetrical layout of the test structures the
temperature is a function of the distance from the support of the beam.
α λ(λ) ⋅ P S(λ)
∆T (λ) = ------------------------------
- + ∆T 0(λ) , (4.15)
K
∑n κn an
1
K = ---- (4.16)
lb
over the component layers (indexed with n), where κnand an denote the respective
thermal conductivities and cross-sectional areas and lb denotes the length of the
beam. The first term on the right hand side of eqn. (4.15) results from absorption
in the absorber area and ∆T0(λ) is the contribution from the radiation power
90
4.3 Spectral Absorptance Measurements
absorbed in the thermopile area. The latter term can be determined with the refer-
ence structure (αλ = 0), for which eqn. (4.15) reduces to
Thus the absorptance of the absorber area can be calculated from the measured
temperature difference as
∆T (λ) – ∆T 0(λ)
α λ(λ) = -------------------------------------
-. (4.18)
P S(λ)K
The temperature differences ∆T(λ) and ∆T0(λ) are obtained from the correspond-
ing thermopile signals ∆U(λ) and ∆U0(λ). Combining eqns. (2.31), (4.14) and
(4.18) allows αλ to be obtained from the measured thermopile signals and the
ECPR measurement via the proportionality
∆U (λ) – ∆U 0(λ)
α λ(λ) ∼ ---------------------------------------- . (4.19)
P R(λ)
Data Evaluation
To measure the response ∆U(λ) of the test structures a specialized signal retrieval
method was required. Since the radiation intensity on the samples is below
1 W/m2 and their area is 22×10-9 m2, only a few nanowatts are absorbed. With a
sensitivity in the range of 10 V/W the resulting signals are in the nanovolt range.
To distinguish the signals from the noise we used a phase sensitive detector (PSD)
technique [82]. It employs radiation chopping in combination with synchronous
signal averaging.
The oscilloscope was configured to repeatedly record the signal U(t) during a
cycle of the chopper. From the acquisitions over N chopper periods of length tc the
average U of the form
∑ U(t + nt c)
1
U (t) = ---- (4.20)
N
n=0
91
4 Characterization
was calculated. Because the noise, in contrast to the signal, is not correlated with
the chopping, its amplitude is reduced by the factor N in the averaging process.
Thus, by taking the average over thousand chopper cycles the signal-to-noise ratio
can be improved by more than a factor of 30. The averaged waveform U was then
analyzed to find the signal amplitude ∆U.
–t ⁄ τ
U (t) = U (0) + ∆U ( 1 – e ). (4.21)
Two cases may be distinguished. In the first case, the chopping is slow compared
with the sensor response time, i.e.
τ « tc . (4.22)
In this case, at the end of each open or closed chopper phase the signal approxi-
mates its steady-state value with sufficient accuracy. Thus finding the steady-state
amplitude from U(t) is straightforward. The amplitude ∆U is calculated as
∆U = U (t c ⁄ 2) – U (t c) , (4.23)
In the second case, i.e. if condition (4.22) is not satisfied, the sensor response does
not reach the steady-state value, in neither the open nor the closed phases of the
chopper. Thus ∆U is obtained from the dynamic response U(t). It is described by
–t ⁄ τ
1–e
U (t) = ∆U -----------------------
– t c ⁄ 2τ
- 0 < t < tc ⁄ 2 , (4.24)
1+e
92
4.3 Spectral Absorptance Measurements
–( t – t h ) ⁄ τ
e
U (t) = ∆U -----------------------
– t c ⁄ 2τ
- tc ⁄ 2 < t < tc (4.25)
1+e
for the closed chopper. The amplitude ∆U is thus obtained by fitting this model of
the dynamic behavior to the experimental data. Figure 4.14 shows an example of
such a measured dynamic response and the model fit.
XX X
XX
XX
XX
X
XX
XXXXXXX
XX
XXXXXX X X XXX
XXX X
XX
XX XXXXX
X
XX
XX XXX
Response
XX X XXXX
XXX X
XX
XXXX XX XX
XXXXXXX X
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
X XXX
Time
Fig. 4.14: Example of measured sensor response (dots) and fitted model (line).
Measurement Results
The measurements of the spectral absorptance αλ performed in this work provide
relative values. They involve the response of different sensors under identical
radiation conditions, i.e., the device under test, the ECPR, and the reference struc-
ture. For successful measurements two conditions have to be met: First, the differ-
ent sensors have to be placed at the same position with respect to the image of the
exit slit, and second, the radiation intensity has to be stable with time. To meet the
first requirement we kept the distance from the exit slit to the lens and sample
fixed and moved the lens with a micropositioning stage in a plane perpendicular
to the optical axis, thus moving the image of the exit slit in the sample-plane.
Scanning the image intensity distribution with the sensor, the lens was positioned
93
4 Characterization
to give the maximum response, corresponding to the location of the sample in the
center of the image. With this method sample readings were reproducible within
2%. The stability of the radiation intensity was measured over a period of 12 h
with the ECPR. A maximum deviation of 0.3% was found.
Tab. 4.6: Test structures with their absorbing layers (see also table 3.6) and
average absorptance.
layers of the stack exposed to radiation. The absorbing layers of the test structures
are listed in table 4.6. Since aluminum thicker than 100 nm is opaque to IR radia-
tion, layers below metal 1 and metal 2 are shielded from the radiation and are
assumed not to contribute to the absorptance. This assumption is confirmed by the
spectra shown in fig. 4.15. The figure shows the measured relative spectral
94
4.3 Spectral Absorptance Measurements
absorptance of test3 and test10. Both consist of all dielectrics and metal 2, in addi-
tion the absorber sandwich of test10 includes metal 1. Nevertheless, the average
deviation between both spectra is only 2%.
100%
Relative Absorptance test3
75%
test10
50%
25%
0%
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Wavelength [µm]
Fig. 4.15: Relative absorptance of test3 and test10 absorbers.
In test1 and test2 single layers act as absorbers. Their relative absorptance is
shown in fig. 4.16. The topmost layer of test2 is metal 2. Pure aluminum is a good
IR reflector [73] and a weak absorptance can be expected from metal 2. In agree-
ment with this it shows an absorptance below 24% over the entire spectrum. To
characterize the absorption of thermal radiation we introduce the weighted aver-
age absorptance α̃
14.6µm
α̃
∫ 2µm
α λ [ e λ(296K) – e λ(293K) ] dλ
= --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- , (4.26)
14.6µm
∫2µm [ e λ(296K) – e λ(293K) ] dλ
95
4 Characterization
100%
test3:
Relative Absorptance
75%
passivation,
metal 2
50%
test1:
25% passivation
test2: metal 2
0%
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Wavelength [µm]
Fig. 4.16: Relative absorptance of the passivation, metal 2, and passivation with
metal 2.
The weighted average absorptance α̃ of test2 is 12%. The absorber of test1 con-
sists of the oxynitride passivation. It shows 30% to 50% relative absorption in the
band from 8 µm to 13 µm. An absorption peak of 10% is observed at 2.95 µm. No
significant absorption was measured from 2 µm to 2.85 µm and 3.15 µm to 7 µm.
The average weighted absorptance α̃ is 26%. The absorber of test3 consists of the
passivation and metal 2. Its relative absorptance spectrum is also shown in
fig. 4.16. An absorptance of 50% to 100% is observed in the band from 8 µm to
14.5 µm. A 37% absorptance peak was measured at 2.95 µm. The average absorp-
tance α̃ is 55%. The increased absorption in test3 with respect to test1 is explained
by the reflecting properties of metal 2. Radiation transmitted by the passivation is
reflected back by the metal 2 layer and passes again through the passivation.
A similar effect is observed with the spectra in fig. 4.17. The figure shows the rel-
ative absorptance of test4 composed of passivation and intermetal oxide and test5
consisting of the same composition with a metal 1 reflector. For comparison the
relative absorptance of the passivation is also shown. The combination of the
intermetal and passivation layer shows a similar spectrum to the passivation
96
4.3 Spectral Absorptance Measurements
100%
test5:
passivation,
intermetal,
Relative Absorptance
75%
metal 1
test4:
50% passivation,
intermetal
test1:
25%
passivation
0%
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Wavelength [µm]
100%
test7: test4:
all dielectrics passivation,
Relative Absorptance
75%
intermetal
50% test6:
passivation,
intermetal,
25% contact oxide test1:
passivation
0%
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Wavelength [µm]
97
4 Characterization
100%
test9:
test8: all dielectrics,
passivation, poly
intermetal,
Relative Absorptance
75%
poly,
field oxide
50%
test5:
passivation,
25% intermetal,
metal 1
0%
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Wavelength [µm]
Figure 4.18 shows the relative absorptance of test1, test4, test6 and test7. The
absorber sandwiches of these four test structures contain only dielectric layers.
The absorber stack of test6 consists of the passivation, intermetal oxide, and con-
tact oxide. Its spectrum differs only slightly from the spectrum of the passivation
98
4.3 Spectral Absorptance Measurements
with intermetal oxide. In the band from 6.8 µm to 7.8 µm its absorptance is higher,
namely more than 20%. The average weighted absorptance is 32%. The absorber
layer stack of test7 contains the field oxide in addition to the layers of test6. The
effect of the additional layer is a slight increase of the absorption in the band from
7 µm to 9 µm. The maximum increase is 10%. The average absorptance is 35%.
Finally, fig. 4.19 shows the relative absorptance of the absorber layer stacks which
contain poly. These are the absorber sandwiches of test8 and test9. For compari-
son the sandwich composed of passivation, intermetal oxide, and metal 1 is also
shown. All dielectric layers and poly are contained in the absorber sandwich of
test9. It shows an absorption of at least 24% over the entire spectrum and an aver-
age absorptance of 63%. The strongest absorptance of 99% is observed for a
wavelength of 8.25 µm. Similarly the spectral absorptance of test8 is higher than
23% for a range from 2.6 µm to 14.6 µm. It consists of the same layers as test9
with the exception of the contact oxide. Its peak absorptance of 85% occurs at a
wavelength of 8.3 µm. The average weighted absorptance over the spectrum is
57%. The largest difference between the spectrum of test8 and test9 is 21%, the
average difference is 7%.
99
5 Modeling
5 MODELING
All models allow to calculate the sensor resistance R and the sensitivity S. The
normalized detectivity D* and noise equivalent power NEP of the sensor can be
calculated from these. If, in addition, the optics parameters are known, also the
NETD can be obtained. To calculate the performance of the system from the
sensor characteristics, a simple analytical model of the signal conditioning elec-
tronics is used. Figure 5.1 shows the equivalent electric circuit model used for a
presence detector system with a differential low-noise amplifier and two sensors.
100
U R
Ra
g
Va
U R
Thermopile Amplifier
The thermopiles are described as ideal voltage sources U with a series resistance
R. The amplifier is characterized by its input impedance RA, gain g, and noise volt-
age density VA. The sensitivity Ssys and noise voltage density Vsys of the system,
are then calculated as
RA
S sys = Sg -------------------- (5.1)
R A + 2R
and
2
V sys = g ∆ f V A + 8kTR ∆ f . (5.2)
Each thermopile contributes the Johnson noise density of 4kTR. Substituting this
result into eqn. (2.43) yields
V sys R A + 2R 2
- = -------------------- ⋅ ∆ f V A + 8kTR ∆ f .
NEP sys = --------- (5.3)
S sys RAS
101
5 Modeling
A ⋅ ∆f
∗ = ------------------
D sys - (5.4)
NEP sys
2
n f NEP sys 1
NETD sys = -------- ⋅ ------------------ ---------3- (5.5)
E A σT
Thermoelectric sensors are two-stage transducers. The first stage consists of the
thermally isolated absorber structure that converts radiation into a temperature
increase. Its efficiency is given by α/K, where, α and K denote the absorptance
and thermal conductance of the sensor, respectively. The thermal conductance is
defined as the ratio of the average hot contact temperature increase and the total
absorbed power. The second stage is the thermopile which converts the tempera-
ture increase into an electrical signal. Its efficiency is given by γN, where γ denotes
the Seebeck coefficient. The sensitivity S of the complete sensor is the product of
these two efficiencies
U α
S = ---- = ---- ⋅ γN . (5.6)
P K
This expression suggests that increasing α, 1/K, γ, and N would improve the
sensor performance. However, this is misleading. Often, increasing one parameter
may lead to reduce another. For example, if a special IR absorbing layer is depos-
ited onto the membrane to increase α, at the same time 1/K is decreased. Similarly
an increase in the number of thermopiles N improves the thermopile efficiency,
but simultaneously increases its thermal conductance. Thus, for optimizations
these two stages can rarely be considered separately because the thermopile is
integrated in the supporting structure and thus, the performance of both stages are
intertwined.
102
5.1 Analytical Model
AAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAA
AA
rounding dielectrics must be considered. As discussed in section 4.3 the heat
AAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAA
AA Package
AAAAAAAAAAAA
AA AA
AA AA
AA A AA
AA AA
AAAAAAAAAAAA
AA Substrate
103
5 Modeling
area of the beam and that the support of the beams is at ambient temperature T0.
Then eqn. (2.27) reduces to
2
t b κ∇ x T (x) = – αp , (5.7)
where tb, κ, and p denote the thickness of the beam, its average thermal conduc-
tivity, and the incident radiation intensity, respectively. The solution of eqn. (5.7)
shows that the temperature distribution is parabolic along the beam and the ther-
mal conductance K of the beam is given by
αP 2aκαP 2aκ
K = ---------------- = ------------------
- = ---------- , (5.8)
∆T (l T ) αpl T w T
2 lT
where a denotes the cross-sectional area of the beam, and P = plTwT the total inci-
dent radiation power. In view of the cross-section of the beam shown in fig. 5.3
the product aκ can also be written as
aκ = N ( κ d a d + κ 1 w 1 t 1 + κ 2 w 2 t 2 ) , (5.9)
where κ1, κ2, t1, and t2 denote the thermal conductivities and thicknesses of the
two thermopile materials, respectively, and ad and κd the cross-sectional area of
the dielectrics in a thermocouple and their average thermal conductivity. Taking
AAAAA
AAAA
AAAA
AAAAA
AAAA
AAAAA
AA AA AAAAAAA
AAAA
AA A w2
A
AAAA
AAAAA
AAAAA
AAAA ad
wd
w1
104
5.1 Analytical Model
into account that both the thickness and thermal conductivity of the layers are con-
stant for a given CMOS process we define the thermal sheet conductivity κ̃ = κt
for both thermocouple materials and κ̃ d = κ d a d ⁄ w d for the dielectrics with
w d = w 1 + w 2 + 2w 0 . (5.10)
Then K is given by
N
K = 2 ---- ( κ̃ d w d + κ̃ 1 w 1 + κ̃ 2 w 2 ) . (5.11)
lT
αγ l T
S = ----------------------
-, (5.12)
2 ∑i κ̃ i w i
where i runs over 1, 2, and d. Equation (5.12) implies that for maximum sensitivity
all thermocouple dimensions w0, w1, and w2 should be minimal. However, this
also causes a maximum resistance R. It is given by
ρ̃
R = N lT ∑ -----j ,
j wj
(5.13)
where j runs over 1 and 2, and ρ̃ 1 and ρ̃ 2 denote the sheet resistances of the two
thermocouple materials. With eqns. (5.12) and (5.13) the NEP and D* are given
by
ρ̃ j
4 ∑
κ̃ i w i ∆ f kTN j ----- ∑ w
NEP = ----------------------- ⋅ -----------------------------------j
i
(5.14)
αγ lT
105
5 Modeling
and
∆ f wT lT αγ l T ∑ wi
D∗ = ----------------------- = ----------------------- ⋅ ----------------------- .
i
(5.15)
NEP 4 ∑ i
κ̃ i w i
kT ∑
ρ̃
-----j
j wj
From eqn. (5.15) it is obvious that for maximum D* the absorptance, Seebeck
coefficient, and length of the beam should be maximal. If the contribution of the
dielectrics is neglected D* is a function of the ratio q = w1/w2, viz.
αγ l T 1+q
D∗(q) = ----------------------------- ⋅ ------------------------------ . (5.16)
4 ( qκ̃ 1 + κ̃ 2 ) ρ̃
kT ----1- + ρ̃ 2
q
For a given set of material parameters the optimal x is easily found. For the alp1mv
process, for instance, the optimal ratio wpoly/wmetal is 108.4.
This model has been expanded to approximate the sensor operation in air. The
approach followed by Elbel et al. [37], Völklein et al. [38], and Dillner [40] is to
expand eqn. (5.8) to
2
t b κ∇ x T (x) = ( T (x) – T 0 )G cond – αp , (5.17)
where Gcond describes the heat flow from the beam to the substrate and the pack-
age at T0. Approximating this flow by the heat conduction between parallel plates,
Gcond is
κ air κ air
- + --------- ,
G cond = -------- (5.18)
ds dp
106
5.2 Variational Model
where ds and dp denote the distance between the beam and the substrate and pack-
age, respectively. The resulting temperature distribution is of the form
sinh Cx
T (x) = T 0 + -------------------- , (5.19)
sinh Cl T
The membrane type sensors require more complex models. Due to symmetry the
heat transfer problem is essentially two-dimensional. Only for quadratic and cir-
cular symmetric membranes a reduction to one dimension is possible. Corre-
sponding analytical models and solutions have been reported by Völklein
et al. [38] and Dillner [40].
δC I = 0 , (5.20)
Due to symmetry, only a quarter of the membrane, as shown in fig. 5.4, is consid-
ered. The quarter membrane area is divided into two parts, namely the thermopile
107
5 Modeling
AAAAAA
AAAAAA Membrane
AAAAAA
AAAAAA
AAAAAA
AAAAAA
Thermopiles
area and the neighboring region between thermopiles and membrane edge. The
test functions TC(x,y) with the parameters C = (C0,C1,C2) are
sinh C 1 x
T C(x) = T 0 + C 0 ---------------------- (5.22)
sinh C 1 l T
sinh C 1 x sinh C 2 y
T C(x, y) = T 0 + C 0 ---------------------- ⋅ ------------------------ , (5.23)
sinh C 1 l T sinh C 2 w b
108
5.3 Finite Element Model
∇ ⋅ ( κ ∇T ) = I A + I el , (5.24)
where κ is the thermal conductivity tensor, IA denotes the heat generation due to
the absorption of IR radiation, and Iel denotes the electrical power density dissi-
pated for calibration purposes in the integrated heater. The radiation is assumed to
be absorbed homogeneously over the entire membrane area and thickness d. Thus
–1
I A = αpd .
Equation (5.24) was solved in the domain defined by the sensor chip and the sur-
rounding air in the encapsulation. The surfaces of the substrate and filter were
taken as heat sink at T0 (cf. eqn. (2.20)). Figure 5.4 shows the simulation domain.
In view of the symmetry of the device only a quarter of the volume was simulated.
Package lid
Thermopile
Silicon Chip
Membrane
Substrate
Fig. 5.5: Simulation domain with discretization mesh. For clarity the mesh rep-
resenting air is not shown.
109
5 Modeling
110
5.3 Finite Element Model
Sensor S [V/W]
measured simulated α
alp2-I 21.1 30.1 0.70
alp2-II 26.4 35.7 0.74
alp2-III 29.8 52.3 0.57
alp2-IV 27.5 36.7 0.75
alp2-V 40.9 103.1 0.40
alp2-VI 45.8 90.1 0.51
ECPD-III 20.7 27.3 0.76
ECPD-IV 15.6 22.7 0.69
ECPD-V 11.4 18.0 0.63
Tab. 5.2: Measured and simulated sensor responsivities and deduced
absorptances.
0.76. To check the validity of the deduced absorptances α we compare them with
the measured relative absorptance α̃ reported in section 4.3. The sensor mem-
branes consist, in different amounts, of three absorbing layer sandwiches; all
dielectrics and poly or passivation, intermetal, metal 1 in thermopile area and all
dielectrics on the rest of the membrane. The average relative absorptance of these
three sandwiches with ECPD 10 materials in the range from 2 µm to 14.6 µm are
111
5 Modeling
63%, 55%, and 35%, respectively. Taking into account the spectral range used for
the measurements and the estimated accuracies, the absorptances deduced from
the simulation and the spectral measurement are in agreement.
The FEM model allows the calculation of the three-dimensional temperature dis-
tribution in the sensor membrane and surrounding air. To implement such a model
an FEM tool such as SOLIDIS™ or ANSYS™ is required. The computation time
on a Sun Sparc 5 workstation is approximately a minute. The validation demon-
strates that the most reliable thermal conductance values are obtained with this
model. Based on these results we chose to use the FEM for the optimization of the
system performance.
112
5.5 Device Optimization
Figure 5.6 shows the modeled sensitivity of the alp2-VI sensor with
p+-poly/n+-poly thermocouples. In the simulations we varied the width of the two
thermocouple legs wn and wp. The margin of the membrane in this simulation was
100 µm while the thermocouple spacing w0 was chosen at the technological min-
imum of 3 µm. As expected from eqn. (5.12) the largest sensitivity is obtained for
minimal thermocouple widths. The thermopile resistance as a function of the ther-
200
Sensitivity [V/W]
150
100
50
2 20
6 16
10 12
wp [µm] 14 8 w [µm]
18 4 n
mocouple dimensions is shown in fig. 5.7. The sensor with the minimal thermo-
couple widths has the largest resistance.
The calculated NEP of the sensor alone is shown in fig. 5.8. The smallest NEP of
6.5 nW is obtained for wp = 18 µm and wn = 6 µm. The corresponding modeled
NEPsys is shown in fig. 5.9. The optimum value of 11.5 nW for the presence detec-
tor system is found for wp = 12 µm and wn = 4 µm. These results were used for the
layout of the alp2-VI sensor integrated in the SysAlp2-VI system. If we had opti-
mized the stand-alone sensor for NEP, the resulting NEPsys of SysAlp2-VI would
113
5 Modeling
25
Resistance [MΩ]
20
15
10
2 20
6 16
10 12
wp [µm] 14 8 w [µm]
18 4 n
have been 7% higher, namely 12.3 nW. This example demonstrates that optimiza-
tions have to take into account the entire system.
The layout of alp1-V was optimized in the same manner as alp2-VI for a system
with a chopper amplifier. Similarly the pixels of SysAlp1-VII were optimized with
respect to the NETD of the system.
114
5.5 Device Optimization
30
25
NEP [nW]
20
15
10
5
0
2 20
6 16
10 12
wp [µm] 14 8 w [µm]
18 4 n
115
5 Modeling
30
25
NEPSys [nW]
20
15
10
5
0
2 20
6 16
10 12
wp [µm] 14 8 w [µm]
18 4 n
116
6.1 Presence Detector
6 DEMONSTRATORS
117
6 Demonstrators
Fig. 6.1: Photograph of the presence detector system with PCB (front and back).
is present, its radiation is projected on one sensor only. Presumably the body tem-
perature differs from the background temperature and thus, the sensor signals do
not cancel. The output of the microsystem is either positive or negative, depending
on the location of the person in either sector. This output is processed by the elec-
tronics on the PCB. If the absolute value of the output exceeds a certain threshold,
either positive or negative, the detector indicates the presence of the person by
switching on the LED. Figure 6.2 shows the analog signal of the microsystem,
amplified and filtered by the processing electronics, together with the digital
output of the demonstrator when a person walks by at a distance of approximately
2 m. The positive and negative peaks occur when the person crosses the two sec-
tors.
Microsystem Packaging
The microsystem chip is packaged in a standard TO-5 header with a custom cap
shown in fig. 6.3. An IR filter window is integrated in the cap covered by a chrome
layer structured to form a slit diaphragm. The slit and the two sensors on
SysAlp2-VI are arranged as shown in fig. 6.4. This schematic cross-section shows
that each of the two sensors receives radiation from a separate space sector. The
sectors on both sides extend approximately from 2° to 40° with respect to the sym-
metry plane.
118
6.1 Presence Detector
Processed
3 microsystem signal
Response [V]
2 Threshold levels
Digital output
0
0 1 2 3
Time [s]
Fig. 6.2: Processed microsystem signal and resulting digital output when a
person walks by at a distance of 2 m.
Slit diaphragm
IR filter
Package cap
Fig. 6.3: View of the package cap with IR filter window and slit diaphragm.
Signal Processing
The microsystem has two outputs. The difference of the two sensor signals is
amplified by the differential amplifier and output stage. This provides the first
output signal. The voltage of the on-chip bandgap reference of approximately
1.3 V is provided as the analog ground. The amplified sensor voltage refers to this
reference level. These signals are processed and displayed by the circuit placed on
the PCB. The block diagram of the circuit is shown in fig. 6.5. The offset of the
119
6 Demonstrators
Package
IR filter
Sensors
A AA AAA AAA
AA AAA AA AAAAAAA
AA
+
AAA AAAAAA
AA
-
AAA AAA
AAA
AAA
AAA
AAA
Analog ground Offset compensation Reference Optocoupler Connector
microsystem signal with respect to the analog ground is canceled with the offset
compensation block. This block generates an adjustable reference level shifted
with respect to the analog ground. It consists of an amplifier with an adjustable
gain of approximately 1.1. The reference level is adjusted to the output signal level
corresponding to equal radiation power on both sensors. A differential amplifier
is used to amplify the difference between microsystem output and the reference
level. Its output voltage is filtered by a 10 Hz low-pass filter. This analog signal is
analysed with a window comparator. It checks whether the signal is within a given
range around the reference level. The digital output of the comparator is filtered
120
6.2 Thermal Imager
by a Schmitt trigger. Its output remains high for 100 ms after the comparator
detected an out-of-window condition. The signal from the Schmitt trigger is dis-
played by a LED and provided as a digital output on a connector. An optocoupler
is used to decouple connector and system potentials.
The processing electronics is realized with two ICs, two potentiometers, and var-
ious resistors and capacitors on the double-sided printed circuit board shown in
Microsystem
Potentiometer
for offset Window
compensation comparator IC
IC with four
differential On/Off switch
amplifiers
LED Optocoupler
fig. 6.6. The IC AD T9631 contains four differential amplifiers. One is used for
signal amplification, one for offset compensation, and two for the Schmitt trigger.
The IC LT1042 is the window comparator. One high resolution potentiometer is
used for offset compensation, the other to adjust the comparator window width.
121
6 Demonstrators
be plugged into the imager. As shown in fig. 6.7 the computer is used to control
+
Multimeter
-
Control/
Readout
Addressing Computer
& Display
the operation of the demonstrator and to acquire and display the image data. The
housing contains an IR Fresnel lens casting an image of the thermal scene onto the
sensor array. The lens is made from polyethylene with a diameter of 12.7 mm,
10 lines/mm, a focal length of 9.4 mm, and nf of 0.74. With the pitch of 245 µm
and 330 µm the angular resolution is 1.5° for of ArrAlp1-IV and 2° for
ArrAlp1-VII. The polyethylene sheet transmits 53% of the IR radiation from a
person at 24°C.
The signals from the individual pixels are multiplexed and amplified by the
on-chip circuit. The multiplexer is controlled by the address supplied by the com-
puter. The differential output signal of the microsystem is converted to digital
form by a multimeter and transmitted to the computer. To acquire a complete
image, all pixel addresses are sequentially supplied to the multiplexer, and the
respective signals are synchronously converted with the multimeter. The timing
122
6.2 Thermal Imager
of the addressing and A/D conversion is shown in fig. 6.8. To achieve synchroni-
zation between the addressing and the A/D conversion, the computer also pro-
vides a trigger whenever a new address is supplied. The A/D conversion is
delayed by 1 ms with respect to the trigger signal. This delay is required to let the
amplifier output signal settle to the new value. The multimeter measures the
output value by integrating the signal during 20 ms. The integration suppresses
Trigger
Output Signal
Time
Fig. 6.8: Timing of the addressing and A/D conversion by the multimeter.
noise and signal components with frequencies above 50 Hz. With this timing
scheme the acquisition of a pixel signal lasts for 21 ms. Thus, 47.6 pixels per
second can be read. For SysAlp1-VII and SysAlp1-IV with hundred and 240 pixels,
respectively, the acquisition of a complete image frame lasts 2.1 s and 5.4 s,
respectively. This corresponds to a frame rate of 0.49 Hz and 0.18 Hz. The frame
rate can be increased by reducing the delay and integration time. However, a
shorter delay increases the electrical cross-talk between the pixels. Furthermore,
a decreased integration time deteriorates the NETD through larger signal band-
width and thus, increased noise. Cross-talk occurs because the amplifier has not
yet completely settled to the new pixel signal when the integration starts. Thus the
signal from the previous pixel affects the next reading.
123
6 Demonstrators
Figure 6.9 shows an image acquired with the microsystem SysAlp1-IV. A delay of
1 ms and an integration time of 20 ms was used, corresponding to a signal band-
width of 50 Hz and a frame rate of 0.49 Hz. The picture shows a person, head and
chest with arms up at a distance of approximately 2.5 m. Black corresponds to
ambient temperature, while white indicates 16°C above ambient.
16°
12°
∆T
8°
4°
0°
The NETD achieved with this configuration is 715 mK. This was determined by
the following measurements. The thermal imager was placed in the sensitivity
measurement setup described in section 4.1, viewing the two blackbodies. The
signal from the pixel viewing the centers of the blackbodies was then recorded.
Figure 6.10 shows the signal of an alp1-IV pixel with a signal bandwidth of 10 Hz
and blackbody temperatures of 23°C and 28°C. The temperature sensitivity of the
imager with the SysAlp1-IV and SysAlp1-VII is 1.5 mV/K and 1 mV/K, respec-
tively. The standard deviation of the signal with both blackbodies at equal temper-
atures is 380 µV and 320 µV, respectively. This corresponds to NETDs of
124
6.2 Thermal Imager
12
10 ∆T = 5 K
8
Signal [mV]
6
4
∆T = 0 K
2
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Time [s]
Fig. 6.10: Signals of a single pixel from SysAlp1-IV alternately viewing blackbod-
ies with a temperature difference of 5 K and 0 K.
715 mK for SysAlp1-IV and 560 mK for SysAlp1-VII with respect to a signal band-
width of 50 Hz.
125
7 Summary and Outlook
A FEM model was applied for the simulation of sensor performance before the
fabrication. The accuracy of this model was tested by comparing the measured and
simulated sensitivity for nine different sensors. A deviation of 21% was found in
the worst case. Optimization of a sensor layout with this model was demonstrated
for a presence detection system.
126
We built two demonstrators to show the potential of the fabricated microsystems.
The first, using two separate sensors, is for presence detection while the second
demonstrates IR thermal imaging with sensor arrays. With both demonstrators the
presence of a person at a distance of several meters is clearly detected.
To fully exploit the potential of this technology for integrated sensor microsys-
tems, future research will have to address several tasks:
127
Appendix
Appendix
References
[1] K. Peterson, “Silicon as a Mechanical Material”, Proc. of the IEEE, Vol. 70,
pp. 420-457, 1982.
[2] H. Baltes, O. Paul, and O. Brand, “Micromachined Thermally Based
CMOS Microsensors”, Proc. of the IEEE, in press, 1998.
[3] S. Middelhoek and S. Audet, “Silicon Sensors”, Delft University Press,
Delft, 1994.
[4] G. Kovacs, “Micromachined Transducers Sourcebook”, McGraw-Hill, New
York, 1998.
[5] H. Baltes, “Future of IC Microtransducers”, Sensors and Actuators A,
Vol. 56, pp. 179-192, 1996.
[6] D. Jaeggi, “Thermal Converter by CMOS Technology”, Ph. D. thesis ETH
No. 11567, ETH Zurich, 1996.
[7] M. Müller, R. Gottfried-Gottfried, A. Hübel, R. Jähne, and H. Kück, “A
Thermoelectric Infrared Radiation Sensor with Monolithically Integrated
Amplifier Stage and Temperature Sensor”, Digest of Technical Papers
Transducers '95, Vol. 2, pp. 640-643, 1995.
[8] P. Malcovati, “CMOS Thermoelectric Sensor Interfaces”, Ph. D. thesis
ETH No. 11424, ETH Zurich, 1996.
[9] A. Häberli, “Compensation and Calibration of IC Microsensors”,
Ph. D. thesis ETH No. 12090, ETH Zurich, 1997.
[10] C. Menolfi, Q. Huang, and N. Schneeberger, “A Low Noise Thermoelectric
Infrared Detector Microsystem in a Digital CMOS Technology”, Proc.
ESSCIRC '96, Neuchatel, pp. 128-131, 1996.
128
[11] F. Mayer, A. Häberli, H. Jacobs, G. Ofner, O. Paul, and H. Baltes, “Sin-
gle-Chip CMOS Anemometer”, Technical Digest of International Electron
Devices Meeting, IEEE, pp. 895-898, 1997.
[12] R. Dann, “Infrared: Sensing Pollution”, Sensor Review, Vol. 14, No. 3,
pp. 33-35, 1994.
[13] M. Schlesinger, “Infrared Technology Fundamentals”, 2nd Edition, Marcel
Dekker Inc., New York, 1994.
[14] J. D. Vincent, “Fundamentals of Infrared Detector Operation & Testing”,
John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1990.
[15] W. Lang, K. Kühl, and H. Sandmaier, “Absorbing Layers for Thermal In-
frared Detectors”, Digest of Technical Papers Transducers '91, pp. 635-638,
1991.
[16] M. Golay, “A Pneumatic Infra-Red Detector”, Review of Scientific Instru-
ments, Vol. 18, p. 357, 1947.
[17] M. Royer and T. Midavaine, “IR and FIR Sensors”, Sensors, Vol. 6, Eds.
E. Wagner, R. Dändliker, and K. Spenner, VCH Weinheim, 1992.
[18] J. Chevrier, K. Baert, and T. Slater, “Infrared Pneumatic Detector Made by
Micromachining Technology”, J. Micromechanics and Microengineering,
Vol. 5, pp. 193-195, 1995.
[19] T. Kenny, J. Reynolds, J. Podosek, E. Vote, L. Miller, H. Rockstad, and
W. Kaiser, “Micromachined Infrared Sensors Using Tunneling Displace-
ment Transducers“, Rev. Scientific Instruments, Vol. 67, pp.112-28, 1996.
[20] J. Grade, A. Bazilai, J. Reynolds, C. Liu, A. Partridge, H. Jerman, and
T. Kenny, “Wafer-Scale Processing, Assembly, and Testing of Tunneling
Infrared Detectors“, Digest of Technical Papers Transducers '97, Vol. 2,
pp. 1241-1244, 1997.
[21] H. Jerominek, M. Renault, N. Swart, F. Picard, T. Pope, M. Levesque,
M. Lehoux, G. Bilodeou, M. Pelletier, D. Audet, and P. Lambert, “Micro-
machined VO2 Based Uncooled IR Bolometric Detector Arrays with Inte-
grated CMOS Readout Electronics”, SPIE Symposium on Micromachining
and Microfabrication, Proc. SPIE Vol 2882, pp. 111-121, 1996.
129
Appendix
130
[34] R. Lenggenhager, H. Baltes, and T. Elbel, “Thermoelectric Infrared Sensors
in CMOS Technology“, Sensors and Actuators A, Vols. 37-38, pp. 216-220,
1993.
[35] T. Srinivas, P. Timans, R. Butcher, and H. Ahmed, “A Free-Standing Micro-
thermopile Infrared Detector”, Sensors and Actuators A, Vol. 32,
pp. 403-406, 1992.
[36] J. Schieferdecker, R. Quad, E. Holzenkämpf, and M. Schulze, “Infrared
Thermopile Sensor with High Sensitivity and Very Low Temperature Coef-
ficient”, Sensors and Actuators A, Vol. 46-47, pp. 422-427, 1995.
[37] T. Elbel, R. Lenggenhager, and H. Baltes, “Model of Thermoelectric Radi-
ation Sensors made by CMOS and Micromachining”, Sensors and Actua-
tors A, Vol. 35, pp. 101-106, 1992.
[38] F. Völklein and H. Baltes, “Optimization Tool for the Performance Param-
eters of Thermoelectric Microsensors”, Sensors and Actuators A, Vol. 36,
pp. 65-71, 1993.
[39] J. Funk, G. Wachutka, and H. Baltes, “Scaling Laws for Optimized Design
of Integrated Thermopiles”, Digest of Technical Papers Transducers '93,
pp. 742-745, 1993.
[40] U. Dillner, “Thermal Modeling of Multilayer Membranes for Sensor Appli-
cations”, Sensors and Actuators A, Vol. 41-42, pp. 260-267, 1994.
[41] T. Elbel, S. Poser, and H. Fischer, “Thermoelectric Radiation Microsen-
sors”, Sensors and Actuators A, Vol. 41-42, pp. 493-496, 1994.
[42] N. Schneeberger, O. Paul, and H. Baltes, “Optimization of CMOS Infrared
Detector Microsystems”, SPIE Symposium on Micromachining and Micro-
fabrication, Proc. SPIE Vol. 2882, pp. 122-131, 1996.
[43] W. Baer, T. Hull, K. Wise, and K. Najafi, “A Multiplexed Silicon Infrared
Thermal Imager”, Digest of Technical Papers Transducers '91, pp. 631-634,
1991.
[44] R. Lenggenhager and H. Baltes, “Improved Thermoelectric Infrared Sensor
using Double Poly CMOS Technology”, Digest of Technical Papers
Transducers '93, pp. 1008-1011, 1993.
[45] R. Lenggenhager, D. Jaeggi, P. Malcovati, H. Duran, H. Baltes, and
E. Doering, “CMOS Membrane Infrared Sensors and Improved TMAHW
131
Appendix
132
[58] O. Paul, M. von Arx, and H. Baltes, “Process-Dependent Thermophysical
Properties of CMOS IC Thin Films”, Digest of Technical Papers
Transducers '95, Vol. 1, pp. 178-181, 1995.
[59] H. Baltes, O. Paul, and J. Korvink, “Simulation Toolbox and Material Pa-
rameter Data Base for CMOS MEMS”, Proc. 7th International Symposium
on Micro Machine and Human Science, pp. 1-8, 1996.
[60] J. Brice, “Semiconductor Silicon”, H. Ruff and R. Burgess, The Electro-
chemical Society Softbound Proceedings Series, Princeton, p. 339, 1973.
[61] J. Reismann, M. Berkenblit, S. Chan, F. Kaufman, and D. Green, “The
Controlled Etching of Silicon in Catalyzed Ethylene-Diamine-Pyrocatechol
Water Solutions”, J. Electrochemical Society, Vol. 126, pp. 1406-1415,
1979.
[62] R. Finne and D. Klein, “A Water-Amine-Complexing Agent System for
Etching Silicon”, J. Electrochemical Society, Vol. 114, p. 965, 1967.
[63] X. Wu, Q. Wu, and W. Ko, “A Study on Deep Etching of Silicon Using
EPW”, Digest of Technical Papers Transducers '85, pp. 291-294, 1985.
[64] M. Parameswaran and H. Baltes, “Oxide Microstructures Fabrication: A
Novel Approach”, Sensors and Materials, Vol. 3, pp. 115-122, 1988.
[65] D. Jaeggi, H. Baltes, and D. Moser, “Thermoelectric AC Power Sensors by
CMOS Technology”, IEEE Electron Device Letters, Vol. 13, pp. 366-368,
1992.
[66] D. Moser, “CMOS Flow Sensors”, Ph. D. thesis ETH No. 10059,
ETH Zurich, 1993.
[67] H. Seidl, L. Csepregi, A. Heuberger, and H. Baumgärtl, “Anisotropic Etch-
ing of Crystalline Silicon in Alkaline Solutions, Orientation Dependence
and Behavior of Passivation Layers”, J. Electrochemical Society, Vol. 13,
pp. 3612-3626, 1990.
[68] O. Dorsch, A. Hein, E. Obermeier, “Effect of Silicon Content of Aqueous
KOH on Etching Behavior of Convex Corners in (100) Single Crystal Sili-
con”, Digest of Technical Papers Transducers '97, Vol. 1, pp. 683-686,
1997.
[69] S. Linder, “Chip Stacks for Memory Applications”, Ph. D. thesis ETH No.
11347, ETH Zurich, 1996.
133
Appendix
134
[82] M. Meade, “Lock-In Amplifiers: principles and applications”, Peregrinus,
London, 1983.
[83] J. Korvink, J. Funk, and H. Baltes, “IMEMS Modeling”, Sensors and Mate-
rials, Vol. 6, pp. 235-243, 1994.
135
Appendix
Acknowledgments
First of all I would like to thank Prof. Dr. Henry Baltes for making this work pos-
sible, for creating a professional, friendly and productive atmosphere at the Phys-
ical Electronics Laboratory (PEL), for introducing me to microsystems, and for
his generous support of my work, from drafting the original research plan to the
critical review of this thesis.
It is my pleasure to thank Prof. Dr. Oliver Paul, now with the University of
Freiburg im Breisgau, who was my supervisor throughout this work. To meet his
standards has always been a challenge, and I learned a lot trying to do so. I want
to thank him for his guidance and readiness to assist whenever needed. I also want
to thank him for uncompromisingly proof-reading this thesis like so many of my
texts before.
I wish to thank Dr. Ulrich Dillner for co-examining and proof-reading this thesis.
I want to thank Dr. René Lenggenhager for his work on CMOS thermoelectric IR
sensors which was the starting point of my work.
I owe special thanks to my office-mate and friend Felix Mayer for his support
during periods of frustration or hard work and for sharing the good times.
It was a pleasure to share the office with Dr. Johannes Bühler, Michael Mayer, and
Rolf Frei.
I want to thank Donat Scheiwiler for his work on the demonstrator systems and
the outstanding performance in keeping the equipment up and running. I would
like to thank Max Schlapfer for his friendly companionship and assistance in
image editing.
136
I would like to thank Serge Déteindre, Verena Dubacher, Kristian Haller, Marcel
Hübscher, Phillip Ludwig, Karl Przibilla, and Marcel Vogel for the contribution
they made to this thesis during their student projects, which I had the pleasure to
supervise.
I am indebted to the staff of our industrial partners, notably Dr. P. Ryser, Dr. M.
Forster, Dr. K. Müller, and Dr. M. Loepfe of Cerberus AG, and Mr. E. Doering
and Dr. A. Descombes of EM Microelectronic-Marin SA and P. Sagnol of Atmel
ES2.
I want to thank my colleagues at PEL whose enthusiasm and friendship make this
laboratory a very special place to work. These are Dr. Martin Bächtold, Dr. Daniel
Bolliger, Dr. Thomas Boltshauser, Dr. Frank Bose, Dr. Oliver Brand,
Dr. Ruggero Castagnetti, Christian Cornila, Dr. Michael Dammann, Dr. Jörg
Funk, Markus Emmenegger, Liselotte Glasl, Dr. Andreas Häberli, Dr. Egon Herr,
Erna Hug, Mark Hornung, Andreas Koll, Stefan Koller, Prof. Dr. Jan Korvink,
Dirk Lange, Dr. Stefan Linder, Igor Levak, Christoph Maier, Matthias Metz,
Heidi Moser, Dr. David Moser, Thomas Müller, Luca Plattner, Dr. Concetta Ric-
cobene, Jaques Robadey, Dr. Berthold Rogge, Michael Schneider,
Dr. Franz-Peter Steiner, Ralph Steiner, Stefano Taschini, Dr. Stephan Traut-
weiler, Yelena von Allmen, Martin von Arx, Dr. Rolf Vogt, Prof. Dr. Gerhard
Wachutka, Dr. Rolf Wohlgemuth, Volker Ziebart, and Martin Zimmermann.
I owe special thanks to my parents and to my wife Flavia. Through their ongoing
support, love, and understanding they have contributed substantially to my work.
This work has been supported by the LESIT and MINAST priority programs of
the Board of the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology and the ESPRIT project
DEMAC of the European Community.
137
Appendix
Curriculum Vitae
Nov. 1988 -Nov. 1993 Student of physics at ETH Zurich. Diploma thesis on
mechanical material properties of dielectric CMOS
thin films.
Nov. 1993 - Apr. 1998 Work towards a doctoral degree at the Physical
Electronics Laboratory directed by Prof. Dr. H. Baltes
at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH)
Zurich.
138
List of Abbreviations
alp1mv Analog, Low-Power, 1 µm, Medium Voltage
alp2lv Analog, Low-Power, 2 µm, Low Voltage
CMOS Complementary Metal Oxide Semiconductor
ECPR Electrically Calibrated Pyroelectric Radiometer
EDP Ethylene-Diamine Pyrocatechol
FEM Finite Element Method
FET Field Effect Transistors
IC Integrated Circuit
IPHT Institut für Physikalische Hochtechnologie
IR Infrared
KOH Potassium hydroxide
LED Light Emitting Diode
MEMS Micro Electro Mechanical System
MOS Metal Oxide Semiconductor
NEP Noise Equivalent Power
NETD Noise Equivalent Temperature Difference
PCB Printed Circuit Board
PMMA PolyMethyl-Methacrylat
PSD Phase Sensitive Detector
VLSI Very Large Scale Integration
139