Quick search Find article
Quick search
Find article

Comparison on Nanometrology: Nano 2—Step height

L Koenders1, R Bergmans2, J Garnaes3, J Haycocks4, N Korolev5, T Kurosawa6, F Meli7, B C Park8, G S Peng9, G B Picotto10, E Prieto11, S Gao12, B Smereczynska13, T Vorburger14 and G Wilkening1

Show affiliations


SUPPLEMENTARY COMPARISON

The ability to measure step height and to calibrate step height artefacts is of vital interest in nanometrology. On that score the WGDM7 decided in 1998 to include measurements of step heights in a series of comparisons on the field of nanometrology.

The comparison about step height (NANO2) started in September 2000 with the Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt (PTB) as pilot laboratory. Fourteen national metrology institutes worldwide participated in this comparison. A set of five step height standards in the range from 7 nm to 800 nm was used for the comparison. The lateral size of the structures of the step height standards was chosen so that the height could be measured by different types of instruments, for example, interference microscopes, stylus instruments and scanning probe microscopes (SPM). The reference values were calculated as the weighted mean of all measurements that fulfilled the En < 1 criteria.

Most of the results were in good agreement with the reference values. It is noticeable that the results obtained by different types of instruments are quite compatible. Also this comparison is the first comprehensive test of the reliability of SPM and their suitability for traceable measurements of step heights. Further it was shown that today step heights on samples can be measured with uncertainties in the sub-nanometre range. Differences in the calculation of the uncertainty depend on the types of instruments and on the users. For each class of instrument, e.g. SPM, it would be meaningful to homogenise these models. Hence the results of this comparison are of great importance in many respects.

Main text. To reach the main text of this paper, click on Final Report. Note that this text is that which appears in Appendix B of the BIPM key comparison database kcdb.bipm.org/.

The final report has been peer-reviewed and approved for publication by the CCL, according to the provisions of the Mutual Recognition Arrangement (MRA).


Dates

Issue 1A (Technical Supplement 2003)



Users also read

What's this?
This innovative new feature generates a list of articles 'also read' by other users based on them reading the original article. Article abstracts citations and references are all considered and weighted accordingly. We hope that this will help you find relevant papers for your research.

  1. Final report on EUROMET.L-S15.a (EUROMET Project 925): Intercomparison on step height standards and 1D gratings
  2. Final report on CCL-S3 supplementary line scale comparison Nano3
  3. NANO5—2D Grating—Final report

View by subject




Export







Please login to access our web services, or create an account if you don't yet have one.

You must have cookies enabled in your web browser to be able to login.

Username
Password

Forgotten your password? Get a new one here.