Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-npj9w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T15:36:06.876Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Analytic description, measurements, and modeling of 3D-embedded silicon inductance for High-Performance Hybrid Systems Applications

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 March 2013

Philippe Descamps*
Affiliation:
LaMIPS, Laboratoire Commun CRISMAT-NXP Semiconductors-PRESTO Engineering, UMR 6508 CNRS, 6 Boulevard Maréchal Juin, Caen, France.
Olivier Tesson
Affiliation:
NXP Semiconductors, 2 Esplanade Anton Philips, Campus Efficiences, Colombelles BP 20000, 14096 Caen, Cedex 9, France
Magali Duplessis
Affiliation:
NXP Semiconductors, 2 Esplanade Anton Philips, Campus Efficiences, Colombelles BP 20000, 14096 Caen, Cedex 9, France
Daniel Pasquet
Affiliation:
LaMIPS, Laboratoire Commun CRISMAT-NXP Semiconductors-PRESTO Engineering, UMR 6508 CNRS, 6 Boulevard Maréchal Juin, Caen, France.
Hugues Murray
Affiliation:
LaMIPS, Laboratoire Commun CRISMAT-NXP Semiconductors-PRESTO Engineering, UMR 6508 CNRS, 6 Boulevard Maréchal Juin, Caen, France.
*
Corresponding author: P. Descamps Email: philipe.descamps@nxp.com
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this paper, the design and the measurements of three-dimensional through silicon vias (TSVs) based-integrated solenoids embedded within high-resistive silicon is presented. Prior to silicon implementation, a rigorous theoretical analysis is proposed to put in obviousness the advantages of using such coil architecture for L and S band applications. This analysis, demonstrates a clear reduction of the footprint passive function lying on the external substrate together with a reduced capacitive coupling with the local environment. Two-port radio frequency measurements have been performed in a wide-frequency range (100 MHz – 50 GHz) in order to support the theoretical investigations. Solenoids exhibit high-quality factors below 4 GHz – Q = 25 @ 2 GHz for a 800 pH device – and clearly outperforms classical planar architecture considered in most of the integrated circuit processes. Two different modeling approaches (compact modeling and EM modeling) are then proposed in order to speed-up their design implementation in a typical CAD design flow. Based on the available data, a good agreement is shown between and simulated data.

Information

Type
Research Papers
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press and the European Microwave Association 2013 
Figure 0

Fig. 1. SEM image of the solenoid. (a) Top view. (b) Bottom view.

Figure 1

Fig. 2. Cross-section of stacking technology to fabricate through vias and 3D solenoids.

Figure 2

Fig. 3. Schematic representation of 3D solenoid.

Figure 3

Fig. 4. Illustration of a one turn solenoid. (a) Top view. (b) 3D view.

Figure 4

Fig. 5. Illustration of a 2-turn solenoid made by connecting two elementary coils (standard configuration), the access lines and the measurements added pads. (a) Top view. (b) 3D view.

Figure 5

Fig. 6. Illustration of a 7-turn and U-shaped solenoid. (a) Top view. (b) 3D view.

Figure 6

Fig. 7. Examples of test structures for RF characterization of classical solenoid with 1, 3, and 5 turns, and U-type solenoid with 7 and 9 turns.

Figure 7

Table 1. Geometric variations for five conventional solenoids and four U-type solenoids.

Figure 8

Fig. 8. Cutting a 2-turn 3D conventional solenoid for the calculation of basic self-inductance.

Figure 9

Table 2. Estimated analytical value of the self-inductance (nH) of 3D solenoids based on the principle of partial inductances compared to N2 variation law given in equation (2).

Figure 10

Fig. 9. X-ray photographs of structure of solenoids.

Figure 11

Fig. 10. On-wafer measurements of R for 3D conventional solenoids with 1–5 turns (a) and U-type 3D solenoids with 7–10 turns from the same crystal (b).

Figure 12

Fig. 11. On-wafer measurements of L for 3D conventional solenoids with 1–5 turns (a) and U-type 3D solenoids with 7–9 turns (b).

Figure 13

Fig. 12. On-wafer measurements of Q for 3D conventional solenoids with 1–5 turns (a) and U-type 3D solenoids with 7–9 turns (b).

Figure 14

Table 3. Variations on the measurements of R, L, and Q of 1-turn (RFind1) and 2-turn 3D solenoids (RFind2).

Figure 15

Fig. 13. Scanning electron microscope view illustrating the filling of copper in the high through vias.

Figure 16

Fig. 14. Photograph of 1-turn octagonal-shaped inductance.

Figure 17

Fig. 15. Comparison of self-inductance L (a) and Q-factor (b) measurements between a 3D solenoid and an octagonal CMOS and BiCMOS inductance.

Figure 18

Fig. 16. Picture of SMD inductance.

Figure 19

Fig. 17. Inductance L versus the surface for SMD inductances and conventional 3D solenoids.

Figure 20

Fig. 18. Induction created by a rectangular surface at the point P.

Figure 21

Fig. 19. Induction created by a cylindrical wire with radius r.

Figure 22

Fig. 20. 1-turn 3D-embedded solenoid.

Figure 23

Fig. 21. Extracted parameters for the EM model compared to RF measurements with a 2-turn 3D solenoid. (a) Resistance. (b) Self-inductance. (c) Quality factor. (d) Return loss. (e) Insertion loss.

Figure 24

Fig. 22. Equivalent electrical circuit of a 1-turn 3D solenoid.

Figure 25

Fig. 23. Illustration of the capacitance between copper and silicon in a through via.

Figure 26

Fig. 24. Illustration of the resistance and capacitance of the substrate.

Figure 27

Fig. 25. Parasitic capacitances existing between a copper line and silicon substrate.

Figure 28

Fig. 26. Parasitic capacitances between a copper line and a ground plane.

Figure 29

Fig. 27. RF measuments compared with the physical model before and after optimization for return loss S11 (a) and insertion lossses S21. (b) of a 1-turn solenoid.

Figure 30

Fig. 28. Comparison of R (a), L (b), and Q (c) between RF measurements and physical model with and without optimization for a 1-turn solenoid.

Figure 31

Table 4. Values of parasitic elements of the equivalent model before and after optimization.

Figure 32

Fig. 29. Variations of the width W of lines and impact on extracted parameters obtained from the physical model.