Part I: Background and Fundamentals Introduction, Mohamed Gad-el-Hak, University of Notre Dame Scaling of Micromechanical Devices, William Trimmer, Standard MEMS, Inc., and Robert H. Stroud, Aerospace Corporation Mechanical Properties of MEMS Materials, William N. Sharpe, Jr., Johns Hopkins University Flow Physics, Mohamed Gad-el-Hak, University of Notre Dame Integrated Simulation for MEMS: Coupling Flow-Structure-Thermal-Electrical Domains, Robert M. Kirby and George Em Karniadakis, Brown University, and Oleg Mikulchenko and Kartikeya Mayaram, Oregon State University Liquid Flows in Microchannels, Kendra V. Sharp and Ronald J. Adrian, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Juan G. Santiago and Joshua I. Molho, Stanford University Burnett Simulations of Flows in Microdevices, Ramesh K. Agarwal and Keon-Young Yun, Wichita State University Molecular-Based Microfluidic Simulation Models, Ali Beskok, Texas A&M University Lubrication in MEMS, Kenneth S. Breuer, Brown University Physics of Thin Liquid Films, Alexander Oron, Technion, Israel Bubble/Drop Transport in Microchannels, Hsueh-Chia Chang, University of Notre Dame Fundamentals of Control Theory, Bill Goodwine, University of Notre Dame Model-Based Flow Control for Distributed Architectures, Thomas R. Bewley, University of California, San Diego Soft Computing in Control, Mihir Sen and Bill Goodwine, University of Notre Dame Part II: Design and Fabrication Materials for Microelectromechanical Systems Christian A. Zorman and Mehran Mehregany, Case Western Reserve University MEMS Fabrication, Marc J. Madou, Nanogen, Inc. LIGA and Other Replication Techniques, Marc J. Madou, Nanogen, Inc. X-Ray-Based Fabrication, Todd Christenson, Sandia National Laboratories Electrochemical Fabrication (EFAB), Adam L. Cohen, MEMGen Corporation Fabrication and Characterization of Single-Crystal Silicon Carbide MEMS, Robert S. Okojie, NASA Glenn Research Center Deep Reactive Ion Etching for Bulk Micromachining of Silicon Carbide, Glenn M. Beheim, NASA Glenn Research Center Microfabricated Chemical Sensors for Aerospace Applications, Gary W. Hunter, NASA Glenn Research Center, Chung-Chiun Liu, Case Western Reserve University, and Darby B. Makel, Makel Engineering, Inc. Packaging of Harsh-Environment MEMS Devices, Liang-Yu Chen and Jih-Fen Lei, NASA Glenn Research Center Part III: Applications of MEMS Inertial Sensors, Paul L. Bergstrom, Michigan Technological University, and Gary G. Li, OMM, Inc. Micromachined Pressure Sensors, Jae-Sung Park, Chester Wilson, and Yogesh B. Gianchandani, University of Wisconsin-Madison Sensors and Actuators for Turbulent Flows. Lennart Loefdahl, Chalmers University of Technology, and Mohamed Gad-el-Hak, University of Notre Dame Surface-Micromachined Mechanisms, Andrew D. Oliver and David W. Plummer, Sandia National Laboratories Microrobotics Thorbjoern Ebefors and Goeran Stemme, Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden Microscale Vacuum Pumps, E. Phillip Muntz, University of Southern California, and Stephen E. Vargo, SiWave, Inc. Microdroplet Generators. Fan-Gang Tseng, National Tsing Hua University, Taiwan Micro Heat Pipes and Micro Heat Spreaders, G. P. "Bud" Peterson, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Microchannel Heat Sinks, Yitshak Zohar, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology Flow Control, Mohamed Gad-el-Hak, University of Notre Dame) Part IV: The Future Reactive Control for Skin-Friction Reduction, Haecheon Choi, Seoul National University Towards MEMS Autonomous Control of Free-Shear Flows, Ahmed Naguib, Michigan State University Fabrication Technologies for Nanoelectromechanical Systems, Gary H. Bernstein, Holly V. Goodson, and Gregory L. Snider, University of Notre Dame Index

The MEMS Handbook

Bulk silicon etching techniques, used to selectively remove silicon from substrates, have been broadly applied in the fabrication of micromachined sensors, actuators, and structures. Despite the more recent emergence of higher resolution, surface-micromachining approaches, the majority of currently shipping silicon sensors are made using bulk etching. Particularly in light of newly introduced dry etching methods compatible with complementary metal-oxide-semiconductors, it is unlikely that bulk micromachining will decrease in popularity in the near future. The available etching methods fall into three categories in terms of the state of the etchant: wet, vapor, and plasma. For each category, the available processes are reviewed and compared in terms of etch results, cost, complexity, process compatibility, and a number of other factors. In addition, several example micromachined structures are presented.

/pdf/bulk-micromachining-of-silicon-57ln84jsy8.pdf

Bulk micromachining of silicon

Comparison of chemical cleaning methods of glass in preparation for silanization

A method for fabricating Si nanostructures with an air‐operated atomic force microscope (AFM) is presented. An electrically conducting AFM tip is used to oxidize regions of size 10–30 nm of a H‐passivated Si (100) surface at write speeds up to 1 mm/s. This oxide serves as an effective mask for pattern transfer into the substrate by selective liquid etching. The initial oxide growth rate depends exponentially on the applied voltage which produces an effective ‘‘tip sharpening’’ that allows small features to be produced by a relatively large diameter tip.

Fabrication of si nanostructures with an atomic force microscope

Pyramidal texturing of silicon solar cell with TMAH chemical anisotropic etching

The quality of vertical roughness produced by the etching of Si in aqueous KOH has been studied by varying several experimental parameters such as molarity, time of etching, temperature, and stirring. We note that at room temperature, unstirred etching is smoother at low and high molarities, and etch rate and roughness both peak near 5–6 M. With no stirring, roughness increases as a function of etch time, then levels off. With stirring, roughness decreases, especially around the peak etch rate near 5–6 M. For a fixed molarity like 5 M, unstirred etching becomes smoother with increasing temperature even as the etch rate increases rapidly. Such results suggest that masking by hydrogen bubbles or silicate etch products is the principle origin of vertical roughness. Bubble properties as a function of molarity and stirring (as determined from electrolysis experiments) are used to suggest a pseudo‐masking model to explain some roughness properties.

Etching roughness for (100) silicon surfaces in aqueous KOH

Ellipsometric measurements (in conjunction with observations of reflectance and cell current and voltage) have been performed in for Si wafers, of various crystallographic orientations and dopant types, during growth of surface films under anodic and cathodic bias and during open‐circuit etch back. The optical effects have been modeled in terms of the formation and removal of thin films on the Si surface, with contributions, in some cases, from surface roughness. Changes in the thickness and stoichiometry of the surface phase during various treatments provide a basis for a model of the Si etching chemistry and for the orientation dependence of the etch rate.

Ellipsometric Study of Orientation‐Dependent Etching of Silicon in Aqueous KOH

Orientation‐dependent etching of silicon by aqueous is a standard procedure in the microelectronics industry. We have measured the etching products by recording the Raman spectra in real time as the etching of {100} silicon progressed in a solution. The primary etching species has been determined to be OH−, and the etching products have been determined to be the silicate . Isopropyl alcohol does not appear to participate chemically in the etching process.

A Raman Study of Etching Silicon in Aqueous KOH

Study of Bias‐Dependent Etching of Si in Aqueous KOH

The etch‐stop phenomenon which occurs in both p‐ and n‐Si when the doping density exceeds 1019 cm−3 has been studied in situ with ellipsometry. Biasing the samples both anodically and cathodically from open‐circuit potential causes layers to grow which can then be observed to etch back when the applied potential is released. We are lead to the conclusion that p‐Si etch stops because of spontaneous passivation which produces a thin oxide‐like layer, while n‐Si shows a tendency to etch stop, probably owing to formation of a prepassive layer.

E. D. Palik

Papers

Etching roughness for (100) silicon surfaces in aqueous KOH

Ellipsometric Study of Orientation‐Dependent Etching of Silicon in Aqueous KOH

A Raman Study of Etching Silicon in Aqueous KOH

Study of Bias‐Dependent Etching of Si in Aqueous KOH

Ellipsometric Study of the Etch‐Stop Mechanism in Heavily Doped Silicon