REU2007-final1-Elaine Mau
•
1 like•207 views
This document summarizes research on fabricating a spacer for a resonant cavity imaging biosensor. It describes three main parts: 1) fabricating the spacer using two mask etching processes, 2) employing wafer bonding techniques like gravity and photoresist, and 3) examining the resonance through measurements to determine the viability of each bonding technique. Photoresist bonding performed better with less tilt and a tighter sandwich structure than gravity bonding. Further testing is still needed but photoresist bonding shows promise as an adhesive for the biosensor spacer.
![[How it works] Resonant Cavity
Imaging Biosensor
(RCIB)
Photodetector Array
Si Si-SiO2
reflector
Collimated
Light
Si
Cavity
Si-SiO2
reflector
microarray
Recorded
Signals
I
I
λ
I
λ
I
λ
I
λ]()
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (15)
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (14)
Similar to REU2007-final1-Elaine Mau
Similar to REU2007-final1-Elaine Mau (20)
REU2007-final1-Elaine Mau
- 1. Spacer for Resonant Cavity Imaging Biosensor Elaine Mau, Rutgers University
- 2. [How it works] Resonant Cavity Imaging Biosensor (RCIB) Photodetector Array Si Si-SiO2 reflector Collimated Light Si Cavity Si-SiO2 reflector microarray Recorded Signals I I λ I λ I λ I λ
- 3. Methods Part 1: Fabrication of the spacer Part 2: Employment of wafer bonding techniques a) Gravity c) Photoresist Part 3: Examining resonance to determine the viability of each technique a) Distance between Mirrors b) Tilt c) Stability
- 5. Part 1: Fabrication of Spacer Mask 1: Channels
- 6. Part 1: Fabrication of Spacer Mask 2: Donuts Front Side Etching
- 7. Part 1: Fabrication of Spacer Mask 2: Donuts Back Side Etching
- 8. Part 2: Employment of wafer bonding techniques
- 9. Part 2: Employment of wafer bonding techniques Gravity Photoresist
- 11. Part 3: Measurements Distance Between Two Mirrors Tilt Stability
- 12. Results Gravity Photoresist Qualities Gravity Photoresist Average Mirror Separation 225 µm 210 µm Tilt 2.2 nm/µm 0.22 nm/µm Stability Somewhat Somewhat
- 13. Conclusion Alternative method performed for Deep Reactive Ion Etching is not recommended Excessive handling Etching channels using method describe is possible Etching through for donuts using method describe may be done using backside etching; however, there is lack of alignment Using photoresist as adhesive is promising, but further tests must be preformed Sandwich is tighter with photoresist Tilt of photoresist sandwich was ten times more
- 14. Acknowledgements Thank you Professor Ruane, David Bergstein, Phillip Spuhler, Arthur Wu, and Abdol Hossein Entekhobi Boston University and National Science Foundation for providing this research opportunity!