Conventional magnetic heads typically employ lapping to fabricate structures within the head. For example, lapping is typically used in processing a read sensor in a read transducer. Lapping determines the stripe height, or length measured from the air-bearing surface (ABS), of the read sensor. Similarly, lapping may be used in fabricating the main pole of a conventional write transducer. The nose length, or the distance from the ABS at which the pole tip widens, may also be determined through lapping.
In order to control lapping an electronic lapping guide (ELG) is typically used.
The lapping is terminated when the resistance of the conventional ELG 10 indicates that the desired length of the conventional ELG 10 has been reached, via step 36. Because the conventional ELG 10 and structure, such as a read sensor or pole, both exist on the transducer being lapped, the lengths of the conventional ELG 10 and the structure change with lapping. Consequently, the lengths of the read sensor or pole may also be set in step 36.
Although the conventional method 30 and conventional ELG 10 function, there may be variations in lapping. In particular, the method 10 may not provide the desired length in the structure being fabricated. For example, the pole and read sensor may not have the desired nose lengths and stripe heights. Consequently, once the transducer is completed, it is tested. It may then be determined that some portion of the transducers do not function as desired. As a result, additional inventory is maintained or additional transducers are fabricated to ensure the number and quality of transducers desired are available.
Accordingly, what is needed is an improved method for providing and using an ELG in a magnetic transducer.
A method and system for providing an ELG for a structure in a magnetic transducer are described. The structure has a front edge and a back edge. The ELG includes a stripe having a top edge and a bottom edge. The method and system include calibrating a sheet resistance of the stripe and calibrating an offset of the top edge of the stripe from the back edge of the structure. The method and system further include terminating the lapping based at least on the sheet resistance and the offset of the ELG.
The structure 220 being fabricated has a front edge 222 and a back edge 224. For simplicity, the structure 220 is shown as a rectangle. However, in another embodiment, the structure 220 may have a different shape. In addition, the structure 220 is depicted as terminating at the back edge 224. However, in another embodiment, the back edge 224 may simply mark a relevant position. For example, for a pole, the back edge 224 may correspond to the end of the nose of the pole. The ELG includes a stripe having a top edge 214 and a bottom edge 212. The front edge 222 of the structure 220 and the bottom edge 212 of the ELG(s) 210 reside at the surface being lapped. In one embodiment, the ELG(s) 210 and the corresponding structure(s) 220 are coplanar. For example, a read ELG (RELG) being used in lapping a read sensor may be coplanar with the read sensor. Similarly, a write ELG (WELG) used in lapping a pole may be coplanar with the pole. In one embodiment, the stripe 210 may be a simple shape, such as a rectangle. In another embodiment, the stripe may have a different shape. The track width of the ELG(s) 210 may also be well controlled. For example, in one embodiment, the track width of an ELG 210 is controlled to be within one percent of the nominal track width. In one embodiment, the ELG(s) are placed in each flash field on a wafer being processed. In one embodiment, each ELG 210 is a tunneling magnetoresistive (MR) stripe.
The sheet resistance of the ELG 210 is calibrated, via step 102. In one embodiment, step 102 calibrates the sheet resistance of each stripe 210. This calibration may be performed using a known method, such as the Van der Pauw method.
The offset of the top edge 214 of the ELG 210, or stripe 210, from the back edge 224 of the structure 210 is calibrated, via step 104. In one embodiment, the top edge 214 of each ELG 210 is designed to be the same distance from the surface being lapped as the back edge 224 of the structure 210. In such an embodiment, the mask(s) used to form each ELG 210 and the corresponding structure 220 have endpoints corresponding to the top edge 214 and the back edge 224, respectively, at the same distance from the surface to be lapped. However, due to fabrication conditions, there still may be an offset between the top edge 214 of the ELG 210 and the back edge 224 of the structure 220. For example,
Referring back to
Through the use of the method 100, the lapping may be significantly better controlled. As a result, structures such as read sensors and portions of the pole(s) may be lapped closer to the desired goals. As a result the fabrication may be improved. In particular, large variations in the structures which may adversely affect device performance may be avoided. Device manufacturability and performance may thus be improved.
The resistance of the ELG 210 is measured during lapping, via step 112. Well known techniques may be used to perform the resistance measurement. Step 112 may include taking multiple resistance measurements during lapping. For example, the resistance of the ELG 210 may be measured substantially continuously for at least a portion of the lapping performed.
Based on the resistance, the sheet resistance calibration performed in step 102 of the method 100, and the offset calibration performed in step 104 of the method 100, the target length of the ELG 210 is determined, via step 114. The target length of the ELG 210 corresponds to the target length of the structure 220 being fabricated. In one embodiment, the back edge 224, such as the back end of the read sensor or the end of the nose of a pole, is designed to be the same distance from the surface being lapped as the top edge 214 of the ELG 210. However, there may be some offset, which may be calibrated using step 104 of the method 100. Thus, in step 114 the correspondence between the resistance of the ELG 210 and the lengths of the ELG 210 and structure 220 can be determined. The lapping is terminated when the resistance of the ELG 210 indicates that the target length of the ELG 210, and thus the desired length of the structure 220, has been reached, via step 116.
The ELG 210 may thus be used to control lapping. Because both the sheet resistance and the offset of the ELG 210 have been calibrated, the target length of the ELG 210 may be better determined in step 114. Lapping can thus be better controlled. As a result, variations in lapping may be reduced. Consequently, the structure 220 may have a length closer to the desired length. For example, variations in the stripe height of a read sensor and the nose length of a pole may be reduced. Device manufacturability and performance may thus be better controlled.
A plurality of windage test stripes is provided, via step 152. The windage test stripes have a differing heights corresponding to a plurality of mask dimensions.
A test resistance for the windage test stripes 250, 252, 254, and 256 is measured, via step 154. The stripe height for the windage test stripes 250, 252, 254, and 256 is determined, via step 156. The actual stripe heights h1, h2, h3, and h4 may be determined based on a known sheet resistance of the stripes 250, 252, 254, and 256, the resistances of the stripes 250, 252, 254, and 256, and the width, w, of the stripes. The length is given by the sheet resistance multiplied by the width and divided by the resistance measured.
A correction factor between the heights and the mask dimensions is determined using the lengths determined in step 156 and the mask dimensions, via step 158. The correction factor determined in step 158 may be used to account for differences in the actual heights of structures formed.
Through the use of the method 150, calibration of the ELG may be improved. In particular, the differences between the designed length as expressed in the masks and the actual lengths of the ELGs may be determined. As a result of this calibration, the differences between the lengths of the ELGs and the lengths of the structures being fabricated may be better determined. Consequently, the ELG may provide a more accurate indication of the height of the structure being fabricated. When used in connection with the methods 100 and 110, lapping may be improved.
One or more Van der Pauw test patterns are provided for a corresponding ELG, via step 172. The Van der Pauw test pattern is fabricated of the same materials as the ELG. In one embodiment, each ELG has at least one corresponding Van der Pauw test pattern. Thus, each flash field may have at least one corresponding Van der Pauw test pattern. Van der Pauw test patterns are one well known mechanism for determining sheet resistance. However, in another embodiment, other test patterns might be used.
One or more test resistance measurements are taken for the Van der Pauw test pattern via step 174. In one embodiment, a single test resistance measurement might be used. However, in another embodiment, multiple measurements are taken for each test pattern. Based on these test resistance measurements and the known geometry of the Van der Pauw test pattern, the sheet resistance of the ELG may be determined, via step 176.
The method 170 allows for calibration of the sheet resistance of the ELG(s) used. In particular, the wafer-to-wafer variations in the sheet resistance of the ELG may be accounted for. In combination with the improved calibration of the offset(s) for the ELG(s), the target length of the ELGs may be better determined. In addition, resistance of the ELG corresponding to the desired length of the structure may be better determined. Consequently, lapping may be improved.
Referring to
In the embodiment depicted, the shared ground pad 370 is used for both the WELG 320 and the RELG 310. Use of a shared ground pad 370 may enable closer placement of the RELG 310 and WELG 320 to the read sensor 332 and pole 340, respectively. Further, in order to reduce the number of fabrication processes specific to the WELG 320, contacts are providing through the films provided during fabrication of the transducer 304 to allow electrical contact to the WELG 320.
The WELG 320 has a bottom edge 322 at the surface 380 being lapped and a top edge 324. The pole 340 has a front edge 344 at the surface being lapped and a back edge 346 at the end of the nose 342, where the pole 340 widens. The RELG 310 has a bottom edge 312 at the surface 380 being lapped and a top edge 314. The read sensor 332 has a front edge 334 at the surface 380 being lapped and a back edge 336 at the end of read sensor 332. Through the use of the methods 100, 150, and 170, the offset of the edges 324 and 346 and the offset between the edges 314 and 336 may be calibrated.
Also shown are pads 390, 392, 394, and 396. In one embodiment, the pads 390, 392, 394, and 396 may reside above the pads 350 and 360. The pads 390, 392, 394, and 396 are used to make contact to leads for a Van der Pauw test pattern (not shown) or windage test stripes (not shown in
Using the methods 100, 150, and 170, the sheet resistances and offsets of the RELG 310 and WELG 320 may be calibrated. Further, the RELG 310 and WELG 320 may be employed to control lapping of the surface 380. As a result, variations in the lapping and, therefore, in the lengths of the nose 342 and read sensor 332 may be reduced. Consequently, manufacturability and performance of the head 300 may be improved.
This application is a divisional of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/056,409, filed on Mar. 27, 2008, and now issued as U.S. Pat. No. 8,151,441, which is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4157497 | Eisen et al. | Jun 1979 | A |
4670732 | Church | Jun 1987 | A |
4675986 | Yen | Jun 1987 | A |
5065483 | Zammit | Nov 1991 | A |
5210667 | Zammit | May 1993 | A |
5361547 | Church et al. | Nov 1994 | A |
5597340 | Church et al. | Jan 1997 | A |
5678086 | Gandola et al. | Oct 1997 | A |
5722155 | Stover et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5742995 | Amin et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5772493 | Rottmayer et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5876264 | Church et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5963784 | Bothra et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
6003361 | Amin et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6027397 | Church et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6029339 | Chang et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6047224 | Stover et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6083081 | Fukuroi et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6131271 | Fontana et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6193584 | Rudy et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6288870 | Saliba | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6347983 | Hao et al. | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6364743 | Pust et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6399401 | Kye et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6475064 | Hao et al. | Nov 2002 | B2 |
6532646 | Watanuki | Mar 2003 | B2 |
6609948 | Fontana, Jr. et al. | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6623330 | Fukuroi | Sep 2003 | B2 |
6674610 | Thomas et al. | Jan 2004 | B1 |
6684171 | Church et al. | Jan 2004 | B2 |
6699102 | Reiley et al. | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6728067 | Crawforth et al. | Apr 2004 | B2 |
6758722 | Zhu | Jul 2004 | B2 |
6760197 | Boutaghou et al. | Jul 2004 | B2 |
6786803 | Crawforth et al. | Sep 2004 | B2 |
6793557 | Bunch et al. | Sep 2004 | B2 |
6846222 | Church et al. | Jan 2005 | B2 |
6857937 | Bajorek | Feb 2005 | B2 |
6884148 | Dovek et al. | Apr 2005 | B1 |
6935923 | Burbank et al. | Aug 2005 | B2 |
6950289 | Lam et al. | Sep 2005 | B2 |
6982042 | Church et al. | Jan 2006 | B2 |
7014530 | Kasiraj et al. | Mar 2006 | B2 |
7139152 | Mahnad et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7149061 | Yamakura et al. | Dec 2006 | B2 |
7206172 | Ding et al. | Apr 2007 | B2 |
7244169 | Cyrille et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7245459 | Cyrille et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7268976 | Yamakura et al. | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7271982 | MacDonald et al. | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7272883 | Le et al. | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7287316 | Kasahara et al. | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7333300 | Church et al. | Feb 2008 | B2 |
7359152 | Matono et al. | Apr 2008 | B2 |
7360296 | Cyrille et al. | Apr 2008 | B2 |
7393262 | Biskeborn | Jul 2008 | B2 |
7422511 | Fukuroi | Sep 2008 | B2 |
7551406 | Thomas et al. | Jun 2009 | B1 |
7554767 | Hu et al. | Jun 2009 | B1 |
7564110 | Beach et al. | Jul 2009 | B2 |
7603762 | Baer et al. | Oct 2009 | B2 |
7643250 | Araki et al. | Jan 2010 | B2 |
7716814 | Sasaki et al. | May 2010 | B2 |
7770281 | Pentek | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7788796 | Hsiao et al. | Sep 2010 | B2 |
7861400 | Lille | Jan 2011 | B2 |
8151441 | Rudy et al. | Apr 2012 | B1 |
8165709 | Rudy | Apr 2012 | B1 |
8291743 | Shi et al. | Oct 2012 | B1 |
8307539 | Rudy et al. | Nov 2012 | B1 |
8443510 | Shi et al. | May 2013 | B1 |
20010004800 | Yoshida et al. | Jun 2001 | A1 |
20010051491 | Hao et al. | Dec 2001 | A1 |
20020012204 | Boutaghou et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020094758 | Reiley et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020173227 | Lam et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20030020467 | Kasahara et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030021069 | Crawforth et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20040009739 | Zhu | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040075942 | Bajorek | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040097173 | Crawforth et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040179310 | Lam et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20050023673 | Nowak | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050028354 | Shindo et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050070206 | Kasiraj et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050164607 | Bajorek | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050180048 | MacDonald et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050185345 | Ding et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050219752 | Takahashi | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20060027528 | Church et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060028770 | Etoh et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060034021 | Wu | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060044683 | Matono et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060103990 | Ito et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060126222 | Aoki et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060139802 | Sasaki et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060168798 | Naka | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20070008660 | Yamakura et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070070543 | Gunder et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070246761 | Beach et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20080013219 | Wu | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080072418 | Kondo et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080144215 | Hsiao et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080273275 | Lille | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20090152235 | Hsiao et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090211081 | Boone, Jr. et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090268348 | Bonhote et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20100162556 | Guruz et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100165513 | Bonhote et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100208391 | Gokemeijer | Aug 2010 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
60153137 | Aug 1985 | JP |
2000067408 | Mar 2000 | JP |
Entry |
---|
Matsushita, et al., “Elaborate Precision Machining Technologies for Creating High Added Value at Low Cost”, Fujitsu Sci. Tech. J., 43, 1, pp. 67-75, Jan. 2007. |
Office Action dated Mar. 21, 2011 from U.S. Appl. No. 12/056,409, 16 pages. |
Notice of Allowance dated Dec. 8, 2011 from U.S. Appl. No. 12/056,409, 12 pages. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 12056409 | Mar 2008 | US |
Child | 13419313 | US |