Innotec Planning Questionaire
mrlin at stanford.edu
Wed Mar 11 21:11:33 PDT 2009
I use Innotec to evap. metals on carbon nanotubes, which are
destroyed in sputtering systems.
Also, when calculating utilization, you may want to do (non-staff
usage) / (available time for students), that is, subtract training /
staff usage time from the "avail time" since that will be the true
time available to students. You may also want to compute a similar
number for reservations. That utilization will then truly reflect how
crazy it has been to use (or get a reservation) on the innotec.
At 01:44 PM 3/11/2009, Ed Myers wrote:
>Attached are two documents regarding Innotec usage. The utilization
>graph shows the level of usage of the Innotec. As you can see, the
>utilization rate has climbed by ~25% over the last few years. This,
>along with the cancelation of reservations has created a lot of pain
>for those depending on this tool.
>The second attachment (Usage Items) is a list of all the depositions
>done in the system since mid-October 2008. When I looked at the
>depositions, it appears that ~75% of those depositions could be done
>in a different tool. I admit, there are a lot of assumptions
>regarding this estimation, one being we may not have that other
>tool. We are attempting to do some equipment planning and we need
>clarification as to why you have chosen to use the Innotec.
>To me, there are a couple of options to relieve the pressure on the
>Innotec. The simplest and the one you hear the most is a second
>Innotec. Option two may be adding/replacing/modifying a metal
>system to off load the deposition which don't have to be on the
>Innotec. A third option may be addition of an ion mill system to
>lower our dependence on lift-off processing. Or options you can point out.
>I prefer we chose the correct tool for the right applications and
>add capability if possible (we have not forgotten about the requests
>for dielectric depositions). For example, if we can identify
>another tool which can off load the Innotec and provide new
>capability this could also be a winning solution. Another approach
>could reconfigure the Gryphon or SCT or working on the uniformity of
>To help us in planning, could you please respond as to why you use
>the Innotec. The reasons may range from the need for very thin
>films, uniformity of the deposition (then you should provide a
>uniformity target), in-situ thickness monitoring (what range can you
>tolerate?), multiple layers in a single pump down (how many?),
>required for lift-off (what metals are you sing) device sensitivity
>(plasma damage), substrate (polymer or organic), contamination
>categories (clean verse gold contaminated), large batch of wafers
>(how many), or I would use a different tool (if it did...).....
>Please hit the reply button and share your reasons for using the
>Innotec and what other approaches could serve your needs.
>Ed and your SNF staff
More information about the innotec