Inconsistent exposure

Mahnaz Mansourpour mahnaz at stanford.edu
Tue Dec 5 11:46:54 PST 2006


Hello all,

Uija ran test this morning and everything looks very good.

mahnaz





Arash Hazeghi wrote:

>Nah, mask was brand new, I was using 1.7um with 1.6sec exposure time
>
>Arash
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Mahnaz Mansourpour [mailto:mahnaz at stanford.edu] 
>Sent: Monday, December 04, 2006 9:03 AM
>To: Arash Hazeghi; uyoon at snf.stanford.edu
>Subject: Re: Inconsistent exposure
>
>Arash Hazeghi wrote:
>
>  
>
>>Hi,
>>I exposed a number a wafers (1.7um 3612) resist using Karlsuss (exp. Time
>>1.6sec) The first wafer that I inspected after development came out OK and
>>    
>>
>I
>  
>
>>didn't check the rest, today I noted the 5/7 wafers were exposed improperly
>>(looks like underexpose finer features did not come out). I wonder what
>>    
>>
>went
>  
>
>>wrong?
>>
>>Thanks,
>>Arash
>> 
>>
>>    
>>
>Hi Arash,
>
>The system just has the major pm done on it. Uija and I ran  quiet few 
>wafers and we were able to resolve 1 um with no problem.
>what are the fine features size wise? could it be that the mask got dirty?
>
>mahnaz
>
>
>  
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://snf.stanford.edu/pipermail/karlsuss/attachments/20061205/5517a0f1/attachment.html>


More information about the karlsuss mailing list