From chingmei at snf.stanford.edu Fri Feb 6 18:48:20 2009 From: chingmei at snf.stanford.edu (chingmei at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2009 18:48:20 -0800 Subject: Shutdown lampoly SNF 2009-02-06 18:48:20: entrance load failed, requested rotate action Message-ID: wafer is still stuck in the entrance From cbaxter at snf.stanford.edu Sat Feb 7 00:02:08 2009 From: cbaxter at snf.stanford.edu (cbaxter at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2009 00:02:08 -0800 Subject: Shutdown lampoly SNF 2009-02-06 18:48:20: entrance load failed, requested rotate action Message-ID: Removed wafer on flat finder and cal, cycled wafers w/out problem. From emyers at snf.stanford.edu Sat Feb 7 07:14:06 2009 From: emyers at snf.stanford.edu (emyers at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2009 07:14:06 -0800 Subject: Problem lampoly SNF 2009-02-07 07:14:05: No HBr Message-ID: Due to a fault in the gas bunker, HBr has been turned off. From mtang at snf.stanford.edu Mon Feb 9 09:11:42 2009 From: mtang at snf.stanford.edu (mtang at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2009 09:11:42 -0800 Subject: Shutdown lampoly SNF 2009-02-09 09:11:41: No HBr Message-ID: From eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu Mon Feb 9 14:07:08 2009 From: eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu (eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2009 14:07:08 -0800 Subject: Comment lampoly SNF 2009-02-09 14:07:08: HBr update Message-ID: Helium eak checked the gas panel and found no leaks. Currently performing a pressure decay test and also continuing to monitor the HBr gas detector. We will give a projected time of repair tomorrow when we have more information. From eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu Tue Feb 10 13:41:30 2009 From: eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu (eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 13:41:30 -0800 Subject: Comment lampoly SNF 2009-02-10 13:41:29: HBr update Message-ID: Pressure decay test was good. Now panel is pressurized with HBr. The cylinder valve and the valve to the tool are still closed. We will monitor both the pressure and gas sensor over night. If everything is OK , we will turn HBr on by 10 am tomorrow. From eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu Tue Feb 10 13:41:38 2009 From: eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu (eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 13:41:38 -0800 Subject: Comment lampoly SNF 2009-02-09 14:07:08: HBr update Message-ID: Archived From eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu Wed Feb 11 10:08:08 2009 From: eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu (eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 10:08:08 -0800 Subject: Problem lampoly SNF 2009-02-07 07:14:05: No HBr Message-ID: HBr is now available. From eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu Wed Feb 11 10:08:18 2009 From: eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu (eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 10:08:18 -0800 Subject: Shutdown lampoly SNF 2009-02-09 09:11:41: No HBr Message-ID: HBr is now available. From eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu Wed Feb 11 10:08:38 2009 From: eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu (eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 10:08:38 -0800 Subject: Comment lampoly SNF 2009-02-10 13:41:29: HBr update Message-ID: HBr is now available From raneeyoo at snf.stanford.edu Sat Feb 21 15:44:13 2009 From: raneeyoo at snf.stanford.edu (raneeyoo at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2009 15:44:13 -0800 Subject: Comment lampoly SNF 2009-02-21 15:44:13: too fast etch rate Message-ID: the etch rate is too fast. C2F6 leakage during the etch. From mtang at snf.stanford.edu Sun Feb 22 07:33:03 2009 From: mtang at snf.stanford.edu (mtang at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 07:33:03 -0800 Subject: Problem lampoly SNF 2009-02-22 07:33:03: Etch rate problem Message-ID: Keyogran reports a 5X increase in etch rates on wafers and recipe she has well-characterized. Will check system on Monday. In the meantime, it is not recommended to use lampoly for critical etches. From raneeyoo at snf.stanford.edu Mon Feb 23 17:01:46 2009 From: raneeyoo at snf.stanford.edu (raneeyoo at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 17:01:46 -0800 Subject: Comment lampoly SNF 2009-02-23 17:01:45: alert alarm340 Message-ID: there is an alarm."internal timer will overflow in 48hours. the system must be restarted" From mtang at snf.stanford.edu Tue Feb 24 16:49:19 2009 From: mtang at snf.stanford.edu (mtang at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 16:49:19 -0800 Subject: Comment lampoly SNF 2009-02-23 17:01:45: alert alarm340 Message-ID: Cesar rebooted the computer. This should eliminate the error. From mtang at snf.stanford.edu Tue Feb 24 16:59:39 2009 From: mtang at snf.stanford.edu (mtang at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 16:59:39 -0800 Subject: Problem lampoly SNF 2009-02-22 07:33:03: Etch rate problem Message-ID: raneeyoo and chingmei both reported higher than usual etch rates on chips. I ran an etch rate test (standard recipe 1, with 60 sec main etch, 30 sec overetch) and found the following: Si etch depth: 4618 A, 1.1% uniformity Selectivity to resist: 4.2X This is perhaps less than 5% higher than what we normally see. The etch rate was run after 10 dummy wafers were run -- and it may be me, but it seemed the plasma got less pink with the HBr (which is slightly pink anyway) as more wafers were run.... Also, ran chamber leak rate: 0.49 mt/min And checked gas flows -- all well within spec (less than 5% deviation of full scale.) Sorry, there does not seem to be an obvious cause of reported etch rate issues. From bchui at snf.stanford.edu Wed Feb 25 18:34:29 2009 From: bchui at snf.stanford.edu (bchui at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 18:34:29 -0800 Subject: Comment lampoly SNF 2009-02-25 18:34:28: re: too fast etch rate Message-ID: It seems to etch a bit fast (etches Si at close to 4000A/min), but the C2F6 flow was at .2, probably just MFC calib noise. From mtang at snf.stanford.edu Fri Feb 27 08:00:38 2009 From: mtang at snf.stanford.edu (mtang at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 08:00:38 -0800 Subject: Comment lampoly SNF 2009-02-25 18:34:28: re: too fast etch rate Message-ID: Followed up with bchui, who says on further analysis, the lampoly looks fine. To paraphrase his responses: "I was... using 0.5um lines patterned on 0.7um 955 resist (on plain Si wafers). Actually the etch went beautifully--nice selectivity, good sidewalls, etc,.... I etched 1.2um in 210 sec, i.e. 3428A/min, which is just right for Si!"