Thread: New Inlens Detector ABCC controls don't function quickly....

[James Conway]

Greetings:
With the new In-lens detector we installed last week, the Auto 
Brightness and Contrast controls are now a bit too reactive to small 
changes in B-C. Give it some time and allow it to settle down and it 
should result in a uniform Contrast and Brightness setting.  This seems 
to work better in Full screen mode. rather than reduced raster, and is 
better with faster scan rates than slower.  Default settings for 
Brightness can be set to 50% and then slowly adjust contrast manually 
for your preferred image gray scale values.

Hope users are settling in with the new detector and are pleased with 
the improved imaging.
Charging on UVN- 30 is normal and you can reduce this effect with thin 
metal layers on top of your PMMA layer.
SEE me if you have questions.

Yours,

James Conway


Ilya Fushman wrote:

> This is unrelated to your email, but I was writing at 30 kV on 
> Monday night and noticed that I had issues with the auto-BC. At a 
> setting of 3 on the beam scan speed successive refresh frames were 
> periodically too bright. This made it really hard to focus. The fact 
> that we use UVN 30 may be an issue because it charges.
> -ilya
>
>     ----- Original Message -----
>     From: James Conway <mailto:jwc at snf.stanford.edu>
>     To: Raith SNF Mailing list <mailto:raith at snf.stanford.edu>
>     Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2004 6:06 PM
>     Subject: Raith Update WED. May 19, 2004 1800 hours... Dose
>     increments found in error on one exposure.
>
>
>     Greetings:
>
>     Today I was working on the Raith much of the day continuing
>     qualifications after the PM. Today I was writing at 20 keV.
>
>     The gun emission was stable and working at 20 keV and 10 um
>     aperture I had a Beam Current value of 0.044 nA.
>     I did notice during my write that the third element was dosed
>     below the first two of the series.  Dose was the same and chip 2 X
>     1.25 Dose factor in its dose increment.   Dose was set to Areas -
>     160 uC/cm-2, Lines - 660 uC/cm-2, and dots to 0.5 ms dwell time.
>     However the EBL dose result was low by about 50%, much to my
>     surprise.  The write time per chip was 32 minutes.
>
>     I also noticed that the Zoom U, V values were different that the
>     Zoom U = 1.49 Zoom V =1.49 values I normally encountered.
>     The W.F. to W.F. stitching was poor with breaks on the order of
>     200  nm in Y. Some write fields appear to be rotated by about - 1
>     degree. 
>
>     Users are requested to carefully inspect their dose arrays to
>     verify you are getting proper dose increments.
>     Users are requested to report if they see stitching problems in
>     their patterns.
>
>     I will review protocol files tomorrow to see if human error may
>     have accounted for the bad chip exposure.
>     I plan to repeat this exposure on other material as well.
>
>     Thank you for your support!
>
>     James Conway
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://snf.stanford.edu/pipermail/raith/attachments/20040520/b9e0f4df/attachment.html>