From splewa at leland.stanford.edu Wed Jan 10 13:48:33 2001 From: splewa at leland.stanford.edu (Sandy Plewa) Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 13:48:33 -0800 Subject: Meeting Reminder - Friday, 1/12/01 Message-ID: Meeting Reminder: SNF Advisory Meeting - Friday, January 12, 2001 - Noon - Faculty Club From mcvittie at cis.Stanford.EDU Fri Jan 12 10:00:19 2001 From: mcvittie at cis.Stanford.EDU (Jim McVittie) Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 10:00:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: Thoughts SNF Equipment Message-ID: All, Attached are some of my equipment ideas for SNF. In particlar, I focus on the 6 inch wafer issue. Jim -------------------------------------------------------------- James P. McVittie Senior Research Scientist Allen Center for Integrated Systems jmcvittie at stanford.edu Stanford University Tel: (650) 725-3640 Rm. 336, 330 Serra Mall Fax: (650) 723-4659 Stanford, CA 94305-4075 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 6-inch-Ideas.doc Type: application/octet-stream Size: 32256 bytes Desc: URL: From kovacs at cis.Stanford.EDU Fri Jan 12 10:08:19 2001 From: kovacs at cis.Stanford.EDU (Greg Kovacs) Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 11:08:19 -0700 Subject: Thoughts SNF Equipment Message-ID: <200101121851.KAA23287@cis.Stanford.EDU> Jim, This is an excellent, and well-thought-out document, and I think it will serve us well. I agree with you regarding pressures forcing us toward 6" wafers and at the same time will continue to track down leads for keeping the 4" stuff up until we make the switch. My comment about "pizza sized wafers" was, I think, reacted to rather strongly given the intent. My point was really that the whole "Moore's Law" business is not for universities. I personally think we may have already gone too far with the big Canon litho system, but usage statistics will speak for themselves. What lab users seem to want to do is make devices that work and, given a realistic number of litho steps, have a yield greater than zero. My big concern is optimizing learning in training students in the SNF and minimizing suffering due to equipment problems. I think we can do a lot in that area. If 6" is a stable size, I'm pleased as can be, and I think everyone else will be too. If we can make one jump to 6" and not engage in trying to chase larger wafer sizes and core optical lithography tools that go beyond majority needs, we should be in good shape strategically. Then we can move our attention toward shoring up our resources and improving user success and staff satisfaction (coupled things). I didn't mean to offend anyone with the pizza comment. I think I was still hungry. Thanks Jim! Best, Greg >All, > >Attached are some of my equipment ideas for SNF. In particlar, I focus on >the 6 inch wafer issue. > > Jim >-------------------------------------------------------------- >James P. McVittie Senior Research Scientist >Allen Center for Integrated Systems jmcvittie at stanford.edu >Stanford University Tel: (650) 725-3640 >Rm. 336, 330 Serra Mall Fax: (650) 723-4659 >Stanford, CA 94305-4075 > From mtang at snf.stanford.edu Fri Jan 12 13:42:26 2001 From: mtang at snf.stanford.edu (Mary Tang) Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 13:42:26 -0800 Subject: Labmember Survey Message-ID: <3A5F7A42.943156CE@snf.stanford.edu> AdCom Members -- Attached is a Word file of the labmember survey from this afternoon's meeting... Comments, suggestions, advice are appreciated. Mary -- Mary X. Tang, Ph.D. National Nanofabrication Users' Network Stanford Nanofabrication Facility CIS Room 136, Mail Code 4070 Stanford, CA 94305 (650)723-9980 mtang at snf.stanford.edu -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: SNF_SurveyEditMT2.doc Type: application/msword Size: 32256 bytes Desc: not available URL: From shott at snf.stanford.edu Fri Jan 12 15:42:35 2001 From: shott at snf.stanford.edu (John Shott) Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 15:42:35 -0800 Subject: Equipment Usage Statistics ... Message-ID: <3A5F966B.48BBC9A4@snf.stanford.edu> SNF Advisory Committee: Attached is an Excel file containing the equipment usage data that I handed out today. Have a pleasant weekend, John -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: SNF_Equip_Use.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 369152 bytes Desc: not available URL: From splewa at leland.stanford.edu Fri Jan 19 08:49:18 2001 From: splewa at leland.stanford.edu (Sandy Plewa) Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 08:49:18 -0800 Subject: SNF Advisory Meeting date - 2/09 Message-ID: The next meeting of the SNF Advisory Committee is scheduled for Friday, February 9 from 111:00 am to 1:00 pm in CISX316. Lunch will be provided so please RSVP as I will need a headcount. Thanks! Sandy From mtang at snf.stanford.edu Fri Jan 19 16:31:10 2001 From: mtang at snf.stanford.edu (Mary Tang) Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 16:31:10 -0800 Subject: Labmember Survey Message-ID: <3A68DC4E.EF4DDA36@snf.stanford.edu> AdCom Team -- I believe we targeted today as the date for comments and suggestions regarding the proposed labmember survey. Only two comments on the labmember survey thus far -- first, that we should distribute or post a summary of the results for all labmembers to view and second, to let labmembers know we intend to follow up with more surveys in the future, to gage our progress. Any other comments or suggestions? It would be ideal to get a version that everyone is happy with (or at least willing to live with) so that we can start distributing the survey and tabulating results. If we would like results in time for the next AdCom meeting, we should probably begin distributing no later than late next week (giving people two weeks to respond.) For your reference, attached is the survey, in the form as distributed at the last AdCom meeting. Thanks for your time -- Mary -- Mary X. Tang, Ph.D. National Nanofabrication Users' Network Stanford Nanofabrication Facility CIS Room 136, Mail Code 4070 Stanford, CA 94305 (650)723-9980 mtang at snf.stanford.edu -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: SNF_SurveyEditMT2.doc Type: application/msword Size: 32256 bytes Desc: not available URL: