From mcvittie at snf.stanford.edu Tue Jul 1 09:51:51 2003 From: mcvittie at snf.stanford.edu (Jim McVittie) Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2003 09:51:51 -0700 Subject: Polyimide References: <3F00BB5D.3831166C@snf.stanford.edu> Message-ID: <3F01BC26.A4703653@snf.stanford.edu> Mary, Before we approve lot of things for the two Laurels, we need some verification that flume exhaust on these tools is working properly, and we need procedures on how to handle the liquids that are being spun coated. For normal flume hoods there are std test procedure but for these home made exhaust systems, it not clear what to do. Jim Mary Tang wrote: > Hi all -- > > I did a quick google search on pyralin, which is, I take it, what people > use for polyimide coating. A quick read-through seems to show that > pyralin requires heat cure in order to become polyimide and that the > monomer coating can be dissolved in NMP or some specialty solvent called > "Brewer Science ARC cleaner." The polyimide monomer is only sparingly > soluble in acetone or water. NMP is 2-N-methyl pyrolidinone -- a nice, > safe, green solvent that appears in EMT-130 and most of the other > metal-safe resist strippers in the lab. I'd suggest that we may be able > to have people just use the laurel for polyimide and use NMP to rinse > out the bowl and lid. I don't think there's a problem in mixing NMP and > acetone waste at the laurel, because it all goes into a carboy anyway > (on the svg track, solidifying polyimide could cause problems with the > lines... but maybe I'm wrong in assuming this is less of a problem on > the laurel?) > > Addendum: Dick just stopped by as I was writing this... He also says > we should consider the PMMA problem -- currently, solutions with high > concentrations of PMMA monomer are not allowed on tracks or the laurel > because it is hard to clean with acetone... The FAQ section of the > MicroChem website (http://www.microchem.com/products/pmma_faq.htm) says > that PMMA can be removed with NMP as well, so maybe we ought to give the > NMP a try? > > What do you all think? > > (Dick, by the way, has found some really good info from the Laurell > people which might present a mechanical, as opposed to a chemical, > solution.) > > 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: mcvittie.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 422 bytes Desc: Card for Jim McVittie URL: From mtang at snf.stanford.edu Tue Jul 1 10:44:35 2003 From: mtang at snf.stanford.edu (Mary Tang) Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2003 10:44:35 -0700 Subject: Polyimide References: <3F00BB5D.3831166C@snf.stanford.edu> <3F01BC26.A4703653@snf.stanford.edu> Message-ID: <3F01C883.6E84E772@snf.stanford.edu> Hi Jim -- You're absolutely right... I just got a little enthusiastic... NMP is generally no more harmful than acetone (and a lot less volatile and with a high flash point), so it was on that basis that I rather assumed that our exhaust was adequate... But, as much as I hate to admit it, Randy True is right -- we really should have a good, reliable method for using polyimide -- it is such an important material for MEMS and other applications that we should invest time, energy, and if necessary, money, to ensure we've got a safe, reliable, and easy to maintain way of using it. And you're right -- our ability to monitor and control our fume exhaust is the main limitation in introduction of this and other MEMS and nanotech chemicals. I should look into this (actually, I think you already had started to as well -- do you have info you can share or any suggestions as to where to start?) I know that commercial chemical research fume hoods aren't that pricey (bio-X has some absolutely gorgeous ones, for $12K) so maybe this is something we might be able to consider, do you think? Mary Jim McVittie wrote: > Mary, > > Before we approve lot of things for the two Laurels, we need some > verification that flume exhaust on these tools is working properly, and we > need procedures on how to handle the liquids that are being spun coated. For > normal flume hoods there are std test procedure but for these home made > exhaust systems, it not clear what to do. > > Jim > > Mary Tang wrote: > > > Hi all -- > > > > I did a quick google search on pyralin, which is, I take it, what people > > use for polyimide coating. A quick read-through seems to show that > > pyralin requires heat cure in order to become polyimide and that the > > monomer coating can be dissolved in NMP or some specialty solvent called > > "Brewer Science ARC cleaner." The polyimide monomer is only sparingly > > soluble in acetone or water. NMP is 2-N-methyl pyrolidinone -- a nice, > > safe, green solvent that appears in EMT-130 and most of the other > > metal-safe resist strippers in the lab. I'd suggest that we may be able > > to have people just use the laurel for polyimide and use NMP to rinse > > out the bowl and lid. I don't think there's a problem in mixing NMP and > > acetone waste at the laurel, because it all goes into a carboy anyway > > (on the svg track, solidifying polyimide could cause problems with the > > lines... but maybe I'm wrong in assuming this is less of a problem on > > the laurel?) > > > > Addendum: Dick just stopped by as I was writing this... He also says > > we should consider the PMMA problem -- currently, solutions with high > > concentrations of PMMA monomer are not allowed on tracks or the laurel > > because it is hard to clean with acetone... The FAQ section of the > > MicroChem website (http://www.microchem.com/products/pmma_faq.htm) says > > that PMMA can be removed with NMP as well, so maybe we ought to give the > > NMP a try? > > > > What do you all think? > > > > (Dick, by the way, has found some really good info from the Laurell > > people which might present a mechanical, as opposed to a chemical, > > solution.) > > > > 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 -- 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 From mcvittie at cis.Stanford.EDU Tue Jul 1 13:03:56 2003 From: mcvittie at cis.Stanford.EDU (Jim McVittie) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 13:03:56 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Use of RTA AG210 for SOD Message-ID: All, This is a request to use a RTA to anneal curing spin-on dielectric. Jim ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 09:36:37 -0700 (PDT) From: Jim McVittie To: Jason Reid Subject: Re: SOD RTA? Jason, The small RTA AG 210 System is available for your application. A few months back, we opened it up to any material within the limits of things that do not melt or cause other problems. Jim On Mon, 30 Jun 2003, Jason Reid wrote: > Hi Jim, > > Would you have any objections to curing spin-on dielectric in > one of CIS' RTA systems? The cure temperature is 425C. Since > we've last talked, the trace impurity levels in my company's > siloxane-based material have been reduced reduced to the ppb level. > A large semiconductor company is also trialing the material on a > 90-nm production line. > > After the softbake, expect ~1% mass loss on the RTA cure. Most > of the volatilization is likely water (OH crosslinking) with > a bit of organic fragments thrown in. > > If you have any questions or concerns, let's talk. I'm happy to > supply any data you may need to make your decision. > > Thanks, > Jason Reid > Silecs, Inc. > (formerly GuideOptics) > 408-930-4314 > > > > > > -- -------------------------------------------------------------- James P. McVittie, Ph.D. SNF Director of Technology Allen Center for Integrated Systems Stanford Nanofabrication Facility Stanford University jmcvittie at stanford.edu Rm. 336, 330 Serra Mall Fax: (650) 723-4659 Stanford, CA 94305-4075 Tel: (650) 725-3640 From rcrane at snf.stanford.edu Tue Jul 1 17:19:59 2003 From: rcrane at snf.stanford.edu (Dick Crane) Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2003 17:19:59 -0700 Subject: [Fwd: Innotec materials] Message-ID: <3F02252F.66CA8EF3@snf.stanford.edu> Hellooo specmat, I have an user wishing to deposit cobalt in the Innotec evaporator. Co has been approved for use in the metalica tool and is acceptable to me for use in the Innotec as it is very similar to Ni. Like Ni, Co is a suspected carcinogen. Since Co has not been previously used in the Innotec, it should be considered a new material for this tool and subject to specmat approval. This is an easy approval request. Thanks, Dick "Scott D. Andrews" wrote: > Hello, > > Could you tell me what I need to do to have Co authorized for use in the > innotec? > > Thank you, > Scott Andrews From mcvittie at cis.Stanford.EDU Tue Jul 1 19:28:00 2003 From: mcvittie at cis.Stanford.EDU (Jim McVittie) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 19:28:00 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Fwd: Innotec materials] In-Reply-To: <3F02252F.66CA8EF3@snf.stanford.edu> Message-ID: Dick, >From a vacuum standpoint there is no problem. I agree that if we allow Ni, we should allow Co. However, I do have a concern of flaking in that system. We might want to consider any flaking from the chamber walls to be toxic so I suggest using the vacuum cleaner from the implanter to remove any flaking on a weekly basis. Jim On Tue, 1 Jul 2003, Dick Crane wrote: > Hellooo specmat, > > I have an user wishing to deposit cobalt in the Innotec evaporator. Co has > been approved for use in the metalica tool and is acceptable to me for use > in the Innotec as it is very similar to Ni. Like Ni, Co is a suspected > carcinogen. Since Co has not been previously used in the Innotec, it should > be considered a new material for this tool and subject to specmat approval. > > This is an easy approval request. > > Thanks, > > Dick > > "Scott D. Andrews" wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > Could you tell me what I need to do to have Co authorized for use in the > > innotec? > > > > Thank you, > > Scott Andrews > > From mtang at snf.stanford.edu Wed Jul 2 07:18:39 2003 From: mtang at snf.stanford.edu (Mary Tang) Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2003 07:18:39 -0700 Subject: [Fwd: Innotec materials] References: Message-ID: <3F02E9BF.50008466@snf.stanford.edu> Hello SpecMatters: So, from Margaret's original web files, it appears that Co was previously approved for use in the lab in: dektak2 drytek1 drytek4 metalica mrc semhitachi So, can we add innotec to this list (noting flaking concerns)? Or should we continue to review all future requests? Mary Jim McVittie wrote: > Dick, > > >From a vacuum standpoint there is no problem. I agree that if we allow Ni, > we should allow Co. However, I do have a concern of flaking in that > system. We might want to consider any flaking from the chamber walls to > be toxic so I suggest using the vacuum cleaner from the implanter to > remove any flaking on a weekly basis. > > Jim > > On Tue, 1 Jul 2003, Dick Crane wrote: > > > Hellooo specmat, > > > > I have an user wishing to deposit cobalt in the Innotec evaporator. Co has > > been approved for use in the metalica tool and is acceptable to me for use > > in the Innotec as it is very similar to Ni. Like Ni, Co is a suspected > > carcinogen. Since Co has not been previously used in the Innotec, it should > > be considered a new material for this tool and subject to specmat approval. > > > > This is an easy approval request. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Dick > > > > "Scott D. Andrews" wrote: > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > Could you tell me what I need to do to have Co authorized for use in the > > > innotec? > > > > > > Thank you, > > > Scott Andrews > > > > -- 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 From jperez at snf.stanford.edu Wed Jul 2 09:01:17 2003 From: jperez at snf.stanford.edu (Jeannie Perez) Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2003 09:01:17 -0700 Subject: [Fwd: Innotec materials] References: <3F02E9BF.50008466@snf.stanford.edu> Message-ID: <3F0301CD.AE50CBBC@snf.stanford.edu> Hello, My understanding is that Co, Ni, Fe are ferromagnetic materials and are difficult to sputter in the Metalica. Additional preparation is needed for the Metalica (by bonding a thin sample of the desired material to an aluminum backing plate). I recommend that they use the Innotec and not use Metalica. I've referred them to the Innotec in the past. Jeannie Mary Tang wrote: > Hello SpecMatters: > > So, from Margaret's original web files, it appears that Co was previously > approved for use in the lab in: > dektak2 > drytek1 > drytek4 > metalica > mrc > semhitachi > > So, can we add innotec to this list (noting flaking concerns)? Or should we > continue to review all future requests? > > Mary > > Jim McVittie wrote: > > > Dick, > > > > >From a vacuum standpoint there is no problem. I agree that if we allow Ni, > > we should allow Co. However, I do have a concern of flaking in that > > system. We might want to consider any flaking from the chamber walls to > > be toxic so I suggest using the vacuum cleaner from the implanter to > > remove any flaking on a weekly basis. > > > > Jim > > > > On Tue, 1 Jul 2003, Dick Crane wrote: > > > > > Hellooo specmat, > > > > > > I have an user wishing to deposit cobalt in the Innotec evaporator. Co has > > > been approved for use in the metalica tool and is acceptable to me for use > > > in the Innotec as it is very similar to Ni. Like Ni, Co is a suspected > > > carcinogen. Since Co has not been previously used in the Innotec, it should > > > be considered a new material for this tool and subject to specmat approval. > > > > > > This is an easy approval request. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Dick > > > > > > "Scott D. Andrews" wrote: > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > Could you tell me what I need to do to have Co authorized for use in the > > > > innotec? > > > > > > > > Thank you, > > > > Scott Andrews > > > > > > > > -- > 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 -- Jeannie Perez Stanford Nanofabrication Facility CIS Room 146, Mail Code 4070 Stanford, CA 94305 (650) 723-7997 jperez at snf.stanford.edu From mcvittie at cis.Stanford.EDU Wed Jul 2 09:08:49 2003 From: mcvittie at cis.Stanford.EDU (Jim McVittie) Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 09:08:49 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Fwd: Innotec materials] In-Reply-To: <3F0301CD.AE50CBBC@snf.stanford.edu> Message-ID: Jeannie, Sorry, I was not paying attention that Metalica was on the list. You are totally correct. Ferromagnetic materials are indeed difficult to sputter. I thought this request was for the Innotec and not Metalica. Jim On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, Jeannie Perez wrote: > Hello, > My understanding is that Co, Ni, Fe are ferromagnetic materials and are difficult > to sputter in the Metalica. Additional preparation is needed for the Metalica (by > bonding a thin sample of the desired material to an aluminum backing plate). I > recommend that they use the Innotec and not use Metalica. I've referred them to > the Innotec in the past. > Jeannie > > Mary Tang wrote: > > > Hello SpecMatters: > > > > So, from Margaret's original web files, it appears that Co was previously > > approved for use in the lab in: > > dektak2 > > drytek1 > > drytek4 > > metalica > > mrc > > semhitachi > > > > So, can we add innotec to this list (noting flaking concerns)? Or should we > > continue to review all future requests? > > > > Mary > > > > Jim McVittie wrote: > > > > > Dick, > > > > > > >From a vacuum standpoint there is no problem. I agree that if we allow Ni, > > > we should allow Co. However, I do have a concern of flaking in that > > > system. We might want to consider any flaking from the chamber walls to > > > be toxic so I suggest using the vacuum cleaner from the implanter to > > > remove any flaking on a weekly basis. > > > > > > Jim > > > > > > On Tue, 1 Jul 2003, Dick Crane wrote: > > > > > > > Hellooo specmat, > > > > > > > > I have an user wishing to deposit cobalt in the Innotec evaporator. Co has > > > > been approved for use in the metalica tool and is acceptable to me for use > > > > in the Innotec as it is very similar to Ni. Like Ni, Co is a suspected > > > > carcinogen. Since Co has not been previously used in the Innotec, it should > > > > be considered a new material for this tool and subject to specmat approval. > > > > > > > > This is an easy approval request. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > Dick > > > > > > > > "Scott D. Andrews" wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > > > Could you tell me what I need to do to have Co authorized for use in the > > > > > innotec? > > > > > > > > > > Thank you, > > > > > Scott Andrews > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > 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 > > -- > Jeannie Perez > Stanford Nanofabrication Facility > CIS Room 146, Mail Code 4070 > Stanford, CA 94305 > (650) 723-7997 > jperez at snf.stanford.edu > > > -- -------------------------------------------------------------- James P. McVittie, Ph.D. SNF Director of Technology Allen Center for Integrated Systems Stanford Nanofabrication Facility Stanford University jmcvittie at stanford.edu Rm. 336, 330 Serra Mall Fax: (650) 723-4659 Stanford, CA 94305-4075 Tel: (650) 725-3640 From mahnaz at snf.stanford.edu Wed Jul 2 16:55:43 2003 From: mahnaz at snf.stanford.edu (Mahnaz) Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2003 16:55:43 -0700 Subject: [Fwd: Forwarded attachment...] Message-ID: <3F0370FF.B082901B@snf.stanford.edu> Hello For documentation sake as well as that I did ok the chemical. I am interested in the result very much personally. mahnaz -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: Michael West Wiemer Subject: Forwarded attachment... Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 14:15:17 -0700 (PDT) Size: 91070 URL: From mahnaz at snf.stanford.edu Mon Jul 7 11:20:47 2003 From: mahnaz at snf.stanford.edu (Mahnaz) Date: Mon, 07 Jul 2003 11:20:47 -0700 Subject: Ammonium Persulfate Message-ID: <3F09B9FF.E12E683A@snf.stanford.edu> Hello all, Mohammed Bodi has requested to bring this chemical in the lab for the use of Si etch. He would use it at WBgeneral . I was little pressured this morning between the litho meeting and few other things and he had taken the chemical inside the lab when I realized that it is in the form of crystals and called him to say he has to mix it outside and He had been stopped by Mary and ULI already. mahnaz From mcvittie at snf.stanford.edu Tue Jul 8 10:59:18 2003 From: mcvittie at snf.stanford.edu (Jim McVittie) Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2003 10:59:18 -0700 Subject: Erbium, Ytterbium and Praseodynium for Gardner Message-ID: <3F0B0676.8B4AB914@snf.stanford.edu> All, Don Gardner has requested permission to anneal wafers with oxide implanted with Erbium (Er), Ytterbium (Yb) and Praseodynium (Pr) in the Forming Gas tube at 400 to 500C C. The rare earth dopants will be implanted 800A deep to a peak concentration of low E18 per cm3. There is no data available on the diffusion rates and energy level in Si for these atoms. The vapor pressures are known. The temperatures for a vapor pressure of 0.1mT for Yb, Er and Pr are 690C, 930C and 1150C, respectively. At 520C, Yb, which has the highest vapor of the three, has a vapor pressure of 1E-8 Torr. Talking to Peter Griffin, it is unlikely that much would diffusion to the surface at 500C, and what did make to the surface would not come off very easily. Peter, Mike Deal and I, all feel there is no problem with this request. So I am going to give Don the go ahead. Note the wafer cleaning is to be done in the Silicide bench. Jim -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: "Gardner, D S" Subject: Rare earths Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2003 14:37:26 -0700 Size: 39188 URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: mcvittie.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 422 bytes Desc: Card for Jim McVittie URL: From mcvittie at snf.stanford.edu Tue Jul 8 12:43:51 2003 From: mcvittie at snf.stanford.edu (Jim McVittie) Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2003 12:43:51 -0700 Subject: Erbium, Ytterbium and Praseodynium for Gardner References: <3F0B0676.8B4AB914@snf.stanford.edu> Message-ID: <3F0B1EF7.2DE411A5@snf.stanford.edu> All, I found a mistake in my vapor pressure table for Ytterbium. Appearently, who ever put the table together, mixed up the degree "C' and degree "K" data for Ytterbium. Yb has a pressure around 1E-3 torr at 500C instead of the 1E-8 torr. If any Yb makes it to the surface, it most likely would vaporize if there is no oxygen around. I am not sure how clean our FG tube is in terms of oxygen. Any oxygen around would oxidize the Yb at the surface. Yb2O3 with a melting point of 2450C is very stable. For now, I told Don, he could go ahead with the Er and Pr samples but I need to think some more about Yb. Jim Jim McVittie wrote: > All, > > Don Gardner has requested permission to anneal wafers with oxide > implanted with Erbium (Er), Ytterbium (Yb) and Praseodynium (Pr) in the > Forming Gas tube at 400 to 500C C. The rare earth dopants will be > implanted 800A deep to a peak concentration of low E18 per cm3. There is > no data available on the diffusion rates and energy level in Si for > these atoms. The vapor pressures are known. The temperatures for a > vapor pressure of 0.1mT for Yb, Er and Pr are 690C, 930C and 1150C, > respectively. At 520C, Yb, which has the highest vapor of the three, has > a vapor pressure of 1E-8 Torr. Talking to Peter Griffin, it is unlikely > that much would diffusion to the surface at 500C, and what did make to > the surface would not come off very easily. Peter, Mike Deal and I, all > feel there is no problem with this request. So I am going to give Don > the go ahead. Note the wafer cleaning is to be done in the Silicide > bench. > > Jim > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: Rare earths > Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2003 14:37:26 -0700 > From: "Gardner, D S" > To: "Jim McVittie (E-mail)" > CC: "Gardner, D S" > > Jim, > > I could not find the original e-mail with the details of our samples, so here it is again. > > I am implanting rare earths into silicon dioxide at a depth of 850A below the surface. The rare earth is either Erbium, Praseodymium, or Ytterbium. The peak concentration at 850A inside the oxide is about 0.01 atomic%. The concentration at the surface would be significantly lower (See the attached profile). > > I am proposing cleaning the wafers at the silicide wet bench and then anneal them in the forming gas anneal furnace. > > The wafers are ready to go, so please let's consider this soon. > > With best regards, > Don > > <> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Name: Er in SiO2 232 keV.jpg > Er in SiO2 232 keV.jpg Type: JPEG Image (image/jpeg) > Encoding: base64 > Description: Er in SiO2 232 keV.jpg > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Jim McVittie > SNF Director of Technology > Stanford University > Stanford Nanofabrication Facility > > Jim McVittie > SNF Director of Technology > Stanford University > Stanford Nanofabrication Facility > Allen Center for Integrated Systems Rm. 336, 330 Serra Mall Fax: 650 723-4659 > Stanford Work: 650 725-3640 > CA > 94305-4075 > Additional Information: > Last Name McVittie > First Name Jim > Version 2.1 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: mcvittie.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 422 bytes Desc: Card for Jim McVittie URL: From mtang at snf.stanford.edu Fri Jul 11 16:08:47 2003 From: mtang at snf.stanford.edu (Mary Tang) Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2003 16:08:47 -0700 Subject: Ks bonder References: <3F0F3AD8.E830E657@snf.stanford.edu> Message-ID: <3F0F437F.4059832@snf.stanford.edu> Hi Mahnaz -- I know it's been difficult -- but a clean bonder would be SO incredibly useful for many people in the lab.... I'm at Smalltalk on Monday and have a doctor appointment Wednesday morning. However, I don't think you really need me at your meeting -- if I may offer my two cents... 1. I am not sure we need to have a separate furnace for processing wafers out of the bonder. The chance of cross-contamination is highest if clean wafers are processed with potentially contaminated ones in the same furnace run (Jim's contamination experiments last year, if I recall correctly, showed problems with a silicon wafer processed with a glass wafer, but marginal problems with wafers processed in the next furnace run) -- and all we have to do is to specify that KS bonded wafers get processed by themselves. If we are really concerned about any potential contamination, then I think the only risk would be where the wafers come in direct contact with labware -- perhaps we should have dedicated quartzware and cassettes/boxes for bonded wafers in oxidation furnaces. If we go this route, then I don't think we need to specify a furnace. (Because of the contamination question, I'm copying specmat on this.) 2. Alternatively, we had talked, in the past, about using tylan4 for riskier processing. I believe Ted has already set aside and cleaned new quartzware just for this purposes. I wonder, though, that following processing in tylan4, can we consider the bonded wafers to be "CMOS clean"? Especially if we start allowing other risky processing in this tube? I don't know -- I think that we ought to consider keeping the issue of a "semidirty" oxidation tube separate from thermal bonding of KS bonded wafers. Although I think it's a great idea to have a "semidirty" furnace to do things in, using this for KS bonded wafers will defeat the whole purpose of having a clean bonder. 3. I take it that cleaning the KS bonded wafers may open up a new can of worms. I tend to feel, however, that the silicon wafers ought to be very clean to begin with (otherwise, they wouldn't contact-bond). So, if we require that the wafers be wbdiff cleaned prior to ksbonding (is this reasonable?) and immediately go from the bonder to the furnace (with dedicated "Clean" cassettes and boxes), will this satisfy our contamination requirements? What do you all think? M Mahnaz wrote: > Hello all, > > I am planing very seriously to bring up the KS bonder with in few weeks > the most. > Jim, I need to know which furnace you have in mind for wafers coming out > of the bonder. > I suggest we have a short meeting some times next week and review things > so I can start tackling this task even though I am so overwhelmed with > amount of training requests I am receiving. Few users pretty much check > with me every other day and I feel some pressure there as well. So I am > going to do this .... > > I am going to semicon on Tuesday 15th. My schedule is open on Monday > and Wednesday morning and Friday all day - so far. > Please let me know what are your concerns and issues. > > mahnaz From rcrane at snf.stanford.edu Fri Jul 11 16:25:25 2003 From: rcrane at snf.stanford.edu (Dick Crane) Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2003 16:25:25 -0700 Subject: Ks bonder References: <3F0F3AD8.E830E657@snf.stanford.edu> <3F0F437F.4059832@snf.stanford.edu> Message-ID: <3F0F4765.6DA74CB4@snf.stanford.edu> All, I believe Jim had suggested T-7 as the furnace to use. Please be aware that T-7 will become TEOS in the next few months and should not be a candidate for the post bonder operations. I agree with Mary's proposal. Thanks, Dick Mary Tang wrote: > Hi Mahnaz -- > > I know it's been difficult -- but a clean bonder would be SO incredibly > useful for many people in the lab.... > > I'm at Smalltalk on Monday and have a doctor appointment Wednesday morning. > However, I don't think you really need me at your meeting -- if I may offer > my two cents... > > 1. I am not sure we need to have a separate furnace for processing wafers > out of the bonder. The chance of cross-contamination is highest if clean > wafers are processed with potentially contaminated ones in the same furnace > run (Jim's contamination experiments last year, if I recall correctly, > showed problems with a silicon wafer processed with a glass wafer, but > marginal problems with wafers processed in the next furnace run) -- and all > we have to do is to specify that KS bonded wafers get processed by > themselves. If we are really concerned about any potential contamination, > then I think the only risk would be where the wafers come in direct contact > with labware -- perhaps we should have dedicated quartzware and > cassettes/boxes for bonded wafers in oxidation furnaces. If we go this > route, then I don't think we need to specify a furnace. (Because of the > contamination question, I'm copying specmat on this.) > > 2. Alternatively, we had talked, in the past, about using tylan4 for > riskier processing. I believe Ted has already set aside and cleaned new > quartzware just for this purposes. I wonder, though, that following > processing in tylan4, can we consider the bonded wafers to be "CMOS clean"? > Especially if we start allowing other risky processing in this tube? I > don't know -- I think that we ought to consider keeping the issue of a > "semidirty" oxidation tube separate from thermal bonding of KS bonded > wafers. Although I think it's a great idea to have a "semidirty" furnace to > do things in, using this for KS bonded wafers will defeat the whole purpose > of having a clean bonder. > > 3. I take it that cleaning the KS bonded wafers may open up a new can of > worms. I tend to feel, however, that the silicon wafers ought to be very > clean to begin with (otherwise, they wouldn't contact-bond). So, if we > require that the wafers be wbdiff cleaned prior to ksbonding (is this > reasonable?) and immediately go from the bonder to the furnace (with > dedicated "Clean" cassettes and boxes), will this satisfy our contamination > requirements? > > What do you all think? > > M > > Mahnaz wrote: > > > Hello all, > > > > I am planing very seriously to bring up the KS bonder with in few weeks > > the most. > > Jim, I need to know which furnace you have in mind for wafers coming out > > of the bonder. > > I suggest we have a short meeting some times next week and review things > > so I can start tackling this task even though I am so overwhelmed with > > amount of training requests I am receiving. Few users pretty much check > > with me every other day and I feel some pressure there as well. So I am > > going to do this .... > > > > I am going to semicon on Tuesday 15th. My schedule is open on Monday > > and Wednesday morning and Friday all day - so far. > > Please let me know what are your concerns and issues. > > > > mahnaz From latta at snf.stanford.edu Fri Jul 11 18:16:04 2003 From: latta at snf.stanford.edu (Nancy Latta) Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2003 18:16:04 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Ks bonder In-Reply-To: <3F0F4765.6DA74CB4@snf.stanford.edu> Message-ID: Folks- Well, as long as we are chiming in with our concerns, I'd like to sort out the SC2 (classic RCA clean) issue. Where? Nancy On Fri, 11 Jul 2003, Dick Crane wrote: > All, > > I believe Jim had suggested T-7 as the furnace to use. Please be aware that T-7 > will become TEOS in the next few months and should not be a candidate for the > post bonder operations. I agree with Mary's proposal. > > Thanks, > > Dick > > Mary Tang wrote: > > > Hi Mahnaz -- > > > > I know it's been difficult -- but a clean bonder would be SO incredibly > > useful for many people in the lab.... > > > > I'm at Smalltalk on Monday and have a doctor appointment Wednesday morning. > > However, I don't think you really need me at your meeting -- if I may offer > > my two cents... > > > > 1. I am not sure we need to have a separate furnace for processing wafers > > out of the bonder. The chance of cross-contamination is highest if clean > > wafers are processed with potentially contaminated ones in the same furnace > > run (Jim's contamination experiments last year, if I recall correctly, > > showed problems with a silicon wafer processed with a glass wafer, but > > marginal problems with wafers processed in the next furnace run) -- and all > > we have to do is to specify that KS bonded wafers get processed by > > themselves. If we are really concerned about any potential contamination, > > then I think the only risk would be where the wafers come in direct contact > > with labware -- perhaps we should have dedicated quartzware and > > cassettes/boxes for bonded wafers in oxidation furnaces. If we go this > > route, then I don't think we need to specify a furnace. (Because of the > > contamination question, I'm copying specmat on this.) > > > > 2. Alternatively, we had talked, in the past, about using tylan4 for > > riskier processing. I believe Ted has already set aside and cleaned new > > quartzware just for this purposes. I wonder, though, that following > > processing in tylan4, can we consider the bonded wafers to be "CMOS clean"? > > Especially if we start allowing other risky processing in this tube? I > > don't know -- I think that we ought to consider keeping the issue of a > > "semidirty" oxidation tube separate from thermal bonding of KS bonded > > wafers. Although I think it's a great idea to have a "semidirty" furnace to > > do things in, using this for KS bonded wafers will defeat the whole purpose > > of having a clean bonder. > > > > 3. I take it that cleaning the KS bonded wafers may open up a new can of > > worms. I tend to feel, however, that the silicon wafers ought to be very > > clean to begin with (otherwise, they wouldn't contact-bond). So, if we > > require that the wafers be wbdiff cleaned prior to ksbonding (is this > > reasonable?) and immediately go from the bonder to the furnace (with > > dedicated "Clean" cassettes and boxes), will this satisfy our contamination > > requirements? > > > > What do you all think? > > > > M > > > > Mahnaz wrote: > > > > > Hello all, > > > > > > I am planing very seriously to bring up the KS bonder with in few weeks > > > the most. > > > Jim, I need to know which furnace you have in mind for wafers coming out > > > of the bonder. > > > I suggest we have a short meeting some times next week and review things > > > so I can start tackling this task even though I am so overwhelmed with > > > amount of training requests I am receiving. Few users pretty much check > > > with me every other day and I feel some pressure there as well. So I am > > > going to do this .... > > > > > > I am going to semicon on Tuesday 15th. My schedule is open on Monday > > > and Wednesday morning and Friday all day - so far. > > > Please let me know what are your concerns and issues. > > > > > > mahnaz > From mcvittie at cis.Stanford.EDU Fri Jul 11 18:31:06 2003 From: mcvittie at cis.Stanford.EDU (Jim McVittie) Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2003 18:31:06 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Ks bonder In-Reply-To: <3F0F437F.4059832@snf.stanford.edu> Message-ID: Mary, I do not think the bonder itself will be a big source of contamination. I think how clean the wafers going into the bonder is probably more important. I believe a number of users want to put the bonded wafer into clean tools after the bonding. So if the bonder is dirty, we will have to deal with it and get it clean. With the 2 new Intel tubes coming on board, we should have enough tubes to lose #7, dedicate a tube for silicides/bonding and another tube to really dirty processes (including gold contaminated wafers). I would keep the dirty tube on the bottom (position #4) and then the silicide tube above it with tubes #1 and #2 being kept super clean. The dirty tube and all associated quartz need to be clearly labelled. I will be the mountain backpacking on M, T and W of next week. Jim On Fri, 11 Jul 2003, Mary Tang wrote: > Hi Mahnaz -- > > I know it's been difficult -- but a clean bonder would be SO incredibly > useful for many people in the lab.... > > I'm at Smalltalk on Monday and have a doctor appointment Wednesday morning. > However, I don't think you really need me at your meeting -- if I may offer > my two cents... > > 1. I am not sure we need to have a separate furnace for processing wafers > out of the bonder. The chance of cross-contamination is highest if clean > wafers are processed with potentially contaminated ones in the same furnace > run (Jim's contamination experiments last year, if I recall correctly, > showed problems with a silicon wafer processed with a glass wafer, but > marginal problems with wafers processed in the next furnace run) -- and all > we have to do is to specify that KS bonded wafers get processed by > themselves. If we are really concerned about any potential contamination, > then I think the only risk would be where the wafers come in direct contact > with labware -- perhaps we should have dedicated quartzware and > cassettes/boxes for bonded wafers in oxidation furnaces. If we go this > route, then I don't think we need to specify a furnace. (Because of the > contamination question, I'm copying specmat on this.) > > 2. Alternatively, we had talked, in the past, about using tylan4 for > riskier processing. I believe Ted has already set aside and cleaned new > quartzware just for this purposes. I wonder, though, that following > processing in tylan4, can we consider the bonded wafers to be "CMOS clean"? > Especially if we start allowing other risky processing in this tube? I > don't know -- I think that we ought to consider keeping the issue of a > "semidirty" oxidation tube separate from thermal bonding of KS bonded > wafers. Although I think it's a great idea to have a "semidirty" furnace to > do things in, using this for KS bonded wafers will defeat the whole purpose > of having a clean bonder. > > 3. I take it that cleaning the KS bonded wafers may open up a new can of > worms. I tend to feel, however, that the silicon wafers ought to be very > clean to begin with (otherwise, they wouldn't contact-bond). So, if we > require that the wafers be wbdiff cleaned prior to ksbonding (is this > reasonable?) and immediately go from the bonder to the furnace (with > dedicated "Clean" cassettes and boxes), will this satisfy our contamination > requirements? > > What do you all think? > > M > > > > Mahnaz wrote: > > > Hello all, > > > > I am planing very seriously to bring up the KS bonder with in few weeks > > the most. > > Jim, I need to know which furnace you have in mind for wafers coming out > > of the bonder. > > I suggest we have a short meeting some times next week and review things > > so I can start tackling this task even though I am so overwhelmed with > > amount of training requests I am receiving. Few users pretty much check > > with me every other day and I feel some pressure there as well. So I am > > going to do this .... > > > > I am going to semicon on Tuesday 15th. My schedule is open on Monday > > and Wednesday morning and Friday all day - so far. > > Please let me know what are your concerns and issues. > > > > mahnaz > > From latta at snf.stanford.edu Wed Jul 16 15:54:36 2003 From: latta at snf.stanford.edu (Nancy Latta) Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 15:54:36 -0700 Subject: Silicon carbide and diamond -like materials Message-ID: <3F15D7AC.6090605@snf.stanford.edu> Folks, Do we have any policy about these materials in the etchers (not to be eched but as substrates or underlying layer) and oxidation furnaces/LPCVD's? I know we have done some work with sapphire.... I am asking for a lab member who contatced me via phone.... Thanks, Nancy -- Nancy Latta Stanford Nanofabrication Facility CIS Room 145 420 Via Palou Mall Stanford, CA 94305-4070 (650) 725-6727 latta at snf.stanford.edu From mtang at snf.stanford.edu Thu Jul 17 07:30:07 2003 From: mtang at snf.stanford.edu (Mary Tang) Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2003 07:30:07 -0700 Subject: chemicals... References: Message-ID: <3F16B2EF.94684A43@snf.stanford.edu> Hi Dongwoon -- Mahnaz has the yellow stickers -- please get one from her. I'm glad you found a source for PASA -- I did not realize you could use garden-variety stuff from Aldrich -- I think previous people who have used this have gotten it from some specialty supplier in Japan. Let me know how it works for you. By the way, we are trying to build up our specialty chemicals database (part of an effort to develop SpecMat, the Special Materials Committee, so that we have records and references for all non-standard materials used in the lab.) Although I am sure that PASA was once approved, we no longer seem to have information on this handy... Could I get from you the following info? 1. MSDS sheet 2. Any references on its use for your specific application 3. Where you plan to use it (which equipment, including wet benches) 4. How you get rid of any PASA waste 5. Storage requirements 6. The state (solid, liquid, etc.) -- I'm not sure if your PASA is in powder or liquid form. Please realize that we generally do not allow powders in the lab (they contaminate things very easily -- but you can certainly mix them in liquid before bringing them into the lab.) Please provide Mahnaz or me with this info before bringing in your PASA. Thanks, Mary Dong-Woon Shin wrote: > Hi, Ms Tang > > I would like to introduce my personal chemical to the storage cabinet. > Can I store it inside the flammable cabinet? Also, how/where can I lable > it? (yellow sticker for personal chemicals) > > The material is PASA(poly aniline sulfonic acid) by Sigma Aldrich. > This is a water soluble conductive polymer to help reducing the charging > in e-beam lithography. > > Mr. Paul Jerabek is aware of this chemical and it has been used in the > clean in previous years. > > Please let me know. > > Thank you. > > Sincerely, > > Dongwoon Shin -- 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 stanford.edu http://snf.stanford.edu From mahnaz at snf.stanford.edu Thu Jul 17 08:38:37 2003 From: mahnaz at snf.stanford.edu (Mahnaz) Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2003 08:38:37 -0700 Subject: [Fwd: SOG] Message-ID: <3F16C2FD.CDB9A13C@snf.stanford.edu> Hello Two people have asked me this week and one person said that we have oked it in the past. Can we check on SOG ( spin on glass)? I am extremely busy to day. mahnaz -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: slee at briontech.com Subject: SOG Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 16:59:42 -0700 (PDT) Size: 1263 URL: From mtang at snf.stanford.edu Thu Jul 17 08:43:40 2003 From: mtang at snf.stanford.edu (Mary Tang) Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2003 08:43:40 -0700 Subject: [Fwd: SOG] References: <3F16C2FD.CDB9A13C@snf.stanford.edu> Message-ID: <3F16C42C.EE76C07B@snf.stanford.edu> Hi Mahnaz -- Yes, we have OK'ed it in the past (I know that Aaron used it a lot, and he had said it was OK'ed.) We just need to know where it's going. I'll send a note to Shi-Sheng. Mary Mahnaz wrote: > Hello > > Two people have asked me this week and one person said that we have oked > it in the past. Can we check on SOG ( spin on glass)? I am extremely > busy to day. > > mahnaz > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: SOG > Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 16:59:42 -0700 (PDT) > From: slee at briontech.com > To: > > Hi Mahnaz, > Do you know of anyone used SOG (spin-on-glass) in the lab? Is it > allowed material at SNF? > Thanks > Shi-Sheng -- 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 stanford.edu http://snf.stanford.edu From mtang at snf.stanford.edu Thu Jul 17 08:48:43 2003 From: mtang at snf.stanford.edu (Mary Tang) Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2003 08:48:43 -0700 Subject: [Fwd: SOG] References: <3F16C2FD.CDB9A13C@snf.stanford.edu> Message-ID: <3F16C55B.F996C55@snf.stanford.edu> Hi Shi-Sheng -- SOG has been used in the lab. However, formulations vary widely, in purity and composition. Could you please provide the following info? 1. MSDS sheets for the specific vendor and formulations you'll be using 2. Application notes (either from the vendor or from references or, better yet, both) 3. Where it's going to go (which equipment) and how will it be processed (temperature of any curing steps, for example.) 4. How you'll get rid of waste 5. Any other special concerns that there might be for using this stuff For more detail as to the things to consider when bringing in a new material, please refer to the website at http://snf.stanford.edu/Materials/NewMatProc.html Please send info electronically to specmat at snf.stanford.edu, or drop it off on my desk... Thanks! Mary Mahnaz wrote: > Hello > > Two people have asked me this week and one person said that we have oked > it in the past. Can we check on SOG ( spin on glass)? I am extremely > busy to day. > > mahnaz > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: SOG > Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 16:59:42 -0700 (PDT) > From: slee at briontech.com > To: > > Hi Mahnaz, > Do you know of anyone used SOG (spin-on-glass) in the lab? Is it > allowed material at SNF? > Thanks > Shi-Sheng -- 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 stanford.edu http://snf.stanford.edu From mtang at snf.stanford.edu Thu Jul 17 16:15:31 2003 From: mtang at snf.stanford.edu (Mary Tang) Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2003 16:15:31 -0700 Subject: Silicon carbide and diamond -like materials References: <3F15D7AC.6090605@snf.stanford.edu> Message-ID: <3F172E13.486216A7@snf.stanford.edu> No idea. Jim, Mike, and John are the contamination experts for materials like this. Let's see what the consensus is (maybe when J & M get back.) M Nancy Latta wrote: > Folks, > > Do we have any policy about these materials in the etchers (not to be > eched but as substrates or underlying layer) and oxidation furnaces/LPCVD's? > > I know we have done some work with sapphire.... > > I am asking for a lab member who contatced me via phone.... > > Thanks, > > Nancy > > -- > Nancy Latta > Stanford Nanofabrication Facility > CIS Room 145 > 420 Via Palou Mall > Stanford, CA 94305-4070 > (650) 725-6727 > latta at snf.stanford.edu -- 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 stanford.edu http://snf.stanford.edu From mcvittie at cis.Stanford.EDU Fri Jul 18 13:04:35 2003 From: mcvittie at cis.Stanford.EDU (Jim McVittie) Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2003 13:04:35 -0700 (PDT) Subject: SiC/equipment "compatibility" In-Reply-To: <41C71AF75675D54BB97C2FADCAE7F994026676B8@exchange.di.com> Message-ID: Nihat, The only question with SiC is how clean it is. Clean SiC would have no problem in an etcher or a LPCVD tube. However, I see lot materials with can not be allowed in the clean equipment because they are loaded with metal impurities. Can you tell me what the source of your SiC is and do you have any purity spec on it. Thanks, Jim On Mon, 14 Jul 2003, Nihat Okulan wrote: > Hello Jim, > Did you have a chance to speak to your colleagues regarding my SiC question? > Thanks, Nihat > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Nihat Okulan > Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 4:23 PM > To: 'mcvittie at cis.stanford.edu' > Subject: SiC/equipment "compatibility" > > > Hello Jim, > I finished my process development run for my probes successfully. For this, > I used the P5000 and the LPCVD Nitride furnace at Stanford. > Now, for the next class of probes the requirement is that SiC is being used > as part of the probe tip. As you know, SiC is a semiconductor that is being > more commonly used in microfabrication (mainly due to its mechanical and > thermal properties). > And here is my blunt question: Can this material be used in the P5000 and in > the LPCVD furnace? In my case, only max. 5% of the wafer surface consist of > SiC (which actually is buried under an oxide etch mask, bringing it to > almost %0 exposure)? > > Regards, Nihat. > > > Nihat Okulan, Ph.D. > Probe Scientist > Veeco Metrology Group > 112 Robin Hill Road > Santa Barbara, Ca 93117 > Tel: (805) 967-2700 xt.2238 > Fax: (805) 967-7717 > > -- -------------------------------------------------------------- James P. McVittie, Ph.D. SNF Director of Technology Allen Center for Integrated Systems Stanford Nanofabrication Facility Stanford University jmcvittie at stanford.edu Rm. 336, 330 Serra Mall Fax: (650) 723-4659 Stanford, CA 94305-4075 Tel: (650) 725-3640 From mcvittie at cis.Stanford.EDU Fri Jul 18 13:22:19 2003 From: mcvittie at cis.Stanford.EDU (Jim McVittie) Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2003 13:22:19 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Cu contamination results samples to go into STSetch In-Reply-To: <8EF5A5A8A6DD6341BF5A9BBE81DA7432015A77B3@orsmsx403.jf.intel.com> Message-ID: Hi Alan, Sorry, I did not get back to you earlier. I took a short vacation this week. Your samples #2 and #3 look pretty good. As long as you follow the same procedure as used on sample #2, you can go ahead. Jim On Fri, 11 Jul 2003, Myers, Alan M wrote: > Jim, > I spoke with you roughly one month ago about running silicon die in the STS tool which had Cu on the backside of the die. In order to prevent Cu exposure to the STS tool I did the following processing steps > > 1. Coat the Cu side of the die with 7 micron resist and pre-bake for 30 minutes > 2. Coat the front-side of the die with 7 micron resist and pre-bake for 30 minutes > 3. Expose the front-side and manually develop > 4. Coat a 4" wafer with 54 microns of resist > 5. Place the processed die Cu side down onto the 4" wafer with the thick resist > 6. Post bake the wafer with the embedded die for 30 minutes. > > I processed a wafer like this and sent it to Intel for analysis. Based > on the type of sample TOF SIMS was used to detect the presence of Cu. > TOF-SIMS is a highly surface sensitive technique. Just for your > information, the Intel TOF-SIMS guru quotes the lowest detectable > surface contamination as 5e12 atoms/cm2. The lowest Cu level that Intel > would allow in their fab is 1e12 atoms/cm2. I've attached his comments > at the bottom of this note for your reference. > > I've attached the TOF-SIMS results. Three different samples were tested. > > 1. The first sample looked at the side of the die that had Cu and > polyimide. The results show the Cu is present. > > 2. Sample 2 is the sample I described above. The measured areas where > both in an area on the die that had no resist coverage on the area of > the die that had resist and next to the die on the wafer that the die > was embedded on. Both of these areas showed no detectable copper > > 3. Sample 3 is the a die that I patterned but did not embed on a resist > coated wafer. The measured areas where area that had resist and areas > that had no resist. > > My question is, can I process die in the STS that have gone through the > processing I have described above as long as I am careful to avoid > etching through the die. > > Thanks, > > Alan > > > <<0326012R.xls (Compressed)>> > -----Original Message----- > From: Mallari, Jason C > Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 1:24 PM > To: Kim, Sarah E > Subject: RE: TOF-SIMS job#PTD0326012 > > Sarah, > The number provided by TOF-SIMS is the ratio of Cu to 30^Si. >From our past reference the number provided correlates to "roughly" 5E12 atoms/cm^2. If you require a more precise quantification I would suggest submitting it to TXRF. > > jm > -- -------------------------------------------------------------- James P. McVittie, Ph.D. SNF Director of Technology Allen Center for Integrated Systems Stanford Nanofabrication Facility Stanford University jmcvittie at stanford.edu Rm. 336, 330 Serra Mall Fax: (650) 723-4659 Stanford, CA 94305-4075 Tel: (650) 725-3640 From mahnaz at snf.stanford.edu Thu Jul 24 14:01:30 2003 From: mahnaz at snf.stanford.edu (Mahnaz) Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2003 14:01:30 -0700 Subject: [Fwd: PC3-1500 planarization coating use] Message-ID: <3F20492A.5E8A09CB@snf.stanford.edu> Hi Claudia, I am not able to open the diskette containing MSDS you have given me. Please send me a copy of the msds and I will look in to it. mahnaz -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: cm_richter at att.net Subject: PC3-1500 planarization coating use Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2003 20:25:25 +0000 Size: 1273 URL: From mahnaz at snf.stanford.edu Fri Jul 25 09:10:03 2003 From: mahnaz at snf.stanford.edu (Mahnaz) Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2003 09:10:03 -0700 Subject: [Fwd: FW: Technical Information on IC1-200, DC4-500 and PC3-1500. Information on products from Futurrex.] Message-ID: <3F21565B.CB6A095@snf.stanford.edu> Hi Claudia, I reviewed your request for PC3-1500 and I am ok with it. As usual get a yellow label from me and please only small bottle as storage is major issue for us here at Stanford. Your request for Ic1-200 and DC4-500: what will be the process steps on these chemicals? With IC1-200, it should be no plasma etching at all. With DC4-500 , curing needs up to 850C temperature, how will you go about that? mahnaz -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: "Claudia Richter" Subject: FW: Technical Information on IC1-200, DC4-500 and PC3-1500. Information on products from Futurrex. Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2003 14:00:09 -0700 Size: 150828 URL: From mtang at snf.stanford.edu Fri Jul 25 10:23:08 2003 From: mtang at snf.stanford.edu (Mary Tang) Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2003 10:23:08 -0700 Subject: [Fwd: FW: Technical Information on IC1-200, DC4-500 and PC3-1500. Information on products from Futurrex.] References: <3F21565B.CB6A095@snf.stanford.edu> Message-ID: <3F21677C.36DCE975@snf.stanford.edu> Hi Mahnaz, Claudia -- I know you two have gone through this, but for our SpecMat records, could I also get the following information (this list is from our website)? 1. Why don't any currently approved chemicals work for your purpose? 2. List all the lab equipment and wet benches that you propose to use with this chemical: 3. Proposed quantity of the chemical that you want to bring into lab 4. Where will the chemical be stored and for how long? (Will it remain only for your evaluation period or do you need this for long term usage?) 5. How do you dispose of excess chemical and/or byproducts? 6. What is your process flow for this part of your process? I take it that this is a spin-on-glass. Where will you be curing it? I take it that you'll be curing this in the 400 C range? Thanks, Mary Mahnaz wrote: > Hi Claudia, > > I reviewed your request for PC3-1500 and I am ok with it. As usual get > a yellow label from me and please only small bottle as storage is major > issue for us here at Stanford. > > Your request for Ic1-200 and DC4-500: what will be the process steps on > these chemicals? > With IC1-200, it should be no plasma etching at all. > With DC4-500 , curing needs up to 850C temperature, how will you go > about that? > > mahnaz > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: FW: Technical Information on IC1-200, DC4-500 and PC3-1500. Information on products from Futurrex. > Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2003 14:00:09 -0700 > From: "Claudia Richter" > To: > > Claudia Richter > Senior Staff Engineer > Los Gatos Research, Inc. > 67 E. Evelyn Ave. Ste. 3 > Mountain View, CA. 94041 > Ph# : (650) 965-7717 > FAX: (650) 965-7074 > www.lgrinc.com/ > > -----Original Message----- > From: Micah Yairi [mailto:mylgr at earthlink.net] > Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2003 11:58 AM > To: crlgr at earthlink.net > Subject: FW: Technical Information on IC1-200, DC4-500 and PC3-1500. > Information on products from Futurrex. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Zbigniew P. Sobczak [mailto:zpsobczak at futurrex.com] > Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2003 9:24 AM > To: Micah Yairi > Cc: Sebastian Sobczak > Subject: FW: Technical Information on IC1-200, DC4-500 and PC3-1500. > Information on products from Futurrex. > > Dear Mr. Yairi: > > Please find enclosed MSDS for PC3-1500 and requested price quote: > > Product: Quantity: Price ($): > > Planarizing Coating PC3-1500 1 L 245.00 > > If you feel that further assistance is needed please do not hesitate to > contact me at your earliest convenience. > > Sincerely, > > Zbigniew P. Sobczak > Futurrex, Inc. > T: 973-209-1563 > E-mail: zpsobczak at futurrex.com > www.futurrex.com > > -----Original Message----- > From: Zbigniew P. Sobczak [mailto:zpsobczak at futurrex.com] > Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 5:14 PM > To: Claudia Richter > Cc: Sebastian Sobczak > Subject: Technical Information on IC1-200, DC4-500 and PC3-1500. > Information on products from Futurrex. > > Dear Ms. Richter: > > Thank you for your inquiry about spin-on glass and planarizing coatings. > Please find enclosed Technical Information on Intermediate Coating > IC1-200 > (SOG). > Maximum recommended film thickness of IC1-200 is 500 nm, achieved by > double > spin coating. Excessive tensile stress in films thicker than 500 nm > might > lead to film cracking. It is also not recommended to expose IC1-200 > films > even after 400?C bake to oxygen plasma. Exposure to oxygen plasma > generates > silanol groups in IC1-200 film, which leads to moisture adsorption into > IC1-200 film and possible reliability issues. SOGs are not used as > stand-alone dielectrics but are usually sandwiched between CVD silicon > oxide > films and are applied to smoothen surface topology and to fill narrow > trenches in surface topology. IC1-200 film is insensitive to oxygen > plasma > and its properties resemble those of CVD oxide only after 850?C bake. > IC1-200 film becomess insoluble in common solvents after bake on a > hotplate > at 100?C for 60 s. > There is also attached Technical Information on Dielectric Coating > DC4-500. > Maximum film thickness for DC4-500 is 1 ?m, applied by double coating. > After > curing at temperatures exceeding 850?C, DC4-500 film achieves higher > degree > of hardness than other SOG films. > The most effective technique to planarize CVD silicon oxide on top of > optical waveguides is to apply Planarizing Coating PC3-1500 in > sacrificial > etchback process. > Technical Information on PC3-1500 is attached. > To give you a proper perspective, there is enclosed information on > products > from Futurrex. Please revue enclosed information and if any product > suits > your interests, Technical Information on that product will be e-mailed > to > you. > If you feel that further assistance is needed please do not hesitate to > contact me at your earliest convenience. > > Sincerely, > > Zbigniew P. Sobczak > Futurrex, Inc. > T: 973-209-1563 > E-mail: zpsobczak at futurrex.com > www.futurrex.com > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Name: PC3-1500.pdf > PC3-1500.pdf Type: Acrobat (application/pdf) > Encoding: base64 > Download Status: Not downloaded with message > > Name: PC3-1500 MSDS.xls > PC3-1500 MSDS.xls Type: EXCEL File (application/msexcel) > Encoding: base64 > Download Status: Not downloaded with message -- 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 stanford.edu http://snf.stanford.edu From mcvittie at snf.stanford.edu Fri Jul 25 13:12:52 2003 From: mcvittie at snf.stanford.edu (Jim McVittie) Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2003 13:12:52 -0700 Subject: [Fwd: FW: Technical Information on IC1-200, DC4-500 and PC3-1500. Information on products from Futurrex.] References: <3F21565B.CB6A095@snf.stanford.edu> <3F21677C.36DCE975@snf.stanford.edu> Message-ID: <3F218F44.DA35E8E3@snf.stanford.edu> Mary, I found it extremely useful to always get (demand) a copy of the vendor's application note for any type of resist related chemical. There are a number of reasons for doing this. First, you can check to make sure the particular chemical is going to do what the user claims. Second, these notes are often much informative on how to use the chemical that the MSDS. Next, other users who may want to this chemistry will need this info. And finally, I learned a lot useful info from readingf these app notes. Jim Ps. Do we have a place where the hard copies of the appl notes, msds and request forms are being filed? I have a pile of info that I can bring down to be stored. Mary Tang wrote: > Hi Mahnaz, Claudia -- > > I know you two have gone through this, but for our SpecMat records, could I also get the following information > (this list is from our website)? > > 1. Why don't any currently approved chemicals work for your purpose? > 2. List all the lab equipment and wet benches that you propose to use with this chemical: > 3. Proposed quantity of the chemical that you want to bring into lab > 4. Where will the chemical be stored and for how long? (Will it remain only for your evaluation period or do > you need this for long term usage?) > 5. How do you dispose of excess chemical and/or byproducts? > 6. What is your process flow for this part of your process? > > I take it that this is a spin-on-glass. Where will you be curing it? I take it that you'll be curing this in > the 400 C range? > > Thanks, > > Mary > > Mahnaz wrote: > > > Hi Claudia, > > > > I reviewed your request for PC3-1500 and I am ok with it. As usual get > > a yellow label from me and please only small bottle as storage is major > > issue for us here at Stanford. > > > > Your request for Ic1-200 and DC4-500: what will be the process steps on > > these chemicals? > > With IC1-200, it should be no plasma etching at all. > > With DC4-500 , curing needs up to 850C temperature, how will you go > > about that? > > > > mahnaz > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > Subject: FW: Technical Information on IC1-200, DC4-500 and PC3-1500. Information on products from Futurrex. > > Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2003 14:00:09 -0700 > > From: "Claudia Richter" > > To: > > > > Claudia Richter > > Senior Staff Engineer > > Los Gatos Research, Inc. > > 67 E. Evelyn Ave. Ste. 3 > > Mountain View, CA. 94041 > > Ph# : (650) 965-7717 > > FAX: (650) 965-7074 > > www.lgrinc.com/ > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Micah Yairi [mailto:mylgr at earthlink.net] > > Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2003 11:58 AM > > To: crlgr at earthlink.net > > Subject: FW: Technical Information on IC1-200, DC4-500 and PC3-1500. > > Information on products from Futurrex. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Zbigniew P. Sobczak [mailto:zpsobczak at futurrex.com] > > Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2003 9:24 AM > > To: Micah Yairi > > Cc: Sebastian Sobczak > > Subject: FW: Technical Information on IC1-200, DC4-500 and PC3-1500. > > Information on products from Futurrex. > > > > Dear Mr. Yairi: > > > > Please find enclosed MSDS for PC3-1500 and requested price quote: > > > > Product: Quantity: Price ($): > > > > Planarizing Coating PC3-1500 1 L 245.00 > > > > If you feel that further assistance is needed please do not hesitate to > > contact me at your earliest convenience. > > > > Sincerely, > > > > Zbigniew P. Sobczak > > Futurrex, Inc. > > T: 973-209-1563 > > E-mail: zpsobczak at futurrex.com > > www.futurrex.com > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Zbigniew P. Sobczak [mailto:zpsobczak at futurrex.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 5:14 PM > > To: Claudia Richter > > Cc: Sebastian Sobczak > > Subject: Technical Information on IC1-200, DC4-500 and PC3-1500. > > Information on products from Futurrex. > > > > Dear Ms. Richter: > > > > Thank you for your inquiry about spin-on glass and planarizing coatings. > > Please find enclosed Technical Information on Intermediate Coating > > IC1-200 > > (SOG). > > Maximum recommended film thickness of IC1-200 is 500 nm, achieved by > > double > > spin coating. Excessive tensile stress in films thicker than 500 nm > > might > > lead to film cracking. It is also not recommended to expose IC1-200 > > films > > even after 400?C bake to oxygen plasma. Exposure to oxygen plasma > > generates > > silanol groups in IC1-200 film, which leads to moisture adsorption into > > IC1-200 film and possible reliability issues. SOGs are not used as > > stand-alone dielectrics but are usually sandwiched between CVD silicon > > oxide > > films and are applied to smoothen surface topology and to fill narrow > > trenches in surface topology. IC1-200 film is insensitive to oxygen > > plasma > > and its properties resemble those of CVD oxide only after 850?C bake. > > IC1-200 film becomess insoluble in common solvents after bake on a > > hotplate > > at 100?C for 60 s. > > There is also attached Technical Information on Dielectric Coating > > DC4-500. > > Maximum film thickness for DC4-500 is 1 ?m, applied by double coating. > > After > > curing at temperatures exceeding 850?C, DC4-500 film achieves higher > > degree > > of hardness than other SOG films. > > The most effective technique to planarize CVD silicon oxide on top of > > optical waveguides is to apply Planarizing Coating PC3-1500 in > > sacrificial > > etchback process. > > Technical Information on PC3-1500 is attached. > > To give you a proper perspective, there is enclosed information on > > products > > from Futurrex. Please revue enclosed information and if any product > > suits > > your interests, Technical Information on that product will be e-mailed > > to > > you. > > If you feel that further assistance is needed please do not hesitate to > > contact me at your earliest convenience. > > > > Sincerely, > > > > Zbigniew P. Sobczak > > Futurrex, Inc. > > T: 973-209-1563 > > E-mail: zpsobczak at futurrex.com > > www.futurrex.com > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Name: PC3-1500.pdf > > PC3-1500.pdf Type: Acrobat (application/pdf) > > Encoding: base64 > > Download Status: Not downloaded with message > > > > Name: PC3-1500 MSDS.xls > > PC3-1500 MSDS.xls Type: EXCEL File (application/msexcel) > > Encoding: base64 > > Download Status: Not downloaded with message > > -- > 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 stanford.edu > http://snf.stanford.edu -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: mcvittie.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 422 bytes Desc: Card for Jim McVittie URL: From mcvittie at snf.stanford.edu Fri Jul 25 14:48:47 2003 From: mcvittie at snf.stanford.edu (Jim McVittie) Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2003 14:48:47 -0700 Subject: App Notes/Info for Futurrex IC1-200, DC4-500 and PC3-1500 Message-ID: <3F21A5BF.97215BE4@snf.stanford.edu> All, Attached is the info I got back from Futurrex for the SOG and Planarizing material that Claudia is requesting to bring into the lab. Jim -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: "Zbigniew P. Sobczak" Subject: Technical Information on IC1-200, DC4-500 and PC3-1500. Information on products from Futurrex. Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2003 17:36:13 -0700 Size: 1051801 URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: mcvittie.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 422 bytes Desc: Card for Jim McVittie URL: From latta at snf.stanford.edu Fri Jul 25 16:09:32 2003 From: latta at snf.stanford.edu (Nancy Latta) Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2003 16:09:32 -0700 Subject: Indium dep. "NNUN" inquiry Message-ID: <3F21B8AC.4060602@snf.stanford.edu> Hi Spec Mat, Ernie Caine, formallly of UCSB, has requsted an evaporation of In in the Innotec. To date we have not approved that material, that we know of.... Nancy -- Nancy Latta Stanford Nanofabrication Facility CIS Room 145 420 Via Palou Mall Stanford, CA 94305-4070 (650) 725-6727 latta at snf.stanford.edu -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: Jeannie Perez Subject: [Fwd: Indium dep. "NNUN" inquiry] Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2003 15:42:40 -0700 Size: 3777 URL: From mcvittie at snf.stanford.edu Fri Jul 25 17:21:47 2003 From: mcvittie at snf.stanford.edu (Jim McVittie) Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2003 17:21:47 -0700 Subject: Innotec: Indium and allowed materials References: <3F21B8AC.4060602@snf.stanford.edu> Message-ID: <3F21C99B.7669C46@snf.stanford.edu> Nancy, Indium is right on the line in terms of vapor pressure. Materials with vapor pressures above indium are not allowed and those below indium are allowed. So I would indium in the allowed group. The not allowed group incude: Bi, Ca, Li, Mg, As, Zn, Pb, Tl, Sb, Sr, Te, Na, K, Se, Cd, P, S, Cs and Hg. The allowed materials in terms of vapor pressure include: In, Ag, Al, Cu, Pd, Au, Fe, Co, Pt, Zr, Ir, Re, Mn, Pm, Sn, Be, Ge, Cr, Pr, Ni, Si, V, Rh, Mo, Ru, Nb, Os, W, and Ta. I have not looked at any of toxic issues with regard to this last group. So the listed allowed group in not the final word. Jim Jim Nancy Latta wrote: > Hi Spec Mat, > > Ernie Caine, formallly of UCSB, has requsted an evaporation of In in the > Innotec. To date we have not approved that material, that we know of.... > > Nancy > -- > Nancy Latta > Stanford Nanofabrication Facility > CIS Room 145 > 420 Via Palou Mall > Stanford, CA 94305-4070 > (650) 725-6727 > latta at snf.stanford.edu > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: [Fwd: Indium dep. "NNUN" inquiry] > Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2003 15:42:40 -0700 > From: Jeannie Perez > To: Nancy Latta CNRI/MEMS-Exchang > > Hello Nancy, > F.Y.I. this material (In) isn't one that has been qualified on the > Innotec or Metalica. I know he is talking about evaporating wafers. > Regards, > > -- > Jeannie Perez > Stanford Nanofabrication Facility > CIS Room 146, Mail Code 4070 > Stanford, CA 94305 > (650) 723-7997 > jperez at snf.stanford.edu > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: Indium dep. "NNUN" inquiry > Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 23:28:19 -0400 > From: Ernie Caine > Organization: Santa Barbara Focalplane > To: jperez at snf.stanford.edu > CC: ernie.j.caine at lmco.com > > Jeannie: > > I'm writing this to inquire about getting an indium metal evaporation > done at Stanford SNF through the NNUN program. > > The company I work for does indium evaporations in-house inorder to make > indium bumps of ~5 micron height. The wafers have patterned optical > resist such that standard acetone liftoff is done after the evaporation. > > One of the problems we have is with 'spitting' indium that leaves blobs > of it on the wafers which affects the height of the bump depending on > when the spit occurs during the evaporation step and if it lands over > open areas. This spitting is more than likely due to the simple thermal > heater/crucible we are using and the non-uniform heat distribution in > the crucible, bottom to top. We would like to coat a few wafers in a > system with an e-beam evaporator to see if there is an improvement. The > dep rate is about 100-150 A/sec. > > Can you do this there? Our wafers are InSb and are 75mm (3") in > diameter. > If you are not the right contact for this inquiry would you please pass > this note on? > > Thanks, > > -Ernie Caine > Senior Research Engineer > Santa Barbara Focalplane > 346 Bollay Drive > Goleta, CA 93117-8777 > 805-571-2377 > -562-8777 FAX -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: mcvittie.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 422 bytes Desc: Card for Jim McVittie URL: From mtang at snf.stanford.edu Mon Jul 28 07:44:54 2003 From: mtang at snf.stanford.edu (Mary Tang) Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 07:44:54 -0700 Subject: [Fwd: FW: Technical Information on IC1-200, DC4-500 and PC3-1500. Information on products from Futurrex.] References: <3F21565B.CB6A095@snf.stanford.edu> <3F21677C.36DCE975@snf.stanford.edu> <3F218F44.DA35E8E3@snf.stanford.edu> Message-ID: <3F2536E6.6F4F9F45@snf.stanford.edu> Yes Jim, you are absolutely right and I can't believe I didn't request references or application notes in my note... Mahnaz keeps SpecMat info for chemicals that she has already approved. I think we should set up some place where we can store hard copies (I will volunteer my office -- once I've cleared out some stuff -- for now.) I much prefer electronic forms, but will grant that lots of stuff is not available electronically. I'm thinking that we should, on some sort of regular basis, generate a report for ourselves and for labmembers, which lists the new materials requests submitted and the outcomes. We could keep a database of these materials and all the relevant references -- then this would be a useful resource, not only for SpecMat, but for labmembers as well... What do you think? If you'd like to drop off your 'pile of info' I will find a place to store it. Mary Jim McVittie wrote: > Mary, > > I found it extremely useful to always get (demand) a copy of the vendor's application note for any type of resist > related chemical. There are a number of reasons for doing this. First, you can check to make sure the particular > chemical is going to do what the user claims. Second, these notes are often much informative on how to use the > chemical that the MSDS. Next, other users who may want to this chemistry will need this info. And finally, I > learned a lot useful info from readingf these app notes. Jim > > Ps. Do we have a place where the hard copies of the appl notes, msds and request forms are being filed? I have a > pile of info that I can bring down to be stored. > > Mary Tang wrote: > > > Hi Mahnaz, Claudia -- > > > > I know you two have gone through this, but for our SpecMat records, could I also get the following information > > (this list is from our website)? > > > > 1. Why don't any currently approved chemicals work for your purpose? > > 2. List all the lab equipment and wet benches that you propose to use with this chemical: > > 3. Proposed quantity of the chemical that you want to bring into lab > > 4. Where will the chemical be stored and for how long? (Will it remain only for your evaluation period or do > > you need this for long term usage?) > > 5. How do you dispose of excess chemical and/or byproducts? > > 6. What is your process flow for this part of your process? > > > > I take it that this is a spin-on-glass. Where will you be curing it? I take it that you'll be curing this in > > the 400 C range? > > > > Thanks, > > > > Mary > > > > Mahnaz wrote: > > > > > Hi Claudia, > > > > > > I reviewed your request for PC3-1500 and I am ok with it. As usual get > > > a yellow label from me and please only small bottle as storage is major > > > issue for us here at Stanford. > > > > > > Your request for Ic1-200 and DC4-500: what will be the process steps on > > > these chemicals? > > > With IC1-200, it should be no plasma etching at all. > > > With DC4-500 , curing needs up to 850C temperature, how will you go > > > about that? > > > > > > mahnaz > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > Subject: FW: Technical Information on IC1-200, DC4-500 and PC3-1500. Information on products from Futurrex. > > > Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2003 14:00:09 -0700 > > > From: "Claudia Richter" > > > To: > > > > > > Claudia Richter > > > Senior Staff Engineer > > > Los Gatos Research, Inc. > > > 67 E. Evelyn Ave. Ste. 3 > > > Mountain View, CA. 94041 > > > Ph# : (650) 965-7717 > > > FAX: (650) 965-7074 > > > www.lgrinc.com/ > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Micah Yairi [mailto:mylgr at earthlink.net] > > > Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2003 11:58 AM > > > To: crlgr at earthlink.net > > > Subject: FW: Technical Information on IC1-200, DC4-500 and PC3-1500. > > > Information on products from Futurrex. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Zbigniew P. Sobczak [mailto:zpsobczak at futurrex.com] > > > Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2003 9:24 AM > > > To: Micah Yairi > > > Cc: Sebastian Sobczak > > > Subject: FW: Technical Information on IC1-200, DC4-500 and PC3-1500. > > > Information on products from Futurrex. > > > > > > Dear Mr. Yairi: > > > > > > Please find enclosed MSDS for PC3-1500 and requested price quote: > > > > > > Product: Quantity: Price ($): > > > > > > Planarizing Coating PC3-1500 1 L 245.00 > > > > > > If you feel that further assistance is needed please do not hesitate to > > > contact me at your earliest convenience. > > > > > > Sincerely, > > > > > > Zbigniew P. Sobczak > > > Futurrex, Inc. > > > T: 973-209-1563 > > > E-mail: zpsobczak at futurrex.com > > > www.futurrex.com > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Zbigniew P. Sobczak [mailto:zpsobczak at futurrex.com] > > > Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 5:14 PM > > > To: Claudia Richter > > > Cc: Sebastian Sobczak > > > Subject: Technical Information on IC1-200, DC4-500 and PC3-1500. > > > Information on products from Futurrex. > > > > > > Dear Ms. Richter: > > > > > > Thank you for your inquiry about spin-on glass and planarizing coatings. > > > Please find enclosed Technical Information on Intermediate Coating > > > IC1-200 > > > (SOG). > > > Maximum recommended film thickness of IC1-200 is 500 nm, achieved by > > > double > > > spin coating. Excessive tensile stress in films thicker than 500 nm > > > might > > > lead to film cracking. It is also not recommended to expose IC1-200 > > > films > > > even after 400?C bake to oxygen plasma. Exposure to oxygen plasma > > > generates > > > silanol groups in IC1-200 film, which leads to moisture adsorption into > > > IC1-200 film and possible reliability issues. SOGs are not used as > > > stand-alone dielectrics but are usually sandwiched between CVD silicon > > > oxide > > > films and are applied to smoothen surface topology and to fill narrow > > > trenches in surface topology. IC1-200 film is insensitive to oxygen > > > plasma > > > and its properties resemble those of CVD oxide only after 850?C bake. > > > IC1-200 film becomess insoluble in common solvents after bake on a > > > hotplate > > > at 100?C for 60 s. > > > There is also attached Technical Information on Dielectric Coating > > > DC4-500. > > > Maximum film thickness for DC4-500 is 1 ?m, applied by double coating. > > > After > > > curing at temperatures exceeding 850?C, DC4-500 film achieves higher > > > degree > > > of hardness than other SOG films. > > > The most effective technique to planarize CVD silicon oxide on top of > > > optical waveguides is to apply Planarizing Coating PC3-1500 in > > > sacrificial > > > etchback process. > > > Technical Information on PC3-1500 is attached. > > > To give you a proper perspective, there is enclosed information on > > > products > > > from Futurrex. Please revue enclosed information and if any product > > > suits > > > your interests, Technical Information on that product will be e-mailed > > > to > > > you. > > > If you feel that further assistance is needed please do not hesitate to > > > contact me at your earliest convenience. > > > > > > Sincerely, > > > > > > Zbigniew P. Sobczak > > > Futurrex, Inc. > > > T: 973-209-1563 > > > E-mail: zpsobczak at futurrex.com > > > www.futurrex.com > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Name: PC3-1500.pdf > > > PC3-1500.pdf Type: Acrobat (application/pdf) > > > Encoding: base64 > > > Download Status: Not downloaded with message > > > > > > Name: PC3-1500 MSDS.xls > > > PC3-1500 MSDS.xls Type: EXCEL File (application/msexcel) > > > Encoding: base64 > > > Download Status: Not downloaded with message > > > > -- > > 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 stanford.edu > > http://snf.stanford.edu -- 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 stanford.edu http://snf.stanford.edu From mtang at snf.stanford.edu Mon Jul 28 07:49:41 2003 From: mtang at snf.stanford.edu (Mary Tang) Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 07:49:41 -0700 Subject: Innotec: Indium and allowed materials References: <3F21B8AC.4060602@snf.stanford.edu> <3F21C99B.7669C46@snf.stanford.edu> Message-ID: <3F253804.42E4132@snf.stanford.edu> So is it official then? In is approved for use in the innotec? Are there any concerns, as there were with tin, with flaking that we (or rather, Jeannie, Maurice, and Jim H) need to take into consideration? Actually, is waste a concern, following cleaning of the innotec? (Is all waste from innotec cleans considered hazardous waste and dealt with accordingly?) Mary Jim McVittie wrote: > Nancy, > > Indium is right on the line in terms of vapor pressure. Materials with vapor > pressures above indium are not allowed and those below indium are allowed. So > I would indium in the allowed group. The not allowed group incude: Bi, Ca, Li, > Mg, As, Zn, Pb, Tl, Sb, Sr, Te, Na, K, Se, Cd, P, S, Cs and Hg. The allowed > materials in terms of vapor pressure include: In, Ag, Al, Cu, Pd, Au, Fe, Co, > Pt, Zr, Ir, Re, Mn, Pm, Sn, Be, Ge, Cr, Pr, Ni, Si, V, Rh, Mo, Ru, Nb, Os, W, > and Ta. I have not looked at any of toxic issues with regard to this last > group. So the listed allowed group in not the final word. > > Jim > > Jim > > Nancy Latta wrote: > > > Hi Spec Mat, > > > > Ernie Caine, formallly of UCSB, has requsted an evaporation of In in the > > Innotec. To date we have not approved that material, that we know of.... > > > > Nancy > > -- > > Nancy Latta > > Stanford Nanofabrication Facility > > CIS Room 145 > > 420 Via Palou Mall > > Stanford, CA 94305-4070 > > (650) 725-6727 > > latta at snf.stanford.edu > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > Subject: [Fwd: Indium dep. "NNUN" inquiry] > > Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2003 15:42:40 -0700 > > From: Jeannie Perez > > To: Nancy Latta CNRI/MEMS-Exchang > > > > Hello Nancy, > > F.Y.I. this material (In) isn't one that has been qualified on the > > Innotec or Metalica. I know he is talking about evaporating wafers. > > Regards, > > > > -- > > Jeannie Perez > > Stanford Nanofabrication Facility > > CIS Room 146, Mail Code 4070 > > Stanford, CA 94305 > > (650) 723-7997 > > jperez at snf.stanford.edu > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > Subject: Indium dep. "NNUN" inquiry > > Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 23:28:19 -0400 > > From: Ernie Caine > > Organization: Santa Barbara Focalplane > > To: jperez at snf.stanford.edu > > CC: ernie.j.caine at lmco.com > > > > Jeannie: > > > > I'm writing this to inquire about getting an indium metal evaporation > > done at Stanford SNF through the NNUN program. > > > > The company I work for does indium evaporations in-house inorder to make > > indium bumps of ~5 micron height. The wafers have patterned optical > > resist such that standard acetone liftoff is done after the evaporation. > > > > One of the problems we have is with 'spitting' indium that leaves blobs > > of it on the wafers which affects the height of the bump depending on > > when the spit occurs during the evaporation step and if it lands over > > open areas. This spitting is more than likely due to the simple thermal > > heater/crucible we are using and the non-uniform heat distribution in > > the crucible, bottom to top. We would like to coat a few wafers in a > > system with an e-beam evaporator to see if there is an improvement. The > > dep rate is about 100-150 A/sec. > > > > Can you do this there? Our wafers are InSb and are 75mm (3") in > > diameter. > > If you are not the right contact for this inquiry would you please pass > > this note on? > > > > Thanks, > > > > -Ernie Caine > > Senior Research Engineer > > Santa Barbara Focalplane > > 346 Bollay Drive > > Goleta, CA 93117-8777 > > 805-571-2377 > > -562-8777 FAX -- 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 stanford.edu http://snf.stanford.edu From mcvittie at snf.stanford.edu Mon Jul 28 09:43:37 2003 From: mcvittie at snf.stanford.edu (Jim McVittie) Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 09:43:37 -0700 Subject: Futurrex Purity: IC1-200, DC4-500 and PC3-1500 References: <3F21565B.CB6A095@snf.stanford.edu> <3F21677C.36DCE975@snf.stanford.edu> <3F218F44.DA35E8E3@snf.stanford.edu> Message-ID: <3F2552B9.AC3D2823@snf.stanford.edu> All, I read over all the Futurrex Info on their planarizing, SOG and resist materials. There is no mention of purity. To be consistent with the restrictions we place of deposited layer from the outside, we really need some purity specs on these materials if we are going let them go into any of the clean etchers. I suggest we have Clausdia contact Futurrex and ask them for purity specs for all the materials, she is requesting to bring into the lab and to use in clean tools. Jim > > > Hi Mahnaz, Claudia -- > > > > I know you two have gone through this, but for our SpecMat records, could I also get the following information > > (this list is from our website)? > > > > 1. Why don't any currently approved chemicals work for your purpose? > > 2. List all the lab equipment and wet benches that you propose to use with this chemical: > > 3. Proposed quantity of the chemical that you want to bring into lab > > 4. Where will the chemical be stored and for how long? (Will it remain only for your evaluation period or do > > you need this for long term usage?) > > 5. How do you dispose of excess chemical and/or byproducts? > > 6. What is your process flow for this part of your process? > > > > I take it that this is a spin-on-glass. Where will you be curing it? I take it that you'll be curing this in > > the 400 C range? > > > > Thanks, > > > > Mary > > > > Mahnaz wrote: > > > > > Hi Claudia, > > > > > > I reviewed your request for PC3-1500 and I am ok with it. As usual get > > > a yellow label from me and please only small bottle as storage is major > > > issue for us here at Stanford. > > > > > > Your request for Ic1-200 and DC4-500: what will be the process steps on > > > these chemicals? > > > With IC1-200, it should be no plasma etching at all. > > > With DC4-500 , curing needs up to 850C temperature, how will you go > > > about that? > > > > > > mahnaz > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > Subject: FW: Technical Information on IC1-200, DC4-500 and PC3-1500. Information on products from Futurrex. > > > Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2003 14:00:09 -0700 > > > From: "Claudia Richter" > > > To: > > > > > > Claudia Richter > > > Senior Staff Engineer > > > Los Gatos Research, Inc. > > > 67 E. Evelyn Ave. Ste. 3 > > > Mountain View, CA. 94041 > > > Ph# : (650) 965-7717 > > > FAX: (650) 965-7074 > > > www.lgrinc.com/ > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Micah Yairi [mailto:mylgr at earthlink.net] > > > Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2003 11:58 AM > > > To: crlgr at earthlink.net > > > Subject: FW: Technical Information on IC1-200, DC4-500 and PC3-1500. > > > Information on products from Futurrex. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Zbigniew P. Sobczak [mailto:zpsobczak at futurrex.com] > > > Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2003 9:24 AM > > > To: Micah Yairi > > > Cc: Sebastian Sobczak > > > Subject: FW: Technical Information on IC1-200, DC4-500 and PC3-1500. > > > Information on products from Futurrex. > > > > > > Dear Mr. Yairi: > > > > > > Please find enclosed MSDS for PC3-1500 and requested price quote: > > > > > > Product: Quantity: Price ($): > > > > > > Planarizing Coating PC3-1500 1 L 245.00 > > > > > > If you feel that further assistance is needed please do not hesitate to > > > contact me at your earliest convenience. > > > > > > Sincerely, > > > > > > Zbigniew P. Sobczak > > > Futurrex, Inc. > > > T: 973-209-1563 > > > E-mail: zpsobczak at futurrex.com > > > www.futurrex.com > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Zbigniew P. Sobczak [mailto:zpsobczak at futurrex.com] > > > Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 5:14 PM > > > To: Claudia Richter > > > Cc: Sebastian Sobczak > > > Subject: Technical Information on IC1-200, DC4-500 and PC3-1500. > > > Information on products from Futurrex. > > > > > > Dear Ms. Richter: > > > > > > Thank you for your inquiry about spin-on glass and planarizing coatings. > > > Please find enclosed Technical Information on Intermediate Coating > > > IC1-200 > > > (SOG). > > > Maximum recommended film thickness of IC1-200 is 500 nm, achieved by > > > double > > > spin coating. Excessive tensile stress in films thicker than 500 nm > > > might > > > lead to film cracking. It is also not recommended to expose IC1-200 > > > films > > > even after 400?C bake to oxygen plasma. Exposure to oxygen plasma > > > generates > > > silanol groups in IC1-200 film, which leads to moisture adsorption into > > > IC1-200 film and possible reliability issues. SOGs are not used as > > > stand-alone dielectrics but are usually sandwiched between CVD silicon > > > oxide > > > films and are applied to smoothen surface topology and to fill narrow > > > trenches in surface topology. IC1-200 film is insensitive to oxygen > > > plasma > > > and its properties resemble those of CVD oxide only after 850?C bake. > > > IC1-200 film becomess insoluble in common solvents after bake on a > > > hotplate > > > at 100?C for 60 s. > > > There is also attached Technical Information on Dielectric Coating > > > DC4-500. > > > Maximum film thickness for DC4-500 is 1 ?m, applied by double coating. > > > After > > > curing at temperatures exceeding 850?C, DC4-500 film achieves higher > > > degree > > > of hardness than other SOG films. > > > The most effective technique to planarize CVD silicon oxide on top of > > > optical waveguides is to apply Planarizing Coating PC3-1500 in > > > sacrificial > > > etchback process. > > > Technical Information on PC3-1500 is attached. > > > To give you a proper perspective, there is enclosed information on > > > products > > > from Futurrex. Please revue enclosed information and if any product > > > suits > > > your interests, Technical Information on that product will be e-mailed > > > to > > > you. > > > If you feel that further assistance is needed please do not hesitate to > > > contact me at your earliest convenience. > > > > > > Sincerely, > > > > > > Zbigniew P. Sobczak > > > Futurrex, Inc. > > > T: 973-209-1563 > > > E-mail: zpsobczak at futurrex.com > > > www.futurrex.com > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Name: PC3-1500.pdf > > > PC3-1500.pdf Type: Acrobat (application/pdf) > > > Encoding: base64 > > > Download Status: Not downloaded with message > > > > > > Name: PC3-1500 MSDS.xls > > > PC3-1500 MSDS.xls Type: EXCEL File (application/msexcel) > > > Encoding: base64 > > > Download Status: Not downloaded with message > > > > -- > > 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 stanford.edu > > http://snf.stanford.edu -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: mcvittie.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 422 bytes Desc: Card for Jim McVittie URL: From mahnaz at snf.stanford.edu Mon Jul 28 10:21:35 2003 From: mahnaz at snf.stanford.edu (Mahnaz) Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 10:21:35 -0700 Subject: [Fwd: RR2 - Futurrex Resist Remover] Message-ID: <3F255B9F.6A4B731D@snf.stanford.edu> Hello I have ok the chemical for him, I am not sure if I had forwarded this to specmat . He gave me a hard copy of MSDS. mahnaz -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: sergei Subject: Re: RR2 - Futurrex Resist Remover Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 14:23:54 -0700 Size: 1658 URL: From mtang at snf.stanford.edu Mon Jul 28 10:27:45 2003 From: mtang at snf.stanford.edu (Mary Tang) Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 10:27:45 -0700 Subject: [Fwd: RR2 - Futurrex Resist Remover] References: <3F255B9F.6A4B731D@snf.stanford.edu> Message-ID: <3F255D11.B4EE2949@snf.stanford.edu> Hi Mahnaz -- How will he dispose of the stripper? (Is it a solvent and if so, can it be mixed in with other stuff in the solvent carboy?) Can we get an electronic version of the MSDS and (as Jim so rightfully pointed out) any application notes? Sorry, more paperwork - but if we have it on file, we won't have to do it again... Thanks, Mary Mahnaz wrote: > Hello > > I have ok the chemical for him, I am not sure if I had forwarded this to > specmat . He gave me a hard copy of MSDS. > > mahnaz > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: Re: RR2 - Futurrex Resist Remover > Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 14:23:54 -0700 > From: sergei > To: Mahnaz > References: <3ECAAD9A.8040207 at scipp.ucsc.edu> <3ECE531D.9AEA4640 at snf.stanford.edu> > > Hi Mahnaz, > > I'll use it for stripping negative photoresist off ITO coated glass wafers. > > Sergei > > Mahnaz wrote: > > >Hi Sergei, > > > >If there is a MSDS in the binder, you will only need a yellow label from me. > >Where will you use this chemical at? > > > >mahnaz > > > > > >sergei wrote: > > > > > > > >>Hi Mahnaz, > >> > >>I am working with negative photoresists NR7-3000P and NR7-3000PY. > >>Sometimes it's very hard to strip it off. Futurrex recommends to use > >>RR-2 remover. There's RR-2 MSDS in NSF binder, but apparently no RR-2 in > >>stock. I've already ordered a bottle of RR-2, so can it just be > >>delivered to SNF or I need to do some paper work before? > >> > >>Thank you, > >>Sergei > >> > >> > > > > > > > > -- 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 stanford.edu http://snf.stanford.edu From mtang at snf.stanford.edu Mon Jul 28 16:57:48 2003 From: mtang at snf.stanford.edu (Mary Tang) Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 16:57:48 -0700 Subject: spinning of chemicals References: <20030728213538.3059BABD0@sitemail.everyone.net> Message-ID: <3F25B87B.E5DAA684@snf.stanford.edu> Hi Alex -- First, could you please send future requests and responses to this email to specmat at snf? There's a bunch of us on the committee and this will make sure we all see your request -- the emails for specmat also get archived, so we'll always have the info at hand. As for your request... Please check out the procedures for bringing in new chemicals into the lab, which can be found at: http://snf.stanford.edu/Materials/NewMatProc.html Some of the information requested may not apply to your case, but if you could do due diligence and provide the information as best as you can, it would be greatly appreciated. One this that concerns me -- will the cholesterol and tocopheral acetate be solid? I ask because we do not generally allow powders or crystals to be brought into the lab and ask that they be mixed in diluents before coming into the lab. Thanks, Mary Alex Freeman wrote: > Mary, > > I have a need to spin the following recipes on few wafers. I would like to submit them for review and approval. > > 1. a mixture of hexane (95%)+ cholestorol (2%) + tocopherol acetate (2%). > 2. a mixture of light mineral oil and hexane (not sure what ratio, most likely 50-50). > > Please let me know what you and the others decide. > Thanks. > > alex > > ============================= > Alex Freeman, Ph.D > Cytoplex Biosciences > 2401 Merced St. > San Leandro, CA 94577 > Ph 214-353-2925 > http://www.cytoplex.com > ==================================== > > _____________________________________________________________ > Get email for your site ---> http://www.everyone.net -- 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 stanford.edu http://snf.stanford.edu From mcvittie at cis.Stanford.EDU Tue Jul 29 13:17:29 2003 From: mcvittie at cis.Stanford.EDU (Jim McVittie) Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2003 13:17:29 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Yttrium in Innotec In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20030728162302.09c1eea8@hdai1.PObox.stanford.edu> Message-ID: Hongjie, I spent a bit of time looking on the internet for safety issues related to Yttrium. Except for the one reference to the ignition of turnings, I could not fine any problems. http://www.azom.com/details.asp?ArticleID=1638 There lots of references to depositing Yttrium by ebeam. The deposition ref table that I use all the time says ebeam is an excellant choice for Yttrium. So I say go ahead and order you target material. You can use the Innotech. Jim On Mon, 28 Jul 2003, Hongjie Dai wrote: > > Hi Jim, > > We talked to PlasMaterials and were told that Y is common for Ebeam > evaporation. It is fairly inert once its surface oxidizes and is > passivated by the oxide. There is not much heath hazard. The reason we > want to try it is its low workfunction and air stability for our nanotube > FET work. > > If you agree, we will order the Y target. We hope to try evaporation > without a crucible liner first, since we may not be doing this often later > if it does not work for us. > > Thanks, Hongjie > > PS. I also just had a nice meeting with Gibbons and Nishi about the PECVD > setup. We will be going ahead with several ideas, with your guidance on > safety. Details later. > > > At 02:22 PM 7/28/2003 -0700, you wrote: > >On Mon, 28 Jul 2003, Hongjie Dai wrote: > > > > > > > > Jim, > > > > > > I'd like to get a permission from you to try an ebeam evaporation of > > > Yittrium in Inotec. Would that be ok? > > > > > > Hongjie > > > > > > >Hongjie, > > > >I have included some general info and the MSDS for yttrium below. The > >vapor pressure looks good. In a quick look at the MSDS, I did not see any > >major problems, however there is a question of about "turnings ignite in > >air". Let me look at this a little more and I will get back to you. > > > > Jim > > > > > >Name: yttrium > >Symbol: Y > >Atomic number: 39 > >Atomic weight: 88.90585 (2) > >Vapor Pressure: 1E-4 torr at 1157C, 1E-6 torr at 973C, 1E-8 at 830C > >CAS Registry ID: 7440-65-5 > >Standard state: solid at 298 K > >Colour: silvery white > >Classification: Metallic > > > >- Yttrium has a silvery-metallic lustre. Yttrium turnings ignite in air. > > > >- The metals are extractedas salts from the ores by extraction with > >sulphuric > >acid (H2SO4), hydrochloric acid (HCl), and sodium hydroxide (NaOH). > > > > > >******* Material Safety Data Sheet for Yttrium ******** > > acc. to OSHA and ANSI > > Printing date 05/30/2000 Reviewed on 05/05/2000 > >1 Identification of substance: > > * Product details: > > > > * Trade name: Yttrium foil > > > > * Stock number: 00401 > > > > * Manufacturer/Supplier: > > Alfa Aesar, A Johnson Matthey Company > > Johnson Matthey Catalog Company, Inc. > > 30 Bond Street > > Ward Hill, MA 01835-8099 > > Emergency Phone: (978) 521-6300 > > CHEMTREC: (800) 424-9300 > > Web Site: www.alfa.com > > > > * Information department: Health, Safety and Environmental > > Department > > > > * Emergency information: > > During normal hours the Health, Safety and Environmental > > Department. After normal hours call Chemtrec at (800) 424- > > 9300. > >2 Composition/Data on components: > > * Chemical characterization: > > Description: (CAS#) > > > > Yttrium (CAS# 7440-65-5), 100% > > * Identification number(s): > > > > * EINECS Number: 231-174-8 > > > >3 Hazards identification > > * Hazard description: ? Not applicable > > > > * Information pertaining to particular dangers for man and > > environment > > Not applicable > >4 First aid measures > > * General information No special measures required. > > > > * After inhalation Seek medical treatment in case of > > complaints. > > > > * After skin contact Generally the product does not irritate > > the skin. > > > > * After eye contact > > Rinse opened eye for several minutes under running water. If > > symptoms persist, consult a doctor. > > > > * After swallowing Seek medical treatment. > >5 Fire fighting measures > > * Suitable extinguishing agents > > Product is not flammable. Use fire fighting measures that > > suit the surrounding fire. > > > > * Protective equipment: No special measures required. > >6 Accidental release measures > > * Person-related safety precautions: Not required. > > > > * Measures for environmental protection: > > Do not allow material to be released to the environment > > without proper governmental permits. > > > > * Measures for cleaning/collecting: Pick up mechanically. > > > > * Additional information: > > See Section 7 for information on safe handling > > See Section 8 for information on personal protection > > equipment. > > See Section 13 for disposal information. > >7 Handling and storage > > * Handling > > > > * Information for safe handling: > > Keep container tightly sealed. > > Store in cool, dry place in tightly closed containers. > > No special precautions are necessary if used correctly. > > * Information about protection against explosions and fires: > > No special measures required. > > > > * Storage > > > > * Requirements to be met by storerooms and receptacles: > > No special requirements. > > > > * Information about storage in one common storage facility: > > Not required. > > > > * Further information about storage conditions: None. > >8 Exposure controls and personal protection > > * Additional information about design of technical systems: > > No further data; see item 7. > > > > Components with limit values that require monitoring at the > > workplace: > > > > Yttrium and compounds, as Y > > mg/m3 > > ACGIH TLV 1 > > Belgium TWA 1 > > Germany TWA 5-inhalable fraction of the aerosol > > Switzerland TWA 1 > > United Kingdom TWA 1; 3-STEL > > Netherlands TWA 1 > > Denmark TWA 1 > > Finland TWA 1 > > Ireland TWA 1; 3-STEL > > OSHA PEL 1 > > > > * Additional information: No data > > > > * Personal protective equipment > > > > * General protective and hygienic measures > > The usual precautionary measures for handling chemicals > > should be followed. > > > > * Breathing equipment: Not required. > > > > * Protection of hands: Not required. > > > > * Eye protection: Safety glasses > > > > * Body protection: Protective work clothing. > >9 Physical and chemical properties: > > * Form: Foil > > > > * Color: Grey > > > > * Odor: Odorless > > > > * Value/Range Unit > > Method > > > > * Change in condition > > > > * Melting point/Melting range: 1522 ? C > > > > * Boiling point/Boiling range: 2927 ? C > > > > * Sublimation temperature / start: Not determined > > > > * Flash point: Not applicable > > > > * Flammability (solid, gaseous) Fine powder: flammable > > > > * Ignition temperature: Not determined > > > > * Decomposition temperature: Not determined > > > > * Danger of explosion: > > Product does not present an explosion hazard. > > > > * Explosion limits: > > > > * Lower: Not determined > > > > * Upper: Not determined > > > > * Vapor pressure: Not determined > > > > * Density: at 20 ? C 4.472 g/cm3 > > > > * Solubility in / Miscibility with > > > > * Water: Insoluble > >10 Stability and reactivity > > * Thermal decomposition / conditions to be avoided: > > Decomposition will not occur if used and stored according to > > specifications. > > * Materials to be avoided: > > > > * Dangerous reactions No dangerous reactions known > > > > * Dangerous products of decomposition: Metal oxide fume > > > >[TOP] > >11 Toxicological information > > * Acute toxicity: > > * Primary irritant effect: > > > > * on the skin: Powder: irritant effect > > > > * on the eye: Powder: irritant effect > > > > * Sensitization: No sensitizing effects known. > > > > * Subacute to chronic toxicity: > > Yttrium is similar to the lanthanons and may have an > > anticoagulant effect on blood. Exposure to lanthanons may > > also lead to sensitivity to heat, itching, increased > > awareness of odor and taste, and liver damage. > > > > * Additional toxicological information: > > To the best of our knowledge the acute and chronic toxicity > > of this substance is not fully known. > > No classification data on carcinogenic properties of this > > material is available from the EPA, IARC, NTP, OSHA or > > ACGIH. > >12 Ecological information > > * General notes: > > Do not allow material to be released to the environment > > without proper governmental permits. > >*13 Disposal considerations > > * Product: > > > > * Recommendation > > Consult state, local or national regulations for proper > > disposal. > > > > * Uncleaned packagings: > > > > * Recommendation: > > Disposal must be made according to official regulations. > >*14 Transport information > > Not a hazardous material for transportation. > > > > * DOT regulations: > > > > * Hazard class: None > > > > * Land transport ADR/RID (cross-border) > > > > * ADR/RID class: None > > > > * Maritime transport IMDG: > > > > * IMDG Class: None > > > > * Air transport ICAO-TI and IATA-DGR: > > > > * ICAO/IATA Class: None > > > > * Transport/Additional information: > > Not dangerous according to the above specifications. > > > > > >[TOP] > >*15 Regulations > > * Product related hazard informations: > > Observe the general safety regulations when handling > > chemicals > > > > * National regulations > > All components of this product are listed in the U.S. > > Environmental Protection Agency Toxic Substances Control Act > > Chemical Substance Inventory. > > > > * Information about limitation of use: > > For use only by technically qualified individuals. > >*16 Other information: > > Employers should use this information only as a supplement to > > other information gathered by them, and should make > > independent judgement of suitability of this information to > > ensure proper use and protect the health and safety of > > employees. This information is furnished without warranty, > > and any use of the product not in conformance with this > > Material Safety Data Sheet, or in combination with any other > > product or process, is the responsibility of the user. > > > > * Department issuing MSDS: Health, Safety and Environmental > > Department. > > > > * Contact: Darrell R. Sanders > > ===================================== > Hongjie Dai > Department of Chemistry > Stanford University > Stanford, CA 94305 > Tel: 650-723-4518 (office) > 650-725-9156 (lab) > Fax: 650-725-0259 > Email: hdai1 at stanford.edu > ===================================== > > > -- -------------------------------------------------------------- James P. McVittie, Ph.D. SNF Director of Technology Allen Center for Integrated Systems Stanford Nanofabrication Facility Stanford University jmcvittie at stanford.edu Rm. 336, 330 Serra Mall Fax: (650) 723-4659 Stanford, CA 94305-4075 Tel: (650) 725-3640 From hdai1 at stanford.edu Tue Jul 29 13:21:08 2003 From: hdai1 at stanford.edu (Hongjie Dai) Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2003 13:21:08 -0700 Subject: Yttrium in Innotec In-Reply-To: References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030728162302.09c1eea8@hdai1.PObox.stanford.edu> Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.2.20030729132016.01aa14a8@hdai1.PObox.stanford.edu> Jim, Great. Thanks. David Mann will order Y for Inotec and try it with Qian. Hongjie At 01:17 PM 7/29/2003 -0700, Jim McVittie wrote: >Hongjie, > >I spent a bit of time looking on the internet for safety issues related to >Yttrium. Except for the one reference to the ignition of turnings, I could >not fine any problems. http://www.azom.com/details.asp?ArticleID=1638 >There lots of references to depositing Yttrium by ebeam. The deposition >ref table that I use all the time says ebeam is an excellant choice for >Yttrium. So I say go ahead and order you target material. You can use the >Innotech. > > Jim > >On Mon, 28 Jul 2003, Hongjie Dai wrote: > > > > > Hi Jim, > > > > We talked to PlasMaterials and were told that Y is common for Ebeam > > evaporation. It is fairly inert once its surface oxidizes and is > > passivated by the oxide. There is not much heath hazard. The reason we > > want to try it is its low workfunction and air stability for our nanotube > > FET work. > > > > If you agree, we will order the Y target. We hope to try evaporation > > without a crucible liner first, since we may not be doing this often later > > if it does not work for us. > > > > Thanks, Hongjie > > > > PS. I also just had a nice meeting with Gibbons and Nishi about the PECVD > > setup. We will be going ahead with several ideas, with your guidance on > > safety. Details later. > > > > > > At 02:22 PM 7/28/2003 -0700, you wrote: > > >On Mon, 28 Jul 2003, Hongjie Dai wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Jim, > > > > > > > > I'd like to get a permission from you to try an ebeam evaporation of > > > > Yittrium in Inotec. Would that be ok? > > > > > > > > Hongjie > > > > > > > > > >Hongjie, > > > > > >I have included some general info and the MSDS for yttrium below. The > > >vapor pressure looks good. In a quick look at the MSDS, I did not see any > > >major problems, however there is a question of about "turnings ignite in > > >air". Let me look at this a little more and I will get back to you. > > > > > > Jim > > > > > > > > >Name: yttrium > > >Symbol: Y > > >Atomic number: 39 > > >Atomic weight: 88.90585 (2) > > >Vapor Pressure: 1E-4 torr at 1157C, 1E-6 torr at 973C, 1E-8 at 830C > > >CAS Registry ID: 7440-65-5 > > >Standard state: solid at 298 K > > >Colour: silvery white > > >Classification: Metallic > > > > > >- Yttrium has a silvery-metallic lustre. Yttrium turnings ignite in air. > > > > > >- The metals are extractedas salts from the ores by extraction with > > >sulphuric > > >acid (H2SO4), hydrochloric acid (HCl), and sodium hydroxide (NaOH). > > > > > > > > >******* Material Safety Data Sheet for Yttrium ******** > > > acc. to OSHA and ANSI > > > Printing date 05/30/2000 Reviewed on 05/05/2000 > > >1 Identification of substance: > > > * Product details: > > > > > > * Trade name: Yttrium foil > > > > > > * Stock number: 00401 > > > > > > * Manufacturer/Supplier: > > > Alfa Aesar, A Johnson Matthey Company > > > Johnson Matthey Catalog Company, Inc. > > > 30 Bond Street > > > Ward Hill, MA 01835-8099 > > > Emergency Phone: (978) 521-6300 > > > CHEMTREC: (800) 424-9300 > > > Web Site: www.alfa.com > > > > > > * Information department: Health, Safety and Environmental > > > Department > > > > > > * Emergency information: > > > During normal hours the Health, Safety and Environmental > > > Department. After normal hours call Chemtrec at (800) 424- > > > 9300. > > >2 Composition/Data on components: > > > * Chemical characterization: > > > Description: (CAS#) > > > > > > Yttrium (CAS# 7440-65-5), 100% > > > * Identification number(s): > > > > > > * EINECS Number: 231-174-8 > > > > > >3 Hazards identification > > > * Hazard description: ? Not applicable > > > > > > * Information pertaining to particular dangers for man and > > > environment > > > Not applicable > > >4 First aid measures > > > * General information No special measures required. > > > > > > * After inhalation Seek medical treatment in case of > > > complaints. > > > > > > * After skin contact Generally the product does not irritate > > > the skin. > > > > > > * After eye contact > > > Rinse opened eye for several minutes under running water. If > > > symptoms persist, consult a doctor. > > > > > > * After swallowing Seek medical treatment. > > >5 Fire fighting measures > > > * Suitable extinguishing agents > > > Product is not flammable. Use fire fighting measures that > > > suit the surrounding fire. > > > > > > * Protective equipment: No special measures required. > > >6 Accidental release measures > > > * Person-related safety precautions: Not required. > > > > > > * Measures for environmental protection: > > > Do not allow material to be released to the environment > > > without proper governmental permits. > > > > > > * Measures for cleaning/collecting: Pick up mechanically. > > > > > > * Additional information: > > > See Section 7 for information on safe handling > > > See Section 8 for information on personal protection > > > equipment. > > > See Section 13 for disposal information. > > >7 Handling and storage > > > * Handling > > > > > > * Information for safe handling: > > > Keep container tightly sealed. > > > Store in cool, dry place in tightly closed containers. > > > No special precautions are necessary if used correctly. > > > * Information about protection against explosions and fires: > > > No special measures required. > > > > > > * Storage > > > > > > * Requirements to be met by storerooms and receptacles: > > > No special requirements. > > > > > > * Information about storage in one common storage facility: > > > Not required. > > > > > > * Further information about storage conditions: None. > > >8 Exposure controls and personal protection > > > * Additional information about design of technical systems: > > > No further data; see item 7. > > > > > > Components with limit values that require monitoring at the > > > workplace: > > > > > > Yttrium and compounds, as Y > > > mg/m3 > > > ACGIH TLV 1 > > > Belgium TWA 1 > > > Germany TWA 5-inhalable fraction of the aerosol > > > Switzerland TWA 1 > > > United Kingdom TWA 1; 3-STEL > > > Netherlands TWA 1 > > > Denmark TWA 1 > > > Finland TWA 1 > > > Ireland TWA 1; 3-STEL > > > OSHA PEL 1 > > > > > > * Additional information: No data > > > > > > * Personal protective equipment > > > > > > * General protective and hygienic measures > > > The usual precautionary measures for handling chemicals > > > should be followed. > > > > > > * Breathing equipment: Not required. > > > > > > * Protection of hands: Not required. > > > > > > * Eye protection: Safety glasses > > > > > > * Body protection: Protective work clothing. > > >9 Physical and chemical properties: > > > * Form: Foil > > > > > > * Color: Grey > > > > > > * Odor: Odorless > > > > > > * Value/Range Unit > > > Method > > > > > > * Change in condition > > > > > > * Melting point/Melting range: 1522 ? C > > > > > > * Boiling point/Boiling range: 2927 ? C > > > > > > * Sublimation temperature / start: Not determined > > > > > > * Flash point: Not applicable > > > > > > * Flammability (solid, gaseous) Fine powder: flammable > > > > > > * Ignition temperature: Not determined > > > > > > * Decomposition temperature: Not determined > > > > > > * Danger of explosion: > > > Product does not present an explosion hazard. > > > > > > * Explosion limits: > > > > > > * Lower: Not determined > > > > > > * Upper: Not determined > > > > > > * Vapor pressure: Not determined > > > > > > * Density: at 20 ? C 4.472 g/cm3 > > > > > > * Solubility in / Miscibility with > > > > > > * Water: Insoluble > > >10 Stability and reactivity > > > * Thermal decomposition / conditions to be avoided: > > > Decomposition will not occur if used and stored according to > > > specifications. > > > * Materials to be avoided: > > > > > > * Dangerous reactions No dangerous reactions known > > > > > > * Dangerous products of decomposition: Metal oxide fume > > > > > >[TOP] > > >11 Toxicological information > > > * Acute toxicity: > > > * Primary irritant effect: > > > > > > * on the skin: Powder: irritant effect > > > > > > * on the eye: Powder: irritant effect > > > > > > * Sensitization: No sensitizing effects known. > > > > > > * Subacute to chronic toxicity: > > > Yttrium is similar to the lanthanons and may have an > > > anticoagulant effect on blood. Exposure to lanthanons may > > > also lead to sensitivity to heat, itching, increased > > > awareness of odor and taste, and liver damage. > > > > > > * Additional toxicological information: > > > To the best of our knowledge the acute and chronic toxicity > > > of this substance is not fully known. > > > No classification data on carcinogenic properties of this > > > material is available from the EPA, IARC, NTP, OSHA or > > > ACGIH. > > >12 Ecological information > > > * General notes: > > > Do not allow material to be released to the environment > > > without proper governmental permits. > > >*13 Disposal considerations > > > * Product: > > > > > > * Recommendation > > > Consult state, local or national regulations for proper > > > disposal. > > > > > > * Uncleaned packagings: > > > > > > * Recommendation: > > > Disposal must be made according to official regulations. > > >*14 Transport information > > > Not a hazardous material for transportation. > > > > > > * DOT regulations: > > > > > > * Hazard class: None > > > > > > * Land transport ADR/RID (cross-border) > > > > > > * ADR/RID class: None > > > > > > * Maritime transport IMDG: > > > > > > * IMDG Class: None > > > > > > * Air transport ICAO-TI and IATA-DGR: > > > > > > * ICAO/IATA Class: None > > > > > > * Transport/Additional information: > > > Not dangerous according to the above specifications. > > > > > > > > >[TOP] > > >*15 Regulations > > > * Product related hazard informations: > > > Observe the general safety regulations when handling > > > chemicals > > > > > > * National regulations > > > All components of this product are listed in the U.S. > > > Environmental Protection Agency Toxic Substances Control Act > > > Chemical Substance Inventory. > > > > > > * Information about limitation of use: > > > For use only by technically qualified individuals. > > >*16 Other information: > > > Employers should use this information only as a supplement to > > > other information gathered by them, and should make > > > independent judgement of suitability of this information to > > > ensure proper use and protect the health and safety of > > > employees. This information is furnished without warranty, > > > and any use of the product not in conformance with this > > > Material Safety Data Sheet, or in combination with any other > > > product or process, is the responsibility of the user. > > > > > > * Department issuing MSDS: Health, Safety and Environmental > > > Department. > > > > > > * Contact: Darrell R. Sanders > > > > ===================================== > > Hongjie Dai > > Department of Chemistry > > Stanford University > > Stanford, CA 94305 > > Tel: 650-723-4518 (office) > > 650-725-9156 (lab) > > Fax: 650-725-0259 > > Email: hdai1 at stanford.edu > > ===================================== > > > > > > > >-- >-------------------------------------------------------------- >James P. McVittie, Ph.D. SNF Director of Technology >Allen Center for Integrated Systems Stanford Nanofabrication Facility >Stanford University jmcvittie at stanford.edu >Rm. 336, 330 Serra Mall Fax: (650) 723-4659 >Stanford, CA 94305-4075 Tel: (650) 725-3640 ===================================== Hongjie Dai Department of Chemistry Stanford University Stanford, CA 94305 Tel: 650-723-4518 (office) 650-725-9156 (lab) Fax: 650-725-0259 Email: hdai1 at stanford.edu ===================================== From afreeman at cytoplex.com Tue Jul 29 20:56:07 2003 From: afreeman at cytoplex.com (Alex Freeman) Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2003 20:56:07 -0700 (PDT) Subject: spinning of chemicals Message-ID: <20030730035607.ECD9CAC02@sitemail.everyone.net> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: specmat-snf.doc Type: application/msword Size: 31744 bytes Desc: not available URL: From latta at snf.stanford.edu Thu Jul 31 09:21:39 2003 From: latta at snf.stanford.edu (Nancy Latta) Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 09:21:39 -0700 Subject: Indium request resolved. Message-ID: <3F294213.2020706@snf.stanford.edu> Dear Committee, I reveived the following message from Ernie Caine. I had forwarded his request last week and he has resolved his problem; Nancy, Jeannie Perez was to have forwarded this to you earlier this week. To update you, I found that Thin Film Technology in Buellton down here (www.thinfilmtechnology.com) does indium evaps routinely for indium bump applications, so I'll be sending two 5" wafers to them, at a cost of about $1500 (!) They use a very low dep rate of 10-15 A/s to keep spitting down, etc. Indium is very messy. -- Nancy Latta Stanford Nanofabrication Facility CIS Room 145 420 Via Palou Mall Stanford, CA 94305-4070 (650) 725-6727 latta at snf.stanford.edu From latta at snf.stanford.edu Thu Jul 31 13:54:23 2003 From: latta at snf.stanford.edu (Nancy Latta) Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 13:54:23 -0700 (PDT) Subject: GaN Message-ID: Folks, MEMSX is asking about N2 annealing of GaN, no temp specified. Any tube I can do this in? Thanks! Nancy From mtang at snf.stanford.edu Thu Jul 31 15:02:37 2003 From: mtang at snf.stanford.edu (Mary Tang) Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 15:02:37 -0700 Subject: GaN References: Message-ID: <3F2991FD.91780587@snf.stanford.edu> I've absolutely no idea... Jim, Mike, John? M Nancy Latta wrote: > Folks, > > MEMSX is asking about N2 annealing of GaN, no temp specified. > > Any tube I can do this in? > > Thanks! > > Nancy -- 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 stanford.edu http://snf.stanford.edu From mcvittie at snf.stanford.edu Thu Jul 31 16:10:58 2003 From: mcvittie at snf.stanford.edu (Jim McVittie) Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 16:10:58 -0700 Subject: GaN References: <3F29893D.B305180A@snf.stanford.edu> Message-ID: <3F29A202.9A184612@snf.stanford.edu> Nancy, Can we use Gaas22 or Gaas23 for the anneal? Jim Jim McVittie wrote: > Nancy, > > If we had our "dirty" tube, we could do it there. For now lets look at > the Pacific Western furnace stack. Is there an anneal tube there? Jim > > Nancy Latta wrote: > > > Folks, > > > > MEMSX is asking about N2 annealing of GaN, no temp specified. > > > > Any tube I can do this in? > > > > Thanks! > > > > Nancy -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: mcvittie.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 422 bytes Desc: Card for Jim McVittie URL: From latta at snf.stanford.edu Thu Jul 31 17:07:52 2003 From: latta at snf.stanford.edu (Nancy Latta) Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 17:07:52 -0700 Subject: GaN In-Reply-To: <3F29A202.9A184612@snf.stanford.edu> References: <3F29893D.B305180A@snf.stanford.edu> <3F29A202.9A184612@snf.stanford.edu> Message-ID: <3F29AF58.1090703@snf.stanford.edu> Jim, I just went and took a look at the furnace, I think it was Gaas22 (Gasa23 is dark). They appear to be Harris group run. Posted is an old qualified users list with an note that Wayne Martin is the lead guy. Anyway, I think if I deleved into it I could find someone in the Harris group to train me, but in this particular case I think that the MEMSX folks can find an alternative. Nancy Jim McVittie wrote: > Nancy, Can we use Gaas22 or Gaas23 for the anneal? Jim > > Jim McVittie wrote: > > >>Nancy, >> >>If we had our "dirty" tube, we could do it there. For now lets look at >>the Pacific Western furnace stack. Is there an anneal tube there? Jim >> >>Nancy Latta wrote: >> >> >>>Folks, >>> >>>MEMSX is asking about N2 annealing of GaN, no temp specified. >>> >>>Any tube I can do this in? >>> >>>Thanks! >>> >>> Nancy -- Nancy Latta Stanford Nanofabrication Facility CIS Room 145 420 Via Palou Mall Stanford, CA 94305-4070 (650) 725-6727 latta at snf.stanford.edu From mtang at snf.stanford.edu Thu Jul 31 17:49:48 2003 From: mtang at snf.stanford.edu (Mary Tang) Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 17:49:48 -0700 Subject: New Material Request References: <007301c357b6$e50cedc0$090810ac@genorx.int> Message-ID: <3F29B92B.6D07A264@snf.stanford.edu> Fellow SpecMat'ers -- I think this looks OK to me, but will cede to your superior knowledge. There are a couple of items I'm a little unsure about. 1. The TLV for dichloroethane is pretty low. But no lower than chlorobenzene, which we allow in the headway. Dick, didn't you say that the rate of exhaust over the headway was deemed to be adequate by the Stanford safety folk for TLV of 10 ppm? 2. The amount of dichloroethane is very low, but technically, it's a halogenated solvent, so I believe it's supposed to be collected separately from other waste (both solid and liquid), and labeled as such, so that it can be incinerated at a higher temperature than ordinary solvent waste... (Maybe we ought to have another pot for solid halogenated waste, for stuff like this and chlorobenzene?) What do you say? Mary Edward Myers wrote: > Dr. McVittie, I have attached the supporting documentation for bring > new chemicals in to the SNF facility. We anticipate using very small > quantities during our evaluation and will be using a very limited > equipment set (Headway Coater and wbsolvent). If there is any more > supporting documentation, or information I can provide to expedite > your review please let me know. Regards, Ed MyersGenoRx, Inc.3916 > Trust WayHayward, CA 94545phone: (510) 732-9100email: > emyers at genorx.com -- 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 stanford.edu http://snf.stanford.edu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mtang at snf.stanford.edu Thu Jul 31 18:09:31 2003 From: mtang at snf.stanford.edu (Mary Tang) Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 18:09:31 -0700 Subject: spinning of chemicals References: <20030730035607.ECD9CAC02@sitemail.everyone.net> Message-ID: <3F29BDCB.75CCFA12@snf.stanford.edu> Hi Alex -- So far, looks good to me, but a couple of questions. 1. Is this a one-time experiment? (Will you be storing these chemicals over time or disposing of them soon after use? Knowing how cholesterol oxidizes, I would suspect you might want to get rid of it after using it, is that correct?) 2. We don't really have a specific area set up outside the lab for weighing and mixing chemicals. We might be able to set you up with something in the wafersaw room (there's a solvent bench there) but we don't have a precision balance. You do know that you can purchase cholesterol (I don't know about tocopherol acetate) in solvent solution, don't you? It's actually a lot handier -- you pipet the exact amount you want (more precisely than you could ever weigh such small amounts), dry it down with as little N2, then dissolve up in whatever solvent system you want. I've got pipettes, if you want to try this approach. 3. I don't know if it's such a good idea to use the wafersaw after spinning on your chemicals. The wafersaw uses a slurry of plain old city water to cool the blade and also generates a lot of silicon grit which sprays across the top of your wafer -- if you are concerned about surface quality, this is not a good tool to use... Mary Alex Freeman wrote: > Dear Mary, > > I will be mixing the cholestorol into the liquids, so I will not be bringing the powder inside the clean room. Enclosed please find the official document filled out for your review. > > alex > > ============================= > Alex Freeman, Ph.D > Cytoplex Biosciences > 2401 Merced St. > San Leandro, CA 94577 > Ph 214-353-2925 > http://www.cytoplex.com > ==================================== > > --- Mary Tang wrote: > >Hi Alex -- > > > >First, could you please send future requests and responses to this email to specmat at snf? There's a bunch of us on > >the committee and this will make sure we all see your request -- the emails for specmat also get archived, so we'll > >always have the info at hand. > > > >As for your request... Please check out the procedures for bringing in new chemicals into the lab, which can be > >found at: > >http://snf.stanford.edu/Materials/NewMatProc.html > > > >Some of the information requested may not apply to your case, but if you could do due diligence and provide the > >information as best as you can, it would be greatly appreciated. One this that concerns me -- will the cholesterol > >and tocopheral acetate be solid? I ask because we do not generally allow powders or crystals to be brought into > >the lab and ask that they be mixed in diluents before coming into the lab. > > > >Thanks, > > > >Mary > > > > > >Alex Freeman wrote: > > > >> Mary, > >> > >> I have a need to spin the following recipes on few wafers. I would like to submit them for review and approval. > >> > >> 1. a mixture of hexane (95%)+ cholestorol (2%) + tocopherol acetate (2%). > >> 2. a mixture of light mineral oil and hexane (not sure what ratio, most likely 50-50). > >> > >> Please let me know what you and the others decide. > >> Thanks. > >> > >> alex > >> > >> ============================= > >> Alex Freeman, Ph.D > >> Cytoplex Biosciences > >> 2401 Merced St. > >> San Leandro, CA 94577 > >> Ph 214-353-2925 > >> http://www.cytoplex.com > >> ==================================== > >> > >> _____________________________________________________________ > >> Get email for your site ---> http://www.everyone.net > > > >-- > >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 stanford.edu > >http://snf.stanford.edu > > _____________________________________________________________ > Get email for your site ---> http://www.everyone.net > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Name: specmat-snf.doc > specmat-snf.doc Type: WINWORD File (application/msword) > Encoding: base64 > Download Status: Not downloaded with message -- 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 stanford.edu http://snf.stanford.edu From ieaadhovdb at flyinghaggis.com Tue Jul 1 21:43:25 2003 From: ieaadhovdb at flyinghaggis.com (Walter Downs) Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 12:43:25 +0800 Subject: freebie Message-ID: <000b01c34054$96a6f357$9871c7dc@lwru> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: siphon.gif Type: image/gif Size: 25778 bytes Desc: not available URL: From yxlzfroe at bandaid.nl Tue Jul 22 10:17:38 2003 From: yxlzfroe at bandaid.nl (Jasper Gray) Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2003 20:17:38 +0300 Subject: scenery door Message-ID: <002501c35076$28142e5a$6ad0e058@pzdrz> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: reason.gif Type: image/gif Size: 3250 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: cesarean section.gif Type: image/gif Size: 3217 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: multicultural.gif Type: image/gif Size: 3558 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: race.gif Type: image/gif Size: 27862 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: treat.gif Type: image/gif Size: 426 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: tribe.gif Type: image/gif Size: 235 bytes Desc: not available URL: