From mtang at snf.stanford.edu Thu Oct 2 08:28:15 2003 From: mtang at snf.stanford.edu (Mary Tang) Date: Thu, 02 Oct 2003 08:28:15 -0700 Subject: ag4108 References: <3F785F7C.FD57F30D@snf.stanford.edu> <3F7A05C5.3CDD4EE7@snf.stanford.edu> Message-ID: <3F7C440F.E3D2CCF0@snf.stanford.edu> Hi Jim -- So, for the SpecMat record, is Ge approved for the AG4108? In general, or just for Chi On? And are there process limits (i.e., temperature, gases?) And are Ge pieces handled in the same way as Si pieces? (I do like the idea of visually checking for lost pieces.) Also, what etching was done to remove Ge from quartz? Also, it's been maybe two years or so since I was trained on this system -- at that time, silicon pieces were allowed, but only if placed on silicon carrier wafers with etched pockets, with the understanding that the pockets were close in size to the pieces. Have things changed since then? I also wonder if it might not be better to use two silicon wafers, bonded together, as a carrier, with the top wafer having KOH- through-etched pockets -- the pockets will be deeper if you KOH etch from the backside, the pocket will have inward sloping sidewalls (which might help hold thinner pieces, like Ge). Thanks, Mary Jim McVittie wrote: > Mary, > > When ChiOn Chui was using the AG4108 system last week about Wednesday, he > lost a Ge sample in the chamber. During subsequent runs by other users, the > sample melted and formed a ball about 1/4 in diameter. In addition, it > oxided resulting in Ge oxide deposition on the chamber walls. > > I found out about the problem during lunch time on Friday. By the time I > contacted the users to see who had lost a piece of Ge, he had already > contacted Uli saying that he had probably lost a piece of Ge. I told him > that this was unacceptable and if it happened again Ge would banded from the > system. I feel he honestly did not know that he had loss a piece of Ge. He > said he had been using irregular shaped pieces and apparently a portion of a > piece which broke off from thermal stress and slipped off the carrier > wafer. > > He and I talked to Len about the problem. We agreed that from now on, anyone > using pieces in this system would have to open and check the chamber at the > end of their run. > > The glassware was cleaned with no problems, yesterday. > > Jim > > Mary Tang wrote: > > > Hi Jim -- > > > > Can you update us on the ag4108? I also understand that there was a > > particle problem reported last Thursday and when investigated on Friday, > > a lot of strange film was observed on the quartzware. I understand that > > you suspect this may be Ge, and although it was approved for the ag4108 > > a while ago, I was wondering... what sort of limits were placed on the > > approval and what can be done for the system now? > > > > Thanks, > > > > 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 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 Oct 6 16:50:53 2003 From: mtang at snf.stanford.edu (Mary Tang) Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2003 16:50:53 -0700 Subject: Ge Cleaning Message-ID: <3F81FFDD.84B63B4A@snf.stanford.edu> Hi SpecMat'ers -- Bashar just dropped by my office to ask about where he should clean Ge wafers prior to Ge growth in epi... I understand that there's a lot of work going on trying to determine the definitive Ge clean for device work and that the process is still evolving -- I know little about Ge, but would appreciate some info, for the SpecMat record, if you please... Again, I know the proposed clean process is evolving, but Bashar's requirements, don't seem to be as critical, as he's using epi Ge as a sacrificial protective layer, and perhaps he can get by (and we can tolerate, and maybe even get some good info) with a less-than-completely-optimal process? >From our chat, it seems that the latest Ge clean is a PRS-1000 clean for 10 minutes, rinse, dry, then 6 cycles of HF and dump rinse before final spin dry. Bashar was wondering if and where he would be allowed to do such a clean. For the SpecMat record, has Ge been processed in any of the wet benches? If so, which ones and under what conditions? (Rumor has it that wbsilicide has been used.) Would Ge in PRS-1000 at wbmetal be acceptable? Alternatively, and perhaps, more conservatively, how about doing PRS-1000 in a glass beaker at wbgeneral, followed by the first HF dip using a clean polyethylene beaker? (The HF dips should remove any sodium introduced by use of glass beakers; HF has been shown to be nearly as good as HCl in removing metals.) Bashar is on a bit of a time crunch right now, so asked Uli and me what he should do -- although we don't have the complete story, we'd like to propose something that is workable for Bashar as well as alleviates any concerns about contamination in the epi system. So, what do y'all say? 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 stanford.edu http://snf.stanford.edu From mtang at snf.stanford.edu Mon Oct 6 16:55:59 2003 From: mtang at snf.stanford.edu (Mary Tang) Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2003 16:55:59 -0700 Subject: Rollup for September Message-ID: <3F82010F.F1305BDF@snf.stanford.edu> Hi all -- This is what I've got from Sept. '03 -- is it OK? Any changes or additions? Thanks, 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 stanford.edu http://snf.stanford.edu From mcvittie at snf.stanford.edu Mon Oct 6 18:37:40 2003 From: mcvittie at snf.stanford.edu (Jim McVittie) Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2003 18:37:40 -0700 Subject: Ge Cleaning References: <3F81FFDD.84B63B4A@snf.stanford.edu> Message-ID: <3F8218E4.7A48DC05@snf.stanford.edu> Mary, The whole point of doing a pre-epi clean is to remove metals. At present, we do not understand how to remove metals from Ge. It does not make any sense to me to start a clean by putting the wafers into a bath known to be most likely contaminated with all types of metals. I have told Bashar and the students working with Ge that if they are going to use PRS-1000 for the orginic clean step, it has to be done in a quartz beaker. If he wants to TRXF measurement to prove that the the metal bench PRS -1000 is clean, it is fine with him. Or if someone can make a logical argument why the metal bench PRS-1000 is clean without doing any testing, let me hear it. Jim Mary Tang wrote: > Hi SpecMat'ers -- > > Bashar just dropped by my office to ask about where he should clean Ge > wafers prior to Ge growth in epi... I understand that there's a lot of > work going on trying to determine the definitive Ge clean for device > work and that the process is still evolving -- I know little about Ge, > but would appreciate some info, for the SpecMat record, if you please... > > Again, I know the proposed clean process is evolving, but Bashar's > requirements, don't seem to be as critical, as he's using epi Ge as a > sacrificial protective layer, and perhaps he can get by (and we can > tolerate, and maybe even get some good info) with a > less-than-completely-optimal process? > > >From our chat, it seems that the latest Ge clean is a PRS-1000 clean for > 10 minutes, rinse, dry, then 6 cycles of HF and dump rinse before final > spin dry. Bashar was wondering if and where he would be allowed to do > such a clean. > > For the SpecMat record, has Ge been processed in any of the wet > benches? If so, which ones and under what conditions? (Rumor has it > that wbsilicide has been used.) Would Ge in PRS-1000 at wbmetal be > acceptable? Alternatively, and perhaps, more conservatively, how about > doing PRS-1000 in a glass beaker at wbgeneral, followed by the first HF > dip using a clean polyethylene beaker? (The HF dips should remove any > sodium introduced by use of glass beakers; HF has been shown to be > nearly as good as HCl in removing metals.) > > Bashar is on a bit of a time crunch right now, so asked Uli and me what > he should do -- although we don't have the complete story, we'd like to > propose something that is workable for Bashar as well as alleviates any > concerns about contamination in the epi system. So, what do y'all say? > > 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 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 mtang at snf.stanford.edu Tue Oct 7 08:16:07 2003 From: mtang at snf.stanford.edu (Mary Tang) Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2003 08:16:07 -0700 Subject: Ge Cleaning References: <3F81FFDD.84B63B4A@snf.stanford.edu> <3F8218E4.7A48DC05@snf.stanford.edu> Message-ID: <3F82D8B7.F46A5841@snf.stanford.edu> Thanks Jim -- I hadn't carefully considered the additional metals... It seems that Bashar is on a deadline -- can we help him in any way? A quick check of the Baker on-line purity analysis shows that PRS-1000 has at least no more trace purities than 6:1 BOE, with the exception of the following: - As/Sb - 100 ppb max vs 30 - Ca - 500 vs 200 - Fe - 500 vs 200 - K - 500 vs 300 - Na - 500 vs 300 - Zn - 500 vs 300 Trace elements tested for in VLSI products, but not for PRS-1000 are Pb (max 300 ppb) and Ti (max 300 ppb.) I think PRS-1000 is pretty clean because we used to use it at Intel for cleaning non-metal wafers in the CMOS line after certain steps where the resist was plasma hardened (but that was 15 years ago, and things have no doubt changed considerably since then...) So, how's this for a proposal: do PRS-1000 clean at wbgeneral in a quartz beaker (Uli has one on-hand, I believe) and subsequent HF dips at wbsilicide? Finally, I'm a little confused -- what kind of precautions or limitations are there on processing Ge substrates at wbsilicide? (Is this happening there?) Thanks, Mary Jim McVittie wrote: > Mary, > > The whole point of doing a pre-epi clean is to remove metals. At present, we > do not understand how to remove metals from Ge. It does not make any sense to > me to start a clean by putting the wafers into a bath known to be most likely > contaminated with all types of metals. I have told Bashar and the students > working with Ge that if they are going to use PRS-1000 for the orginic clean > step, it has to be done in a quartz beaker. If he wants to TRXF measurement > to prove that the the metal bench PRS -1000 is clean, it is fine with him. Or > if someone can make a logical argument why the metal bench PRS-1000 is clean > without doing any testing, let me hear it. > > Jim > > Mary Tang wrote: > > > Hi SpecMat'ers -- > > > > Bashar just dropped by my office to ask about where he should clean Ge > > wafers prior to Ge growth in epi... I understand that there's a lot of > > work going on trying to determine the definitive Ge clean for device > > work and that the process is still evolving -- I know little about Ge, > > but would appreciate some info, for the SpecMat record, if you please... > > > > Again, I know the proposed clean process is evolving, but Bashar's > > requirements, don't seem to be as critical, as he's using epi Ge as a > > sacrificial protective layer, and perhaps he can get by (and we can > > tolerate, and maybe even get some good info) with a > > less-than-completely-optimal process? > > > > >From our chat, it seems that the latest Ge clean is a PRS-1000 clean for > > 10 minutes, rinse, dry, then 6 cycles of HF and dump rinse before final > > spin dry. Bashar was wondering if and where he would be allowed to do > > such a clean. > > > > For the SpecMat record, has Ge been processed in any of the wet > > benches? If so, which ones and under what conditions? (Rumor has it > > that wbsilicide has been used.) Would Ge in PRS-1000 at wbmetal be > > acceptable? Alternatively, and perhaps, more conservatively, how about > > doing PRS-1000 in a glass beaker at wbgeneral, followed by the first HF > > dip using a clean polyethylene beaker? (The HF dips should remove any > > sodium introduced by use of glass beakers; HF has been shown to be > > nearly as good as HCl in removing metals.) > > > > Bashar is on a bit of a time crunch right now, so asked Uli and me what > > he should do -- although we don't have the complete story, we'd like to > > propose something that is workable for Bashar as well as alleviates any > > concerns about contamination in the epi system. So, what do y'all say? > > > > 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 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 mahnaz at snf.stanford.edu Tue Oct 7 08:45:10 2003 From: mahnaz at snf.stanford.edu (Mahnaz Mansourpour) Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2003 08:45:10 -0700 Subject: [Fwd: MSDS Link: 6-MERCAPTO-1-HEXANOL, 97%] Message-ID: <3F82DF86.DB3B8D82@snf.stanford.edu> Hello I am forwarding this from Nicole's behalf. She will use this as a adhesion promoter and the volume will be about 10 ml and she will store it at her own lab. mahnaz -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: Subject: MSDS Link: 6-MERCAPTO-1-HEXANOL, 97% Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2003 11:46:58 -0600 Size: 1259 URL: From mtang at snf.stanford.edu Tue Oct 7 08:56:50 2003 From: mtang at snf.stanford.edu (Mary Tang) Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2003 08:56:50 -0700 Subject: [Fwd: MSDS Link: 6-MERCAPTO-1-HEXANOL, 97%] References: <3F82DF86.DB3B8D82@snf.stanford.edu> Message-ID: <3F82E242.62928740@snf.stanford.edu> Thanks Mahnaz -- For the sake of completeness for our files: Where will this be used? And where will the substrates be processed subsequently? How will excess be disposed of? (Basically, the things outlined in http://snf.stanford.edu/Materials/NewMatProc.html which are not shown in this email. It is good to have a complete idea of how and where this stuff will be used. Especially if we hope to someday have personal chemicals in the lab somehow linked to SpecMat requests -- even if she stores the chemical in her own lab. By the way, I take it that she's coating gold-containing substrates (or other metal)?) Thanks, Mary Mahnaz Mansourpour wrote: > Hello > > I am forwarding this from Nicole's behalf. > She will use this as a adhesion promoter and the volume will be about 10 > ml and she will store it at her own lab. > > mahnaz > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: MSDS Link: 6-MERCAPTO-1-HEXANOL, 97% > Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2003 11:46:58 -0600 > From: > To: , > > > nicole Kerness (IP: 171.64.97.100) sent you the following MSDS: > > Sender's Message: > one of the new chemicals to be approved > > Common Name: 6-MERCAPTO-1-HEXANOL, 97% > Manufactured By: SIGMA-ALDRICH > Revised: 08/01/2003 > > To view this MSDS, click on the link below: > http://stanford.chemquik.com/default.asp?LinkNum=SAF.451088D > > ______________________________________________________________________ > To learn more about the ChemQuik MSDS System, visit > http://www.chemquik.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 From mcvittie at snf.stanford.edu Tue Oct 7 08:51:39 2003 From: mcvittie at snf.stanford.edu (Jim McVittie) Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2003 08:51:39 -0700 Subject: Ge Cleaning References: <3F81FFDD.84B63B4A@snf.stanford.edu> <3F8218E4.7A48DC05@snf.stanford.edu> <3F82D8B7.F46A5841@snf.stanford.edu> Message-ID: <3F82E10B.4B3495EF@snf.stanford.edu> Mary, PRS-1000 out of the bottle is not a probl;em to me. It is the plastic tank in the metal tank in the Metal bench that concerns me. I expect the tank to be loaded with metals and therefore any solution that is put into the tank would get contaminated. I tried to talk to Bashar about alternatives yesterday. It did not seem to be very interested. Jim Mary Tang wrote: > Thanks Jim -- > > I hadn't carefully considered the additional metals... It seems that Bashar is > on a deadline -- can we help him in any way? > > A quick check of the Baker on-line purity analysis shows that PRS-1000 has at > least no more trace purities than 6:1 BOE, with the exception of the following: > - As/Sb - 100 ppb max vs 30 > - Ca - 500 vs 200 > - Fe - 500 vs 200 > - K - 500 vs 300 > - Na - 500 vs 300 > - Zn - 500 vs 300 > > Trace elements tested for in VLSI products, but not for PRS-1000 are Pb (max 300 > ppb) and Ti (max 300 ppb.) I think PRS-1000 is pretty clean because we used to > use it at Intel for cleaning non-metal wafers in the CMOS line after certain > steps where the resist was plasma hardened (but that was 15 years ago, and things > have no doubt changed considerably since then...) > > So, how's this for a proposal: do PRS-1000 clean at wbgeneral in a quartz > beaker (Uli has one on-hand, I believe) and subsequent HF dips at wbsilicide? > > Finally, I'm a little confused -- what kind of precautions or limitations are > there on processing Ge substrates at wbsilicide? (Is this happening there?) > > Thanks, > > Mary > > Jim McVittie wrote: > > > Mary, > > > > The whole point of doing a pre-epi clean is to remove metals. At present, we > > do not understand how to remove metals from Ge. It does not make any sense to > > me to start a clean by putting the wafers into a bath known to be most likely > > contaminated with all types of metals. I have told Bashar and the students > > working with Ge that if they are going to use PRS-1000 for the orginic clean > > step, it has to be done in a quartz beaker. If he wants to TRXF measurement > > to prove that the the metal bench PRS -1000 is clean, it is fine with him. Or > > if someone can make a logical argument why the metal bench PRS-1000 is clean > > without doing any testing, let me hear it. > > > > Jim > > > > Mary Tang wrote: > > > > > Hi SpecMat'ers -- > > > > > > Bashar just dropped by my office to ask about where he should clean Ge > > > wafers prior to Ge growth in epi... I understand that there's a lot of > > > work going on trying to determine the definitive Ge clean for device > > > work and that the process is still evolving -- I know little about Ge, > > > but would appreciate some info, for the SpecMat record, if you please... > > > > > > Again, I know the proposed clean process is evolving, but Bashar's > > > requirements, don't seem to be as critical, as he's using epi Ge as a > > > sacrificial protective layer, and perhaps he can get by (and we can > > > tolerate, and maybe even get some good info) with a > > > less-than-completely-optimal process? > > > > > > >From our chat, it seems that the latest Ge clean is a PRS-1000 clean for > > > 10 minutes, rinse, dry, then 6 cycles of HF and dump rinse before final > > > spin dry. Bashar was wondering if and where he would be allowed to do > > > such a clean. > > > > > > For the SpecMat record, has Ge been processed in any of the wet > > > benches? If so, which ones and under what conditions? (Rumor has it > > > that wbsilicide has been used.) Would Ge in PRS-1000 at wbmetal be > > > acceptable? Alternatively, and perhaps, more conservatively, how about > > > doing PRS-1000 in a glass beaker at wbgeneral, followed by the first HF > > > dip using a clean polyethylene beaker? (The HF dips should remove any > > > sodium introduced by use of glass beakers; HF has been shown to be > > > nearly as good as HCl in removing metals.) > > > > > > Bashar is on a bit of a time crunch right now, so asked Uli and me what > > > he should do -- although we don't have the complete story, we'd like to > > > propose something that is workable for Bashar as well as alleviates any > > > concerns about contamination in the epi system. So, what do y'all say? > > > > > > 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 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 -------------- 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 Oct 7 11:25:38 2003 From: mtang at snf.stanford.edu (Mary Tang) Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2003 11:25:38 -0700 Subject: Ge Cleaning References: <3F81FFDD.84B63B4A@snf.stanford.edu> <3F8218E4.7A48DC05@snf.stanford.edu> <3F82D8B7.F46A5841@snf.stanford.edu> <3F82E10B.4B3495EF@snf.stanford.edu> Message-ID: <3F830521.42EA83E@snf.stanford.edu> Hi Jim -- So... Does this mean that what's been proposed (PRS-1000 at wbgeneral in a quartz beaker, HF dip/dump rinse/dry cycle at wbsilicide) is acceptable to you? Mary Jim McVittie wrote: > Mary, > > PRS-1000 out of the bottle is not a probl;em to me. It is the plastic tank in the > metal tank in the Metal bench that concerns me. I expect the tank to be loaded with > metals and therefore any solution that is put into the tank would get contaminated. > > I tried to talk to Bashar about alternatives yesterday. It did not seem to be very > interested. > > Jim > > Mary Tang wrote: > > > Thanks Jim -- > > > > I hadn't carefully considered the additional metals... It seems that Bashar is > > on a deadline -- can we help him in any way? > > > > A quick check of the Baker on-line purity analysis shows that PRS-1000 has at > > least no more trace purities than 6:1 BOE, with the exception of the following: > > - As/Sb - 100 ppb max vs 30 > > - Ca - 500 vs 200 > > - Fe - 500 vs 200 > > - K - 500 vs 300 > > - Na - 500 vs 300 > > - Zn - 500 vs 300 > > > > Trace elements tested for in VLSI products, but not for PRS-1000 are Pb (max 300 > > ppb) and Ti (max 300 ppb.) I think PRS-1000 is pretty clean because we used to > > use it at Intel for cleaning non-metal wafers in the CMOS line after certain > > steps where the resist was plasma hardened (but that was 15 years ago, and things > > have no doubt changed considerably since then...) > > > > So, how's this for a proposal: do PRS-1000 clean at wbgeneral in a quartz > > beaker (Uli has one on-hand, I believe) and subsequent HF dips at wbsilicide? > > > > Finally, I'm a little confused -- what kind of precautions or limitations are > > there on processing Ge substrates at wbsilicide? (Is this happening there?) > > > > Thanks, > > > > Mary > > > > Jim McVittie wrote: > > > > > Mary, > > > > > > The whole point of doing a pre-epi clean is to remove metals. At present, we > > > do not understand how to remove metals from Ge. It does not make any sense to > > > me to start a clean by putting the wafers into a bath known to be most likely > > > contaminated with all types of metals. I have told Bashar and the students > > > working with Ge that if they are going to use PRS-1000 for the orginic clean > > > step, it has to be done in a quartz beaker. If he wants to TRXF measurement > > > to prove that the the metal bench PRS -1000 is clean, it is fine with him. Or > > > if someone can make a logical argument why the metal bench PRS-1000 is clean > > > without doing any testing, let me hear it. > > > > > > Jim > > > > > > Mary Tang wrote: > > > > > > > Hi SpecMat'ers -- > > > > > > > > Bashar just dropped by my office to ask about where he should clean Ge > > > > wafers prior to Ge growth in epi... I understand that there's a lot of > > > > work going on trying to determine the definitive Ge clean for device > > > > work and that the process is still evolving -- I know little about Ge, > > > > but would appreciate some info, for the SpecMat record, if you please... > > > > > > > > Again, I know the proposed clean process is evolving, but Bashar's > > > > requirements, don't seem to be as critical, as he's using epi Ge as a > > > > sacrificial protective layer, and perhaps he can get by (and we can > > > > tolerate, and maybe even get some good info) with a > > > > less-than-completely-optimal process? > > > > > > > > >From our chat, it seems that the latest Ge clean is a PRS-1000 clean for > > > > 10 minutes, rinse, dry, then 6 cycles of HF and dump rinse before final > > > > spin dry. Bashar was wondering if and where he would be allowed to do > > > > such a clean. > > > > > > > > For the SpecMat record, has Ge been processed in any of the wet > > > > benches? If so, which ones and under what conditions? (Rumor has it > > > > that wbsilicide has been used.) Would Ge in PRS-1000 at wbmetal be > > > > acceptable? Alternatively, and perhaps, more conservatively, how about > > > > doing PRS-1000 in a glass beaker at wbgeneral, followed by the first HF > > > > dip using a clean polyethylene beaker? (The HF dips should remove any > > > > sodium introduced by use of glass beakers; HF has been shown to be > > > > nearly as good as HCl in removing metals.) > > > > > > > > Bashar is on a bit of a time crunch right now, so asked Uli and me what > > > > he should do -- although we don't have the complete story, we'd like to > > > > propose something that is workable for Bashar as well as alleviates any > > > > concerns about contamination in the epi system. So, what do y'all say? > > > > > > > > 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 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 -- 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 Tue Oct 7 12:04:57 2003 From: mahnaz at snf.stanford.edu (Mahnaz Mansourpour) Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2003 12:04:57 -0700 Subject: [Fwd: MSDS Link: 6-MERCAPTO-1-HEXANOL, 97%] References: <3F82DF86.DB3B8D82@snf.stanford.edu> <3F82E242.62928740@snf.stanford.edu> Message-ID: <3F830E59.4806C10C@snf.stanford.edu> Hi My bad, Nicole is only allowed to do her work at Headway bench. This material ( foil from headway) can be be doubled bag and go in to the hazardous bin. mahnaz Mary Tang wrote: > Thanks Mahnaz -- > > For the sake of completeness for our files: > > Where will this be used? > And where will the substrates be processed subsequently? > How will excess be disposed of? > > (Basically, the things outlined in > http://snf.stanford.edu/Materials/NewMatProc.html which are not shown in this > email. It is good to have a complete idea of how and where this stuff will be > used. Especially if we hope to someday have personal chemicals in the lab > somehow linked to SpecMat requests -- even if she stores the chemical in her > own lab. By the way, I take it that she's coating gold-containing substrates > (or other metal)?) > > Thanks, > > Mary > > Mahnaz Mansourpour wrote: > > > Hello > > > > I am forwarding this from Nicole's behalf. > > She will use this as a adhesion promoter and the volume will be about 10 > > ml and she will store it at her own lab. > > > > mahnaz > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > Subject: MSDS Link: 6-MERCAPTO-1-HEXANOL, 97% > > Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2003 11:46:58 -0600 > > From: > > To: , > > > > > > nicole Kerness (IP: 171.64.97.100) sent you the following MSDS: > > > > Sender's Message: > > one of the new chemicals to be approved > > > > Common Name: 6-MERCAPTO-1-HEXANOL, 97% > > Manufactured By: SIGMA-ALDRICH > > Revised: 08/01/2003 > > > > To view this MSDS, click on the link below: > > http://stanford.chemquik.com/default.asp?LinkNum=SAF.451088D > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > > To learn more about the ChemQuik MSDS System, visit > > http://www.chemquik.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 From mtang at snf.stanford.edu Tue Oct 7 16:00:59 2003 From: mtang at snf.stanford.edu (Mary Tang) Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2003 16:00:59 -0700 Subject: CEM 388SS References: Message-ID: <3F8345AB.4610F5E2@snf.stanford.edu> Hello SpecMat'ers -- Aleta requested this product which is an image contrast agent and optical planarizing material. It seems that there are many formulations, but this one, which contains glycol ether, is specifically designed for the Karl Suss and similar systems, for thick (>5 micron) resists. There are appear to be no non-glycol ether alternatives. I was concerned in that looking at the application notes, it seems that there is no post spin bake (in fact, baking is not good for the material) and that the stuff is SUPPOSED to be tacky when ready for expose. However, it appears from the protocol, that spinning dry post application for at least 20 seconds is considered sufficient to allow for post process handling. If we ask that she always keep the processed wafers in an enclosed box, except when actually working with them, would this be considered sufficient for our lab? I don't think this will be an issue, at any of the stations she proposes to use because of existing exhaust systems, except the karlsuss, which doesn't have one. What do you think? Mary "Jamora, Aleta" wrote: > Hi Mary, > > I have not been able to find an alternative for the CEM 388SS without the glycol ether. It would be great if the Spec Mat commitee would let me use the CEM 388SS as the vendor has supplied it to me already. I am happy to comply with any conditions that Spec Mat requires. > > Much Thanks, > -Aleta Jamora > -- 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 Fri Oct 10 12:28:21 2003 From: mtang at snf.stanford.edu (Mary Tang) Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2003 12:28:21 -0700 Subject: Fw: Simple processing of wafer for Prof. Yoh References: <008101c38f61$13d60a60$156140ab@stanford.edu> Message-ID: <3F870855.D2B7084C@snf.stanford.edu> Hi Rafael -- Dimethylformamide is not stocked at SNF. The MSDS reads like it's bad, but in actual use, it's not really bad (it's kind of viscous and has high boiling point/low vapor pressure, so can probably be readily handled in our hoods.) Mercury Chloride, however, is really toxic and I'm not sure you want to try this unless you've no other options. I don't think our hoods and procedures are adequately equipped to handle this. Indium, however, can be readily etched by many other means, including standard aqua regia. Can you use another etchant system? Mary Rafael Aldaz wrote: > Hello Ladies, > I was just wondering if you could tell me if we have the following chemicals > in the lab: > Mercury Chloride > Dimethylformamide > > or if it's possible to get them in. Thanks, > > Rafael > _____________________________________________________ > Rafael Aldaz > PhD Candidate, Harris Group > Department of Electrical Engineering raldaz at stanford.edu > CISX Building B113-24 snow.stanford.edu/~raldaz > Stanford University Phone: (650) 7252774 > Stanford, CA 94305 Fax: (650) 7234659 > _____________________________________________________ > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Kanji Yoh" > To: "Rafael Aldaz" > Sent: Friday, October 10, 2003 11:45 AM > Subject: Re: Simple processing of wafer for Prof. Yoh > > > Rafael, > > I have received a recipe from Joanna of Michigan University. > > I have attached the recipe. Do we have this chemical ; > > Mercury Chloride and Dimethylformamide? > > > > Kanji > > > > At 10:33 AM -0700 10/10/03, Rafael Aldaz wrote: > > > Kanji, > > > I have to clue how to remove the In dots, but I bet there is probably a > wet > > > etch that does that. Anyway, I't'd be matter of finding out. I'm going > > > into the lab after lunch so contact me with what you want to do. Good > luck, > > > > > > Rafael > > > _____________________________________________________ > > > Rafael Aldaz > > > PhD Candidate, Harris Group > > > Department of Electrical Engineering raldaz at stanford.edu > > > CISX Building B113-24 > snow.stanford.edu/~raldaz > > > Stanford University Phone: (650) > 7252774 > > > Stanford, CA 94305 Fax: (650) 7234659 > > > _____________________________________________________ > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Kanji Yoh" > > > To: "Rafael Aldaz" > > > Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2003 7:03 PM > > > Subject: Re: Simple processing of wafer for Prof. Yoh > > > > > > > > > > Hi Rafael, > > > > Thanks for your note. I was at IBM today. I will be in all day > tomorrow > > > > except at lunch time. Both of the samples (we have got 2 samples) seem > to > > > have > > > > same In particles on the surface which is not visible with naked eye > of > > > course. > > > > Is there a way to selectively remove those (supposed to be ) In dots > from > > > > the surface? > > > > I am alittle bit worried about In dot printing on the mask. Can we > take a > > > > look at > > > > the surface before start processing? Do you know of any method to do > that? > > > > If the particles are not so severe, let's go ahead and do the > lithography > > > as > > > > they are. > > > > Regards. > > > > > > > > Kanji Yoh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > At 11:24 AM -0700 10/9/03, Rafael Aldaz wrote: > > > > > Kanji, > > > > > We are processing our devices right now so most likely I can do > litho on > > > > > your samples tomorrow and probably do the etch either tomorrow or > early > > > next > > > > > week. Let me know is this works out for you, > > > > > > > > > > Rafael > > > > > _____________________________________________________ > > > > > Rafael Aldaz > > > > > PhD Candidate, Harris Group > > > > > Department of Electrical Engineering raldaz at stanford.edu > > > > > CISX Building B113-24 > > > snow.stanford.edu/~raldaz > > > > > Stanford University Phone: (650) > > > 7252774 > > > > > Stanford, CA 94305 Fax: (650) > 7234659 > > > > > _____________________________________________________ > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > From: "James Harris" > > > > > To: "Evan Thrush" ; "Rafael Aldaz" > > > > > > > > > > Cc: "Kanji Yoh" > > > > > Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2003 2:13 AM > > > > > Subject: Simple processing of wafer for Prof. Yoh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Evan or Rafael, > > > > > > Could one of you help Professor Yoh who is a visiting Prof in the > > > > > > group this year from Hokkaido Univ. to spin resist and etch a > simple > > > > > > pattern into a wafer? He has the single level mask for this > process, > > > > > > but isn't trained in the clean room and for a simple process like > > > > > > this, it makes no sense to go through all the qualifications one > > > > > > needs to go through to work in there. Since you guys both do a > lot > > > > > > of processing in CIS, I wonder if one of you could contact Prof. > Yoh > > > > > > and help him out to process his wafer. His office is just down > the > > > > > > hall from mine. If you could do this masking/etching week, it > would > > > > > > be a big help for him as he will finish processing the device when > he > > > > > > goes to Berlin next week. > > > > > > Many thanks, > > > > > > Coach > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > James S. Harris > > > > > > James & Ellenor Chesebrough Professor > > > > > E-Mail:Harris at snow.stanford.edu > > > > > > Department of Electrical Engineering Fax: (650)723-4659 > > > > > > CIS-X Rm 328 Ph: (650)723-9775 > > > > > > Stanford, CA 94305-4075 > > > > > > Adm. Asst.: Gail Chun-Creech Ph: (650)723-0983 > > > > > > > > > > > > __ ___ > > > > > > | | > > > > > > |__| > > > > > > __ arris Group, Solid State & Photonics Lab > > > > > > __| |__ http://www-snow.stanford.edu/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ************************************ > > > > Kanji Yoh > > > > Visiting Professor > > > > Electrical Engineering > > > > Soilid State Electronics Lab > > > > CIS-X Rm.324 > > > > Phone: (650)723-7537 > > > > FAX: (650)723-4659 > > > > ************************************ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---- > > > ************************************ > > Kanji Yoh > > Visiting Professor > > Electrical Engineering > > Soilid State Electronics Lab > > CIS-X Rm.324 > > Phone: (650)723-7537 > > FAX: (650)723-4659 > > ************************************ > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Name: InEtch.pdf > InEtch.pdf Type: Portable Document Format (application/pdf) > 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 bashar at snf.stanford.edu Mon Oct 13 10:21:21 2003 From: bashar at snf.stanford.edu (Shabbir A. Bashar, Ph.D.) Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 10:21:21 -0700 Subject: Question about Poly Dep on STS PECVD In-Reply-To: <3F81FFDD.84B63B4A@snf.stanford.edu> Message-ID: Hi Chris, My name is Shabbir Bashar; I am one of the lab users at SNF. Jeannie Perez thought that you were the most knowledgeable person for the STS PECVD at SNF and that you might be able to help regarding my query about the possibility of Poly deposition using that tool. She also informed me that no one has used it deposit poly for a while. Are you aware of: (a) whether indeed we can deposit poly using the STS PECVD (b) if so, whether deposition of poly would disrupt the tool from being in use for its regular application namely nitride and oxide deposition My samples can be thought of as "gold contaminated" for cleanliness classification purposes. Shabbir. From mcvittie at snf.stanford.edu Mon Oct 13 11:01:49 2003 From: mcvittie at snf.stanford.edu (Jim McVittie) Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 11:01:49 -0700 Subject: Question about Poly Dep on STS PECVD References: Message-ID: <3F8AE88D.B6A9CBFC@snf.stanford.edu> Shabbir, I am not an expert PECVD but I have looked into a bit for teaching plasma processing classes. I am not aware that you can deposition polysilicon in our STS PECVD system. I expect you are going need to increase the temperature significantly above our present deposition temperature of 350 C to get microcrystaline silicon since STS has a fairly low plasma density. In addition, having only a 2% SiH4 source is a problem. For a-Si or PolySi PECVD deposition, one usually needs a SiH4 partial pressure of about 50 mT. This means that the STS would have to operate around 10 Torr flowing only 2% SiH4. It will be interesting to see what Chris has to say about this. Chris has much experience than I have on the tool. Jim "Shabbir A. Bashar, Ph.D." wrote: > Hi Chris, > > My name is Shabbir Bashar; I am one of the lab users at SNF. Jeannie Perez > thought that you were the most knowledgeable person for the STS PECVD at SNF > and that you might be able to help regarding my query about the possibility > of Poly deposition using that tool. She also informed me that no one has > used it deposit poly for a while. Are you aware of: > > (a) whether indeed we can deposit poly using the STS PECVD > (b) if so, whether deposition of poly would disrupt the tool from being in > use for its regular application namely nitride and oxide deposition > > My samples can be thought of as "gold contaminated" for cleanliness > classification purposes. > > Shabbir. From yinliu at lwmicrosystems.com Mon Oct 13 13:59:11 2003 From: yinliu at lwmicrosystems.com (Yin Liu) Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 13:59:11 -0700 Subject: Low temperature PECVD Si3N4 Message-ID: <001801c391cc$dadb0ad0$94f8fea9@D960R031> Hi My name is Yin Liu, a current lab member. I plan to do low temperature PECVD Si3N4 for my devices. My devices are made of Pyrex glass, with Cr, Al and PMMA layers on them. Is it possible that I use STS PECVD to do Si3N4 deposition at 140C? I know there might be organic/carbon contaminations in the machine, and generate some particles. I am sure I will do the nitride and organic cleaning (oxygen plasma) procedures after each time I do the process, to eliminate the chances of bad effect on the machine. Thanks! Yin Liu LW Microsystems (510) 209-7469 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mtang at snf.stanford.edu Tue Oct 14 16:54:23 2003 From: mtang at snf.stanford.edu (Mary Tang) Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 16:54:23 -0700 Subject: Fw: Simple processing of wafer for Prof. Yoh References: <008101c38f61$13d60a60$156140ab@stanford.edu> <3F870855.D2B7084C@snf.stanford.edu> Message-ID: <3F8C8CAE.75807378@snf.stanford.edu> Hi Rafael -- After some discussion with others, we decided -- This process quite definitely cannot be done in our lab. Sorry... but it's pretty bad... Mary Mary Tang wrote: > Hi Rafael -- > > Dimethylformamide is not stocked at SNF. The MSDS reads like it's bad, but in > actual use, it's not really bad (it's kind of viscous and has high boiling > point/low vapor pressure, so can probably be readily handled in our hoods.) > > Mercury Chloride, however, is really toxic and I'm not sure you want to try this > unless you've no other options. I don't think our hoods and procedures are > adequately equipped to handle this. > > Indium, however, can be readily etched by many other means, including standard > aqua regia. Can you use another etchant system? > > Mary > > Rafael Aldaz wrote: > > > Hello Ladies, > > I was just wondering if you could tell me if we have the following chemicals > > in the lab: > > Mercury Chloride > > Dimethylformamide > > > > or if it's possible to get them in. Thanks, > > > > Rafael > > _____________________________________________________ > > Rafael Aldaz > > PhD Candidate, Harris Group > > Department of Electrical Engineering raldaz at stanford.edu > > CISX Building B113-24 snow.stanford.edu/~raldaz > > Stanford University Phone: (650) 7252774 > > Stanford, CA 94305 Fax: (650) 7234659 > > _____________________________________________________ > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Kanji Yoh" > > To: "Rafael Aldaz" > > Sent: Friday, October 10, 2003 11:45 AM > > Subject: Re: Simple processing of wafer for Prof. Yoh > > > > > Rafael, > > > I have received a recipe from Joanna of Michigan University. > > > I have attached the recipe. Do we have this chemical ; > > > Mercury Chloride and Dimethylformamide? > > > > > > Kanji > > > > > > At 10:33 AM -0700 10/10/03, Rafael Aldaz wrote: > > > > Kanji, > > > > I have to clue how to remove the In dots, but I bet there is probably a > > wet > > > > etch that does that. Anyway, I't'd be matter of finding out. I'm going > > > > into the lab after lunch so contact me with what you want to do. Good > > luck, > > > > > > > > Rafael > > > > _____________________________________________________ > > > > Rafael Aldaz > > > > PhD Candidate, Harris Group > > > > Department of Electrical Engineering raldaz at stanford.edu > > > > CISX Building B113-24 > > snow.stanford.edu/~raldaz > > > > Stanford University Phone: (650) > > 7252774 > > > > Stanford, CA 94305 Fax: (650) 7234659 > > > > _____________________________________________________ > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: "Kanji Yoh" > > > > To: "Rafael Aldaz" > > > > Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2003 7:03 PM > > > > Subject: Re: Simple processing of wafer for Prof. Yoh > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Rafael, > > > > > Thanks for your note. I was at IBM today. I will be in all day > > tomorrow > > > > > except at lunch time. Both of the samples (we have got 2 samples) seem > > to > > > > have > > > > > same In particles on the surface which is not visible with naked eye > > of > > > > course. > > > > > Is there a way to selectively remove those (supposed to be ) In dots > > from > > > > > the surface? > > > > > I am alittle bit worried about In dot printing on the mask. Can we > > take a > > > > > look at > > > > > the surface before start processing? Do you know of any method to do > > that? > > > > > If the particles are not so severe, let's go ahead and do the > > lithography > > > > as > > > > > they are. > > > > > Regards. > > > > > > > > > > Kanji Yoh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > At 11:24 AM -0700 10/9/03, Rafael Aldaz wrote: > > > > > > Kanji, > > > > > > We are processing our devices right now so most likely I can do > > litho on > > > > > > your samples tomorrow and probably do the etch either tomorrow or > > early > > > > next > > > > > > week. Let me know is this works out for you, > > > > > > > > > > > > Rafael > > > > > > _____________________________________________________ > > > > > > Rafael Aldaz > > > > > > PhD Candidate, Harris Group > > > > > > Department of Electrical Engineering raldaz at stanford.edu > > > > > > CISX Building B113-24 > > > > snow.stanford.edu/~raldaz > > > > > > Stanford University Phone: (650) > > > > 7252774 > > > > > > Stanford, CA 94305 Fax: (650) > > 7234659 > > > > > > _____________________________________________________ > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > > From: "James Harris" > > > > > > To: "Evan Thrush" ; "Rafael Aldaz" > > > > > > > > > > > > Cc: "Kanji Yoh" > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2003 2:13 AM > > > > > > Subject: Simple processing of wafer for Prof. Yoh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Evan or Rafael, > > > > > > > Could one of you help Professor Yoh who is a visiting Prof in the > > > > > > > group this year from Hokkaido Univ. to spin resist and etch a > > simple > > > > > > > pattern into a wafer? He has the single level mask for this > > process, > > > > > > > but isn't trained in the clean room and for a simple process like > > > > > > > this, it makes no sense to go through all the qualifications one > > > > > > > needs to go through to work in there. Since you guys both do a > > lot > > > > > > > of processing in CIS, I wonder if one of you could contact Prof. > > Yoh > > > > > > > and help him out to process his wafer. His office is just down > > the > > > > > > > hall from mine. If you could do this masking/etching week, it > > would > > > > > > > be a big help for him as he will finish processing the device when > > he > > > > > > > goes to Berlin next week. > > > > > > > Many thanks, > > > > > > > Coach > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > James S. Harris > > > > > > > James & Ellenor Chesebrough Professor > > > > > > E-Mail:Harris at snow.stanford.edu > > > > > > > Department of Electrical Engineering Fax: (650)723-4659 > > > > > > > CIS-X Rm 328 Ph: (650)723-9775 > > > > > > > Stanford, CA 94305-4075 > > > > > > > Adm. Asst.: Gail Chun-Creech Ph: (650)723-0983 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __ ___ > > > > > > > | | > > > > > > > |__| > > > > > > > __ arris Group, Solid State & Photonics Lab > > > > > > > __| |__ http://www-snow.stanford.edu/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ************************************ > > > > > Kanji Yoh > > > > > Visiting Professor > > > > > Electrical Engineering > > > > > Soilid State Electronics Lab > > > > > CIS-X Rm.324 > > > > > Phone: (650)723-7537 > > > > > FAX: (650)723-4659 > > > > > ************************************ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > ---- > > > > > ************************************ > > > Kanji Yoh > > > Visiting Professor > > > Electrical Engineering > > > Soilid State Electronics Lab > > > CIS-X Rm.324 > > > Phone: (650)723-7537 > > > FAX: (650)723-4659 > > > ************************************ > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Name: InEtch.pdf > > InEtch.pdf Type: Portable Document Format (application/pdf) > > 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 ctull at photonimaginginc.com Wed Oct 15 08:56:15 2003 From: ctull at photonimaginginc.com (Carolyn Tull) Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 08:56:15 -0700 Subject: FW: polyimide approval? Message-ID: <000a01c39334$dd445010$6501a8c0@CPQ28121814422> -----Original Message----- From: Carolyn Tull [mailto:ctull at photonimaginginc.com] Sent: Monday, October 13, 2003 9:31 AM To: 'specmat at crystal.stanford.edu' Subject: polyimide approval? Dear Materials Committee, I would like to bring a polyimide into the lab: HD Microsytems PI 2771 polyimde (main ingredient is n-methly-2-pyrollidone). It needs to be kept frozen when not in use. Amount to bring in: 250 g. I see that there are other polyimides in the lab, and I had this one approved 2 years ago, so do I need special approval for this one? I will, of course, put a copy of the MSDS in the SNF binders. thanks very much, Carolyn Tull ctull at photonimaginginc.com P.S. the snf website still has the old e-mail specmat at crystal.stanford.edu which doesn't seem to work. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mtang at snf.stanford.edu Thu Oct 16 07:45:47 2003 From: mtang at snf.stanford.edu (Mary Tang) Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 07:45:47 -0700 Subject: running Ge wafers in the epi- References: <3F8E3019.6040302@stanford.edu> Message-ID: <3F8EAF1B.9305A58F@snf.stanford.edu> Hi Rohit -- Yes, Shabbir Bashar had made this request -- however, as I understand it, this has not been officially approved yet by SpecMat. Maurice, who came to SNF with 10 years of experience doing ASM epi in a research environment (and is quite conservative with respect to contamination issues), felt that this should not be a problem in our epi. Maurice was concerned, however, about doing the cyclic HF at wbsilicide, and suggested decontaminating the HF tank prior to doing the dips to additionally ensure cleanliness at epi and even afterwards as well, to ensure that subsequent materials processed there are safe (many of us were not aware until recently that Ge processing was being done there). Jim agreed, in principle with Maurice's assessment, however, he also expressed the same concerns you are bringing up and indicated that we should consult with epi users before deciding whether to give final approval. Ge cleaning highlights some fundamental issues at SNF. We clearly need to be conservative in approving new materials to meet the research needs of our labmembers, but not at the expense of anyone's research -- and I do think we are conservative. However, we need to make clear-cut decisions and these decisions made need to be clearly rationalized and consistent in policy. We also need to communicate these issues and concerns to each other. And I think we can do much better on these last two issues, as this case has shown. I will follow up with Shabbir to let him know that his process has not been officially approved, at least, as yet. Maurice and Jim -- would you gentlemen be willing to email epi users? How does that sound? Mary "Rohit S. Shenoy" wrote: > Hi Jim, Mary: > > Today in the lab, we heard a labmember (login: bashar) mention > that he had obtained permission from one/both of you to run Ge > wafers or Ge-containing wafers in the epi. He had mentioned that he > was planning to clean the wafers with PRS-1000 and cyclic HF in > place of the standard diffusion clean (sulfuric and peroxide attack > Ge, making the standard diff clean unusable.) As was evident from > the meeting with Mike Deal last week, there is no evidence as yet > that the PRS-1000 + cyclic HF can remove metallic impurities down to > acceptable levels. That is the reason why those of us who do process > Ge are restricted to using only certain metal-contaminated > (semi-clean) tools. I'm surprised and concerned that he claims to be > allowed to run wafers in the epi. A lot of my research critically > requires epi for defect-free growth of Si/SiGe at relatively low > temperature. At the best of times, developing and calibrating these > recipes is an arduous task - involving multiple runs and > cross-sectional TEMs. I worry what would happen if the tool got > contaminated due to insufficient pre-cleaning of substrates. > Could you please get back to us letting us know the status of > allowing Ge into the epi? > > thanks a lot, > -- > Rohit -- 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 Oct 16 09:46:12 2003 From: mcvittie at snf.stanford.edu (Jim McVittie) Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 09:46:12 -0700 Subject: [Fwd: Contaminatioin from FIB Wafers] Message-ID: <3F8ECB54.96740E1D@snf.stanford.edu> -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: Jim McVittie Subject: Contaminatioin from FIB Wafers Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 09:32:27 -0700 Size: 2502 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 mtang at snf.stanford.edu Thu Oct 16 11:22:03 2003 From: mtang at snf.stanford.edu (Mary Tang) Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 11:22:03 -0700 Subject: FW: CEM 388SS References: Message-ID: <3F8EE1CA.C6F427A1@snf.stanford.edu> Hi Aleta & SpecMat'ers -- Mahnaz and I discussed this. As there are no safer alternatives, CEM 388SS is hereby approved for use by Aleta on the headway, provided the appropriate precautions to minimize glycol ether exposure in the lab are taken: 1. Follow processing procedures, as outlined in the application notes -- in particular, 1. to spin for at least 20 seconds AFTER applying the material to the wafer, to "dry" the film and, 2. to use the contact aligner in "proximity" mode. 2. Wafers should be kept in exhausted areas (i.e. wet benches) or stored and transported in an enclosed box. Only during actual exposure processing should wafers be allowed outside an exhausted area or box. Mary "Jamora, Aleta" wrote: > Hi Mary, > > Did the Spec Mat committee ever approve the use of the CEM 388SS ? I was able to run a short test using the CEM 388SS on our production equipment and got some very nice results. I would like to continue working with the material at Stanford as the production folks here grudgingly let me use the coater for a one time usage. I would be using the CEM on the headway spinner and it all cleans up with water. > > Much thanks, > > -Aleta Jamora > > Aerogen Inc. > 2071 Stierlin Court > Mountain View CA > 94043 > > ajamora at aerogen.com > phone 650 864 7407 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jamora, Aleta > Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2003 3:32 PM > To: 'Mary Tang' > Subject: RE: CEM 388SS > > Hi Mary, > > I have not been able to find an alternative for the CEM 388SS without the glycol ether. It would be great if the Spec Mat commitee would let me use the CEM 388SS as the vendor has supplied it to me already. I am happy to comply with any conditions that Spec Mat requires. > > Much Thanks, > -Aleta Jamora > > -----Original Message----- > From: Mary Tang [mailto:mtang at snf.stanford.edu] > Sent: Monday, October 06, 2003 2:52 PM > To: Jamora, Aleta > Subject: CEM 388SS > > Hi Aleta -- > > Just following up with the end-of-month-SpecMat wrap up... I was > wondering if you had a chance to look into whether there was a > non-glycol ether alternative to this material that you requested? If > so, it would be a nice, safe, alternative. If not, let us know and this > material can be approved, on a provisional basis. > > Thanks, > > 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 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 casey at reflectivity.com Thu Oct 16 15:46:52 2003 From: casey at reflectivity.com (Casey Feinstein) Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 15:46:52 -0700 Subject: photoresist Message-ID: Hello Committee, I see on your website that photoresist is an accepted material. Does this apply only to specific photoresists? My concern is that I have several wafers coated with Shipley TOK 3100 resist (in a CMOS foundry on a very clean track) that I would like to pattern at SNF. Is this resist okay in the lab? Casey Feinstein Reflectivity, Inc. 350 Potrero Avenue Sunnyvale, CA 94085 Voice: 408-737-8100 X151 Fax: 408-737-8153 ------------------------------------------- This email message (and any attached document) contains information from Reflectivity, Inc. which may be considered confidential by Reflectivity, or which may be privileged or otherwise exempt from disclosure under law, and is for the sole use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. Any other dissemination, distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you receive this message in error, please notify me and destroy the attached message (and all attached documents) immediately. From mtang at snf.stanford.edu Mon Oct 20 07:29:00 2003 From: mtang at snf.stanford.edu (Mary Tang) Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 07:29:00 -0700 Subject: photoresist Message-ID: <3F93F12C.EAB0A9E4@snf.stanford.edu> Hi Casey -- I believe there should be no problem with patterning in litho, provided this is conventional resist (i.e., not SU-8-like) that isn't tacky and likely to leave a residue that can't be easily removed by acetone (and your wafer backsides are clean.) Will you be etching or doing lift-off films afterward? If not, then I don't think there's any issue with your wafers (would you agree, Mahnaz?) If so, however, there may be concerns -- please let us know which equipment you would plan to use? Thanks, 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 stanford.edu http://snf.stanford.edu From casey at reflectivity.com Mon Oct 20 08:51:47 2003 From: casey at reflectivity.com (Casey Feinstein) Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 08:51:47 -0700 Subject: photoresist Message-ID: Hi Mary, Thanks for getting back to me so quickly. I will be doing no etching or liftoff. I plan to use the EPROM UV to expose my wafers through a mylar contact mask (super high tech) and develop them in my own glassware. I would need the litho wetbench drain too. That's it. Thanks, Casey -----Original Message----- From: Mary Tang [mailto:mtang at snf.stanford.edu] Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 7:29 AM To: Casey Feinstein Cc: specmat at snf.stanford.edu Subject: Re: photoresist Hi Casey -- I believe there should be no problem with patterning in litho, provided this is conventional resist (i.e., not SU-8-like) that isn't tacky and likely to leave a residue that can't be easily removed by acetone (and your wafer backsides are clean.) Will you be etching or doing lift-off films afterward? If not, then I don't think there's any issue with your wafers (would you agree, Mahnaz?) If so, however, there may be concerns -- please let us know which equipment you would plan to use? Thanks, 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 stanford.edu http://snf.stanford.edu From mtang at snf.stanford.edu Mon Oct 20 10:16:08 2003 From: mtang at snf.stanford.edu (Mary Tang) Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 10:16:08 -0700 Subject: photoresist Message-ID: <3F941858.C564EDD8@snf.stanford.edu> Sounds fine to me -- anyone else with another view on this? 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 stanford.edu http://snf.stanford.edu From mahnaz at snf.stanford.edu Mon Oct 20 13:32:40 2003 From: mahnaz at snf.stanford.edu (Mahnaz Mansourpour) Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 13:32:40 -0700 Subject: photoresist Message-ID: <3F944668.4E6AFBD4@snf.stanford.edu> Hi casey, Please do not use any of litho teflon cassettes. I have one for SU8 use when you are in the lab let me know and I will point it out to you. Same goes with the hot plates that you should change the foil after your usage. mahnaz From mtang at snf.stanford.edu Mon Oct 20 15:43:34 2003 From: mtang at snf.stanford.edu (Mary Tang) Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 15:43:34 -0700 Subject: Epi Request Message-ID: <3F946516.23D1C581@snf.stanford.edu> Hi Shabbir -- Just following up on your epi request to process germanium substrates. There was a bit of a discussion, because I thought that you were using new Ge wafers as the first part of bonded wafer process, whereas others seem to think that these wafers will have undergone extensive processing prior to epi. Could you please provide SpecMat with a process flow for your wafers prior to epi? We're sorry for the delay in getting to your request, but this is part of a much larger, more global effort to define how we handle Germanium in our lab, so these first decisions are important as they will set the precedent for future use... Thanks, 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 stanford.edu http://snf.stanford.edu From mtang at snf.stanford.edu Thu Oct 23 08:09:21 2003 From: mtang at snf.stanford.edu (Mary Tang) Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 08:09:21 -0700 Subject: SpecMat request - oxygen plasma Polyimide etching in STS etcher References: <3F414BA9.2030501@snf.stanford.edu> <3F42A7A9.84DC6BF6@snf.stanford.edu> <3F453A89.50506@snf.stanford.edu> Message-ID: <3F97EF21.74C8139E@snf.stanford.edu> Hi all (although this is really directed to Jim & Nancy) -- Randy is back and asking about this request... Was there ever a decision made on this? Jim expresses concern about the chamber conditioning. Is there an issue at all with the Al/Ti hard mask? Is the stsetch the best/appropriate place for this sort of etch? Mary Randy True wrote: > Jim, > > Thanks for the quick response. > > My polyimide etch process will have a similar effect to an oxygen plasma > clean so I'd propose to do the same conditioning as what is done after > an oxygen clean step, namely a 20min deep silicon etch on a photoresist > patterned Si wafer. To test this protocol, I would run and additional > patterned Si wafer after the conditioning wafer and measure the etch > rate. How does that sound? > > --Randy > > Jim McVittie wrote: > > >Randy, > > > >My question is how is your proposed process going affect the current STS > >etch processes. > >Your process will tend to strip off any polymer on the chamber walls and > >thus could change the > >equilibrium gas concentration is subsequent Si etching for some unknown > >number of wafers. Can you propose how we might be able to determine that > >this is not happening or how you could guarantee that the chamber is back > >to the equilibrium wall chemistry after your etch. Your process and post > >etch chamber seasoning must be such that the next user gets the same > >results as if you had been doing a standard deep Si etch. > > > > Jim > > > > > >Randy True wrote: > > > > > > > >>I would like to etch a polyimide film with an oxygen plasma in the STS > >>etcher. The wafer consists of a metal hard mask (Al/Ti bilayer) on an > >>8um thick layer of cured polyimide (PI2611). The wafers will be coming > >>from the metal chamber of the P5000 and are non-gold contaminated. > >>Currently, I am doing the etch in the PQuest with a mixture of Ar and > >>O2. I have also done this etch successfully on an Alcatel deep silicon > >>etcher, the 601E, at their Boston demonstration facility. > >> > >>Thanks, > >>Randy True > >> > >> -- 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 Oct 27 14:50:11 2003 From: mtang at snf.stanford.edu (Mary Tang) Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2003 14:50:11 -0800 Subject: Shabbir Bashar Message-ID: <3F9DA123.43966AEB@snf.stanford.edu> Hi Jim -- I just spoke with Shabbir about his Ge substrate processing request in epi. His Ge is straight from the vendor and he proposes that the first step (after cleaning) be the Ge epi. The second part (which has not been developed, much less approved through SpecMat) is a process in which Si is bonded to the Ge substrate, then smart cut off, leaving a Ge layer on Si. He says it's all "clean" processing even at this point. Then, he would like to put epi Ge on this substrate. I know nothing about the smart cut process for Ge, but it would seem to me that the first part of his process might be acceptable in epi, provided the clean is carefully defined (where it is to be done and what kind of decontamination precautions are needed.) What do you think and how does this sound to you? 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 stanford.edu http://snf.stanford.edu From bashar at snf.stanford.edu Wed Oct 29 13:07:45 2003 From: bashar at snf.stanford.edu (Shabbir A. Bashar, Ph.D.) Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2003 13:07:45 -0800 Subject: Nitride Dep on PECVD Diamond Message-ID: Hi everyone, Per Mary's suggestion I'm sending out this e-mail to SpecMat. I need to deposit a very smooth nitride film on Diamond. My initial trials with Si wafers using the nitride furnace have yielded very encouraging results and I'd like to follow this up by depositing nitride on Diamond. Please let me know your views ... I'd be happy to meet with you all to answer and questions and address any issues. Thanks! Shabbir From piecoco at stanford.edu Wed Oct 29 15:03:18 2003 From: piecoco at stanford.edu (Minhwan Lee) Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2003 15:03:18 -0800 Subject: New Chemicals & Materials Message-ID: <004901c39e70$d8626a40$687640ab@ms> Hello, The following is the information requested for bringing a new material. If there's any other thing I should submit, please let me know. Thank you, Sincerely, Minhwan Lee 1.. Requester name: Minhwan Lee 2.. Phone number: 725-9936(office), 387-7305(cell) 3.. email address: piecoco at stanford.edu 4.. Requestor?s PI (Advisor) or Company: Prof. Fritz Prinz (in Mechanical engineering) 5.. The name of the new Chemical (give all names commonly used): Potassium Silver Iodide, Silver Potassium Iodide. 6.. If there are secondary new chemicals that must be used with this material, such as a developer for a new resist, list each of them here and supply MSDSs for each of them. 7.. Name of vendor/manufacturer that you are planning to obtain this material from: Alfa Aesar 8.. URL for vendor?s website where info on the proposed chemical can be found: http://www.alfa.com 9.. Vendor?s address and phone number: Alfa Aesar 26 Parkridge Road Ward Hill, MA 01835 USA Telephone: 1-978-521-6300 10.. What is your reason for wanting to bring this material into the lab: To get a thin film of potassium silver iodide (KAg4I5) for impedance characterization. 11.. Make a strong case why you can not use an already approved chemical/material for this purpose: We need to have a superionic material which has high ionic conductivity in solid state at room temperature like RbAg4I5 or KAg4I5. There is no such material among already approved chemicals/materials. 12.. List all the lab equipment and wet benches that you propose to use with this chemical: Innotec (E-Gun Evaporator) 13.. Proposed quantity of the chemical that you want to bring into lab (give both raw and mixed quantities): 10grams 14.. State the form that the proposed chemical is in. (Is it solid, powder or liquid? Note: as a general rule, powders are not permitted in the cleanroom.): solid (originally powders but no problem with making it into solid.) 15.. State whether the chemical needed to be mixed to use it: No. 16.. From manufacturer, vendor or the Stanford safety site, obtain a legible Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) for all the proposed chemicals. Send these to the person listed below. OK. 17.. If the chemical/material is to be used in any the "clean" equipment, purity specifications will be needed. This is most important for chemicals/material that are not normally used for VLSI device fabrication. To be allowed into a "clean" tool, the material should MOS grade or better. OK. (Innotec is gold-contaminated.) 18.. Read the MSDSs as well as the Stanford Chemical Storage Groups and the Stanford Chemical Safety Data Base sections on this website to determine the Storage Group Identifier and Main Hazard Class of your chemical/material. Storage Group: C Hazard Class: #28 19.. Determine whether there is enough room to store your material in the designed lab storage areas. Storage groups A,B,D and L are stored in the yellow solvent cabinet in the furnace support area, while storage groups C, E, F and G are stored on top of one of the Pass-through Carts. Ensure your chemical container or material is properly labeled. If there is no available room, it must be stored by in the bulk storage area. You will then need to obtain it from receiving area personnel each time you want to use it and return it to them when you are finished using it (or each time you leave the lab). Note that there is no storage of chemicals/materials in the processing lab or at any wet bench. OK 20.. In your discussions with vendors, try to determine the best way to dispose of your spent chemicals and by-products. The lab has acid/base, HF and solvent drains. The acid/base drains go to a neutralization system before going the city waste water system. The city of Palo Alto has tight limits on the amount of heavy metals that be disposed of through the waste water system. If your chemical contains any metals, there is a good chance that you will have to collect all your waste and dispose of it in labeled containers which are picked up the Health and Safety Department. The HF drains go to a central tank which is pumped out by a HF disposal service at considerable expense on a regular basis. The solvent drains in the solvent benches are collected under the benches and disposed of by Heath and Safety as needed. OK 21.. Put together a detailed process flow description on how you proposed to use this chemical. This should include: Any chemical mixing, all lab equipment and wet benched to be used, all containers to be used, where chemical is to be stored and how chemical and by-products are to be deposed of. This should be in a Word file attached to your e-mail request. In reviewing your procedure, we will be most interested in how the safety and contamination issues are to be dealt with. OK -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: MSDS_KAg4I5.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 219140 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mcvittie at cis.Stanford.EDU Thu Oct 30 09:50:16 2003 From: mcvittie at cis.Stanford.EDU (Jim McVittie) Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2003 09:50:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: SiC/equipment "compatibility" In-Reply-To: <625BD6DD96DE554DBB0558FFE70E0F42076552@sboexch2.int.veeco.com> Message-ID: Nihat, Yes, I would like any more info you have on the SiC material and the contact info for the Case depositioin gp. University grown/deposited materials run from pretty clean to pretty dirty. I have not had contact with the work being done at Case. I will ask around here to see if I can get a feeling about how good they are in term of clean semiconductor material. When in doubt, we usually send a sample out for analysis. Also can you be more specific about what tools you want to use in our lab. Which LPCVD tubes and which P5000 chambers do you want to use. Thanks, Jim On Wed, 29 Oct 2003, Nihat Okulan wrote: > Hi Jim, > here are answers to your questions: > > 1.) The wafers are from Case Western Reserve University 2.) I did not > put a purity spec on the deposited film. I was guaranteed that the film > was deposited in a CMOS clean furnace and that they dope the SiC only > with Nitrogen and Phosphorous (no metal!). The Substrate Si wafers were > high quality, p-type Si wafers and are new. The film is about 20nm thick > SiC and the handle is 300um thick Si. No processing has been done on > those wafers after the deposition. 3)I was planning to use the standard > pre-diffusion clean process since the wafers should still belong to the > "clean" group. > > Please let me know if you would like to get the contact information of > the group that deposited the film. > > Hope to hear from you soon, Nihat. > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jim McVittie [mailto:mcvittie at cis.Stanford.EDU] > Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2003 6:09 PM > To: Nihat Okulan > Subject: RE: SiC/equipment "compatibility" > > > Nihat, > > Sorry, for not getting back to you sooner. In principle, SiC is OK, > however the details about your particular wafers and their cleaning are > important. I need to know the following: > > 1. Where you got your SiC wafer from? > > 2. What are the purity spec on the wafers? > > 3. How and where are you going to clean your wafers? Also what info do you > have on cleaning SiC wafers? We get incoming Si wafers which are loaded > with metal surface contamination. Fortunately, we know how to clean Si > wafers and so we can easily get all the metals off the surface. In the > case of SiC, I do not know anything about how to remove metals from it > surface. I have to feel that we know have to clean your wafers before they > can be allowed into the clean tool. > > > Jim > > On Wed, 29 Oct 2003, Nihat Okulan wrote: > > > I am assuming it is o.k. to use the SiC? > > > > (CMOS furnace, Nitrogen and Phosphorous as dopants) > > > > -Nihat > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Nihat Okulan > > Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 10:24 AM > > To: 'Jim McVittie' > > Subject: RE: SiC/equipment "compatibility" > > > > > > Hi Jim, we have spoken about SiC deposited Silicon wafers before (on > > the phone and per email) and I would like to confirm that it is o.k. > > that I can use the SiC in the LPCVD furnaces (clean bench as well) and > > the P5000. The Silicon wafers have a thin film of SiC deposited > > (20nm). The SiC has no metal impurities in them; they are grown out of > > a cmos furnace at CWRU. I would like to start working on these wafers > > on friday and hope to hear from you soon. > > > > Thanks, Nihat. > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Jim McVittie [mailto:mcvittie at cis.Stanford.EDU] > > Sent: Friday, July 18, 2003 1:05 PM > > To: Nihat Okulan > > Cc: specmat at snf.Stanford.EDU > > Subject: RE: SiC/equipment "compatibility" > > > > > > 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 mtang at snf.stanford.edu Thu Oct 30 10:38:38 2003 From: mtang at snf.stanford.edu (Mary Tang) Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2003 10:38:38 -0800 Subject: New Chemicals & Materials References: <004901c39e70$d8626a40$687640ab@ms> Message-ID: <3FA15AAD.EA448EF1@snf.stanford.edu> Hi Minhwan -- I have to admit that I'm not familiar with ionic conductor properties (perhaps the other SpecMat'ers are). Could you possible provide a reference or two describing the method by which the film is deposited? It would give at least me an idea of the machine configuration and process parameters used in previous experiments and whether the innotec would be able to handle this. Also, how thick did you want to deposit this? And would it be possible to contact any labs that have done this sort of process to find out more information? For example, it would seem, at least to me, that this might be quite soluble in polar solvents, and possibly hygroscopic -- could you find out about physical properties of this compound, particularly those which might affect the innotec? (i.e., solubilities, temp stability, vapor pressure at various temperatures, etc.) The MSDS form has the necessary safety info, but not really much info about the material itself. Oh, also, the MSDS mentions that it is light sensitive (and isn't this similar to the colloids used in photographic film?) Is this a problem for your experiment? Any info would be very helpful... Thanks. (Any comments from anyone else?) Mary Minhwan Lee wrote: > Hello, The following is the information requested for bringing a new > material.If there's any other thing I should submit, please let me > know.Thank you, Sincerely, Minhwan Lee > > 1. Requester name: Minhwan Lee > 2. Phone number: 725-9936(office), 387-7305(cell) > 3. email address: piecoco at stanford.edu > 4. Requestor?fs PI (Advisor) or Company: Prof. Fritz Prinz (in > Mechanical engineering) > 5. The name of the new Chemical (give all names commonly used): > Potassium Silver Iodide, Silver Potassium Iodide. > 6. If there are secondary new chemicals that must be used with this > material, such as a developer for a new resist, list each of them > here and supply MSDSs for each of them. > 7. Name of vendor/manufacturer that you are planning to obtain this > material from: Alfa Aesar > 8. URL for vendor?fs website where info on the proposed chemical can > be found: http://www.alfa.com > 9. Vendor?fs address and phone number: > Alfa Aesar > 26 Parkridge Road > Ward Hill, MA 01835 > USA > Telephone: 1-978-521-6300 > 10. What is your reason for wanting to bring this material into the > lab: > To get a thin film of potassium silver iodide (KAg4I5) for > impedance characterization. > 11. Make a strong case why you can not use an already approved > chemical/material for this purpose: > We need to have a superionic material which has high ionic > conductivity in solid state at room temperature like RbAg4I5 or > KAg4I5. There is no such material among already approved > chemicals/materials. > 12. List all the lab equipment and wet benches that you propose to > use with this chemical: > Innotec (E-Gun Evaporator) > 13. Proposed quantity of the chemical that you want to bring into lab > (give both raw and mixed quantities): > 10grams > 14. State the form that the proposed chemical is in. (Is it solid, > powder or liquid? Note: as a general rule, powders are not > permitted in the cleanroom.): > solid (originally powders but no problem with making it into > solid.) > 15. State whether the chemical needed to be mixed to use it: > No. > 16. From manufacturer, vendor or the Stanford safety site, obtain a > legible Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) for all the proposed > chemicals. Send these to the person listed below. > OK. > 17. If the chemical/material is to be used in any the "clean" > equipment, purity specifications will be needed. This is most > important for chemicals/material that are not normally used for > VLSI device fabrication. To be allowed into a "clean" tool, the > material should MOS grade or better. > OK. (Innotec is gold-contaminated.) > 18. Read the MSDSs as well as the Stanford Chemical Storage Groups > and the Stanford Chemical Safety Data Base sections on this > website to determine the Storage Group Identifier and Main Hazard > Class of your chemical/material. > Storage Group: C > Hazard Class: #28 > 19. Determine whether there is enough room to store your material in > the designed lab storage areas. Storage groups A,B,D and L are > stored in the yellow solvent cabinet in the furnace support area, > while storage groups C, E, F and G are stored on top of one of > the Pass-through Carts. Ensure your chemical container or > material is properly labeled. If there is no available room, it > must be stored by in the bulk storage area. You will then need to > obtain it from receiving area personnel each time you want to use > it and return it to them when you are finished using it (or each > time you leave the lab). Note that there is no storage of > chemicals/materials in the processing lab or at any wet bench. > OK > 20. In your discussions with vendors, try to determine the best way > to dispose of your spent chemicals and by-products. The lab has > acid/base, HF and solvent drains. The acid/base drains go to a > neutralization system before going the city waste water system. > The city of Palo Alto has tight limits on the amount of heavy > metals that be disposed of through the waste water system. If > your chemical contains any metals, there is a good chance that > you will have to collect all your waste and dispose of it in > labeled containers which are picked up the Health and Safety > Department. The HF drains go to a central tank which is pumped > out by a HF disposal service at considerable expense on a regular > basis. The solvent drains in the solvent benches are collected > under the benches and disposed of by Heath and Safety as needed. > OK > 21. Put together a detailed process flow description on how you > proposed to use this chemical. This should include: Any chemical > mixing, all lab equipment and wet benched to be used, all > containers to be used, where chemical is to be stored and how > chemical and by-products are to be deposed of. This should be in > a Word file attached to your e-mail request. In reviewing your > procedure, we will be most interested in how the safety and > contamination issues are to be dealt with. > OK > > -- 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 Oct 30 17:30:03 2003 From: mtang at snf.stanford.edu (Mary Tang) Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2003 17:30:03 -0800 Subject: MSDS for PiRL III References: <183A0EDBFD6E8E46872E909796F5CFEE30A8E5@OZ.atsila.com> Message-ID: <3FA1BB1B.744E08B5@snf.stanford.edu> Hi Mark -- Thanks! Would you happen to have (or maybe Eric has) any application notes from Brewer? First, there's no mention of polyimide, just that it's a "proprietary" polymer. Second, we've got loads of polyimides in the lab, so we (SpecMat) like to ask requestors why something that is currently approved will not suffice. I realize that PiRL III is totally unlike the other polyimides we use, so it would be helpful to have some sort of literature that Brewer should be able to provide as to the capabilities and uses for this material. Finally (this is probably a request for Eric), we'd like to know specific details about its use: how much will be brought in, where it will be stored, where it will be used (questions all listed at http://snf.stanford.edu/Materials/NewMatProc.html) 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 stanford.edu http://snf.stanford.edu Mark McMaster wrote: > Mary ? > > Attached, please find the MSDS for PiRL III from Brewer Science. > > Thanks, > > Mark McMaster > > Cooligy, Inc. > > 2370 Charleston Avenue > > Mountain View, CA94043 > > (650)417-0324 (Office) > > (650)417-0380 (Fax) > > mcmaster at cooligy.com] > > This message is for the designated recipient(s) only. It may contain > information which is confidential / privileged, proprietary or > otherwise private information. If you have received it in error, > please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Please > be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the > contents is prohibited. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: