[Fwd: Thin film sputtered aluminum nitride wafer processing]

Michael Deal mdeal at stanford.edu
Thu Feb 3 09:04:12 PST 2005

    I believe his AlN should be classified as semiclean because it is a 
sputtered  material.   While AlN itself is much more stable than Al, etc, 
(much higher melting point), the fact that it is sputtered should preclude 
its use in "clean" tools, such as oxidation furnaces, epi, etc. since 
sputtering  often deposits other metals.   This would be the same for 
sputtered TiN, TaN, and even sputtered Si3N4 and Si.    (In fact, if he is 
having the AlN sputtered at a vendor, we should make sure there is no gold 
or iron contamination.)

At 08:46 AM 2/3/2005, Ed Myers wrote:
>This is Gary's original email concerning AlN processing.  The notes 
>indicate we would consider semiclean tools, but not clean 
>tools.  Considering the proposed process flow, is there any reason to 
>change this stance?
>>-------- Original Message --------
>>Subject:        Thin film sputtered aluminum nitride wafer processing
>>Date:   Tue, 18 Jan 2005 17:37:05 -0800
>>From:   Gary Yama (RTC) <gary.yama at rtc.bosch.com>
>>To:     specmat at snf.stanford.edu
>>I'm interested in processing sputtered piezoelectric aluminum nitride.
>>Film would be deposited at a vendor, photolith, dry etching, wet 
>>cleaning, and other processing in CMOS clean equipment.  Assuming the 
>>aluminum nitride sputtering tool is CMOS clean, are there any other 
>>restrictions on which CMOS clean tool I can use at Stanford?
>>Are these compatible:
>>tylan oxidation
>>svgcoat, svgdev
>>Thanks - Gary
>>Mary X. Tang, Ph.D.
>>Stanford Nanofabrication Facility
>>CIS Room 136, Mail Code 4070
>>Stanford, CA  94305
>>mtang at stanford.edu

More information about the specmat mailing list