Spec mat status

Arvind Kamath akamath at kovio.com
Tue Mar 1 16:58:06 PST 2005


Hi Ed,Paul 

     Thanks very much for a quick review and decision. 

a) With our application we did provide SIMS data showing the cleanliness
level of the wafers (re-attached). This should prove both surface/bulk
cleanliness levels. Do we still need TXRF? 

b)With the SIMS data  we hoped to show that we were clean enough to use
the metal side of the LTO with the silicon wafers. Could specmat see if
this meets your cleanliness requirement? 

     Regarding the Stainless steel substrates and process flows - we
will certainly come up with a detailed flow showing sequence of specific
equipment sets we would like to use.

            Regards,
		                   Arvind

  
-----Original Message-----
From: Ed Myers [mailto:edmyers at stanford.edu] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 3:56 PM
To: Arvind Kamath
Cc: rissman at stanford.edu
Subject: RE: Spec mat status

Arvind,

SpecMat reviewed both your request.  Unfortunately each raised a 
significant number of questions.  Your request were very large in scope 
(Variants of typical CMOS process flow) and appear to cross the 
contamination group equipment sets.  As a result, SpecMat needs a much 
clearer idea of your process flow before either request can be 
approved.  Please provide a detailed process flow.

With that being said, we understand you have material you want to 
move.  This is what was approved:
1) Since the cleanliness of your material is unknown, you can process 
within the gold contaminated equipment set.  This will allow you in
Tylan4, 
but gold contaminated wafers are not allowed in LTO.

An alternative is to prove your films and substrates are clean through
TXRF 
analysis.  This will be possible for your silicon based substrates, but
not 
for the stainless steel substrates.  If your silicon based wafers are
shown 
to be clean through TXRF analysis, they will be allowed in the clean 
equipment set.

I will be out of town for the remainder of the week.  Any immediate
follow 
up needs to be done through the SpecMat committee.

Regards,


At 04:57 PM 2/25/2005, you wrote:
>Thanks Ed- Arvind
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Ed Myers [mailto:edmyers at stanford.edu]
>Sent: Friday, February 25, 2005 4:49 PM
>To: Arvind Kamath
>Subject: Re: Spec mat status
>
>Arvind,
>
>The next specMat meeting is scheduled for Tuesday from 1 till 2 pm.
>
>Ed
>
>At 03:25 PM 2/25/2005, you wrote:
> >Ed,
> >
> >       We had submitted two new materials for Specmat to review. The
>one
> > regarding our Poly wafers is rather crucial as we have lots reaching
>that
> > stage next Wednesday. Could you let us know if we could use the Gold
> > contaminated oxidation tube and the metal side of the LTO dep
>furnaces?
> > The wafers will not see both.
> >
> >        Please let us know approximately when we can expect a
decision.
> >
> >                Thanks very much,
> >
> >                                        Arvind Kamath


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: silane.pdf
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 441446 bytes
Desc: silane.pdf
URL: <http://snf.stanford.edu/pipermail/specmat/attachments/20050301/faf27272/attachment.obj>


More information about the specmat mailing list