Fwd: Zn, Cd, S TXRF -> ZnCdS in Metallica
edmyers at stanford.edu
Mon Mar 28 16:52:03 PST 2005
I don't agree. I feel we still need to control this process. This is a
killer for our biological users and their gold substrates. Sulphur
contamination of a gold surface inhibits almost all of the biological
surface attachment projects. The TXRF data showed the sulphur to
be >150E14. The other reason I feel we should control this process is the
way the system is used. Typically each deposition is on a single
chip. This greatly increases the number of required depositions and the
amount of sulphur in the system.
If our goal is to keep all materials with vapor pressures less than In out
of the vacuum system, then we can not provide this project an open
door. We should limit the number of depositions allowed per month. We
should only need to support this process until the new sputter is available.
Following the process down the line, these samples are also annealed in
RTAAG, a tool we have been telling users is semi-clean. We should also
move their annealing process out of RTAAG, clean the system and get it back
to the advertised semiclean state.
At 02:24 PM 3/28/2005, Michael Deal wrote:
> If we're not meeting tomorrow (due to people going to MRS), I think
> we can go ahead and approve this based on the numbers and his precautions.
>>X-Sieve: CMU Sieve 2.2
>>Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 14:17:46 -0800 (PST)
>>From: Peter Griffin <griffin at stanford.edu>
>>To: Michael Deal <mdeal at stanford.edu>
>>Cc: specmat at snf.stanford.edu
>>Subject: Zn, Cd, S TXRF -> ZnCdS in Metallica
>>We have performed TXRF for a ZnCdS sputter deposition
>>in the Metallica. Dedicated target holders, chimmney
>>and wafer platten with custom designed inner and outer
>>surrounding "bands" of 1 inch deep aluminium are used
>>to minimize contamination. The dedicated equipment is
>>removed after each deposition and can be bead-blasted
>>clean at an outside facility as needed.
>>Given that the TXRF levels are low-E11, this email is
>>to request a review of the data and permission to run
>>ZnCdS on a regular basis as needed.
>>Thanks, Peter Griffin
>>On Mon, 28 Mar 2005, Michael Deal wrote:
>> > Peter,
>> > Did you send a request into specmat at snf.stanford.edu regarding your
>> > request? We meet tomorrow at 1 pm (Tuesday) and we'll need a request in
>> > order to approve it. (If you have already sent in a request, can you send
>> > me a copy, since I haven't gotten it.) Thanks.
>> > -mike
More information about the specmat