From ericp at snf.stanford.edu Fri Jul 2 23:06:58 2010 From: ericp at snf.stanford.edu (ericp at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2010 23:06:58 -0700 Subject: Problem stsetch SNF 2010-07-02 23:06:58: He flow very unstable Message-ID: Helium flow is fluctuating wildly, from 3 to MAX. Also, lights on the He controller are flashing like crazy. From zappe at snf.stanford.edu Sat Jul 3 09:13:41 2010 From: zappe at snf.stanford.edu (zappe at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Sat, 3 Jul 2010 09:13:41 -0700 Subject: Problem stsetch SNF 2010-07-03 09:13:40: Communication error Message-ID: When I came to the system, it indicated a communication error. The software closed when I acknowledged the error. Don't know how to start the system again (when I start the program, it tries to communicate with the machine without success). From ericp at snf.stanford.edu Mon Jul 5 23:13:52 2010 From: ericp at snf.stanford.edu (ericp at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2010 23:13:52 -0700 Subject: Comment stsetch SNF 2010-07-05 23:13:52: restarted-- ok Message-ID: STSetch 1 is behaving now. From eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu Wed Jul 7 20:54:49 2010 From: eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu (eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2010 20:54:49 -0700 Subject: Comment stsetch SNF 2010-07-07 20:54:49: Update Helium flow problem Message-ID: I believe I found the root cause of the high helium leak rate. When we replaced the cooling He valve a few months ago, it had an indicator switch which actuates when the valve is open. At the time, we thought that it was just a switch and that its position was not critical as long as it switches when the valve is actuated. What I found however is that the the switch actuator is used to meter how much the helium valve is opened. Adjusted the switch position so now the helium flow (bare wafer) from from 2.0 to 3.4. We still need further testing to verify. From latta at snf.stanford.edu Fri Jul 9 12:21:28 2010 From: latta at snf.stanford.edu (latta at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2010 12:21:28 -0700 Subject: Comment stsetch SNF 2010-07-09 12:21:27: Qual after He valve adjustment Message-ID: DEEP 00:10:00 Si ER = 2.06um/min PR ER = 252A/min Sel Si : PR = 82 : 1 DEEP 01:00:00 Si ER = 1.73um/min PR ER = 169A/min Sel Si : PR = 102 : 1 Tested with temp dots, did not get as hig as 130C From jwpchen at snf.stanford.edu Mon Jul 12 09:49:05 2010 From: jwpchen at snf.stanford.edu (jwpchen at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2010 09:49:05 -0700 Subject: Comment stsetch SNF 2010-07-12 09:49:04: SF6 MFC Message-ID: elmer adjusted SF6 pressure (20->15psi?) so I ran another test in ISO... SF6 flow reported by MFC to be 117-140 while setpoint is 130, some slight improvement From eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu Tue Jul 13 15:33:57 2010 From: eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu (eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 15:33:57 -0700 Subject: Comment stsetch SNF 2010-07-13 15:33:57: Update He flow Message-ID: Reinstalled the electrode teflon spacers (pips). Adjusted the He bypas flow and also adjusted the He flow restriction valve to the chamber. Here are the helium flows after the adjustments. The actual values are 10x the panel readout. Bypass flow = 1.05 (wafer loaded and before the process begins) without wafer = 2.72 (during process) bare Si wafer = 1.55 (during process) bare Si wafer on carrier = 1.95 (during process) So the worst case flow (no wafer) is about 17 sccm. A bare Si wafer leaks 5 sccm. An Si wafer on a carrier leaks 9 sccm. Nancy is running a qual now. From eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu Tue Jul 13 15:34:32 2010 From: eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu (eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 15:34:32 -0700 Subject: Problem stsetch SNF 2010-05-06 10:08:36: High cooling He flow Message-ID: Reinstalled the electrode teflon spacers (pips). Adjusted the He bypas flow and also adjusted the He flow restriction valve to the chamber. Here are the helium flows after the adjustments. The actual values are 10x the panel readout. Bypass flow = 1.05 (wafer loaded and before the process begins) without wafer = 2.72 (during process) bare Si wafer = 1.55 (during process) bare Si wafer on carrier = 1.95 (during process) So the worst case flow (no wafer) is about 17 sccm. A bare Si wafer leaks 5 sccm. An Si wafer on a carrier leaks 9 sccm. Nancy is running a qual now. From eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu Tue Jul 13 15:34:46 2010 From: eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu (eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 15:34:46 -0700 Subject: Problem stsetch SNF 2010-05-08 16:46:42: flow fluctuation Message-ID: Reinstalled the electrode teflon spacers (pips). Adjusted the He bypas flow and also adjusted the He flow restriction valve to the chamber. Here are the helium flows after the adjustments. The actual values are 10x the panel readout. Bypass flow = 1.05 (wafer loaded and before the process begins) without wafer = 2.72 (during process) bare Si wafer = 1.55 (during process) bare Si wafer on carrier = 1.95 (during process) So the worst case flow (no wafer) is about 17 sccm. A bare Si wafer leaks 5 sccm. An Si wafer on a carrier leaks 9 sccm. Nancy is running a qual now. From eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu Tue Jul 13 15:35:35 2010 From: eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu (eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 15:35:35 -0700 Subject: Comment stsetch SNF 2010-05-19 04:22:56: Coil power out of tolerance error Message-ID: Archived From eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu Tue Jul 13 15:36:34 2010 From: eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu (eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 15:36:34 -0700 Subject: Comment stsetch SNF 2010-07-05 23:13:52: restarted-- ok Message-ID: Archived From eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu Tue Jul 13 15:37:50 2010 From: eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu (eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 15:37:50 -0700 Subject: Problem stsetch SNF 2010-06-14 14:48:07: More details of etch nonuniformity .... Message-ID: Replaced bad ceramic clamp (missing tip). From eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu Tue Jul 13 15:38:07 2010 From: eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu (eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 15:38:07 -0700 Subject: Comment stsetch SNF 2010-06-21 00:22:32: somebody's devices scattered in machine Message-ID: Archived From eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu Tue Jul 13 15:38:25 2010 From: eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu (eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 15:38:25 -0700 Subject: Comment stsetch SNF 2010-07-07 20:54:49: Update Helium flow problem Message-ID: Archived From eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu Tue Jul 13 15:38:40 2010 From: eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu (eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 15:38:40 -0700 Subject: Problem stsetch SNF 2010-06-21 14:40:21: He flow fluctuates 3.5~6.5 Message-ID: Reinstalled the electrode teflon spacers (pips). Adjusted the He bypas flow and also adjusted the He flow restriction valve to the chamber. Here are the helium flows after the adjustments. The actual values are 10x the panel readout. Bypass flow = 1.05 (wafer loaded and before the process begins) without wafer = 2.72 (during process) bare Si wafer = 1.55 (during process) bare Si wafer on carrier = 1.95 (during process) So the worst case flow (no wafer) is about 17 sccm. A bare Si wafer leaks 5 sccm. An Si wafer on a carrier leaks 9 sccm. Nancy is running a qual now. From latta at snf.stanford.edu Tue Jul 13 16:34:27 2010 From: latta at snf.stanford.edu (latta at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 16:34:27 -0700 Subject: Comment stsetch SNF 2010-07-13 16:34:26: Qual after He adjust Message-ID: DEEP 00:10:00 SI ER = 2.04um/min PR ER = 119A/min Sel = 171 : 1 The uniformity across the wafers is very good and the etch rate of PR has decreased significantly. From latta at snf.stanford.edu Tue Jul 13 16:34:51 2010 From: latta at snf.stanford.edu (latta at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 16:34:51 -0700 Subject: Comment stsetch SNF 2010-06-08 12:02:10: Qual after FSE Message-ID: archived From latta at snf.stanford.edu Tue Jul 13 16:37:17 2010 From: latta at snf.stanford.edu (latta at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 16:37:17 -0700 Subject: Comment stsetch SNF 2010-05-27 15:02:52: Late May Qual- ER low Message-ID: archived From latta at snf.stanford.edu Tue Jul 13 16:37:31 2010 From: latta at snf.stanford.edu (latta at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 16:37:31 -0700 Subject: Comment stsetch SNF 2010-06-15 16:37:21: Qual after He repair and clamp dot replaced Message-ID: archived From latta at snf.stanford.edu Tue Jul 13 16:38:03 2010 From: latta at snf.stanford.edu (latta at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 16:38:03 -0700 Subject: Problem stsetch SNF 2010-05-10 22:16:27: He flow fluctuation Message-ID: stable now From latta at snf.stanford.edu Tue Jul 13 16:38:26 2010 From: latta at snf.stanford.edu (latta at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 16:38:26 -0700 Subject: Comment stsetch SNF 2010-05-14 16:20:25: Re: load lock cover sensor erratic behavior Message-ID: no longer an issue From bchui at snf.stanford.edu Tue Jul 13 16:48:24 2010 From: bchui at snf.stanford.edu (bchui at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 16:48:24 -0700 Subject: Shutdown stsetch SNF 2010-07-13 16:48:23: Can't load wafer Message-ID: because machine thinks load lock cover is open. I tried re-enabling several times to no avail. Spoke with Nancy who recommended red-lighting it. From cbaxter at snf.stanford.edu Wed Jul 14 09:05:05 2010 From: cbaxter at snf.stanford.edu (cbaxter at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2010 09:05:05 -0700 Subject: Shutdown stsetch SNF 2010-07-13 16:48:23: Can't load wafer Message-ID: Repaired bad contact wire on coral box. From eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu Thu Jul 15 08:56:16 2010 From: eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu (eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2010 08:56:16 -0700 Subject: Comment stsetch SNF 2010-07-15 08:56:16: He flow check Message-ID: He flow repeatabiity check. Ran Deep recipe for 3 min using a bare silicon wafer. Bypass flow = 1.05 previous reading was 1.05 Process flow = 1.58 previous reading was 1.50 From jjeong1 at snf.stanford.edu Sat Jul 17 07:46:21 2010 From: jjeong1 at snf.stanford.edu (jjeong1 at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Sat, 17 Jul 2010 07:46:21 -0700 Subject: Problem stsetch SNF 2010-07-17 07:46:20: Wafer-to-wafer etch rate is not constant Message-ID: Etched 8 wafers using Deep recipe. The etch rate got slower as etching more wafers. The etch rate of 1st wafer was 2.28um/min, but it decreased gradually and became 1.75um/min for 8th wafer. During etching, He process flow was initially 1.60, but it dropped to 1.54~1.55 later. From jwpchen at snf.stanford.edu Mon Jul 19 01:06:44 2010 From: jwpchen at snf.stanford.edu (jwpchen at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2010 01:06:44 -0700 Subject: Problem stsetch SNF 2010-07-19 01:06:44: cover door issues again Message-ID: either the load-lock cover switch or coral interlock is acting up again, also observed by previous user. More than 50% of the time, before vent step is completed, machine thinks door is open and stops the vent process From eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu Wed Jul 21 09:47:15 2010 From: eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu (eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 09:47:15 -0700 Subject: Comment stsetch SNF 2010-07-21 09:47:14: He flow check Message-ID: He flow repeatabiity check. Ran Deep recipe for 3 min using a bare silicon wafer. Bypass flow = 1.09 (original reading was 1.05) Process flow = 1.65 (original reading was 1.50) No wafer flow = 2.85 From eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu Wed Jul 21 09:47:27 2010 From: eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu (eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 09:47:27 -0700 Subject: Comment stsetch SNF 2010-07-15 08:56:16: He flow check Message-ID: Archived From bchui at snf.stanford.edu Wed Jul 21 18:33:46 2010 From: bchui at snf.stanford.edu (bchui at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 18:33:46 -0700 Subject: Problem stsetch SNF 2010-07-21 18:33:45: Cover interlock occasionally misreads OPEN Message-ID: Cover interlock occasionally misreads OPEN when venting, causing vent to abort. This happens more frequently when I'm leaning against the chassis or resting my arms on the cover. OPEN signal disappears after I jiggle the lock handle or simply whack the chassis (much like an old TV). Probably something is loose inside. From eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu Fri Jul 23 07:48:01 2010 From: eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu (eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 07:48:01 -0700 Subject: Comment stsetch SNF 2010-07-23 07:48:01: Update cover interlock Message-ID: It looks like the Coral box is defective. I will try to locate a replacement. In the mean time, if the problem occurs, try disableing and re-enableing the tool on Coral. From jwpchen at snf.stanford.edu Sun Jul 25 10:07:18 2010 From: jwpchen at snf.stanford.edu (jwpchen at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Sun, 25 Jul 2010 10:07:18 -0700 Subject: Comment stsetch SNF 2010-07-25 10:07:18: SF6 MFC normal Message-ID: no indication of repair since last time, but SF6 MFC now reads 130+/-1 for a long ISO run From eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu Mon Jul 26 13:42:42 2010 From: eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu (eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 13:42:42 -0700 Subject: Problem stsetch SNF 2010-06-26 05:53:47: SF6 MFC unstable Message-ID: Installed a newly calibrated MFC. Took chamber pressure readings before and after the MFC replacement at various flow setpoints. Here are the results: Setpoint - Ch. press (old MFC) , Ch. press (new MFC) 25 - 2.07 , 2.17 50 - 3.30 , 3.42 75 - 4.38 , 4.44 100- 5.36 , 5.36 125- 6.27 , 6.20 150- 7.11 , 7.00 175-7.93 , 7.76 200-8.84 , 8.57 225-9.65 , 9.37 250-10.65 , 10.28 Flows > 140 sccm on the old MFC were unstable but very stable on the MFC.. From eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu Mon Jul 26 13:42:59 2010 From: eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu (eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 13:42:59 -0700 Subject: Comment stsetch SNF 2010-07-12 09:49:04: SF6 MFC Message-ID: Installed a newly calibrated MFC. Took chamber pressure readings before and after the MFC replacement at various flow setpoints. Here are the results: Setpoint - Ch. press (old MFC) , Ch. press (new MFC) 25 - 2.07 , 2.17 50 - 3.30 , 3.42 75 - 4.38 , 4.44 100- 5.36 , 5.36 125- 6.27 , 6.20 150- 7.11 , 7.00 175-7.93 , 7.76 200-8.84 , 8.57 225-9.65 , 9.37 250-10.65 , 10.28 Flows > 140 sccm on the old MFC were unstable but very stable on the MFC.. From eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu Mon Jul 26 13:43:18 2010 From: eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu (eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 13:43:18 -0700 Subject: Comment stsetch SNF 2010-07-25 10:07:18: SF6 MFC normal Message-ID: Installed a newly calibrated MFC. Took chamber pressure readings before and after the MFC replacement at various flow setpoints. Here are the results: Setpoint - Ch. press (old MFC) , Ch. press (new MFC) 25 - 2.07 , 2.17 50 - 3.30 , 3.42 75 - 4.38 , 4.44 100- 5.36 , 5.36 125- 6.27 , 6.20 150- 7.11 , 7.00 175-7.93 , 7.76 200-8.84 , 8.57 225-9.65 , 9.37 250-10.65 , 10.28 Flows > 140 sccm on the old MFC were unstable but very stable on the MFC.. From eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu Mon Jul 26 14:06:16 2010 From: eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu (eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 14:06:16 -0700 Subject: Problem stsetch SNF 2010-05-10 16:24:02: More troubles with backside He Message-ID: Problem has been resolved by adjusting the He valve position switch. The switch limited the about of He that can flow to the wafer. Now He leak is consistantly about 5 - 6 sccm. From eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu Mon Jul 26 14:06:32 2010 From: eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu (eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 14:06:32 -0700 Subject: Comment stsetch SNF 2010-05-23 16:35:15: Etch observations Message-ID: Archived From eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu Mon Jul 26 14:06:51 2010 From: eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu (eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 14:06:51 -0700 Subject: Comment stsetch SNF 2010-06-21 04:23:13: pieces in chamber Message-ID: Pieces have been removed From barlian at snf.stanford.edu Wed Jul 28 18:37:12 2010 From: barlian at snf.stanford.edu (barlian at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2010 18:37:12 -0700 Subject: Problem stsetch SNF 2010-07-28 18:37:11: software issue again Message-ID: can't vent and unload wafer From eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu Thu Jul 29 09:23:33 2010 From: eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu (eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2010 09:23:33 -0700 Subject: Comment stsetch SNF 2010-07-29 09:23:33: Tested OK after power outtage Message-ID: From jwpchen at snf.stanford.edu Sat Jul 31 07:39:03 2010 From: jwpchen at snf.stanford.edu (jwpchen at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2010 07:39:03 -0700 Subject: Problem stsetch SNF 2010-07-31 07:39:03: transfer chamber pump slow Message-ID: transfer chamber pumps down slowly, often hovers at ~85mT and barely able to reach 80mT after extended wait From jwpchen at snf.stanford.edu Sat Jul 31 07:42:56 2010 From: jwpchen at snf.stanford.edu (jwpchen at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2010 07:42:56 -0700 Subject: Comment stsetch SNF 2010-07-31 07:42:55: transfer chamber leak rate Message-ID: while a wafer is running inside process chamber, transfer chamber is leaking up at about 10mT/minute