From eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu Wed Jun 2 08:07:20 2010 From: eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu (eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 08:07:20 -0700 Subject: Shutdown stsetch SNF 2010-06-02 08:07:20: Field service work Message-ID: Field service working on the backside He cooling problem. From eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu Tue Jun 8 08:33:15 2010 From: eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu (eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2010 08:33:15 -0700 Subject: Problem stsetch SNF 2010-05-07 21:20:38: broken piece outside the holding area Message-ID: Chamber has been cleaned From eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu Tue Jun 8 08:33:25 2010 From: eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu (eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2010 08:33:25 -0700 Subject: Comment stsetch SNF 2010-05-04 13:04:23: May qual Message-ID: Archived From eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu Tue Jun 8 08:33:31 2010 From: eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu (eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2010 08:33:31 -0700 Subject: Comment stsetch SNF 2010-04-12 11:21:56: Monitor He flow Message-ID: Archived From latta at snf.stanford.edu Tue Jun 8 12:02:10 2010 From: latta at snf.stanford.edu (latta at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2010 12:02:10 -0700 Subject: Comment stsetch SNF 2010-06-08 12:02:10: Qual after FSE Message-ID: I ran a qual after the field service repairs. This is run without the spring loaded pips; Si ER = 2.02um/min PR ER = 212A/min Sel Si : PR = 95.3 : 1 So, improvement from last qual (Si ER = 1.71) but still not up to the normal 2.5-2.7um/min for Si. Observations during the qual; He pressure stable, He flow oscillates from 2.3 to 2.9 and back, SF6 flow overshoots the requested 130sccm to about 144sccm then decreases to about 118sccm. Never really stable at 130sccm. From latta at snf.stanford.edu Tue Jun 8 12:02:28 2010 From: latta at snf.stanford.edu (latta at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2010 12:02:28 -0700 Subject: Problem stsetch SNF 2010-05-28 11:41:14: Message-ID: From latta at snf.stanford.edu Tue Jun 8 12:02:36 2010 From: latta at snf.stanford.edu (latta at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2010 12:02:36 -0700 Subject: Comment stsetch SNF 2010-05-28 11:41:18: Message-ID: From latta at snf.stanford.edu Tue Jun 8 12:02:59 2010 From: latta at snf.stanford.edu (latta at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2010 12:02:59 -0700 Subject: Problem stsetch SNF 2010-05-30 07:49:19: wafer broken, He pressure low Message-ID: cleaned and cleared From latta at snf.stanford.edu Tue Jun 8 12:04:03 2010 From: latta at snf.stanford.edu (latta at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2010 12:04:03 -0700 Subject: Problem stsetch SNF 2010-05-17 18:02:47: Helium pressure extremely low Message-ID: noted From eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu Tue Jun 8 15:18:19 2010 From: eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu (eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2010 15:18:19 -0700 Subject: Comment stsetch SNF 2010-05-28 15:02:33: Update He leak Message-ID: Archived From eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu Tue Jun 8 15:18:38 2010 From: eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu (eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2010 15:18:38 -0700 Subject: Problem stsetch SNF 2010-05-26 09:17:52: icp exception during etching Message-ID: Replaced backup batteries From eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu Tue Jun 8 15:18:46 2010 From: eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu (eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2010 15:18:46 -0700 Subject: Comment stsetch SNF 2010-05-21 15:24:14: Update He leak rate Message-ID: Archived From eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu Tue Jun 8 15:24:49 2010 From: eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu (eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2010 15:24:49 -0700 Subject: Shutdown stsetch SNF 2010-06-02 08:07:20: Field service work Message-ID: Root cause of the helium leak was electrode spacer springs. New springs should be in by Thursday but its ok to run without the spacer. From eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu Tue Jun 8 15:28:43 2010 From: eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu (eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2010 15:28:43 -0700 Subject: Problem stsetch SNF 2010-05-09 19:27:44: He Pressure Message-ID: Root cause of the helium leak was electrode spacer springs. New springs should be in by Thursday but its ok to run without the spacer. From eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu Tue Jun 8 15:28:47 2010 From: eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu (eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2010 15:28:47 -0700 Subject: Problem stsetch SNF 2010-05-09 19:31:01: He Pressure Message-ID: Root cause of the helium leak was electrode spacer springs. New springs should be in by Thursday but its ok to run without the spacer. From jwpchen at snf.stanford.edu Tue Jun 8 23:28:46 2010 From: jwpchen at snf.stanford.edu (jwpchen at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2010 23:28:46 -0700 Subject: Comment stsetch SNF 2010-06-08 23:28:46: wafer shattered but He looks ok Message-ID: still a few pieces inside chamber away from center but Helium looks normal compared to most recent qual so i think it's still good to use. Helium pressure range from 4+/-0.5 to 8.5+/-0.5(!) for the dummies I ran. From eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu Wed Jun 9 09:07:57 2010 From: eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu (eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2010 09:07:57 -0700 Subject: Comment stsetch SNF 2010-06-08 23:28:46: wafer shattered but He looks ok Message-ID: Recovered user's wafer pieces. Ran Deep recipe with no problems. Helium flow was 2.5 - 3.6 From damodei at snf.stanford.edu Wed Jun 9 21:43:37 2010 From: damodei at snf.stanford.edu (damodei at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2010 21:43:37 -0700 Subject: Problem stsetch SNF 2010-06-09 21:43:36: DON'T USE! STS is eating my wafers! Message-ID: The STS seems to be performing magic tricks. I had a wafer etching in the machine. The etching completed. I tried to unload the wafer. It didn't come out, but isn't in the chuck anymore either. It seems to have vanished. Presumably it is still in the machine somewhere, but where? And why weren't any alarms triggered? Anyway, please don't use the machine until this is cleared up. My wafer is extremely valuable and depending on where it is I don't want it to break on the next load (your wafer could break too!) From eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu Thu Jun 10 10:04:36 2010 From: eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu (eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 10:04:36 -0700 Subject: Problem stsetch SNF 2010-06-09 21:43:36: DON'T USE! STS is eating my wafers! Message-ID: Recovered the user's wafer and place it in his wafer box. Found the wafer at the bottom of the chamber. Ran the recipe that the user used and watch the wafer load and unload several times with no problem. From mtan at snf.stanford.edu Sun Jun 13 14:56:21 2010 From: mtan at snf.stanford.edu (mtan at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2010 14:56:21 -0700 Subject: Problem stsetch SNF 2010-06-13 14:56:21: etching is non-uniform Message-ID: From shott at snf.stanford.edu Mon Jun 14 14:48:08 2010 From: shott at snf.stanford.edu (shott at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 14:48:08 -0700 Subject: Problem stsetch SNF 2010-06-14 14:48:07: More details of etch nonuniformity .... Message-ID: I've followed up a bit more with Mike Tan to get more details about the nonuniformity that he is seeing. Here is his report: There is huge etching non-uniformity on a single wafer. Through etching 50um sized through holes, I found that the etching time can differ by as much as 60-90 minutes on the different sides of the wafer. Dividing the wafer right through the mid-line, the right side through holes features experienced much faster etching rates than those on the left side. The wafer flat is at the 3 O'clock position. The reference mid-line is drawn according to the machine. The right side of the etch would be referred to the right side of the holder when the user is facing the machine. The etch time for making through holes on the right side is about 210 minutes to 240 minutes for a 300-350um wafer. The etch rate also differs from run to run. Thanks, John From damodei at snf.stanford.edu Mon Jun 14 16:38:50 2010 From: damodei at snf.stanford.edu (damodei at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 16:38:50 -0700 Subject: Problem stsetch SNF 2010-06-14 16:38:49: Helium pressure negative Message-ID: I'm getting a negative helium pressure, both with and without the holder. The He flow is >5. Whatever it was that was causing the low helium pressures last month does NOT appear to have been fully fixed by FSE. From latta at snf.stanford.edu Tue Jun 15 11:14:55 2010 From: latta at snf.stanford.edu (latta at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 11:14:55 -0700 Subject: Shutdown stsetch SNF 2010-06-15 11:14:54: He issues Message-ID: Ran new blank wafer. He pressure was oscillating from 0.2 to 0.75. Should be about 9.0-10.0. He flow was 3.0 to 6.0. Should be steady at 3.0. From eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu Tue Jun 15 14:28:01 2010 From: eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu (eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 14:28:01 -0700 Subject: Shutdown stsetch SNF 2010-06-15 11:14:54: He issues Message-ID: Replaced defective ceramic clamp (missing tip). Ran the deep recipe, the helium flow was 1.5 @ 9.8T From latta at snf.stanford.edu Tue Jun 15 16:37:21 2010 From: latta at snf.stanford.edu (latta at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 16:37:21 -0700 Subject: Comment stsetch SNF 2010-06-15 16:37:21: Qual after He repair and clamp dot replaced Message-ID: The springs for the clamp pips were replaced and the missing dot from the clamp finger was replaced DEEP 00:10:00 Si ER = 1.97um/min PR ER = 208A/min Si : PR Sel = 95 : 1 Uniformity as usual; Center = 18.8 Top = 20.6 Bottom = 19.4 Right = 20.3 Left = 19.6 He was stable at; pressure = 9.79T and flow range was 1.79-1.82sccm From latta at snf.stanford.edu Tue Jun 15 16:39:01 2010 From: latta at snf.stanford.edu (latta at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 16:39:01 -0700 Subject: Problem stsetch SNF 2010-06-14 16:38:49: Helium pressure negative Message-ID: FSE and SNF fix fine- a little dot that makes contact with the wafer fell off. Replaced, re-qual, ok to use From latta at snf.stanford.edu Tue Jun 15 16:39:54 2010 From: latta at snf.stanford.edu (latta at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 16:39:54 -0700 Subject: Problem stsetch SNF 2010-06-13 14:56:21: etching is non-uniform Message-ID: Etching back to the usual amount of non-uniformity after clamp finger repair From xzhuan1 at snf.stanford.edu Wed Jun 16 19:26:47 2010 From: xzhuan1 at snf.stanford.edu (xzhuan1 at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 19:26:47 -0700 Subject: Shutdown stsetch SNF 2010-06-16 19:26:47: wafer broken in holder, please save my pieces! Message-ID: my wafer was broken during etching. pieces are still in the chamber. these pieces are extremely valbuable to me so please carefully save them for me. From eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu Thu Jun 17 08:38:29 2010 From: eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu (eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 08:38:29 -0700 Subject: Shutdown stsetch SNF 2010-06-16 19:26:47: wafer broken in holder, please save my pieces! Message-ID: Recovered wafer pieces and placed them in the user's wafer holder. Ran Deep recipe. Backside helium flow is 1.4 @9.8Torr From xzhuan1 at snf.stanford.edu Thu Jun 17 16:46:20 2010 From: xzhuan1 at snf.stanford.edu (xzhuan1 at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 16:46:20 -0700 Subject: Shutdown stsetch SNF 2010-06-17 16:46:20: wafer broken in chamber again Message-ID: for a second time in a row, my wafer was broken in the process chamber during etching. I used the wafer holder, and was etching about 200um trenches in a 400 um thick wafer. please retrieve my pieces. they are extremely valuable to me. From eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu Fri Jun 18 13:43:41 2010 From: eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu (eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 13:43:41 -0700 Subject: Shutdown stsetch SNF 2010-06-17 16:46:20: wafer broken in chamber again Message-ID: Recovered user's wafer pieces and ran the Deep recipe with no problems. From jwpchen at snf.stanford.edu Mon Jun 21 00:22:32 2010 From: jwpchen at snf.stanford.edu (jwpchen at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2010 00:22:32 -0700 Subject: Comment stsetch SNF 2010-06-21 00:22:32: somebody's devices scattered in machine Message-ID: arrived at machine to see small 1-2mm square device flakes scattered on loader arm and inside chamber. ran a test wafer and saw He pressure of 6-7 (flow is still maxed) so machine is probably still ok to use. ideally the flakes should be cleaned up though From jwpchen at snf.stanford.edu Mon Jun 21 04:23:13 2010 From: jwpchen at snf.stanford.edu (jwpchen at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2010 04:23:13 -0700 Subject: Comment stsetch SNF 2010-06-21 04:23:13: pieces in chamber Message-ID: some of my device pieces broke off, ran a dummy to check, helium pressure is 6-7 so machine should be still good to use From popomoo at snf.stanford.edu Mon Jun 21 14:40:22 2010 From: popomoo at snf.stanford.edu (popomoo at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2010 14:40:22 -0700 Subject: Problem stsetch SNF 2010-06-21 14:40:21: He flow fluctuates 3.5~6.5 Message-ID: When I started to etch, He flow kept fluctuating from 3.5~6.5. I checked the wafer backside, but it looked clean. I also tried the wafer holder, but still fluctuated.... From eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu Tue Jun 22 11:20:07 2010 From: eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu (eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 11:20:07 -0700 Subject: Shutdown stsetch SNF 2010-06-22 11:20:07: Cooling He leak. Message-ID: From eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu Tue Jun 22 14:18:42 2010 From: eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu (eenriquez at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 14:18:42 -0700 Subject: Shutdown stsetch SNF 2010-06-22 11:20:07: Cooling He leak. Message-ID: Replaced the lip seal o-ring. Now the helium flow is 8.5 - 9.5 with the setpoint of 9.7. Its better but its not repaired yet. Will take it off shutdown just in case somebody wants to run at the current helium flow level. From jwpchen at snf.stanford.edu Sat Jun 26 05:53:47 2010 From: jwpchen at snf.stanford.edu (jwpchen at snf.stanford.edu) Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2010 05:53:47 -0700 Subject: Problem stsetch SNF 2010-06-26 05:53:47: SF6 MFC unstable Message-ID: even for unswitched recipe such as ISO, for requested SF6=130 the MFC output bounces between 116-140