Comment svgdev SNF 2010-11-16 17:31:31: SPR955 1um - incompletely developed
mahnaz at stanford.edu
Wed Nov 17 11:54:37 PST 2010
I think that sounds like you might need a bit longer exposure.
Although the lamp change was last week ( so the lamp is new) the E0
shows a little higher exposure.
On 11/16/2010 5:31 PM, jcdoll at snf.stanford.edu wrote:
> about 3 weeks ago i coated 1um of SPR955 on aluminum, exposed on ASML (110 mJ/cm^2) and developed using the standard svgdev recipe (w/ double-checked settings). the results looked good.
> today for the same conditions there was a bit of residual photoresist around the outer 20mm of the wafer. it was 'speckly' and mainly concentrated around topographical features. running the developer rinse another time removed it and the rest of the features still looked good. the 'ring' pattern was visible just by eye, and the center of the wafer looked good w/o a second rinse.
> just a heads up for other 1um 955 users.
More information about the svgdev-pcs