ThermcoPoly1 going gold - results from Thermcopoly 2?
rshyam at stanford.edu
Tue Mar 9 14:17:14 PST 2010
I agree with Robin. Until thermcopoly2 is characterized as well as
thermopoly1 has been with respect to all its recipes/doping/growth
rates/sheet resistances, and until a quality circle meets and reviews
it, the switch should not take place.
On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 11:38 AM, Robin King <robinhmb at yahoo.com> wrote:
> We've always been told that the transition date was not actually fixed, but dependent on the performance of the tool slated to replace it, and Maurice assured us last week that Thermcopoly1 will NOT become gold contaminated until Thermcopoly2 has thickness and dopant results acceptable to the users.
> Hopefully all is well in that regard but we haven't seen any data to that effect. I propose we all meet to review it ala quality circle. In the meantime could we see the results so far?
> Robin King
> IBM/Almaden Research Center
> --- On Tue, 3/9/10, Ed Myers <edmyers at stanford.edu> wrote:
>> From: Ed Myers <edmyers at stanford.edu>
>> Subject: Re: ThermcoPoly1 going gold
>> To: thermcopoly1 at snf.stanford.edu, thermcopoly2 at snf.stanford.edu
>> Cc: "Nancy Latta" <latta at snf.stanford.edu>, "Mary Tang" <mtang at stanford.edu>
>> Date: Tuesday, March 9, 2010, 10:34 AM
>> I want to remind everyone that ThermcoPoly1 will transition
>> over to
>> gold contaminated on Monday, March 15th.
>> Since Maurice is out of the office, please let Nancy or Ed
>> know if
>> you have any concerns.
>> At 12:19 PM 3/3/2010, maurice stevens wrote:
>> >ThermcoPoly1 is tentatively scheduled to become a gold
>> >furnace March 15th.
>> >All clean doped poly with move over to
>> Thermcopoly2. The tubes
>> >operate exactly the same (except that ThermcoPoly2 has
>> not had any
>> >boat calibration issues). All the standard
>> recipes are on both.
>> >We expect to have the doping/growth rate charts
>> finished by that time.
>> >You are free to start using ThermcoPoly2 now and I have
>> >added many of you to the ThermcoPoly2 qualification
>> list. If you
>> >didn't get a qualification let me ( or Ed/Nancy/Mary)
>> know and we will add you.
>> >Why is ThermcoPoly2 the clean tube? Both ThermcoPoly
>> tubes can
>> >deposited doped films but only ThermcoPoly2 is plumbed
>> with Ge. It
>> >is our only "clean" doped Ge tube so it could not
>> become the "gold" tube.
>> >If you have comments or concerns or compliments, let me
>> >maurice at stanford.edu
>> >Maurice Stevens
>> >Stanford Nanofabrication Facility
>> >CIS Room 142, Mail Code 4070
>> >Stanford, CA 94305
>> >P. (650)725-3660
>> >F. (650)725.6278
More information about the thermcopoly1