From tberg at snf.stanford.edu Wed Jul 2 07:57:14 2003 From: tberg at snf.stanford.edu (Ted Berg) Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2003 07:57:14 -0700 Subject: LTO uniformity results Message-ID: <3F02F2CA.F81617C2@snf.stanford.edu> Greetings users, In an effort to better the understanding of LTO uniformity, we would appreciateany feedback on uniformity results if possible thanks ted From mdickey at snf.stanford.edu Wed Jul 9 11:23:09 2003 From: mdickey at snf.stanford.edu (Mike Dickey) Date: Wed, 09 Jul 2003 11:23:09 -0700 Subject: LTO Quartz plate Message-ID: <3F0C5D8D.272D7714@snf.stanford.edu> This message is to let all users of the LTO/BPSG furnace that we now have quartz plate for the wafer boats and quartz top....It is located at the load station of the TYSTAR furnace. It is to be used for setting the quartz boats on when the boats are not on the cantilever. We are putting it there to avoid any accidents of the FGA cantilever coming out while the quartz boats are at the load station. Please use it accordingly and you will no longer need to use wipes. Please let me know if you have any questions or comments. Mike Dickey From beckwith at cis.stanford.edu Wed Jul 9 12:03:02 2003 From: beckwith at cis.stanford.edu (Sharleen Beckwith) Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2003 12:03:02 -0700 Subject: LTO Quartz plate In-Reply-To: <3F0C5D8D.272D7714@snf.stanford.edu> References: <3F0C5D8D.272D7714@snf.stanford.edu> Message-ID: Could a SNF staff member post a procedure near this plate explaining how to keep this plate CLEAN. Otherwise, people will be putting cassette boxes, hands with dirty gloves, and who knows what else on it. Those of who fabricate devices care about these issues. Thanks. At 11:23 AM -0700 7/9/03, Mike Dickey wrote: >This message is to let all users of the LTO/BPSG furnace that we now >have quartz >plate for the wafer boats and quartz top....It is located at the load >station of the TYSTAR furnace. It is to be used for setting the quartz >boats on when the boats are not on the cantilever. We are putting it >there to avoid any accidents of the FGA cantilever coming out while the >quartz boats are at the load station. Please use it accordingly and you >will no longer need to use wipes. Please let me know if you have any >questions or comments. > > Mike Dickey -- Bush "calls his biggest fundraisers Rangers and Pioneers. But today, we stand together with thousands in Burlington, Vermont and tens of thousands more, standing with us right now in every state in this nation. And we call ourselves, simply, Americans." Howard Dean, M. D., June 23, 2003 http://www.deanforamerica.com/ From mdickey at snf.stanford.edu Wed Jul 9 14:02:26 2003 From: mdickey at snf.stanford.edu (Mike Dickey) Date: Wed, 09 Jul 2003 14:02:26 -0700 Subject: Quartz plate II Message-ID: <3F0C82E2.B2CD1503@snf.stanford.edu> Here is the latest on the quartz load station plate for LTO/BPSG. After talking with process I put the quartz plate back at the load station where the wafers are loaded for LTO. The quartz plate will mainly be used to put the quartz boat top on while the wafers are being loaded. So the top will be on it for only a short period of time. The FGA cantilever WILL clear it. We ask that all FGA users be aware that there is not LTO quartzware at the load station when boating out the FGA cantilever. This should have already been practiced. The plate will also be used to house the quartzware/wafers during a pull and clean. At which point it can be put on the TYSTAR side if desired. Users should not put anything at all on this plate. There occasionally have been a wafer box or 2 at the VERY end of the load station away from the front of the tube(s). The quartz plate sits concentricly in the middle of the load station away from any wafer box storing. We still welcome any inputs in this matter. Mike Dickey From zappe at stanford.edu Sat Jul 12 23:04:44 2003 From: zappe at stanford.edu (Stefan Zappe) Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2003 23:04:44 -0700 Subject: PSG400 - 8% Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20030712222205.02d3e6e8@zappe.pobox.stanford.edu> Hi, in an effort to adapt the flow rates for SiH4 and PH3 in the 8%-PSG recipe after the MFCs were exchanged, I ran three test depositions. Best results were obtained so far with SiH4=22, PH3=100 (O2=136) - process pressure was 330 mTorr. Film thickness after a 30 minute deposition was 920 nm (+/- 16% across entire wafer). Etch rate in 6:1 BOE was approx. 700 nm/min. See also attached WinWord file - might be a starting point for further optimization. In the past the PH3 and SiH4 flows in the PSG400 recipes always added up to the SiH4 flow in the LTO400 recipe. My approach was: taking the new SiH4 value (SiH4=155) for the new LTO400 recipe and applying the old SiH4/PH3 ratio (14/86) of the old 8%-PSG recipe. So my first test was SiH4=22, PH3=133, the sum is SiH4+PH3=155 (that is the new SiH4 value for LTO400, while O2=136 is the same for the new PSG400 and the new LTO400 recipe). I then varied the PH3 flow (PH3=100,166) in the next deposition tests. One wafer per run is still available. Anyone interested in (or capable of) checking the actual phosphorus contents ??? Stefan -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: PSG400_8%.doc Type: application/msword Size: 24576 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tkato at stanford.edu Mon Jul 14 16:18:56 2003 From: tkato at stanford.edu (Takahisa Kato) Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2003 16:18:56 -0700 Subject: shift resv. BPSG, free from 13:30 to 17:30, 7/16 Message-ID: <012e01c34a5e$4c6bcba0$355640ab@TKATO> I'm shifting my tylanbpsg reservation to tomorrow morning. so it is free from 13:30 to 17:30 on Wednesday (7/16). Thank you Takahisa From lian at monano.com Thu Jul 17 15:45:57 2003 From: lian at monano.com (Lian Zhang) Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2003 15:45:57 -0700 Subject: about LTO Message-ID: <009101c34cb5$302c5870$846440ab@nanoprobe> Dear LTO users, I'm wondering if anyone has experience with LTO densification. Is there a recipe for it or what? My wafers will go to gold contaminated equipment after this, so it doesn't have to be a clean process if cannot be done during the deposition. Thanks! Lian -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mtang at snf.stanford.edu Mon Jul 21 08:37:22 2003 From: mtang at snf.stanford.edu (Mary Tang) Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2003 08:37:22 -0700 Subject: LTO Process update Message-ID: <3F1C08B2.A063C42C@snf.stanford.edu> Folks, Over the past week or so several members have expressed concern of the change of the flow rates at LTO. We'd like to take a moment to explain the what and why of the change. In mid-April of this year, the process pressure for the recipe LTO400 started to creep up, from about 300mT to 320mT. We think that it was at this point the SiH4 mass flow controller started to go out of true. By June the process pressure was up to 390mT. Through careful testing by the maintenance crew, we discovered that the actual SiH4 flow was roughly twice as much as we thought, (although O2 was still the same.) It seems that the SiH4 MFC had failed, so the maintenance guys replaced it on 7/7. A bit of history; roughly a year ago Jim McVittie did an extensive survey of the flows. His data showed that the MFC's were consistent, but not calibrated. However, based on his data, we knew what our real flows were. Since the SiH4 MFC was replaced with a new, calibrated one, it was decided that we should use the real silane flow -- and while we were at it, use the real O2 flow as well by calibrating this MFC. A test run was perfomed using the recalibrated MFC's and true values on 7/7 and the process pressure dropped significantly, to 212mT. The uniformity improved drastically, too. To the best of our knowledge, the basic process is now back to where we should be and have been running prior to April. We have, however, NOT addressed the doped or other specialty processes. Deepest apologies to ChiOn and other members who have asked about doped PSG. Special thanks to Stefan Zappe for volunteering to work on the doped LTO recipes and to Chi On for his testing of those wafers. Additional thanks to the LPCVD users who so conscientiously fill out the log sheets. Being able to track the data back has been very helpful. Gladys has started writing a new disk with the new values and as members need new or modified recipes they should ask Gladys or Maurice to write them. This is a work-in-progress. One final note... Although process pressure is not the best measure of a flow problem, our best guess is that the SiH4 MFC began drifting in mid-April, with a catastrophic failure in late June. The standard LONH3 process and the 850 low stress process films are probably not affected much by the higher SiH4 flows (since both of these processes have excess/high SiH4 already.) However, processes in which accuracy of SiH4 flow is important (PSG films, for example) may have resulted in non-standard films during this time period. If you have any questions or concerns about this or other issues at tylanbpsg, please contact your friendly neighborhood staff person. Nancy and Mary -- Mary X. Tang, Ph.D. National Nanofabrication Users' Network Stanford Nanofabrication Facility CIS Room 136, Mail Code 4070 Stanford, CA 94305 (650)723-9980 mtang at stanford.edu http://snf.stanford.edu From mtang at snf.stanford.edu Mon Jul 21 11:07:28 2003 From: mtang at snf.stanford.edu (Mary Tang) Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2003 11:07:28 -0700 Subject: Oops... Message-ID: <3F1C2BE0.3C2788E7@snf.stanford.edu> Hi all -- Sorry, there's confusion over the last email I sent out... My apologies, I was working on summaries of recent problems at both LTO and Nitride, and got my terminology confused... I meant 400 C and 450 C processes (not the nitride LONH3 or 850 C processes.) It's my error -- I added this paragraph to Nancy's email, which was entirely accurate up to that point. (http://snf.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?1380:mss:218:200307:pjhlimbdpebglklebopi) The last paragraph should read: "One final note... Although process pressure is not the best measure of a flow problem, our best guess is that the SiH4 MFC began drifting in mid-April, with a catastrophic failure in late June. The standard 400 C process and the 450 process films are probably not affected much by the higher SiH4 flows (since both of these processes have excess/high SiH4 already.) However, processes in which accuracy of SiH4 flow is important (PSG films, for example) may have resulted in non-standard films during this time period. If you have any questions or concerns about this or other issues at tylanbpsg, please contact your friendly neighborhood staff person." -- Mary X. Tang, Ph.D. National Nanofabrication Users' Network Stanford Nanofabrication Facility CIS Room 136, Mail Code 4070 Stanford, CA 94305 (650)723-9980 mtang at stanford.edu http://snf.stanford.edu From maurice at snf.stanford.edu Fri Jul 25 16:50:25 2003 From: maurice at snf.stanford.edu (Maurice Stevens) Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2003 16:50:25 -0700 Subject: LTO up Message-ID: <3F21C241.80B693AD@snf.stanford.edu> pulled,cleaned,coated,tested. green light From iwjung at stanford.edu Mon Jul 28 14:20:48 2003 From: iwjung at stanford.edu (Il Woong Jung) Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 14:20:48 -0700 Subject: Reservation released Tue 00:00-04:00 Message-ID: Il Woong Jung -------------------------- E.L. Ginzton Labs 41C Stanford, CA 94305 E-mail: iwjung at stanford.edu Phone: 650-723-1992(6104) Fax: 650-725-7509 -------------------------- From cm_richter at att.net Tue Jul 29 22:22:18 2003 From: cm_richter at att.net (cm_richter at att.net) Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2003 05:22:18 +0000 Subject: LTO: Cancelled Reservation Thursday (7/31/03) 10am-2:30pm Message-ID: