From maurice at stanford.edu  Thu May 24 08:52:15 2012
From: maurice at stanford.edu (maurice stevens)
Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 08:52:15 -0700
Subject: TylanSiGe (tylan8) usage survey
Message-ID: <4FBE592F.5050200@stanford.edu>

Hi TylanSiGe users,

We are looking the usage of all lab tools and TylanSiGe is one of the 
lowest.

I would appreciate if you could quickly answer a couple of questions for 
me.  Thank you in advance for your feedback.


If TylanSiGe were removed from SNF, could you use ThermcoPoly or Epi to 
continue your research?

If you can't use ThermcoPoly or Epi, why?

If you can use ThermcoPoly or Epi, how much time would you need to re 
characterize your process?


-m

-- 
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



From chienyuc at stanford.edu  Thu May 24 09:56:57 2012
From: chienyuc at stanford.edu (Chien-Yu Chen)
Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 09:56:57 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: TylanSiGe (tylan8) usage survey
In-Reply-To: <4FBE592F.5050200@stanford.edu>
Message-ID: <93970399.54094394.1337878617795.JavaMail.root@zm03.stanford.edu>

Hi Maurice,

I'm one of the users of tylansige, mainly for low-temperature (300C) Ge film growth.  To me, one of the advantages of tylansige is the temperature ramping (down) rate is much faster than thermcopoly.  I was not able to obtain similar Ge film in thermcopoly1 since I usually have hazzy or no deposition, and it may take 3-4 weeks to re-characterize the growth conditions.

I can continue my research using thermcopoly1/2 although I still prefer tylansige.

Chien-Yu
coral: chienyuc
----- Original Message -----
From: "maurice stevens" <maurice at stanford.edu>
To: tylansige at snf.stanford.edu, "Krishna Saraswat" <saraswat at stanford.edu>, "John Bumgarner" <jwb2005 at stanford.edu>, "Brett Huff" <bhuff at stanford.edu>
Sent: 2012?5?24? ??? 8:52:15
Subject: TylanSiGe (tylan8) usage survey

Hi TylanSiGe users,

We are looking the usage of all lab tools and TylanSiGe is one of the 
lowest.

I would appreciate if you could quickly answer a couple of questions for 
me.  Thank you in advance for your feedback.


If TylanSiGe were removed from SNF, could you use ThermcoPoly or Epi to 
continue your research?

If you can't use ThermcoPoly or Epi, why?

If you can use ThermcoPoly or Epi, how much time would you need to re 
characterize your process?


-m

-- 
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