From mark.crain at louisville.edu Tue Dec 23 13:05:00 2008 From: mark.crain at louisville.edu (Mark M Crain) Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2008 13:05:00 -0500 Subject: [labnetwork] Fwd: Mask writing capabilities References: <4911B275.716B.0008.0@gwise.louisville.edu> Message-ID: <4950E1FC.716B.0008.0@gwise.louisville.edu> Hello Again LABNETWORK, I would like to thank everyone who provided input to this survey and apologize for my delay in providing a summary. There were 12 replies, most of them from very well known Universities with programs established for decades. My delay in providing a summary grew out of my concern of publishing our perceived preferences for a new system at an inappropriate time. Summary >From the introductory mask writing only one facility has abandon writing their own mask for purchasing from an outside vendor. Another facility has a direct write and a GCA but also does image setting quality transparency for its lowest resolution work. Pattern Generators such as GCA or Electromask seem to be common in some of the more experience facilities with longer histories. It seems that the trend is towards the use of some of the direct write systems such as the Heidelberg systems and Micronic (if you have the money). One of the things I found most useful from the survey is that we may need to get in to the spin develop and etch technologies to improve our tolerances and work in smaller feature ranges. I guess there is more to fab than manual agitation in a tank or beaker. :-) Those with a long history of mask writing use CPK and APT spin develop/etch systems. This looks like something we will be graduating to in the near future. Mario Portillo made some very good points about getting a system that fits your needs. The issue we have had as a multiuser facility is to fill most of the needs cost effectively. In my opinion, it seems that access to masks may be one of those basic processes that define the overall use of your facility. If the clients (users) need to send out files for expensive masks, they will use caution in their designs. They may actually fab less and hesitate to "just try something" including a marginal improvement in design. This could slow down research and overall use of the facility. While on site mask writing may not be cheap, it seems an important part of the iterative fabrication process. Thanks Again to Everyone on Labnetwork, Mark Hello LABNETWORK I am interested in getting input from the various labs on their mask writing systems. I would like to get a response to the following questions from anyone interested in participating in a survey. I will post a summary to LABNETWORK early next week. Anyone willing to share information but wanting anonymity, please just let me know. 1) What type of system do you primarily use for making photomasks? (Send out files, Flash, laser writing, E beam, other) 2) What system do you wish you had? (type, make, model, options, etc) 3) For those with or looking for a laser writing system. What companies and models did you investigate? (Micronic (Swedish), Heideleberg, Microtech, other) 4) Does your system provide a sufficient resolution for most users? What is the best resolution, minimum feature size? 5) Does the system provide sufficient throughput for the lab? What is the typical throughput? 6) How do you develop your masks? (in a pyrex pan, with a spin developer, other) 7) How do you etch your metal layer? (wet etch manual, wet etch automation, plasma etch, other) 8) is your facility primarily defined as academic, national lab, or commercial? I appreciate the time and effort in replies. Best Regards Mark Mark Crain Cleanroom Manager University of Louisville BRB room 233 2210 South Brook Street Louisville KY 40208 Phone 502/852-1572 Fax 502/852-8128 Mark Crain Cleanroom Manager University of Louisville BRB room 233 2210 South Brook Street Louisville KY 40208 Phone 502/852-1572 Fax 502/852-8128 -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: "Mark M Crain" Subject: Mask writing capabilities Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2008 14:49:25 -0500 Size: 1752 URL: