From voros at eecs.berkeley.edu Wed Jun 1 01:24:42 2011 From: voros at eecs.berkeley.edu (voros at eecs.berkeley.edu) Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 22:24:42 -0700 Subject: [labnetwork] buddy system Message-ID: <8c237caf40fdaeea7a98922b900e7828.squirrel@calmail.berkeley.edu> Dear Colleagues, As we decided last year at the UGIM symposium at Purdue, our next meeting will be held in Berkeley, 8-12 July 2012. We will discuss all lab management issues, among them the current topic. Pls look for the call for papers and other information, coming soon in this labnetwork mail. Save the date! Sincerely Katalin Voros UC Berkeley From agregg at abbiegregg.com Wed Jun 1 03:20:57 2011 From: agregg at abbiegregg.com (Abbie Gregg) Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2011 03:20:57 -0400 Subject: [labnetwork] More on buddy system and a labnetwork suggestion / Fwd: 24/7 operations In-Reply-To: <236AC5CC-569E-4BD4-AA42-AE8324DED468@eng.utah.edu> References: <8F95EA77ACBF904A861E580B44288EFD99BA1419DE@FASXCH02.fasmail.priv> <236AC5CC-569E-4BD4-AA42-AE8324DED468@eng.utah.edu> Message-ID: <5863FB4055D90542A7A7DAE0CEF2ACB006503506AF@E2K7CCR1.netvigour.com> Dear Ian, Great answers here about good ideas for safe 24 x 7 operations, and I am very interested in the Coral system interlock boxes and also to have more interactions in the "off years" between UGIM conferences. Abbie Gregg President Abbie Gregg, Inc. 1130 East University Drive, Suite 105 Tempe, Arizona 85281 Phone 480 446-8000 x 107 Cell 480-577-5083 FAX 480-446-8001 email agregg at abbiegregg.com website www.abbiegregg.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: ??All information contained in or attached to this email constitutes confidential information belonging to Abbie Gregg, Inc., its affiliates and subsidiaries and/or its clients.? This email and any attachments are proprietary and/or confidential and are intended for business use of the addressee(s) only. ??All other uses or disclosures are strictly prohibited.? If the reader is not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that the perusal, copying or dissemination of this email is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender, and delete all copies of this message and its attachments immediately. -----Original Message----- From: labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu [mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] On Behalf Of Ian Harvey Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2011 10:38 AM To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: [labnetwork] More on buddy system and a labnetwork suggestion / Fwd: 24/7 operations Dear lab network, Great forum. Thanks to all for important feedback which I have compiled in the thread below. Here at the Utah nanofab, we run 24/7 with training aimed at proper off-shift use of tools, and we work to create an enforceable buddy system, and build systems that make it easier for labmembers to adhere to the off-shift buddy system. Our intent is: not having a safety buddy is not an option. Among the tools we use to make it easier to adhere to the buddy system (and to silence complaints from faculty that the buddy system requirement is too onerous!) include: a buddy system online calendar, buddy system mailing list, and even buddies for hire (trained undergrads willing to sit in the lab (doing homework) and be a buddy, for pay. No one has used this last tool since it was implemented a year ago, but it has helped silence the faculty critics) http://fab.eng.utah.edu/buddy-tools Outside the fab we have a monitor indicating who is inside (buddies are not required in the adjacent SEM/XPS lab or in the packaging lab). http://fab.eng.utah.edu/index/about-us/Home/lab-members/userinlab And we use the combination of card-key records (we have our own system, and so have real-time access) and video monitoring (including at wetbenches) to enforce the rule as others have indicated. Recently we began generating a monthly report of buddy system violations, sorted by research group, and send the relevant violations to the faculty PI along with their user fee invoice, so that he or she is aware of what is going on with their own group. We do not necessarily associate (yet) disciplinary measures with this report, as we wish to initially just raise the visibility of the need for adherence (and the fact that we are paying attention) first. We do not yet have a culture wherein the labmembers themselves feel a sufficient sense of ownership that they are generally willing to either confront a safety violator in the lab, or else report violations. But it is part of our formal training, that "someone else's safety violation certainly affects you in a number of ways, including..." Such a culture is an ideal that we are striving for: self-monitoring & self-correction among the labmember community. In order to achieve this sense of ownership, belonging, responsibility & accountability, we have had our student representatives assist us by actually writing the policies and being involved in scheduled and weekly lab cleans. http://fab.eng.utah.edu/uploads/pdfs/Nanofab_User_Policy%20Aug_2010.pdf As we prepare to move into our new facility, we will be making additional improvements to the buddy system: (1) by implementation of CORAL and interlock boxes on each of the tools (now in progress), we will be able to begin billing based on time spent on a tool, rather than time spent in the lab. Our interest in the buddy system is a key driver for this administrative change. We hope that by so doing, a researcher will be able to more easily find a colleague to be a buddy (or associate in the same research group, perhaps), since that buddy will not have to pay to be in the lab. (2) our new facility includes a clean conference room attached to the fab and accessible in the bunny suit as well as from a pedestrian entrance (think of the negotiation table between N & S Korea, entered on either side with a symbolic barrier to crossing between. Since ours is not complete yet, here is a link to the Korean table!). http://www.traveladventures.org/continents/asia/panmunjom2.shtml One of the functions of our clean conference room at night will be for buddies not working on the fab tools to have a place to sit in a bunny suit and work on reports or mask designs or device simulations. (3) Carding out of the lab, we will be implementing an annunciator to indicate if someone is about to exit, and leave someone else stranded without a buddy. Clearly, the policies and software methods for allowing someone to enter alone (needs a buddy to also enter within a prescribed period) or exiting (and potentially stranding someone) requires special attention, and we are working on how to implement this presently. ASIDE: As a result of the recent informative LABNETWORK thread on TMAH, we are implementing changes in our lab. My recent question posed to the LABNETWORK on alarm response protocols was also very helpful in providing us much useful information. I suggest that in addition to the UGIM meetings held once per year and which describe these types of management topics, Perhaps we should also have some forum in the "off-years" to get into detail regarding the soft administrative systems, and provide a means of sharing not only best practices, but also code for the soft systems themselves. For example we are implementing CORAL with home-designed interlock boxes with off-the-shelf components, and are quite willing to share our design and the associated CORAL software modules. We are currently in the planning/design stage of our new prox-card entry and tool enable system with associated buddy system features. Others have implemented add-ons to CORAL, or perhaps generated their own soft admin systems with modules that can be ported to others. Is it worthwhile attempting something such as this? We at Utah would be happy to host the first, unless someone else would like to do it. Thank you all, --Ian ******************************************** Ian R. Harvey, Ph.D. Research Associate Professor Department of Mechanical Engineering Adjunct Associate Professor Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering 2232 MEB Associate Director, Utah nanofab College of Engineering / University of Utah mail to suite 2110 MEB, 50 S. Central Campus Drive Salt Lake City, Utah 84112-9011 801/585-6162 (voicemail) 801/581-5676 (lab main number) www.nanofab.utah.edu Begin forwarded message: From: "Hathaway, Malcolm" Date: May 31, 2011 7:07:41 AM MDT To: "labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu" Subject: Re: [labnetwork] 24/7 operations Hi all, This is Mac Hathaway, at Harvard CNS. We have protocols in place similar to those described by John, with the exception that our "toxic" gases (flammables and anything monitored with sensors, Cl2, SiH4, BCl3, etc) are only enabled from 6 AM to 8 PM. We have had discussions about whether this restriction is still needed, given the maturity of our toxic gas monitoring, but 6 AM-8 PM is the current scheme. Everything else in the cleanroom is physically accessible 24/7 (most notably, from a safety standpoint, wetbenches). One thing that is a little different here is that we have an ERT (Emergency Response Team), similar to what exists in many commercial fabs, (not typical for academic sites, as I understand it). The ERT consists of most of our cleanroom staff. We meet monthly for training (and pizza), and we are all on call in the event of an emergency in the cleanroom. We have the buddy rule for working with hazardous materials, with a strong emphasis on the need for a buddy for any work during "off-hours", but as John pointed out, it's not something that lends itself to absolute compliance. With regard to "encouraging compliance", how do people feel about the use of video cameras on the wetbenches? I understand that some locations are using them; has wetbench user "behavior" improved when cameras are in use? Obviously, 24-hour monitoring is not practical, but does the "someone is watching" effect yield positive results? Mac Hathaway Senior Process Engineer Harvard CNS Begin forwarded message: From: "Luciani, Vincent" Date: May 31, 2011 7:29:28 AM MDT To: "'Matthieu Nannini, Dr.'" , "labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu" Subject: Re: [labnetwork] 24/7 operations Hello Matt, Here at the CNST NanoFab (http://www.nist.gov/cnst/index.cfm), we are staffed from 7 AM to midnight, M-F. We use card key access control system and Coral. All users are locked out after hours and we program their afterhours access into the system after their request for after hours access is approved. ? Advance notification, the day before is fine. That way we can avoid any tool repair or facilities conflicts. The advance notification also helps me help others to find a buddy if needed. o A loose, casual buddy agreement between users, leading to one user leaving before another or one working in their office while the other was in the lab was a common failure mode at first. So, we require verbal or email confirmation from both people that they are committed to being each other's buddy at all times. ? Once approved, they can use all tools/processes. ? We use deterrence to discourage cheating, because it will happen. I randomly check Coral records and our CCTV video tapes and suspend/revoke cleanroom privileges for violators (from a 2 week suspension to full revocation depending on the degree of fraud/abuse). Word travels fast when this happens and is a strong deterrent. ? Some tools outside the cleanroom, like the FIB or AFM, can be used without a buddy after I confirm with whoever trained them that they have the required proficiency. ? The NanoFab staff is notified automatically via Blackberry about any gas or fire alarm 24/7. Let me know how it goes for you. Vince Vincent K. Luciani NanoFab Manager Center for Nanoscale Science and Technology National Institute of Standards and Technology 100 Bureau Drive, MS 6201 Gaithersburg, MD 20899-6200 USA +1-301-975-2886 From dcchrist at wisc.edu Wed Jun 1 09:19:32 2011 From: dcchrist at wisc.edu (Daniel C. Christensen) Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2011 08:19:32 -0500 Subject: [labnetwork] 24/7 operations In-Reply-To: <66234D77-2E6F-4607-8DF3-725584013C46@illinois.edu> References: <7218B7C7-2709-4371-9EF4-745EF2DA44FD@mcgill.ca> <66234D77-2E6F-4607-8DF3-725584013C46@illinois.edu> Message-ID: <7630b14025e00.4de5f614@wiscmail.wisc.edu> Our buddy system at the University of Wisconsin-Madison is very similar to what John Hughes described at University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. So I?ve shamelessly cut and edited his email to describe our buddy system. The cleanrooms are accessible 24/7 and we enforce a buddy policy outside of our normally staffed hours (M-F 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.). We allow all activities to be conducted off-hours except equipment maintenance operations, but researchers are encouraged to do processing using hazardous gases only when staff is in the building. The hazardous gas vaults themselves are highly restricted and cannot be accessed except by a very few staff. Our 8 cleanrooms are contiguous and have a single entry point where the gowning room door connects to a central clean corridor. We have a pc on each side of this door to allow for ?log-in? and ?log-out? of the cleanroom . This log in/out of the cleanroom enters data into our ?Coral-like? lab monitoring system (called CRESS) which allows for real-time monitoring of everyone in the cleanrooms. CRESS keeps a running total of the ?body count? in the cleanroom. The system generates a report to the staff of buddy system violations. During non-business hours (remember to do special programming to make an M-F holidays buddy hours) the system does the following: - - When no one is in the cleanroom, two users must log in with-in a couple of minutes of each other to enter. - - When there are >2 users in the cleanroom, a user may leave the cleanroom as normal. - - When there are just two users left in the cleanroom and ?User A? tries to leave, the logout pc tells ?User A? that they are leaving a lone user. The pc then allows "User A" to click a button to continue their exit or another button to abort their exit. Normally, ?User A? will then click to exit followed within a couple of minutes by User B exiting via the logout pc. - - We consider it a buddy system violation for BOTH ?User A? and User B? in the above scenario if User A leaves the cleanroom and User B doesn?t leave shortly thereafter. Dan C Daniel C Christensen Lab Manager Wisconsin Center for Apllied Microelectronics University of Wisconsin-Madison dan at engr.wisc.edu 608-262-6877 From matthieu.nannini at mcgill.ca Wed Jun 1 10:47:47 2011 From: matthieu.nannini at mcgill.ca (Matthieu Nannini, Dr.) Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2011 10:47:47 -0400 Subject: [labnetwork] 24/7 operations In-Reply-To: <5863FB4055D90542A7A7DAE0CEF2ACB006503506AF@E2K7CCR1.netvigour.com> References: <8F95EA77ACBF904A861E580B44288EFD99BA1419DE@FASXCH02.fasmail.priv> <236AC5CC-569E-4BD4-AA42-AE8324DED468@eng.utah.edu> <5863FB4055D90542A7A7DAE0CEF2ACB006503506AF@E2K7CCR1.netvigour.com> Message-ID: Dear all, Great forum indeed ! thanks for all the answers which I could summarize like this: - buddy at all time or during hazardous processes (wet benches and dangerous gases) - hiring of undergrad to sit in or near the lab until 22:00. - train student according to off-hour usage - allow only trusted/experienced users during off-hour - card entry system with live display of who's in the lab - buddy calendar and/or mailing list - tool interlocks to be sure only trained users have access to tools - service area (pumps, chillers, gas bunker) is off-limits - gas monitoring system linked to EHS/ HAZMAT/Campus security - video recording mostly as deterrent system but also for spot checks and backup in case of user arguments - regular staffing in most cases (~7:00 to ~18:00) Thanks again and wish you safe 24/7 operations ;-) ----------------------------------- Matthieu Nannini McGill Nanotools Microfab Manager t: 514 398 3310 c: 514 758 3311 f: 514 398 8434 http://miam2.physics.mcgill.ca/ ------------------------------------ Le 2011-06-01 ? 03:20, Abbie Gregg a ?crit : > Dear Ian, > Great answers here about good ideas for safe 24 x 7 operations, and I am very interested in the Coral system interlock boxes and also to have more interactions in the "off years" between UGIM conferences. > > Abbie Gregg > President > Abbie Gregg, Inc. > 1130 East University Drive, Suite 105 > Tempe, Arizona 85281 > Phone 480 446-8000 x 107 > Cell 480-577-5083 > FAX 480-446-8001 > email agregg at abbiegregg.com > website www.abbiegregg.com > > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: All information contained in or attached to this email constitutes confidential information belonging to Abbie Gregg, Inc., its affiliates and subsidiaries and/or its clients. This email and any attachments are proprietary and/or confidential and are intended for business use of the addressee(s) only. All other uses or disclosures are strictly prohibited. If the reader is not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that the perusal, copying or dissemination of this email is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender, and delete all copies of this message and its attachments immediately. > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu [mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] On Behalf Of Ian Harvey > Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2011 10:38 AM > To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > Subject: [labnetwork] More on buddy system and a labnetwork suggestion / Fwd: 24/7 operations > > Dear lab network, > > Great forum. Thanks to all for important feedback which I have compiled in the thread below. > > Here at the Utah nanofab, we run 24/7 with training aimed at proper off-shift use of tools, and we work to create an enforceable buddy system, and build systems that make it easier for labmembers to adhere to the off-shift buddy system. Our intent is: not having a safety buddy is not an option. > > Among the tools we use to make it easier to adhere to the buddy system (and to silence complaints from faculty that the buddy system requirement is too onerous!) include: > a buddy system online calendar, buddy system mailing list, and even buddies for hire (trained undergrads willing to sit in the lab (doing homework) and be a buddy, for pay. No one has used this last tool since it was implemented a year ago, but it has helped silence the faculty critics) http://fab.eng.utah.edu/buddy-tools > > Outside the fab we have a monitor indicating who is inside (buddies are not required in the adjacent SEM/XPS lab or in the packaging lab). > http://fab.eng.utah.edu/index/about-us/Home/lab-members/userinlab > > And we use the combination of card-key records (we have our own system, and so have real-time access) and video monitoring (including at wetbenches) to enforce the rule as others have indicated. > > Recently we began generating a monthly report of buddy system violations, sorted by research group, and send the relevant violations to the faculty PI along with their user fee invoice, so that he or she is aware of what is going on with their own group. We do not necessarily associate (yet) disciplinary measures with this report, as we wish to initially just raise the visibility of the need for adherence (and the fact that we are paying attention) first. > > We do not yet have a culture wherein the labmembers themselves feel a sufficient sense of ownership that they are generally willing to either confront a safety violator in the lab, or else report violations. But it is part of our formal training, that "someone else's safety violation certainly affects you in a number of ways, including..." Such a culture is an ideal that we are striving for: self-monitoring & self-correction among the labmember community. In order to achieve this sense of ownership, belonging, responsibility & accountability, we have had our student representatives assist us by actually writing the policies and being involved in scheduled and weekly lab cleans. > http://fab.eng.utah.edu/uploads/pdfs/Nanofab_User_Policy%20Aug_2010.pdf > > As we prepare to move into our new facility, we will be making additional improvements to the buddy system: > (1) by implementation of CORAL and interlock boxes on each of the tools (now in progress), we will be able to begin billing based on time spent on a tool, rather than time spent in the lab. Our interest in the buddy system is a key driver for this administrative change. We hope that by so doing, a researcher will be able to more easily find a colleague to be a buddy (or associate in the same research group, perhaps), since that buddy will not have to pay to be in the lab. > > (2) our new facility includes a clean conference room attached to the fab and accessible in the bunny suit as well as from a pedestrian entrance (think of the negotiation table between N & S Korea, entered on either side with a symbolic barrier to crossing between. Since ours is not complete yet, here is a link to the Korean table!). > http://www.traveladventures.org/continents/asia/panmunjom2.shtml > One of the functions of our clean conference room at night will be for buddies not working on the fab tools to have a place to sit in a bunny suit and work on reports or mask designs or device simulations. > > (3) Carding out of the lab, we will be implementing an annunciator to indicate if someone is about to exit, and leave someone else stranded without a buddy. Clearly, the policies and software methods for allowing someone to enter alone (needs a buddy to also enter within a prescribed period) or exiting (and potentially stranding someone) requires special attention, and we are working on how to implement this presently. > > ASIDE: As a result of the recent informative LABNETWORK thread on TMAH, we are implementing changes in our lab. My recent question posed to the LABNETWORK on alarm response protocols was also very helpful in providing us much useful information. > > I suggest that in addition to the UGIM meetings held once per year and which describe these types of management topics, Perhaps we should also have some forum in the "off-years" to get into detail regarding the soft administrative systems, and provide a means of sharing not only best practices, but also code for the soft systems themselves. For example we are implementing CORAL with home-designed interlock boxes with off-the-shelf components, and are quite willing to share our design and the associated CORAL software modules. We are currently in the planning/design stage of our new prox-card entry and tool enable system with associated buddy system features. Others have implemented add-ons to CORAL, or perhaps generated their own soft admin systems with modules that can be ported to others. Is it worthwhile attempting something such as this? We at Utah would be happy to host the first, unless someone else would like to do it. > > Thank you all, > > --Ian > > ******************************************** > Ian R. Harvey, Ph.D. > Research Associate Professor > Department of Mechanical Engineering > Adjunct Associate Professor > Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering > 2232 MEB > > Associate Director, Utah nanofab > College of Engineering / University of Utah > > mail to suite 2110 MEB, 50 S. Central Campus Drive > Salt Lake City, Utah 84112-9011 > 801/585-6162 (voicemail) > 801/581-5676 (lab main number) > www.nanofab.utah.edu > > > Begin forwarded message: > > From: "Hathaway, Malcolm" > Date: May 31, 2011 7:07:41 AM MDT > To: "labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu" > Subject: Re: [labnetwork] 24/7 operations > > Hi all, > > This is Mac Hathaway, at Harvard CNS. We have protocols in place similar to those described by John, with the exception that our "toxic" gases (flammables and anything monitored with sensors, Cl2, SiH4, BCl3, etc) are only enabled from 6 AM to 8 PM. We have had discussions about whether this restriction is still needed, given the maturity of our toxic gas monitoring, but 6 AM-8 PM is the current scheme. Everything else in the cleanroom is physically accessible 24/7 (most notably, from a safety standpoint, wetbenches). > > One thing that is a little different here is that we have an ERT (Emergency Response Team), similar to what exists in many commercial fabs, (not typical for academic sites, as I understand it). The ERT consists of most of our cleanroom staff. We meet monthly for training (and pizza), and we are all on call in the event of an emergency in the cleanroom. > > We have the buddy rule for working with hazardous materials, with a strong emphasis on the need for a buddy for any work during "off-hours", but as John pointed out, it's not something that lends itself to absolute compliance. With regard to "encouraging compliance", how do people feel about the use of video cameras on the wetbenches? I understand that some locations are using them; has wetbench user "behavior" improved when cameras are in use? Obviously, 24-hour monitoring is not practical, but does the "someone is watching" effect yield positive results? > > > Mac Hathaway > Senior Process Engineer > Harvard CNS > > > > Begin forwarded message: > > From: "Luciani, Vincent" > Date: May 31, 2011 7:29:28 AM MDT > To: "'Matthieu Nannini, Dr.'" , "labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu" > Subject: Re: [labnetwork] 24/7 operations > > Hello Matt, > > Here at the CNST NanoFab (http://www.nist.gov/cnst/index.cfm), we are staffed from 7 AM to midnight, M-F. We use card key access control system and Coral. All users are locked out after hours and we program their afterhours access into the system after their request for after hours access is approved. > > ? Advance notification, the day before is fine. That way we can avoid any tool repair or facilities conflicts. The advance notification also helps me help others to find a buddy if needed. > o A loose, casual buddy agreement between users, leading to one user leaving before another or one working in their office while the other was in the lab was a common failure mode at first. So, we require verbal or email confirmation from both people that they are committed to being each other's buddy at all times. > ? Once approved, they can use all tools/processes. > ? We use deterrence to discourage cheating, because it will happen. I randomly check Coral records and our CCTV video tapes and suspend/revoke cleanroom privileges for violators (from a 2 week suspension to full revocation depending on the degree of fraud/abuse). Word travels fast when this happens and is a strong deterrent. > ? Some tools outside the cleanroom, like the FIB or AFM, can be used without a buddy after I confirm with whoever trained them that they have the required proficiency. > ? The NanoFab staff is notified automatically via Blackberry about any gas or fire alarm 24/7. > > Let me know how it goes for you. > > Vince > > > Vincent K. Luciani > NanoFab Manager > Center for Nanoscale Science and Technology National Institute of Standards and Technology 100 Bureau Drive, MS 6201 Gaithersburg, MD 20899-6200 USA > +1-301-975-2886 > > _______________________________________________ > labnetwork mailing list > labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > https://www-mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork From hughes at illinois.edu Wed Jun 1 14:23:59 2011 From: hughes at illinois.edu (Hughes, John S) Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2011 18:23:59 +0000 Subject: [labnetwork] 24/7 operations In-Reply-To: <048A43C7-04BC-45D5-B82B-A266A518D6E6@eng.utah.edu> References: <7218B7C7-2709-4371-9EF4-745EF2DA44FD@mcgill.ca> <66234D77-2E6F-4607-8DF3-725584013C46@illinois.edu> <048A43C7-04BC-45D5-B82B-A266A518D6E6@eng.utah.edu> Message-ID: Hi Ian, We only use one undergrad buddy per shift. Even though they have tasks they need to perform in the cleanrooms, they, like everyone else, are not allowed in the cleanrooms alone, so if all the researchers leave when they're in there, they've got to go out as well. Fortunately, there is almost always some research activity in the labs from 5-10pm, so it's not usually an issue. That said, they're advised to get their assigned tasks out of the way as soon as possible. (The amount of time it takes for them to do their tasks rarely would take more than two hours.) Since the lab buddy office cubicle for the undergrads is right across from the cleanroom entry, they can easily see and hear when someone goes in and out of the lab. They are supposed to always be monitoring who's in the lab no matter where they are, so if they're in their office and someone comes to the lab when no one else is in there, they will have to go in with them. Similarly, if someone leaves the lab so that only one person remains, they will need to gown up and go on in to join them. We do not have any differential pay grades. The undergrad buddies don't work during the normal day shift (M-F; 7:30am-5:00pm). During those times there are always full-time staff around. This is considered the safest time to do any processing, even if there isn't a staff person right in the cleanrooms. Managing the students has always been a bit of a problem, mainly because their work is not usually supervised directly. As with any group of employees, some do a better job than others. It's important to have very specific tasks for them to do, and if possible, a rigid schedule for each task. It also helps if they can stay at the job for a while. There's always a glut of applicants for the lab buddy jobs, so I'm usually able to select those that at least claim they'll be willing to work for 3-4 semesters. I have managed to get the undergrad hires to work together to set their own schedules, making sure they understand how important it is that all the scheduled hours get covered. This has worked very well, in that it saves a lot of management time. There is obviously more of a problem during holiday periods and semester breaks, but there usually seems to be at least one guy who doesn't mind loading up on hours to earn some extra money. (The undergrads are limited to no more than 20 hours/week if classes are in session, but can go up to 40 hours/week during holiday/semester breaks. Also, we have a relatively high percentage of foreign students, and many of them don't go home over breaks.) Occasionally there may be a work shift that, for whatever reason, doesn't get covered. In that case we send out a mass-mail to all cleanroom users letting them know that they will be responsible for providing their own buddy if they choose to work during those hours. Best regards, John ------------------------------------------------------------- John S. Hughes Office: (217) 333-4674 Associate Director FAX: (217) 244-6375 Laboratory Operations hughes at illinois.edu Micro and Nanotechnology Laboratory University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 3114 Micro and Nanotechnology Laboratory 208 North Wright Street Urbana, Illinois 61801 http://mntl.illinois.edu ------------------------------------------------------------- On May 31, 2011, at 7:11 PM, Ian Harvey wrote: Hi John, Your comments were very useful. Glad to see some strong support for an enforced buddy system. I am curious about the undergrad buddies off-shift: Do you have two of them cover each of these shifts so they can be buddies for each other if the researchers are not in the lab? Or do they only go in the lab if a researcher needs them? (we may not yet be at the threshold number of researchers to justify this) Also, do you pay a shift differential for the students relative to students who work the normal dayshift? Can you comment on some of the issues related to managing those students, say training and supervision and getting the task list done vs. the pressures students have with their weird schedules? thanks, --Ian On May 31, 2011, at 3:29 PM, Hughes, John S wrote: Hello Matthieu, I think you already have a lot of feedback on this, but I'll go ahead and describe what we do here at the Micro and Nanotechnology Lab. Our 16 cleanrooms are contiguous and have a single entry point with a card reader. The cleanrooms are accessible 24/7 and we enforce a buddy policy outside of our normally staffed hours (M-F 7:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.). We allow all activities to be conducted off-hours except equipment maintenance operations, but researchers are encouraged to do processing using hazardous gases only when staff are in the building. The hazardous gas vaults themselves are highly restricted and cannot be accessed except by a very few MNTL staff. In order to make it a bit easier to work in the labs off-hours, we have have hired undergrads who are paid an hourly rate to act as buddies when needed. (They have other assigned tasks as well, primarily stocking supplies, cleaning, and managing the cleanroom garments.) The undergrad assistants are given safety training and they share an office area right across from the cleanroom entry. The hours they cover are 5:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. on weekdays, and 10:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. on weekends. At all other times, the researchers must make sure someone else is in the cleanrooms with them. Our card entry system and some custom programming allows real-time monitoring of everyone in the cleanrooms. The computer at the entry has the cleanroom occupant list as its default home page; all the other computers throughout the lab can call up the list with a single click. We try to get everyone into the habit of checking frequently for other cleanroom occupants when they are working late. We are strict about enforcement. The monitoring system automatically flags single occupants and sends out an e-mail to the transgressor, his/her advisor, and several MNTL staff. (There is a threshold which triggers the automated e-mails; five or ten minutes alone is tolerated.) The researchers get one warning. Upon the next offense they have an automatic two-week lab suspension. The third violation results in a one-month suspension, any more and they're banned permanently. We also have cameras at the cleanroom entry and other locations, but they are not generally used for active monitoring. Rather, we check the video records if questions come up later about who was where, when. Regards, John ------------------------------------------------------------- John S. Hughes Office: (217) 333-4674 Associate Director FAX: (217) 244-6375 Laboratory Operations hughes at illinois.edu Micro and Nanotechnology Laboratory University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 3114 Micro and Nanotechnology Laboratory 208 North Wright Street Urbana, Illinois 61801 http://mntl.illinois.edu ------------------------------------------------------------- On May 27, 2011, at 2:47 PM, Matthieu Nannini, Dr. wrote: Dear lab managers, We are in the process of planning a transition to 24/7 operations for our fab. I would appreciate if some of you could share their experience and give advice on must-do's and must-not-do's regarding 24/7 operations. How do you manage staff ? any restriction in processes ? How do you re-inforce the buddy system ? Buddy system at all times or only for specific processes ? Any specific training for users willing to work overnight ? Thanks in advance for your valuable insights. ----------------------------------- Matthieu Nannini McGill Nanotools Microfab Manager t: 514 398 3310 c: 514 758 3311 f: 514 398 8434 http://miam2.physics.mcgill.ca/ ------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ labnetwork mailing list labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu https://www-mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork _______________________________________________ labnetwork mailing list labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu https://www-mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dabunzow at lbl.gov Mon Jun 6 16:07:59 2011 From: dabunzow at lbl.gov (David A. Bunzow) Date: Mon, 06 Jun 2011 13:07:59 -0700 Subject: [labnetwork] More on buddy system and a labnetwork suggestion / Fwd: 24/7 operations In-Reply-To: <5863FB4055D90542A7A7DAE0CEF2ACB006503506AF@E2K7CCR1.netvigour.com> References: <8F95EA77ACBF904A861E580B44288EFD99BA1419DE@FASXCH02.fasmail.priv> <236AC5CC-569E-4BD4-AA42-AE8324DED468@eng.utah.edu> <5863FB4055D90542A7A7DAE0CEF2ACB006503506AF@E2K7CCR1.netvigour.com> Message-ID: <4DED339F.7010008@lbl.gov> Dear Abbie and Ian, I myself have wondered myself why UGIM is only held every two years. Seems to me that a whole lot more goes on that we could cover better annually rather then bi-annually... Just my $0.05 worth.... David A. Bunzow User Facilities Program Manager The Molecular Foundry Materials Science Division Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory 1 Cyclotron Road MS 67-3207 Berkeley, CA 94720 Office: 510-486-4574 FAX: 510-486-7424 Cell: 701-541-2354 On 6/1/2011 12:20 AM, Abbie Gregg wrote: > Dear Ian, > Great answers here about good ideas for safe 24 x 7 operations, and I am very interested in the Coral system interlock boxes and also to have more interactions in the "off years" between UGIM conferences. > > Abbie Gregg > President > Abbie Gregg, Inc. > 1130 East University Drive, Suite 105 > Tempe, Arizona 85281 > Phone 480 446-8000 x 107 > Cell 480-577-5083 > FAX 480-446-8001 > email agregg at abbiegregg.com > website www.abbiegregg.com > > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: All information contained in or attached to this email constitutes confidential information belonging to Abbie Gregg, Inc., its affiliates and subsidiaries and/or its clients. This email and any attachments are proprietary and/or confidential and are intended for business use of the addressee(s) only. All other uses or disclosures are strictly prohibited. If the reader is not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that the perusal, copying or dissemination of this email is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender, and delete all copies of this message and its attachments immediately. > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu [mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] On Behalf Of Ian Harvey > Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2011 10:38 AM > To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > Subject: [labnetwork] More on buddy system and a labnetwork suggestion / Fwd: 24/7 operations > > Dear lab network, > > Great forum. Thanks to all for important feedback which I have compiled in the thread below. > > Here at the Utah nanofab, we run 24/7 with training aimed at proper off-shift use of tools, and we work to create an enforceable buddy system, and build systems that make it easier for labmembers to adhere to the off-shift buddy system. Our intent is: not having a safety buddy is not an option. > > Among the tools we use to make it easier to adhere to the buddy system (and to silence complaints from faculty that the buddy system requirement is too onerous!) include: > a buddy system online calendar, buddy system mailing list, and even buddies for hire (trained undergrads willing to sit in the lab (doing homework) and be a buddy, for pay. No one has used this last tool since it was implemented a year ago, but it has helped silence the faculty critics) http://fab.eng.utah.edu/buddy-tools > > Outside the fab we have a monitor indicating who is inside (buddies are not required in the adjacent SEM/XPS lab or in the packaging lab). > http://fab.eng.utah.edu/index/about-us/Home/lab-members/userinlab > > And we use the combination of card-key records (we have our own system, and so have real-time access) and video monitoring (including at wetbenches) to enforce the rule as others have indicated. > > Recently we began generating a monthly report of buddy system violations, sorted by research group, and send the relevant violations to the faculty PI along with their user fee invoice, so that he or she is aware of what is going on with their own group. We do not necessarily associate (yet) disciplinary measures with this report, as we wish to initially just raise the visibility of the need for adherence (and the fact that we are paying attention) first. > > We do not yet have a culture wherein the labmembers themselves feel a sufficient sense of ownership that they are generally willing to either confront a safety violator in the lab, or else report violations. But it is part of our formal training, that "someone else's safety violation certainly affects you in a number of ways, including..." Such a culture is an ideal that we are striving for: self-monitoring& self-correction among the labmember community. In order to achieve this sense of ownership, belonging, responsibility& accountability, we have had our student representatives assist us by actually writing the policies and being involved in scheduled and weekly lab cleans. > http://fab.eng.utah.edu/uploads/pdfs/Nanofab_User_Policy%20Aug_2010.pdf > > As we prepare to move into our new facility, we will be making additional improvements to the buddy system: > (1) by implementation of CORAL and interlock boxes on each of the tools (now in progress), we will be able to begin billing based on time spent on a tool, rather than time spent in the lab. Our interest in the buddy system is a key driver for this administrative change. We hope that by so doing, a researcher will be able to more easily find a colleague to be a buddy (or associate in the same research group, perhaps), since that buddy will not have to pay to be in the lab. > > (2) our new facility includes a clean conference room attached to the fab and accessible in the bunny suit as well as from a pedestrian entrance (think of the negotiation table between N& S Korea, entered on either side with a symbolic barrier to crossing between. Since ours is not complete yet, here is a link to the Korean table!). > http://www.traveladventures.org/continents/asia/panmunjom2.shtml > One of the functions of our clean conference room at night will be for buddies not working on the fab tools to have a place to sit in a bunny suit and work on reports or mask designs or device simulations. > > (3) Carding out of the lab, we will be implementing an annunciator to indicate if someone is about to exit, and leave someone else stranded without a buddy. Clearly, the policies and software methods for allowing someone to enter alone (needs a buddy to also enter within a prescribed period) or exiting (and potentially stranding someone) requires special attention, and we are working on how to implement this presently. > > ASIDE: As a result of the recent informative LABNETWORK thread on TMAH, we are implementing changes in our lab. My recent question posed to the LABNETWORK on alarm response protocols was also very helpful in providing us much useful information. > > I suggest that in addition to the UGIM meetings held once per year and which describe these types of management topics, Perhaps we should also have some forum in the "off-years" to get into detail regarding the soft administrative systems, and provide a means of sharing not only best practices, but also code for the soft systems themselves. For example we are implementing CORAL with home-designed interlock boxes with off-the-shelf components, and are quite willing to share our design and the associated CORAL software modules. We are currently in the planning/design stage of our new prox-card entry and tool enable system with associated buddy system features. Others have implemented add-ons to CORAL, or perhaps generated their own soft admin systems with modules that can be ported to others. Is it worthwhile attempting something such as this? We at Utah would be happy to host the first, unless someone else would like to do it. > > Thank you all, > > --Ian > > ******************************************** > Ian R. Harvey, Ph.D. > Research Associate Professor > Department of Mechanical Engineering > Adjunct Associate Professor > Department of Electrical& Computer Engineering > 2232 MEB > > Associate Director, Utah nanofab > College of Engineering / University of Utah > > mail to suite 2110 MEB, 50 S. Central Campus Drive > Salt Lake City, Utah 84112-9011 > 801/585-6162 (voicemail) > 801/581-5676 (lab main number) > www.nanofab.utah.edu > > > Begin forwarded message: > > From: "Hathaway, Malcolm" > Date: May 31, 2011 7:07:41 AM MDT > To: "labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu" > Subject: Re: [labnetwork] 24/7 operations > > Hi all, > > This is Mac Hathaway, at Harvard CNS. We have protocols in place similar to those described by John, with the exception that our "toxic" gases (flammables and anything monitored with sensors, Cl2, SiH4, BCl3, etc) are only enabled from 6 AM to 8 PM. We have had discussions about whether this restriction is still needed, given the maturity of our toxic gas monitoring, but 6 AM-8 PM is the current scheme. Everything else in the cleanroom is physically accessible 24/7 (most notably, from a safety standpoint, wetbenches). > > One thing that is a little different here is that we have an ERT (Emergency Response Team), similar to what exists in many commercial fabs, (not typical for academic sites, as I understand it). The ERT consists of most of our cleanroom staff. We meet monthly for training (and pizza), and we are all on call in the event of an emergency in the cleanroom. > > We have the buddy rule for working with hazardous materials, with a strong emphasis on the need for a buddy for any work during "off-hours", but as John pointed out, it's not something that lends itself to absolute compliance. With regard to "encouraging compliance", how do people feel about the use of video cameras on the wetbenches? I understand that some locations are using them; has wetbench user "behavior" improved when cameras are in use? Obviously, 24-hour monitoring is not practical, but does the "someone is watching" effect yield positive results? > > > Mac Hathaway > Senior Process Engineer > Harvard CNS > > > > Begin forwarded message: > > From: "Luciani, Vincent" > Date: May 31, 2011 7:29:28 AM MDT > To: "'Matthieu Nannini, Dr.'", "labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu" > Subject: Re: [labnetwork] 24/7 operations > > Hello Matt, > > Here at the CNST NanoFab (http://www.nist.gov/cnst/index.cfm), we are staffed from 7 AM to midnight, M-F. We use card key access control system and Coral. All users are locked out after hours and we program their afterhours access into the system after their request for after hours access is approved. > > ? Advance notification, the day before is fine. That way we can avoid any tool repair or facilities conflicts. The advance notification also helps me help others to find a buddy if needed. > o A loose, casual buddy agreement between users, leading to one user leaving before another or one working in their office while the other was in the lab was a common failure mode at first. So, we require verbal or email confirmation from both people that they are committed to being each other's buddy at all times. > ? Once approved, they can use all tools/processes. > ? We use deterrence to discourage cheating, because it will happen. I randomly check Coral records and our CCTV video tapes and suspend/revoke cleanroom privileges for violators (from a 2 week suspension to full revocation depending on the degree of fraud/abuse). Word travels fast when this happens and is a strong deterrent. > ? Some tools outside the cleanroom, like the FIB or AFM, can be used without a buddy after I confirm with whoever trained them that they have the required proficiency. > ? The NanoFab staff is notified automatically via Blackberry about any gas or fire alarm 24/7. > > Let me know how it goes for you. > > Vince > > > Vincent K. Luciani > NanoFab Manager > Center for Nanoscale Science and Technology National Institute of Standards and Technology 100 Bureau Drive, MS 6201 Gaithersburg, MD 20899-6200 USA > +1-301-975-2886 > > _______________________________________________ > labnetwork mailing list > labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > https://www-mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From agregg at abbiegregg.com Tue Jun 7 01:48:24 2011 From: agregg at abbiegregg.com (Abbie Gregg) Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2011 01:48:24 -0400 Subject: [labnetwork] More on buddy system and a labnetwork suggestion / Fwd: 24/7 operations In-Reply-To: <4DED339F.7010008@lbl.gov> References: <8F95EA77ACBF904A861E580B44288EFD99BA1419DE@FASXCH02.fasmail.priv> <236AC5CC-569E-4BD4-AA42-AE8324DED468@eng.utah.edu> <5863FB4055D90542A7A7DAE0CEF2ACB006503506AF@E2K7CCR1.netvigour.com> <4DED339F.7010008@lbl.gov> Message-ID: <5863FB4055D90542A7A7DAE0CEF2ACB006504474D3@E2K7CCR1.netvigour.com> Agreed, maybe we can develop a way to get it funded by another entity in the alternate years.... Abbie Gregg President Abbie Gregg, Inc. 1130 East University Drive, Suite 105 Tempe, Arizona 85281 Phone 480 446-8000 x 107 Cell 480-577-5083 FAX 480-446-8001 email agregg at abbiegregg.com website www.abbiegregg.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: All information contained in or attached to this email constitutes confidential information belonging to Abbie Gregg, Inc., its affiliates and subsidiaries and/or its clients. This email and any attachments are proprietary and/or confidential and are intended for business use of the addressee(s) only. All other uses or disclosures are strictly prohibited. If the reader is not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that the perusal, copying or dissemination of this email is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender, and delete all copies of this message and its attachments immediately. From: labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu [mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] On Behalf Of David A. Bunzow Sent: Monday, June 06, 2011 1:08 PM To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: Re: [labnetwork] More on buddy system and a labnetwork suggestion / Fwd: 24/7 operations Dear Abbie and Ian, I myself have wondered myself why UGIM is only held every two years. Seems to me that a whole lot more goes on that we could cover better annually rather then bi-annually... Just my $0.05 worth.... David A. Bunzow User Facilities Program Manager The Molecular Foundry Materials Science Division Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory 1 Cyclotron Road MS 67-3207 Berkeley, CA 94720 Office: 510-486-4574 FAX: 510-486-7424 Cell: 701-541-2354 On 6/1/2011 12:20 AM, Abbie Gregg wrote: Dear Ian, Great answers here about good ideas for safe 24 x 7 operations, and I am very interested in the Coral system interlock boxes and also to have more interactions in the "off years" between UGIM conferences. Abbie Gregg President Abbie Gregg, Inc. 1130 East University Drive, Suite 105 Tempe, Arizona 85281 Phone 480 446-8000 x 107 Cell 480-577-5083 FAX 480-446-8001 email agregg at abbiegregg.com website www.abbiegregg.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: All information contained in or attached to this email constitutes confidential information belonging to Abbie Gregg, Inc., its affiliates and subsidiaries and/or its clients. This email and any attachments are proprietary and/or confidential and are intended for business use of the addressee(s) only. All other uses or disclosures are strictly prohibited. If the reader is not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that the perusal, copying or dissemination of this email is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender, and delete all copies of this message and its attachments immediately. -----Original Message----- From: labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu [mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] On Behalf Of Ian Harvey Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2011 10:38 AM To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: [labnetwork] More on buddy system and a labnetwork suggestion / Fwd: 24/7 operations Dear lab network, Great forum. Thanks to all for important feedback which I have compiled in the thread below. Here at the Utah nanofab, we run 24/7 with training aimed at proper off-shift use of tools, and we work to create an enforceable buddy system, and build systems that make it easier for labmembers to adhere to the off-shift buddy system. Our intent is: not having a safety buddy is not an option. Among the tools we use to make it easier to adhere to the buddy system (and to silence complaints from faculty that the buddy system requirement is too onerous!) include: a buddy system online calendar, buddy system mailing list, and even buddies for hire (trained undergrads willing to sit in the lab (doing homework) and be a buddy, for pay. No one has used this last tool since it was implemented a year ago, but it has helped silence the faculty critics) http://fab.eng.utah.edu/buddy-tools Outside the fab we have a monitor indicating who is inside (buddies are not required in the adjacent SEM/XPS lab or in the packaging lab). http://fab.eng.utah.edu/index/about-us/Home/lab-members/userinlab And we use the combination of card-key records (we have our own system, and so have real-time access) and video monitoring (including at wetbenches) to enforce the rule as others have indicated. Recently we began generating a monthly report of buddy system violations, sorted by research group, and send the relevant violations to the faculty PI along with their user fee invoice, so that he or she is aware of what is going on with their own group. We do not necessarily associate (yet) disciplinary measures with this report, as we wish to initially just raise the visibility of the need for adherence (and the fact that we are paying attention) first. We do not yet have a culture wherein the labmembers themselves feel a sufficient sense of ownership that they are generally willing to either confront a safety violator in the lab, or else report violations. But it is part of our formal training, that "someone else's safety violation certainly affects you in a number of ways, including..." Such a culture is an ideal that we are striving for: self-monitoring & self-correction among the labmember community. In order to achieve this sense of ownership, belonging, responsibility & accountability, we have had our student representatives assist us by actually writing the policies and being involved in scheduled and weekly lab cleans. http://fab.eng.utah.edu/uploads/pdfs/Nanofab_User_Policy%20Aug_2010.pdf As we prepare to move into our new facility, we will be making additional improvements to the buddy system: (1) by implementation of CORAL and interlock boxes on each of the tools (now in progress), we will be able to begin billing based on time spent on a tool, rather than time spent in the lab. Our interest in the buddy system is a key driver for this administrative change. We hope that by so doing, a researcher will be able to more easily find a colleague to be a buddy (or associate in the same research group, perhaps), since that buddy will not have to pay to be in the lab. (2) our new facility includes a clean conference room attached to the fab and accessible in the bunny suit as well as from a pedestrian entrance (think of the negotiation table between N & S Korea, entered on either side with a symbolic barrier to crossing between. Since ours is not complete yet, here is a link to the Korean table!). http://www.traveladventures.org/continents/asia/panmunjom2.shtml One of the functions of our clean conference room at night will be for buddies not working on the fab tools to have a place to sit in a bunny suit and work on reports or mask designs or device simulations. (3) Carding out of the lab, we will be implementing an annunciator to indicate if someone is about to exit, and leave someone else stranded without a buddy. Clearly, the policies and software methods for allowing someone to enter alone (needs a buddy to also enter within a prescribed period) or exiting (and potentially stranding someone) requires special attention, and we are working on how to implement this presently. ASIDE: As a result of the recent informative LABNETWORK thread on TMAH, we are implementing changes in our lab. My recent question posed to the LABNETWORK on alarm response protocols was also very helpful in providing us much useful information. I suggest that in addition to the UGIM meetings held once per year and which describe these types of management topics, Perhaps we should also have some forum in the "off-years" to get into detail regarding the soft administrative systems, and provide a means of sharing not only best practices, but also code for the soft systems themselves. For example we are implementing CORAL with home-designed interlock boxes with off-the-shelf components, and are quite willing to share our design and the associated CORAL software modules. We are currently in the planning/design stage of our new prox-card entry and tool enable system with associated buddy system features. Others have implemented add-ons to CORAL, or perhaps generated their own soft admin systems with modules that can be ported to others. Is it worthwhile attempting something such as this? We at Utah would be happy to host the first, unless someone else would like to do it. Thank you all, --Ian ******************************************** Ian R. Harvey, Ph.D. Research Associate Professor Department of Mechanical Engineering Adjunct Associate Professor Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering 2232 MEB Associate Director, Utah nanofab College of Engineering / University of Utah mail to suite 2110 MEB, 50 S. Central Campus Drive Salt Lake City, Utah 84112-9011 801/585-6162 (voicemail) 801/581-5676 (lab main number) www.nanofab.utah.edu Begin forwarded message: From: "Hathaway, Malcolm" Date: May 31, 2011 7:07:41 AM MDT To: "labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu" Subject: Re: [labnetwork] 24/7 operations Hi all, This is Mac Hathaway, at Harvard CNS. We have protocols in place similar to those described by John, with the exception that our "toxic" gases (flammables and anything monitored with sensors, Cl2, SiH4, BCl3, etc) are only enabled from 6 AM to 8 PM. We have had discussions about whether this restriction is still needed, given the maturity of our toxic gas monitoring, but 6 AM-8 PM is the current scheme. Everything else in the cleanroom is physically accessible 24/7 (most notably, from a safety standpoint, wetbenches). One thing that is a little different here is that we have an ERT (Emergency Response Team), similar to what exists in many commercial fabs, (not typical for academic sites, as I understand it). The ERT consists of most of our cleanroom staff. We meet monthly for training (and pizza), and we are all on call in the event of an emergency in the cleanroom. We have the buddy rule for working with hazardous materials, with a strong emphasis on the need for a buddy for any work during "off-hours", but as John pointed out, it's not something that lends itself to absolute compliance. With regard to "encouraging compliance", how do people feel about the use of video cameras on the wetbenches? I understand that some locations are using them; has wetbench user "behavior" improved when cameras are in use? Obviously, 24-hour monitoring is not practical, but does the "someone is watching" effect yield positive results? Mac Hathaway Senior Process Engineer Harvard CNS Begin forwarded message: From: "Luciani, Vincent" Date: May 31, 2011 7:29:28 AM MDT To: "'Matthieu Nannini, Dr.'" , "labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu" Subject: Re: [labnetwork] 24/7 operations Hello Matt, Here at the CNST NanoFab (http://www.nist.gov/cnst/index.cfm), we are staffed from 7 AM to midnight, M-F. We use card key access control system and Coral. All users are locked out after hours and we program their afterhours access into the system after their request for after hours access is approved. * Advance notification, the day before is fine. That way we can avoid any tool repair or facilities conflicts. The advance notification also helps me help others to find a buddy if needed. o A loose, casual buddy agreement between users, leading to one user leaving before another or one working in their office while the other was in the lab was a common failure mode at first. So, we require verbal or email confirmation from both people that they are committed to being each other's buddy at all times. * Once approved, they can use all tools/processes. * We use deterrence to discourage cheating, because it will happen. I randomly check Coral records and our CCTV video tapes and suspend/revoke cleanroom privileges for violators (from a 2 week suspension to full revocation depending on the degree of fraud/abuse). Word travels fast when this happens and is a strong deterrent. * Some tools outside the cleanroom, like the FIB or AFM, can be used without a buddy after I confirm with whoever trained them that they have the required proficiency. * The NanoFab staff is notified automatically via Blackberry about any gas or fire alarm 24/7. Let me know how it goes for you. Vince Vincent K. Luciani NanoFab Manager Center for Nanoscale Science and Technology National Institute of Standards and Technology 100 Bureau Drive, MS 6201 Gaithersburg, MD 20899-6200 USA +1-301-975-2886 _______________________________________________ labnetwork mailing list labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu https://www-mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jrweaver at purdue.edu Tue Jun 7 09:49:24 2011 From: jrweaver at purdue.edu (Weaver, John R) Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2011 09:49:24 -0400 Subject: [labnetwork] More on buddy system and a labnetwork suggestion / Fwd: 24/7 operations In-Reply-To: <5863FB4055D90542A7A7DAE0CEF2ACB006504474D3@E2K7CCR1.netvigour.com> References: <8F95EA77ACBF904A861E580B44288EFD99BA1419DE@FASXCH02.fasmail.priv> <236AC5CC-569E-4BD4-AA42-AE8324DED468@eng.utah.edu> <5863FB4055D90542A7A7DAE0CEF2ACB006503506AF@E2K7CCR1.netvigour.com> <4DED339F.7010008@lbl.gov> <5863FB4055D90542A7A7DAE0CEF2ACB006504474D3@E2K7CCR1.netvigour.com> Message-ID: <18AD986E445FE847B2A80B53E65704EDA6BA2DF747@VPEXCH02.purdue.lcl> If there is an interest, I have a great forum for us to use as an every-year meeting on facility operations. I have just gone onto the Executive Board of IEST, and we have been having some really good discussions about where we want to go with fabrication facilities. Right now we have been concentrating on design issues, but we could very easily add operational issues to the agenda. The IEST meets every year in May, generally the first week. If it looks like this is something that has significant interest, we can look at ESTECH 2013 to kick off an operations symposium. Long term, we may want to consider combining UGIM with ESTECH in years when UGIM would normally meet, and use ESTECH as a free-standing conference in alternate years. For those who are not familiar with IEST, that is the organization that has been the technical arm of cleanroom design and operation since the 1960s. It is the secretariat for many of the ISO standards in both cleanrooms and now nanotechnology. The standard for cleanroom classification - now ISO, formerly Federal Standard 209 - was written by the IEST. It would be a great forum for our group, now that we have moved away from devices and toward facilities, especially facility operation. What are the thoughts of the group? John John R. Weaver Facility Manager Birck Nanotechnology Center Purdue University (765) 494-5494 jrweaver at purdue.edu From: labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu [mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] On Behalf Of Abbie Gregg Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2011 1:48 AM To: David A. Bunzow; labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: Re: [labnetwork] More on buddy system and a labnetwork suggestion / Fwd: 24/7 operations Agreed, maybe we can develop a way to get it funded by another entity in the alternate years.... Abbie Gregg President Abbie Gregg, Inc. 1130 East University Drive, Suite 105 Tempe, Arizona 85281 Phone 480 446-8000 x 107 Cell 480-577-5083 FAX 480-446-8001 email agregg at abbiegregg.com website www.abbiegregg.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: All information contained in or attached to this email constitutes confidential information belonging to Abbie Gregg, Inc., its affiliates and subsidiaries and/or its clients. This email and any attachments are proprietary and/or confidential and are intended for business use of the addressee(s) only. All other uses or disclosures are strictly prohibited. If the reader is not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that the perusal, copying or dissemination of this email is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender, and delete all copies of this message and its attachments immediately. From: labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu [mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] On Behalf Of David A. Bunzow Sent: Monday, June 06, 2011 1:08 PM To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: Re: [labnetwork] More on buddy system and a labnetwork suggestion / Fwd: 24/7 operations Dear Abbie and Ian, I myself have wondered myself why UGIM is only held every two years. Seems to me that a whole lot more goes on that we could cover better annually rather then bi-annually... Just my $0.05 worth.... David A. Bunzow User Facilities Program Manager The Molecular Foundry Materials Science Division Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory 1 Cyclotron Road MS 67-3207 Berkeley, CA 94720 Office: 510-486-4574 FAX: 510-486-7424 Cell: 701-541-2354 On 6/1/2011 12:20 AM, Abbie Gregg wrote: Dear Ian, Great answers here about good ideas for safe 24 x 7 operations, and I am very interested in the Coral system interlock boxes and also to have more interactions in the "off years" between UGIM conferences. Abbie Gregg President Abbie Gregg, Inc. 1130 East University Drive, Suite 105 Tempe, Arizona 85281 Phone 480 446-8000 x 107 Cell 480-577-5083 FAX 480-446-8001 email agregg at abbiegregg.com website www.abbiegregg.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: All information contained in or attached to this email constitutes confidential information belonging to Abbie Gregg, Inc., its affiliates and subsidiaries and/or its clients. This email and any attachments are proprietary and/or confidential and are intended for business use of the addressee(s) only. All other uses or disclosures are strictly prohibited. If the reader is not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that the perusal, copying or dissemination of this email is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender, and delete all copies of this message and its attachments immediately. -----Original Message----- From: labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu [mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] On Behalf Of Ian Harvey Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2011 10:38 AM To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: [labnetwork] More on buddy system and a labnetwork suggestion / Fwd: 24/7 operations Dear lab network, Great forum. Thanks to all for important feedback which I have compiled in the thread below. Here at the Utah nanofab, we run 24/7 with training aimed at proper off-shift use of tools, and we work to create an enforceable buddy system, and build systems that make it easier for labmembers to adhere to the off-shift buddy system. Our intent is: not having a safety buddy is not an option. Among the tools we use to make it easier to adhere to the buddy system (and to silence complaints from faculty that the buddy system requirement is too onerous!) include: a buddy system online calendar, buddy system mailing list, and even buddies for hire (trained undergrads willing to sit in the lab (doing homework) and be a buddy, for pay. No one has used this last tool since it was implemented a year ago, but it has helped silence the faculty critics) http://fab.eng.utah.edu/buddy-tools Outside the fab we have a monitor indicating who is inside (buddies are not required in the adjacent SEM/XPS lab or in the packaging lab). http://fab.eng.utah.edu/index/about-us/Home/lab-members/userinlab And we use the combination of card-key records (we have our own system, and so have real-time access) and video monitoring (including at wetbenches) to enforce the rule as others have indicated. Recently we began generating a monthly report of buddy system violations, sorted by research group, and send the relevant violations to the faculty PI along with their user fee invoice, so that he or she is aware of what is going on with their own group. We do not necessarily associate (yet) disciplinary measures with this report, as we wish to initially just raise the visibility of the need for adherence (and the fact that we are paying attention) first. We do not yet have a culture wherein the labmembers themselves feel a sufficient sense of ownership that they are generally willing to either confront a safety violator in the lab, or else report violations. But it is part of our formal training, that "someone else's safety violation certainly affects you in a number of ways, including..." Such a culture is an ideal that we are striving for: self-monitoring & self-correction among the labmember community. In order to achieve this sense of ownership, belonging, responsibility & accountability, we have had our student representatives assist us by actually writing the policies and being involved in scheduled and weekly lab cleans. http://fab.eng.utah.edu/uploads/pdfs/Nanofab_User_Policy%20Aug_2010.pdf As we prepare to move into our new facility, we will be making additional improvements to the buddy system: (1) by implementation of CORAL and interlock boxes on each of the tools (now in progress), we will be able to begin billing based on time spent on a tool, rather than time spent in the lab. Our interest in the buddy system is a key driver for this administrative change. We hope that by so doing, a researcher will be able to more easily find a colleague to be a buddy (or associate in the same research group, perhaps), since that buddy will not have to pay to be in the lab. (2) our new facility includes a clean conference room attached to the fab and accessible in the bunny suit as well as from a pedestrian entrance (think of the negotiation table between N & S Korea, entered on either side with a symbolic barrier to crossing between. Since ours is not complete yet, here is a link to the Korean table!). http://www.traveladventures.org/continents/asia/panmunjom2.shtml One of the functions of our clean conference room at night will be for buddies not working on the fab tools to have a place to sit in a bunny suit and work on reports or mask designs or device simulations. (3) Carding out of the lab, we will be implementing an annunciator to indicate if someone is about to exit, and leave someone else stranded without a buddy. Clearly, the policies and software methods for allowing someone to enter alone (needs a buddy to also enter within a prescribed period) or exiting (and potentially stranding someone) requires special attention, and we are working on how to implement this presently. ASIDE: As a result of the recent informative LABNETWORK thread on TMAH, we are implementing changes in our lab. My recent question posed to the LABNETWORK on alarm response protocols was also very helpful in providing us much useful information. I suggest that in addition to the UGIM meetings held once per year and which describe these types of management topics, Perhaps we should also have some forum in the "off-years" to get into detail regarding the soft administrative systems, and provide a means of sharing not only best practices, but also code for the soft systems themselves. For example we are implementing CORAL with home-designed interlock boxes with off-the-shelf components, and are quite willing to share our design and the associated CORAL software modules. We are currently in the planning/design stage of our new prox-card entry and tool enable system with associated buddy system features. Others have implemented add-ons to CORAL, or perhaps generated their own soft admin systems with modules that can be ported to others. Is it worthwhile attempting something such as this? We at Utah would be happy to host the first, unless someone else would like to do it. Thank you all, --Ian ******************************************** Ian R. Harvey, Ph.D. Research Associate Professor Department of Mechanical Engineering Adjunct Associate Professor Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering 2232 MEB Associate Director, Utah nanofab College of Engineering / University of Utah mail to suite 2110 MEB, 50 S. Central Campus Drive Salt Lake City, Utah 84112-9011 801/585-6162 (voicemail) 801/581-5676 (lab main number) www.nanofab.utah.edu Begin forwarded message: From: "Hathaway, Malcolm" Date: May 31, 2011 7:07:41 AM MDT To: "labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu" Subject: Re: [labnetwork] 24/7 operations Hi all, This is Mac Hathaway, at Harvard CNS. We have protocols in place similar to those described by John, with the exception that our "toxic" gases (flammables and anything monitored with sensors, Cl2, SiH4, BCl3, etc) are only enabled from 6 AM to 8 PM. We have had discussions about whether this restriction is still needed, given the maturity of our toxic gas monitoring, but 6 AM-8 PM is the current scheme. Everything else in the cleanroom is physically accessible 24/7 (most notably, from a safety standpoint, wetbenches). One thing that is a little different here is that we have an ERT (Emergency Response Team), similar to what exists in many commercial fabs, (not typical for academic sites, as I understand it). The ERT consists of most of our cleanroom staff. We meet monthly for training (and pizza), and we are all on call in the event of an emergency in the cleanroom. We have the buddy rule for working with hazardous materials, with a strong emphasis on the need for a buddy for any work during "off-hours", but as John pointed out, it's not something that lends itself to absolute compliance. With regard to "encouraging compliance", how do people feel about the use of video cameras on the wetbenches? I understand that some locations are using them; has wetbench user "behavior" improved when cameras are in use? Obviously, 24-hour monitoring is not practical, but does the "someone is watching" effect yield positive results? Mac Hathaway Senior Process Engineer Harvard CNS Begin forwarded message: From: "Luciani, Vincent" Date: May 31, 2011 7:29:28 AM MDT To: "'Matthieu Nannini, Dr.'" , "labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu" Subject: Re: [labnetwork] 24/7 operations Hello Matt, Here at the CNST NanoFab (http://www.nist.gov/cnst/index.cfm), we are staffed from 7 AM to midnight, M-F. We use card key access control system and Coral. All users are locked out after hours and we program their afterhours access into the system after their request for after hours access is approved. * Advance notification, the day before is fine. That way we can avoid any tool repair or facilities conflicts. The advance notification also helps me help others to find a buddy if needed. o A loose, casual buddy agreement between users, leading to one user leaving before another or one working in their office while the other was in the lab was a common failure mode at first. So, we require verbal or email confirmation from both people that they are committed to being each other's buddy at all times. * Once approved, they can use all tools/processes. * We use deterrence to discourage cheating, because it will happen. I randomly check Coral records and our CCTV video tapes and suspend/revoke cleanroom privileges for violators (from a 2 week suspension to full revocation depending on the degree of fraud/abuse). Word travels fast when this happens and is a strong deterrent. * Some tools outside the cleanroom, like the FIB or AFM, can be used without a buddy after I confirm with whoever trained them that they have the required proficiency. * The NanoFab staff is notified automatically via Blackberry about any gas or fire alarm 24/7. Let me know how it goes for you. Vince Vincent K. Luciani NanoFab Manager Center for Nanoscale Science and Technology National Institute of Standards and Technology 100 Bureau Drive, MS 6201 Gaithersburg, MD 20899-6200 USA +1-301-975-2886 _______________________________________________ labnetwork mailing list labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu https://www-mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From vincent.luciani at nist.gov Tue Jun 7 13:25:33 2011 From: vincent.luciani at nist.gov (Luciani, Vincent) Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2011 13:25:33 -0400 Subject: [labnetwork] Annual event? In-Reply-To: <5863FB4055D90542A7A7DAE0CEF2ACB006504474D3@E2K7CCR1.netvigour.com> References: <8F95EA77ACBF904A861E580B44288EFD99BA1419DE@FASXCH02.fasmail.priv> <236AC5CC-569E-4BD4-AA42-AE8324DED468@eng.utah.edu> <5863FB4055D90542A7A7DAE0CEF2ACB006503506AF@E2K7CCR1.netvigour.com> <4DED339F.7010008@lbl.gov> <5863FB4055D90542A7A7DAE0CEF2ACB006504474D3@E2K7CCR1.netvigour.com> Message-ID: <01F47D4EDEEC64488C10B767D15E485808E1FC9BEF@MBCLUSTER.xchange.nist.gov> You can add my$0.05 to David's. Maybe we should plan a (panel?) discussion about it at UGIM 2012. Vince Vincent K. Luciani NanoFab Manager Center for Nanoscale Science and Technology National Institute of Standards and Technology 100 Bureau Drive, MS 6201 Gaithersburg, MD 20899-6200 USA +1-301-975-2886 From: labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu [mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] On Behalf Of Abbie Gregg Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2011 1:48 AM To: David A. Bunzow; labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: Re: [labnetwork] More on buddy system and a labnetwork suggestion / Fwd: 24/7 operations Agreed, maybe we can develop a way to get it funded by another entity in the alternate years.... Abbie Gregg President Abbie Gregg, Inc. 1130 East University Drive, Suite 105 Tempe, Arizona 85281 Phone 480 446-8000 x 107 Cell 480-577-5083 FAX 480-446-8001 email agregg at abbiegregg.com website www.abbiegregg.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: All information contained in or attached to this email constitutes confidential information belonging to Abbie Gregg, Inc., its affiliates and subsidiaries and/or its clients. This email and any attachments are proprietary and/or confidential and are intended for business use of the addressee(s) only. All other uses or disclosures are strictly prohibited. If the reader is not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that the perusal, copying or dissemination of this email is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender, and delete all copies of this message and its attachments immediately. From: labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu [mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] On Behalf Of David A. Bunzow Sent: Monday, June 06, 2011 1:08 PM To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: Re: [labnetwork] More on buddy system and a labnetwork suggestion / Fwd: 24/7 operations Dear Abbie and Ian, I myself have wondered myself why UGIM is only held every two years. Seems to me that a whole lot more goes on that we could cover better annually rather then bi-annually... Just my $0.05 worth.... David A. Bunzow User Facilities Program Manager The Molecular Foundry Materials Science Division Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory 1 Cyclotron Road MS 67-3207 Berkeley, CA 94720 Office: 510-486-4574 FAX: 510-486-7424 Cell: 701-541-2354 On 6/1/2011 12:20 AM, Abbie Gregg wrote: Dear Ian, Great answers here about good ideas for safe 24 x 7 operations, and I am very interested in the Coral system interlock boxes and also to have more interactions in the "off years" between UGIM conferences. Abbie Gregg President Abbie Gregg, Inc. 1130 East University Drive, Suite 105 Tempe, Arizona 85281 Phone 480 446-8000 x 107 Cell 480-577-5083 FAX 480-446-8001 email agregg at abbiegregg.com website www.abbiegregg.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: All information contained in or attached to this email constitutes confidential information belonging to Abbie Gregg, Inc., its affiliates and subsidiaries and/or its clients. This email and any attachments are proprietary and/or confidential and are intended for business use of the addressee(s) only. All other uses or disclosures are strictly prohibited. If the reader is not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that the perusal, copying or dissemination of this email is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender, and delete all copies of this message and its attachments immediately. -----Original Message----- From: labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu [mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] On Behalf Of Ian Harvey Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2011 10:38 AM To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: [labnetwork] More on buddy system and a labnetwork suggestion / Fwd: 24/7 operations Dear lab network, Great forum. Thanks to all for important feedback which I have compiled in the thread below. Here at the Utah nanofab, we run 24/7 with training aimed at proper off-shift use of tools, and we work to create an enforceable buddy system, and build systems that make it easier for labmembers to adhere to the off-shift buddy system. Our intent is: not having a safety buddy is not an option. Among the tools we use to make it easier to adhere to the buddy system (and to silence complaints from faculty that the buddy system requirement is too onerous!) include: a buddy system online calendar, buddy system mailing list, and even buddies for hire (trained undergrads willing to sit in the lab (doing homework) and be a buddy, for pay. No one has used this last tool since it was implemented a year ago, but it has helped silence the faculty critics) http://fab.eng.utah.edu/buddy-tools Outside the fab we have a monitor indicating who is inside (buddies are not required in the adjacent SEM/XPS lab or in the packaging lab). http://fab.eng.utah.edu/index/about-us/Home/lab-members/userinlab And we use the combination of card-key records (we have our own system, and so have real-time access) and video monitoring (including at wetbenches) to enforce the rule as others have indicated. Recently we began generating a monthly report of buddy system violations, sorted by research group, and send the relevant violations to the faculty PI along with their user fee invoice, so that he or she is aware of what is going on with their own group. We do not necessarily associate (yet) disciplinary measures with this report, as we wish to initially just raise the visibility of the need for adherence (and the fact that we are paying attention) first. We do not yet have a culture wherein the labmembers themselves feel a sufficient sense of ownership that they are generally willing to either confront a safety violator in the lab, or else report violations. But it is part of our formal training, that "someone else's safety violation certainly affects you in a number of ways, including..." Such a culture is an ideal that we are striving for: self-monitoring & self-correction among the labmember community. In order to achieve this sense of ownership, belonging, responsibility & accountability, we have had our student representatives assist us by actually writing the policies and being involved in scheduled and weekly lab cleans. http://fab.eng.utah.edu/uploads/pdfs/Nanofab_User_Policy%20Aug_2010.pdf As we prepare to move into our new facility, we will be making additional improvements to the buddy system: (1) by implementation of CORAL and interlock boxes on each of the tools (now in progress), we will be able to begin billing based on time spent on a tool, rather than time spent in the lab. Our interest in the buddy system is a key driver for this administrative change. We hope that by so doing, a researcher will be able to more easily find a colleague to be a buddy (or associate in the same research group, perhaps), since that buddy will not have to pay to be in the lab. (2) our new facility includes a clean conference room attached to the fab and accessible in the bunny suit as well as from a pedestrian entrance (think of the negotiation table between N & S Korea, entered on either side with a symbolic barrier to crossing between. Since ours is not complete yet, here is a link to the Korean table!). http://www.traveladventures.org/continents/asia/panmunjom2.shtml One of the functions of our clean conference room at night will be for buddies not working on the fab tools to have a place to sit in a bunny suit and work on reports or mask designs or device simulations. (3) Carding out of the lab, we will be implementing an annunciator to indicate if someone is about to exit, and leave someone else stranded without a buddy. Clearly, the policies and software methods for allowing someone to enter alone (needs a buddy to also enter within a prescribed period) or exiting (and potentially stranding someone) requires special attention, and we are working on how to implement this presently. ASIDE: As a result of the recent informative LABNETWORK thread on TMAH, we are implementing changes in our lab. My recent question posed to the LABNETWORK on alarm response protocols was also very helpful in providing us much useful information. I suggest that in addition to the UGIM meetings held once per year and which describe these types of management topics, Perhaps we should also have some forum in the "off-years" to get into detail regarding the soft administrative systems, and provide a means of sharing not only best practices, but also code for the soft systems themselves. For example we are implementing CORAL with home-designed interlock boxes with off-the-shelf components, and are quite willing to share our design and the associated CORAL software modules. We are currently in the planning/design stage of our new prox-card entry and tool enable system with associated buddy system features. Others have implemented add-ons to CORAL, or perhaps generated their own soft admin systems with modules that can be ported to others. Is it worthwhile attempting something such as this? We at Utah would be happy to host the first, unless someone else would like to do it. Thank you all, --Ian ******************************************** Ian R. Harvey, Ph.D. Research Associate Professor Department of Mechanical Engineering Adjunct Associate Professor Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering 2232 MEB Associate Director, Utah nanofab College of Engineering / University of Utah mail to suite 2110 MEB, 50 S. Central Campus Drive Salt Lake City, Utah 84112-9011 801/585-6162 (voicemail) 801/581-5676 (lab main number) www.nanofab.utah.edu Begin forwarded message: From: "Hathaway, Malcolm" Date: May 31, 2011 7:07:41 AM MDT To: "labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu" Subject: Re: [labnetwork] 24/7 operations Hi all, This is Mac Hathaway, at Harvard CNS. We have protocols in place similar to those described by John, with the exception that our "toxic" gases (flammables and anything monitored with sensors, Cl2, SiH4, BCl3, etc) are only enabled from 6 AM to 8 PM. We have had discussions about whether this restriction is still needed, given the maturity of our toxic gas monitoring, but 6 AM-8 PM is the current scheme. Everything else in the cleanroom is physically accessible 24/7 (most notably, from a safety standpoint, wetbenches). One thing that is a little different here is that we have an ERT (Emergency Response Team), similar to what exists in many commercial fabs, (not typical for academic sites, as I understand it). The ERT consists of most of our cleanroom staff. We meet monthly for training (and pizza), and we are all on call in the event of an emergency in the cleanroom. We have the buddy rule for working with hazardous materials, with a strong emphasis on the need for a buddy for any work during "off-hours", but as John pointed out, it's not something that lends itself to absolute compliance. With regard to "encouraging compliance", how do people feel about the use of video cameras on the wetbenches? I understand that some locations are using them; has wetbench user "behavior" improved when cameras are in use? Obviously, 24-hour monitoring is not practical, but does the "someone is watching" effect yield positive results? Mac Hathaway Senior Process Engineer Harvard CNS Begin forwarded message: From: "Luciani, Vincent" Date: May 31, 2011 7:29:28 AM MDT To: "'Matthieu Nannini, Dr.'" , "labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu" Subject: Re: [labnetwork] 24/7 operations Hello Matt, Here at the CNST NanoFab (http://www.nist.gov/cnst/index.cfm), we are staffed from 7 AM to midnight, M-F. We use card key access control system and Coral. All users are locked out after hours and we program their afterhours access into the system after their request for after hours access is approved. * Advance notification, the day before is fine. That way we can avoid any tool repair or facilities conflicts. The advance notification also helps me help others to find a buddy if needed. o A loose, casual buddy agreement between users, leading to one user leaving before another or one working in their office while the other was in the lab was a common failure mode at first. So, we require verbal or email confirmation from both people that they are committed to being each other's buddy at all times. * Once approved, they can use all tools/processes. * We use deterrence to discourage cheating, because it will happen. I randomly check Coral records and our CCTV video tapes and suspend/revoke cleanroom privileges for violators (from a 2 week suspension to full revocation depending on the degree of fraud/abuse). Word travels fast when this happens and is a strong deterrent. * Some tools outside the cleanroom, like the FIB or AFM, can be used without a buddy after I confirm with whoever trained them that they have the required proficiency. * The NanoFab staff is notified automatically via Blackberry about any gas or fire alarm 24/7. Let me know how it goes for you. Vince Vincent K. Luciani NanoFab Manager Center for Nanoscale Science and Technology National Institute of Standards and Technology 100 Bureau Drive, MS 6201 Gaithersburg, MD 20899-6200 USA +1-301-975-2886 _______________________________________________ labnetwork mailing list labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu https://www-mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From matthieu.nannini at mcgill.ca Tue Jun 7 16:09:31 2011 From: matthieu.nannini at mcgill.ca (Matthieu Nannini, Dr.) Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2011 16:09:31 -0400 Subject: [labnetwork] More on buddy system and a labnetwork suggestion / Fwd: 24/7 operations In-Reply-To: <29208_1307476713_4DEE82E8_29208_27_12_18AD986E445FE847B2A80B53E65704EDA6BA2DF747@VPEXCH02.purdue.lcl> References: <8F95EA77ACBF904A861E580B44288EFD99BA1419DE@FASXCH02.fasmail.priv> <236AC5CC-569E-4BD4-AA42-AE8324DED468@eng.utah.edu> <5863FB4055D90542A7A7DAE0CEF2ACB006503506AF@E2K7CCR1.netvigour.com> <4DED339F.7010008@lbl.gov> <5863FB4055D90542A7A7DAE0CEF2ACB006504474D3@E2K7CCR1.netvigour.com> <29208_1307476713_4DEE82E8_29208_27_12_18AD986E445FE847B2A80B53E65704EDA6BA2DF747@VPEXCH02.purdue.lcl> Message-ID: <67EB9B59-3AE3-4175-90D1-6AF41AD2183A@mcgill.ca> My 0.05$ would be: let's not re-invent the wheel or duplicate efforts. ----------------------------------- Matthieu Nannini McGill Nanotools Microfab Manager t: 514 398 3310 c: 514 758 3311 f: 514 398 8434 http://miam2.physics.mcgill.ca/ ------------------------------------ Le 2011-06-07 ? 09:49, Weaver, John R a ?crit : If there is an interest, I have a great forum for us to use as an every-year meeting on facility operations. I have just gone onto the Executive Board of IEST, and we have been having some really good discussions about where we want to go with fabrication facilities. Right now we have been concentrating on design issues, but we could very easily add operational issues to the agenda. The IEST meets every year in May, generally the first week. If it looks like this is something that has significant interest, we can look at ESTECH 2013 to kick off an operations symposium. Long term, we may want to consider combining UGIM with ESTECH in years when UGIM would normally meet, and use ESTECH as a free-standing conference in alternate years. For those who are not familiar with IEST, that is the organization that has been the technical arm of cleanroom design and operation since the 1960s. It is the secretariat for many of the ISO standards in both cleanrooms and now nanotechnology. The standard for cleanroom classification ? now ISO, formerly Federal Standard 209 ? was written by the IEST. It would be a great forum for our group, now that we have moved away from devices and toward facilities, especially facility operation. What are the thoughts of the group? John John R. Weaver Facility Manager Birck Nanotechnology Center Purdue University (765) 494-5494 jrweaver at purdue.edu From: labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu [mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] On Behalf Of Abbie Gregg Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2011 1:48 AM To: David A. Bunzow; labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: Re: [labnetwork] More on buddy system and a labnetwork suggestion / Fwd: 24/7 operations Agreed, maybe we can develop a way to get it funded by another entity in the alternate years?. Abbie Gregg President Abbie Gregg, Inc. 1130 East University Drive, Suite 105 Tempe, Arizona 85281 Phone 480 446-8000 x 107 Cell 480-577-5083 FAX 480-446-8001 email agregg at abbiegregg.com website www.abbiegregg.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: All information contained in or attached to this email constitutes confidential information belonging to Abbie Gregg, Inc., its affiliates and subsidiaries and/or its clients. This email and any attachments are proprietary and/or confidential and are intended for business use of the addressee(s) only. All other uses or disclosures are strictly prohibited. If the reader is not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that the perusal, copying or dissemination of this email is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender, and delete all copies of this message and its attachments immediately. From: labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu [mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] On Behalf Of David A. Bunzow Sent: Monday, June 06, 2011 1:08 PM To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: Re: [labnetwork] More on buddy system and a labnetwork suggestion / Fwd: 24/7 operations Dear Abbie and Ian, I myself have wondered myself why UGIM is only held every two years. Seems to me that a whole lot more goes on that we could cover better annually rather then bi-annually... Just my $0.05 worth.... David A. Bunzow User Facilities Program Manager The Molecular Foundry Materials Science Division Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory 1 Cyclotron Road MS 67-3207 Berkeley, CA 94720 Office: 510-486-4574 FAX: 510-486-7424 Cell: 701-541-2354 On 6/1/2011 12:20 AM, Abbie Gregg wrote: Dear Ian, Great answers here about good ideas for safe 24 x 7 operations, and I am very interested in the Coral system interlock boxes and also to have more interactions in the "off years" between UGIM conferences. Abbie Gregg President Abbie Gregg, Inc. 1130 East University Drive, Suite 105 Tempe, Arizona 85281 Phone 480 446-8000 x 107 Cell 480-577-5083 FAX 480-446-8001 email agregg at abbiegregg.com website www.abbiegregg.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: All information contained in or attached to this email constitutes confidential information belonging to Abbie Gregg, Inc., its affiliates and subsidiaries and/or its clients. This email and any attachments are proprietary and/or confidential and are intended for business use of the addressee(s) only. All other uses or disclosures are strictly prohibited. If the reader is not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that the perusal, copying or dissemination of this email is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender, and delete all copies of this message and its attachments immediately. -----Original Message----- From: labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu [mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] On Behalf Of Ian Harvey Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2011 10:38 AM To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: [labnetwork] More on buddy system and a labnetwork suggestion / Fwd: 24/7 operations Dear lab network, Great forum. Thanks to all for important feedback which I have compiled in the thread below. Here at the Utah nanofab, we run 24/7 with training aimed at proper off-shift use of tools, and we work to create an enforceable buddy system, and build systems that make it easier for labmembers to adhere to the off-shift buddy system. Our intent is: not having a safety buddy is not an option. Among the tools we use to make it easier to adhere to the buddy system (and to silence complaints from faculty that the buddy system requirement is too onerous!) include: a buddy system online calendar, buddy system mailing list, and even buddies for hire (trained undergrads willing to sit in the lab (doing homework) and be a buddy, for pay. No one has used this last tool since it was implemented a year ago, but it has helped silence the faculty critics) http://fab.eng.utah.edu/buddy-tools Outside the fab we have a monitor indicating who is inside (buddies are not required in the adjacent SEM/XPS lab or in the packaging lab). http://fab.eng.utah.edu/index/about-us/Home/lab-members/userinlab And we use the combination of card-key records (we have our own system, and so have real-time access) and video monitoring (including at wetbenches) to enforce the rule as others have indicated. Recently we began generating a monthly report of buddy system violations, sorted by research group, and send the relevant violations to the faculty PI along with their user fee invoice, so that he or she is aware of what is going on with their own group. We do not necessarily associate (yet) disciplinary measures with this report, as we wish to initially just raise the visibility of the need for adherence (and the fact that we are paying attention) first. We do not yet have a culture wherein the labmembers themselves feel a sufficient sense of ownership that they are generally willing to either confront a safety violator in the lab, or else report violations. But it is part of our formal training, that "someone else's safety violation certainly affects you in a number of ways, including..." Such a culture is an ideal that we are striving for: self-monitoring & self-correction among the labmember community. In order to achieve this sense of ownership, belonging, responsibility & accountability, we have had our student representatives assist us by actually writing the policies and being involved in scheduled and weekly lab cleans. http://fab.eng.utah.edu/uploads/pdfs/Nanofab_User_Policy%20Aug_2010.pdf As we prepare to move into our new facility, we will be making additional improvements to the buddy system: (1) by implementation of CORAL and interlock boxes on each of the tools (now in progress), we will be able to begin billing based on time spent on a tool, rather than time spent in the lab. Our interest in the buddy system is a key driver for this administrative change. We hope that by so doing, a researcher will be able to more easily find a colleague to be a buddy (or associate in the same research group, perhaps), since that buddy will not have to pay to be in the lab. (2) our new facility includes a clean conference room attached to the fab and accessible in the bunny suit as well as from a pedestrian entrance (think of the negotiation table between N & S Korea, entered on either side with a symbolic barrier to crossing between. Since ours is not complete yet, here is a link to the Korean table!). http://www.traveladventures.org/continents/asia/panmunjom2.shtml One of the functions of our clean conference room at night will be for buddies not working on the fab tools to have a place to sit in a bunny suit and work on reports or mask designs or device simulations. (3) Carding out of the lab, we will be implementing an annunciator to indicate if someone is about to exit, and leave someone else stranded without a buddy. Clearly, the policies and software methods for allowing someone to enter alone (needs a buddy to also enter within a prescribed period) or exiting (and potentially stranding someone) requires special attention, and we are working on how to implement this presently. ASIDE: As a result of the recent informative LABNETWORK thread on TMAH, we are implementing changes in our lab. My recent question posed to the LABNETWORK on alarm response protocols was also very helpful in providing us much useful information. I suggest that in addition to the UGIM meetings held once per year and which describe these types of management topics, Perhaps we should also have some forum in the "off-years" to get into detail regarding the soft administrative systems, and provide a means of sharing not only best practices, but also code for the soft systems themselves. For example we are implementing CORAL with home-designed interlock boxes with off-the-shelf components, and are quite willing to share our design and the associated CORAL software modules. We are currently in the planning/design stage of our new prox-card entry and tool enable system with associated buddy system features. Others have implemented add-ons to CORAL, or perhaps generated their own soft admin systems with modules that can be ported to others. Is it worthwhile attempting something such as this? We at Utah would be happy to host the first, unless someone else would like to do it. Thank you all, --Ian ******************************************** Ian R. Harvey, Ph.D. Research Associate Professor Department of Mechanical Engineering Adjunct Associate Professor Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering 2232 MEB Associate Director, Utah nanofab College of Engineering / University of Utah mail to suite 2110 MEB, 50 S. Central Campus Drive Salt Lake City, Utah 84112-9011 801/585-6162 (voicemail) 801/581-5676 (lab main number) www.nanofab.utah.edu Begin forwarded message: From: "Hathaway, Malcolm" Date: May 31, 2011 7:07:41 AM MDT To: "labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu" Subject: Re: [labnetwork] 24/7 operations Hi all, This is Mac Hathaway, at Harvard CNS. We have protocols in place similar to those described by John, with the exception that our "toxic" gases (flammables and anything monitored with sensors, Cl2, SiH4, BCl3, etc) are only enabled from 6 AM to 8 PM. We have had discussions about whether this restriction is still needed, given the maturity of our toxic gas monitoring, but 6 AM-8 PM is the current scheme. Everything else in the cleanroom is physically accessible 24/7 (most notably, from a safety standpoint, wetbenches). One thing that is a little different here is that we have an ERT (Emergency Response Team), similar to what exists in many commercial fabs, (not typical for academic sites, as I understand it). The ERT consists of most of our cleanroom staff. We meet monthly for training (and pizza), and we are all on call in the event of an emergency in the cleanroom. We have the buddy rule for working with hazardous materials, with a strong emphasis on the need for a buddy for any work during "off-hours", but as John pointed out, it's not something that lends itself to absolute compliance. With regard to "encouraging compliance", how do people feel about the use of video cameras on the wetbenches? I understand that some locations are using them; has wetbench user "behavior" improved when cameras are in use? Obviously, 24-hour monitoring is not practical, but does the "someone is watching" effect yield positive results? Mac Hathaway Senior Process Engineer Harvard CNS Begin forwarded message: From: "Luciani, Vincent" Date: May 31, 2011 7:29:28 AM MDT To: "'Matthieu Nannini, Dr.'" , "labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu" Subject: Re: [labnetwork] 24/7 operations Hello Matt, Here at the CNST NanoFab (http://www.nist.gov/cnst/index.cfm), we are staffed from 7 AM to midnight, M-F. We use card key access control system and Coral. All users are locked out after hours and we program their afterhours access into the system after their request for after hours access is approved. ? Advance notification, the day before is fine. That way we can avoid any tool repair or facilities conflicts. The advance notification also helps me help others to find a buddy if needed. o A loose, casual buddy agreement between users, leading to one user leaving before another or one working in their office while the other was in the lab was a common failure mode at first. So, we require verbal or email confirmation from both people that they are committed to being each other's buddy at all times. ? Once approved, they can use all tools/processes. ? We use deterrence to discourage cheating, because it will happen. I randomly check Coral records and our CCTV video tapes and suspend/revoke cleanroom privileges for violators (from a 2 week suspension to full revocation depending on the degree of fraud/abuse). Word travels fast when this happens and is a strong deterrent. ? Some tools outside the cleanroom, like the FIB or AFM, can be used without a buddy after I confirm with whoever trained them that they have the required proficiency. ? The NanoFab staff is notified automatically via Blackberry about any gas or fire alarm 24/7. Let me know how it goes for you. Vince Vincent K. Luciani NanoFab Manager Center for Nanoscale Science and Technology National Institute of Standards and Technology 100 Bureau Drive, MS 6201 Gaithersburg, MD 20899-6200 USA +1-301-975-2886 _______________________________________________ labnetwork mailing list labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu https://www-mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork From shott at stanford.edu Tue Jun 7 16:42:53 2011 From: shott at stanford.edu (John Shott) Date: Tue, 07 Jun 2011 13:42:53 -0700 Subject: [labnetwork] More on buddy system and a labnetwork suggestion / Fwd: 24/7 operations In-Reply-To: <18AD986E445FE847B2A80B53E65704EDA6BA2DF747@VPEXCH02.purdue.lcl> References: <8F95EA77ACBF904A861E580B44288EFD99BA1419DE@FASXCH02.fasmail.priv> <236AC5CC-569E-4BD4-AA42-AE8324DED468@eng.utah.edu> <5863FB4055D90542A7A7DAE0CEF2ACB006503506AF@E2K7CCR1.netvigour.com> <4DED339F.7010008@lbl.gov> <5863FB4055D90542A7A7DAE0CEF2ACB006504474D3@E2K7CCR1.netvigour.com> <18AD986E445FE847B2A80B53E65704EDA6BA2DF747@VPEXCH02.purdue.lcl> Message-ID: <4DEE8D4D.1040205@stanford.edu> John: Thanks for your comments. Note: if anyone is a clueless as I was until 5 minutes ago, IEST is Institute for Environmental Sciences and Technology. I think that this is an interesting proposal. I don't want to take away anything from UGIM .... it has, despite being primarily a device and technology conference, come to be known as THE place where lab managers get together to compare notes and share best practices related to a variety of facility and operational issues. It would certainly appear, however, as if there is demand for an annual meeting to discuss the management, operation, and facility/equipment needs of the growing number of clean rooms and nano-* facilities. My guess is that there will be a lively discussion of how to best meet that need but I think that ideas that somehow back fill the biannual UGIM meetings with a meeting in the off-UGIM years would be a good idea. One of the nice things about UGIM, in my view, is that it is small enough that it can be hosted at or near a facility that is of interest to this community. John, does ESTECH rotate cities, or is it normally held in Orlando? Thanks, John On 6/7/2011 6:49 AM, Weaver, John R wrote: > > If there is an interest, I have a great forum for us to use as an > every-year meeting on facility operations. I have just gone onto the > Executive Board of IEST, and we have been having some really good > discussions about where we want to go with fabrication facilities. > Right now we have been concentrating on design issues, but we could > very easily add operational issues to the agenda. The IEST meets every > year in May, generally the first week. > > If it looks like this is something that has significant interest, we > can look at ESTECH 2013 to kick off an operations symposium. Long > term, we may want to consider combining UGIM with ESTECH in years when > UGIM would normally meet, and use ESTECH as a free-standing conference > in alternate years. > > For those who are not familiar with IEST, that is the organization > that has been the technical arm of cleanroom design and operation > since the 1960s. It is the secretariat for many of the ISO standards > in both cleanrooms and now nanotechnology. The standard for cleanroom > classification -- now ISO, formerly Federal Standard 209 -- was > written by the IEST. It would be a great forum for our group, now that > we have moved away from devices and toward facilities, especially > facility operation. > > What are the thoughts of the group? > > John > > */John R. Weaver/* > > */Facility Manager/* > > */Birck Nanotechnology Center/* > > */Purdue University/* > > */(765) 494-5494/* > > */jrweaver at purdue.edu/* > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jrweaver at purdue.edu Tue Jun 7 17:06:12 2011 From: jrweaver at purdue.edu (Weaver, John R) Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2011 17:06:12 -0400 Subject: [labnetwork] More on buddy system and a labnetwork suggestion / Fwd: 24/7 operations In-Reply-To: <4DEE8D4D.1040205@stanford.edu> References: <8F95EA77ACBF904A861E580B44288EFD99BA1419DE@FASXCH02.fasmail.priv> <236AC5CC-569E-4BD4-AA42-AE8324DED468@eng.utah.edu> <5863FB4055D90542A7A7DAE0CEF2ACB006503506AF@E2K7CCR1.netvigour.com> <4DED339F.7010008@lbl.gov> <5863FB4055D90542A7A7DAE0CEF2ACB006504474D3@E2K7CCR1.netvigour.com> <18AD986E445FE847B2A80B53E65704EDA6BA2DF747@VPEXCH02.purdue.lcl> <4DEE8D4D.1040205@stanford.edu> Message-ID: <18AD986E445FE847B2A80B53E65704EDA6BA2DF756@VPEXCH02.purdue.lcl> It rotates cities. It was in Chicago this year and Reno last year. I'm not sure where 2013 is scheduled to be, but I'll check. We may be able to influence the location in out years, but I think 2013 is already set - I just don't remember where. John John R. Weaver Facility Manager Birck Nanotechnology Center Purdue University (765) 494-5494 jrweaver at purdue.edu From: John Shott [mailto:shott at stanford.edu] Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2011 4:43 PM To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Cc: John Weaver Subject: Re: [labnetwork] More on buddy system and a labnetwork suggestion / Fwd: 24/7 operations John: Thanks for your comments. Note: if anyone is a clueless as I was until 5 minutes ago, IEST is Institute for Environmental Sciences and Technology. I think that this is an interesting proposal. I don't want to take away anything from UGIM .... it has, despite being primarily a device and technology conference, come to be known as THE place where lab managers get together to compare notes and share best practices related to a variety of facility and operational issues. It would certainly appear, however, as if there is demand for an annual meeting to discuss the management, operation, and facility/equipment needs of the growing number of clean rooms and nano-* facilities. My guess is that there will be a lively discussion of how to best meet that need but I think that ideas that somehow back fill the biannual UGIM meetings with a meeting in the off-UGIM years would be a good idea. One of the nice things about UGIM, in my view, is that it is small enough that it can be hosted at or near a facility that is of interest to this community. John, does ESTECH rotate cities, or is it normally held in Orlando? Thanks, John On 6/7/2011 6:49 AM, Weaver, John R wrote: If there is an interest, I have a great forum for us to use as an every-year meeting on facility operations. I have just gone onto the Executive Board of IEST, and we have been having some really good discussions about where we want to go with fabrication facilities. Right now we have been concentrating on design issues, but we could very easily add operational issues to the agenda. The IEST meets every year in May, generally the first week. If it looks like this is something that has significant interest, we can look at ESTECH 2013 to kick off an operations symposium. Long term, we may want to consider combining UGIM with ESTECH in years when UGIM would normally meet, and use ESTECH as a free-standing conference in alternate years. For those who are not familiar with IEST, that is the organization that has been the technical arm of cleanroom design and operation since the 1960s. It is the secretariat for many of the ISO standards in both cleanrooms and now nanotechnology. The standard for cleanroom classification - now ISO, formerly Federal Standard 209 - was written by the IEST. It would be a great forum for our group, now that we have moved away from devices and toward facilities, especially facility operation. What are the thoughts of the group? John John R. Weaver Facility Manager Birck Nanotechnology Center Purdue University (765) 494-5494 jrweaver at purdue.edu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From agregg at abbiegregg.com Tue Jun 7 23:38:00 2011 From: agregg at abbiegregg.com (Abbie Gregg) Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2011 23:38:00 -0400 Subject: [labnetwork] More on buddy system and a labnetwork suggestion / Fwd: 24/7 operations In-Reply-To: <18AD986E445FE847B2A80B53E65704EDA6BA2DF747@VPEXCH02.purdue.lcl> References: <8F95EA77ACBF904A861E580B44288EFD99BA1419DE@FASXCH02.fasmail.priv> <236AC5CC-569E-4BD4-AA42-AE8324DED468@eng.utah.edu> <5863FB4055D90542A7A7DAE0CEF2ACB006503506AF@E2K7CCR1.netvigour.com> <4DED339F.7010008@lbl.gov> <5863FB4055D90542A7A7DAE0CEF2ACB006504474D3@E2K7CCR1.netvigour.com> <18AD986E445FE847B2A80B53E65704EDA6BA2DF747@VPEXCH02.purdue.lcl> Message-ID: <5863FB4055D90542A7A7DAE0CEF2ACB006504477D5@E2K7CCR1.netvigour.com> I would be interested in this option, if they sponsored or allowed operational discussions. Abbie Gregg President Abbie Gregg, Inc. 1130 East University Drive, Suite 105 Tempe, Arizona 85281 Phone 480 446-8000 x 107 Cell 480-577-5083 FAX 480-446-8001 email agregg at abbiegregg.com website www.abbiegregg.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: All information contained in or attached to this email constitutes confidential information belonging to Abbie Gregg, Inc., its affiliates and subsidiaries and/or its clients. This email and any attachments are proprietary and/or confidential and are intended for business use of the addressee(s) only. All other uses or disclosures are strictly prohibited. If the reader is not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that the perusal, copying or dissemination of this email is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender, and delete all copies of this message and its attachments immediately. From: Weaver, John R [mailto:jrweaver at purdue.edu] Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2011 6:49 AM To: Abbie Gregg; David A. Bunzow; labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: RE: [labnetwork] More on buddy system and a labnetwork suggestion / Fwd: 24/7 operations If there is an interest, I have a great forum for us to use as an every-year meeting on facility operations. I have just gone onto the Executive Board of IEST, and we have been having some really good discussions about where we want to go with fabrication facilities. Right now we have been concentrating on design issues, but we could very easily add operational issues to the agenda. The IEST meets every year in May, generally the first week. If it looks like this is something that has significant interest, we can look at ESTECH 2013 to kick off an operations symposium. Long term, we may want to consider combining UGIM with ESTECH in years when UGIM would normally meet, and use ESTECH as a free-standing conference in alternate years. For those who are not familiar with IEST, that is the organization that has been the technical arm of cleanroom design and operation since the 1960s. It is the secretariat for many of the ISO standards in both cleanrooms and now nanotechnology. The standard for cleanroom classification - now ISO, formerly Federal Standard 209 - was written by the IEST. It would be a great forum for our group, now that we have moved away from devices and toward facilities, especially facility operation. What are the thoughts of the group? John John R. Weaver Facility Manager Birck Nanotechnology Center Purdue University (765) 494-5494 jrweaver at purdue.edu From: labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu [mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] On Behalf Of Abbie Gregg Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2011 1:48 AM To: David A. Bunzow; labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: Re: [labnetwork] More on buddy system and a labnetwork suggestion / Fwd: 24/7 operations Agreed, maybe we can develop a way to get it funded by another entity in the alternate years.... Abbie Gregg President Abbie Gregg, Inc. 1130 East University Drive, Suite 105 Tempe, Arizona 85281 Phone 480 446-8000 x 107 Cell 480-577-5083 FAX 480-446-8001 email agregg at abbiegregg.com website www.abbiegregg.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: All information contained in or attached to this email constitutes confidential information belonging to Abbie Gregg, Inc., its affiliates and subsidiaries and/or its clients. This email and any attachments are proprietary and/or confidential and are intended for business use of the addressee(s) only. All other uses or disclosures are strictly prohibited. If the reader is not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that the perusal, copying or dissemination of this email is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender, and delete all copies of this message and its attachments immediately. From: labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu [mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] On Behalf Of David A. Bunzow Sent: Monday, June 06, 2011 1:08 PM To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: Re: [labnetwork] More on buddy system and a labnetwork suggestion / Fwd: 24/7 operations Dear Abbie and Ian, I myself have wondered myself why UGIM is only held every two years. Seems to me that a whole lot more goes on that we could cover better annually rather then bi-annually... Just my $0.05 worth.... David A. Bunzow User Facilities Program Manager The Molecular Foundry Materials Science Division Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory 1 Cyclotron Road MS 67-3207 Berkeley, CA 94720 Office: 510-486-4574 FAX: 510-486-7424 Cell: 701-541-2354 On 6/1/2011 12:20 AM, Abbie Gregg wrote: Dear Ian, Great answers here about good ideas for safe 24 x 7 operations, and I am very interested in the Coral system interlock boxes and also to have more interactions in the "off years" between UGIM conferences. Abbie Gregg President Abbie Gregg, Inc. 1130 East University Drive, Suite 105 Tempe, Arizona 85281 Phone 480 446-8000 x 107 Cell 480-577-5083 FAX 480-446-8001 email agregg at abbiegregg.com website www.abbiegregg.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: All information contained in or attached to this email constitutes confidential information belonging to Abbie Gregg, Inc., its affiliates and subsidiaries and/or its clients. This email and any attachments are proprietary and/or confidential and are intended for business use of the addressee(s) only. All other uses or disclosures are strictly prohibited. If the reader is not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that the perusal, copying or dissemination of this email is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender, and delete all copies of this message and its attachments immediately. -----Original Message----- From: labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu [mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] On Behalf Of Ian Harvey Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2011 10:38 AM To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: [labnetwork] More on buddy system and a labnetwork suggestion / Fwd: 24/7 operations Dear lab network, Great forum. Thanks to all for important feedback which I have compiled in the thread below. Here at the Utah nanofab, we run 24/7 with training aimed at proper off-shift use of tools, and we work to create an enforceable buddy system, and build systems that make it easier for labmembers to adhere to the off-shift buddy system. Our intent is: not having a safety buddy is not an option. Among the tools we use to make it easier to adhere to the buddy system (and to silence complaints from faculty that the buddy system requirement is too onerous!) include: a buddy system online calendar, buddy system mailing list, and even buddies for hire (trained undergrads willing to sit in the lab (doing homework) and be a buddy, for pay. No one has used this last tool since it was implemented a year ago, but it has helped silence the faculty critics) http://fab.eng.utah.edu/buddy-tools Outside the fab we have a monitor indicating who is inside (buddies are not required in the adjacent SEM/XPS lab or in the packaging lab). http://fab.eng.utah.edu/index/about-us/Home/lab-members/userinlab And we use the combination of card-key records (we have our own system, and so have real-time access) and video monitoring (including at wetbenches) to enforce the rule as others have indicated. Recently we began generating a monthly report of buddy system violations, sorted by research group, and send the relevant violations to the faculty PI along with their user fee invoice, so that he or she is aware of what is going on with their own group. We do not necessarily associate (yet) disciplinary measures with this report, as we wish to initially just raise the visibility of the need for adherence (and the fact that we are paying attention) first. We do not yet have a culture wherein the labmembers themselves feel a sufficient sense of ownership that they are generally willing to either confront a safety violator in the lab, or else report violations. But it is part of our formal training, that "someone else's safety violation certainly affects you in a number of ways, including..." Such a culture is an ideal that we are striving for: self-monitoring & self-correction among the labmember community. In order to achieve this sense of ownership, belonging, responsibility & accountability, we have had our student representatives assist us by actually writing the policies and being involved in scheduled and weekly lab cleans. http://fab.eng.utah.edu/uploads/pdfs/Nanofab_User_Policy%20Aug_2010.pdf As we prepare to move into our new facility, we will be making additional improvements to the buddy system: (1) by implementation of CORAL and interlock boxes on each of the tools (now in progress), we will be able to begin billing based on time spent on a tool, rather than time spent in the lab. Our interest in the buddy system is a key driver for this administrative change. We hope that by so doing, a researcher will be able to more easily find a colleague to be a buddy (or associate in the same research group, perhaps), since that buddy will not have to pay to be in the lab. (2) our new facility includes a clean conference room attached to the fab and accessible in the bunny suit as well as from a pedestrian entrance (think of the negotiation table between N & S Korea, entered on either side with a symbolic barrier to crossing between. Since ours is not complete yet, here is a link to the Korean table!). http://www.traveladventures.org/continents/asia/panmunjom2.shtml One of the functions of our clean conference room at night will be for buddies not working on the fab tools to have a place to sit in a bunny suit and work on reports or mask designs or device simulations. (3) Carding out of the lab, we will be implementing an annunciator to indicate if someone is about to exit, and leave someone else stranded without a buddy. Clearly, the policies and software methods for allowing someone to enter alone (needs a buddy to also enter within a prescribed period) or exiting (and potentially stranding someone) requires special attention, and we are working on how to implement this presently. ASIDE: As a result of the recent informative LABNETWORK thread on TMAH, we are implementing changes in our lab. My recent question posed to the LABNETWORK on alarm response protocols was also very helpful in providing us much useful information. I suggest that in addition to the UGIM meetings held once per year and which describe these types of management topics, Perhaps we should also have some forum in the "off-years" to get into detail regarding the soft administrative systems, and provide a means of sharing not only best practices, but also code for the soft systems themselves. For example we are implementing CORAL with home-designed interlock boxes with off-the-shelf components, and are quite willing to share our design and the associated CORAL software modules. We are currently in the planning/design stage of our new prox-card entry and tool enable system with associated buddy system features. Others have implemented add-ons to CORAL, or perhaps generated their own soft admin systems with modules that can be ported to others. Is it worthwhile attempting something such as this? We at Utah would be happy to host the first, unless someone else would like to do it. Thank you all, --Ian ******************************************** Ian R. Harvey, Ph.D. Research Associate Professor Department of Mechanical Engineering Adjunct Associate Professor Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering 2232 MEB Associate Director, Utah nanofab College of Engineering / University of Utah mail to suite 2110 MEB, 50 S. Central Campus Drive Salt Lake City, Utah 84112-9011 801/585-6162 (voicemail) 801/581-5676 (lab main number) www.nanofab.utah.edu Begin forwarded message: From: "Hathaway, Malcolm" Date: May 31, 2011 7:07:41 AM MDT To: "labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu" Subject: Re: [labnetwork] 24/7 operations Hi all, This is Mac Hathaway, at Harvard CNS. We have protocols in place similar to those described by John, with the exception that our "toxic" gases (flammables and anything monitored with sensors, Cl2, SiH4, BCl3, etc) are only enabled from 6 AM to 8 PM. We have had discussions about whether this restriction is still needed, given the maturity of our toxic gas monitoring, but 6 AM-8 PM is the current scheme. Everything else in the cleanroom is physically accessible 24/7 (most notably, from a safety standpoint, wetbenches). One thing that is a little different here is that we have an ERT (Emergency Response Team), similar to what exists in many commercial fabs, (not typical for academic sites, as I understand it). The ERT consists of most of our cleanroom staff. We meet monthly for training (and pizza), and we are all on call in the event of an emergency in the cleanroom. We have the buddy rule for working with hazardous materials, with a strong emphasis on the need for a buddy for any work during "off-hours", but as John pointed out, it's not something that lends itself to absolute compliance. With regard to "encouraging compliance", how do people feel about the use of video cameras on the wetbenches? I understand that some locations are using them; has wetbench user "behavior" improved when cameras are in use? Obviously, 24-hour monitoring is not practical, but does the "someone is watching" effect yield positive results? Mac Hathaway Senior Process Engineer Harvard CNS Begin forwarded message: From: "Luciani, Vincent" Date: May 31, 2011 7:29:28 AM MDT To: "'Matthieu Nannini, Dr.'" , "labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu" Subject: Re: [labnetwork] 24/7 operations Hello Matt, Here at the CNST NanoFab (http://www.nist.gov/cnst/index.cfm), we are staffed from 7 AM to midnight, M-F. We use card key access control system and Coral. All users are locked out after hours and we program their afterhours access into the system after their request for after hours access is approved. * Advance notification, the day before is fine. That way we can avoid any tool repair or facilities conflicts. The advance notification also helps me help others to find a buddy if needed. o A loose, casual buddy agreement between users, leading to one user leaving before another or one working in their office while the other was in the lab was a common failure mode at first. So, we require verbal or email confirmation from both people that they are committed to being each other's buddy at all times. * Once approved, they can use all tools/processes. * We use deterrence to discourage cheating, because it will happen. I randomly check Coral records and our CCTV video tapes and suspend/revoke cleanroom privileges for violators (from a 2 week suspension to full revocation depending on the degree of fraud/abuse). Word travels fast when this happens and is a strong deterrent. * Some tools outside the cleanroom, like the FIB or AFM, can be used without a buddy after I confirm with whoever trained them that they have the required proficiency. * The NanoFab staff is notified automatically via Blackberry about any gas or fire alarm 24/7. Let me know how it goes for you. Vince Vincent K. Luciani NanoFab Manager Center for Nanoscale Science and Technology National Institute of Standards and Technology 100 Bureau Drive, MS 6201 Gaithersburg, MD 20899-6200 USA +1-301-975-2886 _______________________________________________ labnetwork mailing list labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu https://www-mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From betemc at rit.edu Tue Jun 14 11:29:03 2011 From: betemc at rit.edu (Bruce Tolleson) Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 11:29:03 -0400 Subject: [labnetwork] Cambridge 360 SEM Available Message-ID: If anyone is interested in this tool please contact Scott Blondell at spb1699 at rit.edu. Bruce E. Tolleson Rochester Institute of Technology 82 Lomb Memorial Drive, Bldg 17-2627 Rochester, NY 14623-5604 (585) 478-3836 [cid:image001.jpg at 01CC2A86.43995BD0] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 2550 bytes Desc: image001.jpg URL: From info at fabsurplus.com Thu Jun 16 11:32:35 2011 From: info at fabsurplus.com (Stephen CS Howe) Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2011 17:32:35 +0200 Subject: [labnetwork] Cambridge 360 SEM Available In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1308238355.2007.157.camel@samsung.tower> Dear Scott, We are interested in the tool. Can you send me detialed photos, specifications (Including any options installed) and the requested price of purchase. Yours sincerely, Stephen Howe Company Owner SDI Fabsurplus Group +1 830 388 1071 (USA Mobile) +39 335 710 7756 (Italy Mobile) Skype: Stephencshowe e-mail:showe at fabsurplus.com WWW.FABSURPLUS.COM On Tue, 2011-06-14 at 11:29 -0400, Bruce Tolleson wrote: > If anyone is interested in this tool please contact Scott Blondell at > spb1699 at rit.edu. > > > > Bruce E. Tolleson > > Rochester Institute of Technology > > 82 Lomb Memorial Drive, Bldg 17-2627 > > Rochester, NY 14623-5604 > > (585) 478-3836 > > http://www.rit.edu/~962www/logos/tiger_walking_rit_color.jpg > > > > > _______________________________________________ > labnetwork mailing list > labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > https://www-mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork From karlb at washington.edu Mon Jun 20 05:29:22 2011 From: karlb at washington.edu (=?utf-8?Q?Karl_F_B=C3=B6hringer?=) Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 02:29:22 -0700 Subject: [labnetwork] Open positions at University of Washington Microfabrication Facility Message-ID: <014501cc2f2c$8bb78b30$a326a190$@washington.edu> Multiple open positions at the University of Washington, Seattle Shared Micro/Nano-Fabrication Facility The University of Washington has recently begun a strategic initiative to significantly expand and upgrade our on-campus cleanroom facilities. Our goal is to build our campus into a leading national center for nanoscience and nanofabrication. If you want to be a part of making this happen, we want to hear from you. In the first phase of this effort, over the past two years, we acquired a JEOL 6300FS 100KV electron beam lithography system, as well as approximately five new etching, deposition and metrology tools. The facility currently has 6 open positions and will have additional open positions in the coming months; we are seeking an Associate Director, Senior Process Engineers, Process Engineers, a User Manager and experienced Technicians. We anticipate posting additional positions over the coming weeks. The university has recently appointed Professor Karl B?hringer as the facility director, and Assistant Professor Michael Hochberg, and expert on silicon nanophotonics, as deputy director. Please email a resume or CV to: hochberg at washington.edu for further information and links to the official announcements. Official job descriptions can be found at https://www.ee.washington.edu/operations/payroll/jobs or at http://uw.edu/jobs. Position descriptions: https://uwhires.admin.washington.edu/eng/candidates/default.cfm?szCategory=JobProfile &szOrderID=73694&szlocationID=88 https://uwhires.admin.washington.edu/eng/candidates/default.cfm?szCategory=JobProfile &szOrderID=73300&szlocationID=88 https://uwhires.admin.washington.edu/eng/candidates/default.cfm?szCategory=JobProfile &szOrderID=73972&szlocationID=88 https://uwhires.admin.washington.edu/eng/candidates/default.cfm?szCategory=JobProfile &szOrderID=75363&szlocationID=88 ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: UW-MFF-jobs.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 226613 bytes Desc: not available URL: From info at fabsurplus.com Tue Jun 21 12:43:05 2011 From: info at fabsurplus.com (Stephen CS Howe) Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2011 18:43:05 +0200 Subject: [labnetwork] FEI Tecnai G30 ( electron source 50 - 300 kV) wanted Message-ID: <1308674585.2092.119.camel@samsung.tower> Dear List Members, I need to buy an FEI Tecnai G30 ( electron source 50 - 300 kV). Does anyone have one available that we could purchase ? Yours sincerely, Stephen Howe Company Owner SDI Fabsurplus Group +1 830 388 1071 (USA Mobile) +39 335 710 7756 (Italy Mobile) Skype: Stephencshowe e-mail:showe at fabsurplus.com WWW.FABSURPLUS.COM From bradshaw1234 at gmail.com Thu Jun 23 18:09:35 2011 From: bradshaw1234 at gmail.com (Keith Bradshaw) Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2011 17:09:35 -0500 Subject: [labnetwork] Sputter problem Message-ID: We are sputtering TiO2 . We begin the day with a 250 angstrom rate....each subsequent run is reduced by 10-15% in rate until we are at a 125 angstrom rate. We are not changing anything. Next day we begin again at 250. Tried argon clean between runs, tried 3 hour wait between runs, we are using a load lock and vacuum looks stable , still rate drops on each run. Any ideas? cordially, Keith Bradshaw Dallas -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sgupta at eng.ua.edu Fri Jun 24 00:54:15 2011 From: sgupta at eng.ua.edu (Gupta, Su) Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2011 23:54:15 -0500 Subject: [labnetwork] Sputter problem In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1B53C0DED5D00E40A81DF47DBF6A3DCB025C8DED88F7@MAIL1.ua-net.ua.edu> Hi Keith: Can you give me some more details about your sputter system and the processs? For instance, are you sputtering reactively from a Ti target or is it TiO2? If you are doing DC reactive sputtering from an elemental target, then the target voltage is the best indicator of what is going on with the process. For instance, the target may be oxidizing further with each run (even with the preclean) and you may be dropping down the slope of the hysteresis loop from the 'metallic' rate to the "oxidized" rate, which would be accurately reflected in a drop in the target voltage. A small leak or outgassing could also cause this type of problem, but it probably would not be as regular and systematic as what you are observing. Regards, Su Gupta Assoc. Prof, MTE Faculty Director, uamcro Univ. of Alabama ________________________________ From: labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu [labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] On Behalf Of Keith Bradshaw [bradshaw1234 at gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2011 5:09 PM To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu; Steven Foland Subject: [labnetwork] Sputter problem We are sputtering TiO2 . We begin the day with a 250 angstrom rate....each subsequent run is reduced by 10-15% in rate until we are at a 125 angstrom rate. We are not changing anything. Next day we begin again at 250. Tried argon clean between runs, tried 3 hour wait between runs, we are using a load lock and vacuum looks stable , still rate drops on each run. Any ideas? cordially, Keith Bradshaw Dallas From stevenfoland at gmail.com Fri Jun 24 11:05:05 2011 From: stevenfoland at gmail.com (Steven Foland) Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 10:05:05 -0500 Subject: [labnetwork] Sputter problem In-Reply-To: <1B53C0DED5D00E40A81DF47DBF6A3DCB025C8DED88F7@MAIL1.ua-net.ua.edu> References: <1B53C0DED5D00E40A81DF47DBF6A3DCB025C8DED88F7@MAIL1.ua-net.ua.edu> Message-ID: Hi Prof. Gupta, We are doing RF sputtering, not DC. Cleaning the target longer does increase deposition rate temporarily, but it drops back down quickly. We are most likely operating at the "oxidized" rate, but still are unsure why we are experiencing this gradual decline in film thickness. Here is my data from yesterday: 1st run: 5 minute clean cycle, 5 minute coat cycle: 250 Angstroms 2nd run: 5 min clean, 10 min coat: 198 Angstroms 3rd run: 10 min clean, 5 min coat: 118 Angstroms 4th run: 5 min clean, 5 min coat: 96 Angstroms 5th run: 5 min clean, 5 min coat: 80 Angstroms 6th run: 5 min clean, 5 min coat: 90 Angstroms 7th run: 20 min clean, 5 min coat: 120 Angstroms So you see, we have a gradual decline in dep rate, but can increase the dep rate slightly by running a longer clean cycle. If enough time has passed (a day or two) between runs, the rate increases back to its original value of ~250 Angstroms in 5 minutes. Thoughts? Thank you, Steven Foland On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 11:54 PM, Gupta, Su wrote: > Hi Keith: > > Can you give me some more details about your sputter system and the > processs? For instance, are you sputtering reactively from a Ti target or is > it TiO2? If you are doing DC reactive sputtering from an elemental target, > then the target voltage is the best indicator of what is going on with the > process. For instance, the target may be oxidizing further with each run > (even with the preclean) and you may be dropping down the slope of the > hysteresis loop from the 'metallic' rate to the "oxidized" rate, which would > be accurately reflected in a drop in the target voltage. A small leak or > outgassing could also cause this type of problem, but it probably would not > be as regular and systematic as what you are observing. > > Regards, > Su Gupta > Assoc. Prof, MTE > Faculty Director, uamcro > Univ. of Alabama > ________________________________ > From: labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu [labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] On > Behalf Of Keith Bradshaw [bradshaw1234 at gmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2011 5:09 PM > To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu; Steven Foland > Subject: [labnetwork] Sputter problem > > We are sputtering TiO2 . > > We begin the day with a 250 angstrom rate....each subsequent run is reduced > by 10-15% in rate until we are at a 125 angstrom rate. We are not changing > anything. > > Next day we begin again at 250. > > Tried argon clean between runs, tried 3 hour wait between runs, we are > using a load lock and vacuum looks stable , still rate drops on each run. > > Any ideas? > > cordially, > > Keith Bradshaw > Dallas > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Hathaway at cns.fas.harvard.edu Fri Jun 24 12:15:07 2011 From: Hathaway at cns.fas.harvard.edu (Mac Hathaway) Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 12:15:07 -0400 Subject: [labnetwork] Sputter problem In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4E04B80B.1050906@cns.fas.harvard.edu> Hi Keith, Since I see no other better responses yet, I'll give you my two cents (not being a sputtering guru, myself): Sounds like something is getting hot. Things to check: Loose RF connections in the chamber, and back to the tuning network. Also, check inside your tuning network for loose connections. Does your forward/reflected power change over the day? Another place to look is your RF power supply. Mac Hathaway Harvard CNS Keith Bradshaw wrote: > We are sputtering TiO2 . > > We begin the day with a 250 angstrom rate....each subsequent run is > reduced by 10-15% in rate until we are at a 125 angstrom rate. We are > not changing anything. > > Next day we begin again at 250. > > Tried argon clean between runs, tried 3 hour wait between runs, we are > using a load lock and vacuum looks stable , still rate drops on each run. > > Any ideas? > > cordially, > > Keith Bradshaw > Dallas From sgupta at eng.ua.edu Fri Jun 24 12:37:35 2011 From: sgupta at eng.ua.edu (Gupta, Su) Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 11:37:35 -0500 Subject: [labnetwork] Sputter problem In-Reply-To: References: <1B53C0DED5D00E40A81DF47DBF6A3DCB025C8DED88F7@MAIL1.ua-net.ua.edu>, Message-ID: <1B53C0DED5D00E40A81DF47DBF6A3DCB025C8DED88FD@MAIL1.ua-net.ua.edu> Hi Steven: Are you sputtering reactively or from a TiO2 target? Please give me power, pressure, flow conditions for your coating and cleaning cycles. That will help me to understand your problem better. Thanks, Su ________________________________ From: Steven Foland [stevenfoland at gmail.com] Sent: Friday, June 24, 2011 10:05 AM To: Gupta, Su Cc: Keith Bradshaw; labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu Subject: Re: [labnetwork] Sputter problem Hi Prof. Gupta, We are doing RF sputtering, not DC. Cleaning the target longer does increase deposition rate temporarily, but it drops back down quickly. We are most likely operating at the "oxidized" rate, but still are unsure why we are experiencing this gradual decline in film thickness. Here is my data from yesterday: 1st run: 5 minute clean cycle, 5 minute coat cycle: 250 Angstroms 2nd run: 5 min clean, 10 min coat: 198 Angstroms 3rd run: 10 min clean, 5 min coat: 118 Angstroms 4th run: 5 min clean, 5 min coat: 96 Angstroms 5th run: 5 min clean, 5 min coat: 80 Angstroms 6th run: 5 min clean, 5 min coat: 90 Angstroms 7th run: 20 min clean, 5 min coat: 120 Angstroms So you see, we have a gradual decline in dep rate, but can increase the dep rate slightly by running a longer clean cycle. If enough time has passed (a day or two) between runs, the rate increases back to its original value of ~250 Angstroms in 5 minutes. Thoughts? Thank you, Steven Foland On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 11:54 PM, Gupta, Su > wrote: Hi Keith: Can you give me some more details about your sputter system and the processs? For instance, are you sputtering reactively from a Ti target or is it TiO2? If you are doing DC reactive sputtering from an elemental target, then the target voltage is the best indicator of what is going on with the process. For instance, the target may be oxidizing further with each run (even with the preclean) and you may be dropping down the slope of the hysteresis loop from the 'metallic' rate to the "oxidized" rate, which would be accurately reflected in a drop in the target voltage. A small leak or outgassing could also cause this type of problem, but it probably would not be as regular and systematic as what you are observing. Regards, Su Gupta Assoc. Prof, MTE Faculty Director, uamcro Univ. of Alabama ________________________________ From: labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu [labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] On Behalf Of Keith Bradshaw [bradshaw1234 at gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2011 5:09 PM To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu; Steven Foland Subject: [labnetwork] Sputter problem We are sputtering TiO2 . We begin the day with a 250 angstrom rate....each subsequent run is reduced by 10-15% in rate until we are at a 125 angstrom rate. We are not changing anything. Next day we begin again at 250. Tried argon clean between runs, tried 3 hour wait between runs, we are using a load lock and vacuum looks stable , still rate drops on each run. Any ideas? cordially, Keith Bradshaw Dallas From stevenfoland at gmail.com Fri Jun 24 13:00:57 2011 From: stevenfoland at gmail.com (Steven Foland) Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 12:00:57 -0500 Subject: [labnetwork] Sputter problem In-Reply-To: <1B53C0DED5D00E40A81DF47DBF6A3DCB025C8DED88FD@MAIL1.ua-net.ua.edu> References: <1B53C0DED5D00E40A81DF47DBF6A3DCB025C8DED88F7@MAIL1.ua-net.ua.edu> <1B53C0DED5D00E40A81DF47DBF6A3DCB025C8DED88FD@MAIL1.ua-net.ua.edu> Message-ID: Hi Su, I am sputtering reactively. Power is 300W during cleaning, 200W during coat. Pressure is 40 mTorr during clean, 4 mTorr during coat. Flow rates are: 20 sccm Ar, with 1.65 sccm O2 during coat. Thanks, Steven On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 11:37 AM, Gupta, Su wrote: > Hi Steven: > > Are you sputtering reactively or from a TiO2 target? Please give me power, > pressure, flow conditions for your coating and cleaning cycles. That will > help me to understand your problem better. > > Thanks, Su > > ________________________________ > From: Steven Foland [stevenfoland at gmail.com] > Sent: Friday, June 24, 2011 10:05 AM > To: Gupta, Su > Cc: Keith Bradshaw; labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > Subject: Re: [labnetwork] Sputter problem > > Hi Prof. Gupta, > > We are doing RF sputtering, not DC. Cleaning the target longer does > increase deposition rate temporarily, but it drops back down quickly. We are > most likely operating at the "oxidized" rate, but still are unsure why we > are experiencing this gradual decline in film thickness. > > Here is my data from yesterday: > 1st run: 5 minute clean cycle, 5 minute coat cycle: 250 Angstroms > 2nd run: 5 min clean, 10 min coat: 198 Angstroms > 3rd run: 10 min clean, 5 min coat: 118 Angstroms > 4th run: 5 min clean, 5 min coat: 96 Angstroms > 5th run: 5 min clean, 5 min coat: 80 Angstroms > 6th run: 5 min clean, 5 min coat: 90 Angstroms > 7th run: 20 min clean, 5 min coat: 120 Angstroms > > So you see, we have a gradual decline in dep rate, but can increase the dep > rate slightly by running a longer clean cycle. > > If enough time has passed (a day or two) between runs, the rate increases > back to its original value of ~250 Angstroms in 5 minutes. > > Thoughts? > > Thank you, > Steven Foland > > On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 11:54 PM, Gupta, Su sgupta at eng.ua.edu>> wrote: > Hi Keith: > > Can you give me some more details about your sputter system and the > processs? For instance, are you sputtering reactively from a Ti target or is > it TiO2? If you are doing DC reactive sputtering from an elemental target, > then the target voltage is the best indicator of what is going on with the > process. For instance, the target may be oxidizing further with each run > (even with the preclean) and you may be dropping down the slope of the > hysteresis loop from the 'metallic' rate to the "oxidized" rate, which would > be accurately reflected in a drop in the target voltage. A small leak or > outgassing could also cause this type of problem, but it probably would not > be as regular and systematic as what you are observing. > > Regards, > Su Gupta > Assoc. Prof, MTE > Faculty Director, uamcro > Univ. of Alabama > ________________________________ > From: labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu > [labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] On > Behalf Of Keith Bradshaw [bradshaw1234 at gmail.com bradshaw1234 at gmail.com>] > Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2011 5:09 PM > To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu; Steven Foland > Subject: [labnetwork] Sputter problem > > We are sputtering TiO2 . > > We begin the day with a 250 angstrom rate....each subsequent run is reduced > by 10-15% in rate until we are at a 125 angstrom rate. We are not changing > anything. > > Next day we begin again at 250. > > Tried argon clean between runs, tried 3 hour wait between runs, we are > using a load lock and vacuum looks stable , still rate drops on each run. > > Any ideas? > > cordially, > > Keith Bradshaw > Dallas > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Hathaway at cns.fas.harvard.edu Fri Jun 24 13:19:49 2011 From: Hathaway at cns.fas.harvard.edu (Mac Hathaway) Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 13:19:49 -0400 Subject: [labnetwork] Sputter problem In-Reply-To: <4E04B80B.1050906@cns.fas.harvard.edu> References: <4E04B80B.1050906@cns.fas.harvard.edu> Message-ID: <4E04C735.1020604@cns.fas.harvard.edu> Apologies, I meant no other responses of any kind! : ) Mac Hathaway wrote: > Hi Keith, > > Since I see no other better responses yet, I'll give you my two cents > (not being a sputtering guru, myself): > > Sounds like something is getting hot. Things to check: > > Loose RF connections in the chamber, and back to the tuning network. > Also, check inside your tuning network for loose connections. > > Does your forward/reflected power change over the day? > > Another place to look is your RF power supply. > > > Mac Hathaway > Harvard CNS > > > > Keith Bradshaw wrote: > >> We are sputtering TiO2 . >> >> We begin the day with a 250 angstrom rate....each subsequent run is >> reduced by 10-15% in rate until we are at a 125 angstrom rate. We are >> not changing anything. >> >> Next day we begin again at 250. >> >> Tried argon clean between runs, tried 3 hour wait between runs, we are >> using a load lock and vacuum looks stable , still rate drops on each run. >> >> Any ideas? >> >> cordially, >> >> Keith Bradshaw >> Dallas >> > > _______________________________________________ > labnetwork mailing list > labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu > https://www-mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rmorrison at draper.com Fri Jun 24 13:50:10 2011 From: rmorrison at draper.com (Morrison, Richard H., Jr.) Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 13:50:10 -0400 Subject: [labnetwork] Sputter problem In-Reply-To: References: <1B53C0DED5D00E40A81DF47DBF6A3DCB025C8DED88F7@MAIL1.ua-net.ua.edu> Message-ID: <94CDEF5D18F0BB4A85B1D78EFBDD6FDA04381A96@exchbk1.draper.com> HI, How is your base pressure and leak back rate? If you have a leak it may be adding extra O2 which the Ti just gobbles up. What machine are you doing this in? How is your water cooling flow, if there is reduced flow it will affect the process, stuff will heat up, the heat may cause the target to de-bond, thus creating a bad RF circuit. That recently happened to us on a sputter tool, the target de-bonded slightly and the rate dropped. Are you doing a reactive process or do you have a TiO2 target? Is your pressure control working properly, is the gate valve actively controlled ? if so if there anything wrong with the pressure signal to the gate valve? Hope this helps. Rick Rick Morrison Senior Member Technical Staff Acting Group Leader Mems Fabrication Draper Laboratory 555 Technology Square Cambridge, MA 02139 617-258-3420 From: labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu [mailto:labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] On Behalf Of Steven Foland Sent: Friday, June 24, 2011 11:05 AM To: Gupta, Su Cc: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu; Keith Bradshaw Subject: Re: [labnetwork] Sputter problem Hi Prof. Gupta, We are doing RF sputtering, not DC. Cleaning the target longer does increase deposition rate temporarily, but it drops back down quickly. We are most likely operating at the "oxidized" rate, but still are unsure why we are experiencing this gradual decline in film thickness. Here is my data from yesterday: 1st run: 5 minute clean cycle, 5 minute coat cycle: 250 Angstroms 2nd run: 5 min clean, 10 min coat: 198 Angstroms 3rd run: 10 min clean, 5 min coat: 118 Angstroms 4th run: 5 min clean, 5 min coat: 96 Angstroms 5th run: 5 min clean, 5 min coat: 80 Angstroms 6th run: 5 min clean, 5 min coat: 90 Angstroms 7th run: 20 min clean, 5 min coat: 120 Angstroms So you see, we have a gradual decline in dep rate, but can increase the dep rate slightly by running a longer clean cycle. If enough time has passed (a day or two) between runs, the rate increases back to its original value of ~250 Angstroms in 5 minutes. Thoughts? Thank you, Steven Foland On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 11:54 PM, Gupta, Su wrote: Hi Keith: Can you give me some more details about your sputter system and the processs? For instance, are you sputtering reactively from a Ti target or is it TiO2? If you are doing DC reactive sputtering from an elemental target, then the target voltage is the best indicator of what is going on with the process. For instance, the target may be oxidizing further with each run (even with the preclean) and you may be dropping down the slope of the hysteresis loop from the 'metallic' rate to the "oxidized" rate, which would be accurately reflected in a drop in the target voltage. A small leak or outgassing could also cause this type of problem, but it probably would not be as regular and systematic as what you are observing. Regards, Su Gupta Assoc. Prof, MTE Faculty Director, uamcro Univ. of Alabama ________________________________ From: labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu [labnetwork-bounces at mtl.mit.edu] On Behalf Of Keith Bradshaw [bradshaw1234 at gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2011 5:09 PM To: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu; Steven Foland Subject: [labnetwork] Sputter problem We are sputtering TiO2 . We begin the day with a 250 angstrom rate....each subsequent run is reduced by 10-15% in rate until we are at a 125 angstrom rate. We are not changing anything. Next day we begin again at 250. Tried argon clean between runs, tried 3 hour wait between runs, we are using a load lock and vacuum looks stable , still rate drops on each run. Any ideas? cordially, Keith Bradshaw Dallas -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: